THE BORE

General => Dysfunctional Hall of Fame => Topic started by: Eschaton on December 25, 2012, 11:49:01 PM

Title: star trek
Post by: Eschaton on December 25, 2012, 11:49:01 PM
should I watch this? or do something else
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 25, 2012, 11:50:03 PM
Yes as long as you go straight to deep space 9 or voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 25, 2012, 11:52:48 PM
TNG > *
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 25, 2012, 11:53:42 PM
TNG > *

Rewatch it it really isn't.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 25, 2012, 11:58:54 PM
It has good parts and bad.

Really, it's been so long since I've seen any Trek show. Should really do a rewatch but that's like 500 hours or whatever, lol.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 26, 2012, 12:01:38 AM
It has good parts and bad.


okay stoney
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 26, 2012, 12:01:42 AM
TNG then DS9 yes. Never, ever Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 26, 2012, 12:05:15 AM
so by process of elimination i should start with DS9

If you watch DS9 first it will ruin the other ones in terms of how much better it is to the other ones.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 26, 2012, 12:06:56 AM
TNG then DS9 yes. Never, ever Voyager.

This is my prerogative too.

Original series is fine as well.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 26, 2012, 12:07:34 AM
TNG then DS9 yes. Never, ever Voyager.

This is my prerogative too.

Original series is fine as well.

TNG is a snooze fest.

it's only saving graces are data and Q.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 26, 2012, 12:10:31 AM
so then why is voyager so divisive? Kinda thinking about starting with TNG

Misogyny
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 26, 2012, 12:17:58 AM
Most of the first two season of TNG are pretty dire, so just watch a few select episodes and then move onto Season 3.

Select episodes being mainly the two-parter at the beginning and any episodes with Q. Here's a handy guide:

http://www.tv.com/shows/star-trek-the-next-generation/episodes/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 26, 2012, 12:25:34 AM
so then why is voyager so divisive? Kinda thinking about starting with TNG

start with the original movie. if you like, continue.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 26, 2012, 12:28:09 AM
It has good parts and bad.


okay stoney
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Trent Dole on December 26, 2012, 12:29:51 AM
Why the fuck was there never a TNG movie with Q anyway? So lame.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on December 26, 2012, 12:31:00 AM
I insist that you watch TNG - perhaps not in its entirety but definitely season 3 on - prior to jumping on DS9.

Reason is because TNG established its own lore, as well as restructured that of the original series, all of which acts as a foundation for the Deep Space Nine Universe. There is definitely some overlap between the two shows. You will be completely lost with regard to key episodes and characters from DS9 whose back story originate in TNG.

I give DS9 a lot of credit. The only Star Trek show post-original series that didn't succumb to the Borg get-out-of-ratings-jail-free card. First Stark Trek program to abandon the by-then antiquated episodic format and present a season-long arc. The Dominion War.

I simply cannot believe how far the series fell after that. Voyager was a return to the old TNG formula, but by then viewers were bored by the pristine and stoic presentation of the Federation which had been replaced by a more gritty and militaristic appearance in DS9. You want to know what Voyager should have been? Watch the first 3 seasons of BSG.

Enterprise started slow, but I think it began to warm up in the end. By then it was too late, but the show's writers did their best to damage control a doomed backwards concept that should never have launched in the first place. Going backwards in the Star Trek Universe timeline is the same as erasing almost 50 years of Star Trek lore, which isn't something that sits well with Star Trek loyalists.

What they should have done instead is create a series based on:

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQT5ZrUQhuCn-KibWk0T9ctLXEDXZethGRFzxKGeJ7fAGI4UUjN8TCXgE6c)(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRzw7aGEYPaN43h0coi9sg2kuwMrhtS9NLf8LzJcOVO1OooMjpeN769T37o)(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRad_ZM2eIHBOKBo3T25Drciacp51oyLOfp6rxvxoAdMxCYOUyDLXfPk7E)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 26, 2012, 02:19:37 AM
I watched Season 1 of TNG on Blu-Ray a few months back, it's still pretty fun. I need to pick up Season 2.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 26, 2012, 02:42:53 AM
"Why not Voyager"

Apart from Tom Paris, Seven of Spandex and maybe Kes I found all the chars to be dreadful and wanted their ship to be blown up every episode. I was always rooting for the villains. That and they used so many recycled ideas from TOS and TNG that it may as well have been horse armor DLC to the first shows. They did introduce interesting species though, but never ever did it matter longer than 2 episodes. That and it came after DS9 which is an absolute masterclass of Star Trek.


EDIT: Actually the Doctor was great too.

If I had to rank TNG = DS9 > TOS >>>> Voyager >>>>> Enterprise (shitty start). DS9 is probably better than TNG overall but TNG is the character set that made me fall in love with Star Trek.

 
Quote
You want to know what Voyager should have been? Watch the first 3 seasons of BSG.
(http://i.imgur.com/ysB3H.jpg)

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on December 26, 2012, 09:22:46 AM
I started watching star trek tng earlier this month after having limited exposure to star trek past the recent film, wrath of khan, an episode of tos, and whatever through osmosis.  I'm mostly following the gaf recommended watching order, although I skipped the original series.  Here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=435749

So far (in season 4) it's beyond what I expected.  I really truly enjoy the show.  Between those awfully dull gifs on gaf and knowing some obnoxious star trek fans in real life, I had a lot of assumptions.  Now I just feel bad for judging the show by its fans and wish I watched it earlier.

It is unbelievably boring, but the interesting side of boring.  It's like watching the day to day of a starship and not something entertaining.


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 26, 2012, 11:10:28 AM
EDIT: Actually the Doctor was great too.

I was glad when the Doctor showed up in First Contact, he was cool.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 26, 2012, 01:48:07 PM
Since we're talking about TNG:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7jbP1_H9sA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cXWrdHshE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 26, 2012, 04:15:17 PM
:rofl at dr. crusher being exposed to alien viruses , energy and everything terrible. no mercy for MILF widows i suppose

Just wait until Season 7 when she screws a ghost. :hump
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 26, 2012, 05:08:08 PM
Just wait until Wesley Crusher
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Bloodwake on December 26, 2012, 06:14:14 PM
TNG, then DS9

I'm rewatching DS9 myself at the moment. DS9 may be the best of the series. It is so very dark compared to the rest of the Trek series. Extremely good writing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 26, 2012, 06:31:10 PM
I'm rewatching DS9 myself at the moment. DS9 may be the best of the series. It is so very dark compared to the rest of the Trek series. Extremely good writing.

:bow Michael Piller :bow2

Except he also was one of the main forces behind Voyager, but I won't hold that against him.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Bloodwake on December 26, 2012, 06:33:20 PM
Most of the TNG writers moved to DS9. DS9 also had Ira Steven Behr, who really diversified how a Trek series was presented. Ronald D Moore was also on board for DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 26, 2012, 06:52:58 PM
There's a chat log out there with Ronald Moore (maybe IGN?) where he more or less describes the management styles of the writing on each of the franchises since he worked on TNG, DS9 and VOY. On TNG it was still a new endeavor so they had situations like where he was given basically a free hand to recreate Klingon culture from scratch, on DS9 they were always kinda the red-headed stepchild and generally ignored or left alone to the point where Berman (I think) wanted the Dominion War to be over in like four episodes but didn't care enough that they were allowed to do it for three years.

On Voyager though everything was top-down controlled, they couldn't do this, they had to use that, conflict amongst the crew wasn't allowed (even though one of the original core premises was the conflict between the Maquis and Starfleet), the ship had to be repaired and people had to live so it wasn't too depressing (another part of the original premise being how alone they were), etc. People would come in with good story ideas that Berman and Taylor would instantly kill in favor of crap like Threshold. Story lines and character development were curtailed because higher ups disliked serialization and arcs afraid people just tuning in would be scared off. It being the "flagship" show of UPN just made this all worse and drew in more higher ups with their own ideas of how it should be.

And since Voyager was getting all that focus, DS9 was allowed to even more go down its own path.

There's like a short version of this in Enterprise in the first two seasons (look Ferengi! Borg! Decontamination chamber!) where it was supposed to be this hot new streamlined way to bring in not only new fans who never saw Star Trek before or were afraid of sci-fi, but also to bring back all the Star Trek fans who supposedly loved the TOS and some TNG but bailed due to DS9 and "franchise fatigue." And then they basically stopped caring about it when it failed, Star Trek was added to the title, the third season is one long serial and then you have the fan service final season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 26, 2012, 07:30:06 PM
As awesome as a holdeck would be, it seemed to malfunction every three episodes or so of TNG. Geordi Laforge must have been a shitty engineer.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 26, 2012, 07:38:41 PM
well the transporters were also fucked up on the regular
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 26, 2012, 10:41:32 PM
(http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x185/vikingjimmy/CantSee-Captain.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 26, 2012, 11:00:38 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/W4rpY.jpg)

describes FTL sometimes
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Bloodwake on December 27, 2012, 02:36:46 AM
DS9 is the master of the slow build. The Dominion were introduced in season two and were around until the beginning of the show. Meanwhile Voyager sucked.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 27, 2012, 05:35:09 AM
I've been trying to slog through Voyager lately. It's not awful, it's just a little lackluster. Some of the characters are pretty interesting, but then they never seem to do anything interesting with them.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 27, 2012, 06:15:41 AM
Kes is like the only character that has a multi episode plot that actually pays off. Voyager is made of poo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 27, 2012, 10:08:11 AM
Year of Hell two part redeems voyager- watch it if you havent
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ToxicAdam on December 27, 2012, 10:44:19 AM
I watched about every episode of Voyager, but can't tell you one story that I remember. All I can recall are the stunt castings, fan service and a couple very good season finales.

It seemed like a show that was always chasing after the most ratings, instead of trying to be a good show and tell a good story. Although, I guess after DS9's failure, that was to be expected.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 27, 2012, 10:51:58 AM
The only episode of Voyager I can remember was the one where Janeway and one of the other members of the crew got up to warp 10 and evolved into lizards, which then mated. It was probably the worst episode of Star Trek ever.

This is the only good thing related to Voyager:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZLcIpbOHIU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 27, 2012, 10:56:10 AM
I've never been a Star Trek person but I watched TNG many Saturday mornings as a kid. I'd get up super early to sneak into the basement for morning cartoons around 6am. Golden Girls would be on at 6, then TNG at 6:30, and cartoons would start at seven lol

I'll probably go through the series soon. I liked the characters at the time and have heard the show hasn't aged poorly. My fav ep as a kid was the one where Data is in the 1700s or some shit and falls in love with some chick, then the town people try to kill him lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 27, 2012, 11:24:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXTtRttJgyU

Fucking love me some year of hell
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 27, 2012, 11:25:17 AM
The only episode of Voyager I can remember was the one where Janeway and one of the other members of the crew got up to warp 10 and evolved into lizards, which then mated. It was probably the worst episode of Star Trek ever.
Fuck that poo episode. Fuck it to hell.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 27, 2012, 11:29:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tIWYtcwp2I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsOE73pxpys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRW8mv3GnDA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 27, 2012, 11:34:25 AM
God damn dat last 3-4 seasons of Deep Space 9. YOU WANT SUM SPACESHIPS BLOWIN UP HERE WE GOOOOOO awesome bald bearded sisko get
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on December 27, 2012, 11:36:32 AM
I suppose the success of the rebooted Star Trek movie has stalled any possibility of seeing a new television series.

It sucks because we'll never learn how the Federation and the different empires fared in the aftermath of Dominion War, which shifted the balance of power in the quadrant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 27, 2012, 11:48:25 AM
I suppose the success of the rebooted Star Trek movie has stalled any possibility of seeing a new television series.

It sucks because we'll never learn how the Federation and the different empires fared in the aftermath of Dominion War, which shifted the balance of power in the quadrant.
yup, sadly.

There'll be a new TV series. I just think it'll be a reboot, and largely ignore any of the older stuff.  For better or worse.
It will be insta poo :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 27, 2012, 03:48:11 PM
Voyager does have some quite good standalone episodes (Death Wish, Distant Origin, Living Witness, Timeless, Pathfinder, for example...) but if you cobbled them all together it might fill one season's worth. You could probably hit two seasons if you included the kinda dumb but fun episodes.

You could also cobble together a season or two of some outright atrocious ones. Like say anything involving that Irish town or whatever the fuck in the holodeck. Or nearly any episode involving Chakotay dreaming.
Year of Hell two part redeems voyager- watch it if you havent
It was originally conceived to be an entire season of the show or at least a half-season, but all viewers hate serialized stories so it became a two-parter.

Equinox is a decent two-parter too.
I suppose the success of the rebooted Star Trek movie has stalled any possibility of seeing a new television series.

It sucks because we'll never learn how the Federation and the different empires fared in the aftermath of Dominion War, which shifted the balance of power in the quadrant.
There are novels that are considered canon that follow up after Nemesis, DS9 and Voyager. The DS9 ones in particular are pretty good and do explore that post-War situation.

Such as Garak's backstory along with some post-destruction of Cardassia musings to Dr. Bashir written by the actor who played Garak:
(http://i2.listal.com/image/341849/200full.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 27, 2012, 05:46:25 PM
I'm just past the part in Voyager where they got the borg lady on their crew. Watching Harry Kim fawn all over her is kind of nauseating. I'm also sick of episodes where Chakotay goes on vision quests/communes with nature. He's a cool character otherwise.

Top Tier Voyager crewmates: Tom Paris, Dr. Hal O. Graham (I know he doesn't have a name but it's so obvious that this should be his name)

Mid Tier Voyager crewmates: B'elanna, Janeway, Chakotay

Shit Tier Voyager crewmates: Neelix, Harry, Borg lady (might redeem herself hopefully)


Pretty much all of DS9 crew is top tier.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 27, 2012, 07:57:42 PM
Oh God, the episode where Neelix's organs got stolen.  :-\
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 28, 2012, 06:03:10 AM
Borg lady (might redeem herself hopefully)
Unless you view her as purely eye candy, you will be in for a rough ride
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: recursivelyenumerable on December 28, 2012, 07:10:02 AM
On Voyager though everything was top-down controlled, they couldn't do this, they had to use that, conflict amongst the crew wasn't allowed (even though one of the original core premises was the conflict between the Maquis and Starfleet)

I remember it was weird how they built that up at the start and almost immediately forgot about it. TBH it would probably have been lame anyway if they'd followed through (and dragged it out over years of being in situations where it was totally irrelevant?)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on December 28, 2012, 12:30:20 PM
:bawl :bawl :bawl :bawl Tasha Yar

If she were around for measure of a man, they could've answered whether that event in episode 2 was rape, consensual, masturbation, or something else  :'(
 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Shaka Khan on December 28, 2012, 01:02:20 PM
It has good parts and bad.


okay stoney

:lol :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ToxicAdam on December 28, 2012, 02:23:21 PM
Neelix is insufferable. I feel like B'elana was supposed to be the eye candy until they realized no fan was having it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 28, 2012, 02:55:49 PM
this new chick who replaced Dr. Crusher sucks ass. I hate her

Crusher returns permanently in Season 3.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ToxicAdam on December 28, 2012, 02:59:46 PM
Have you hit the Whoopi episodes yet? What a terrible casting choice.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 28, 2012, 08:50:21 PM
On Voyager though everything was top-down controlled, they couldn't do this, they had to use that, conflict amongst the crew wasn't allowed (even though one of the original core premises was the conflict between the Maquis and Starfleet)

I remember it was weird how they built that up at the start and almost immediately forgot about it. TBH it would probably have been lame anyway if they'd followed through (and dragged it out over years of being in situations where it was totally irrelevant?)

Whatever happened to the race of aliens that looked like tall oompa loompas that were the primary antagonists in the first season? And the organ stealers who also seemed like they might become the primary antagonists? They've both just kind of disappeared.

Also it is kind of weird that Voyager started off being so technologically superior to everyone and they had to wrestle with "do we help them with our technology or not interfere?" and now they are lucky if they are on even terms with everyone else.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 28, 2012, 09:07:47 PM
The Kazon (oompa loompas) are around until the end of the second season, indeed that season has the only good usage of them and their original concept as warring "Crips/Bloods" sects. One reason they ditched the Kazon other than the fact they sucked was they eventually realized that Voyager had been traveling for two years and still kept running into these wannabe Klingon dopes who didn't even have transporters and whose only source of ships were ones they had stolen years ago that barely matched up with Voyager.

I think the evidence that Voyager writers couldn't help but ruin villains is to compare the Borg when they first get a hint of them, Species 8472 when first introduced and even the Hirogen at the start to Borg kids/Unimatrix Zero, BOOTHBY SIMULATION, and Nazi's on the Holodeck. Even individuals like The Borg Queen, Seska and Q fail to escape their erosion from contact with the true villain of the series, Captain Janeway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on December 29, 2012, 12:32:13 AM
Just finished S1. I really liked it, even though it was maybe too episodic to be really considered good. I'll definitely keep watching.

Keep it up.

I would probably have suggested skipping season 1 altogether had it not introduced two reoccurring and pivotal characters of the series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Bloodwake on December 29, 2012, 01:20:29 AM
Year of Hell on Voyager was pretty awesome. But that's basically the latter half of DS9.

Seriously, who DIDN'T get fucked over at least once on DS9? Even secondary characters like Garak and Nog get fucked hard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 29, 2012, 07:32:13 PM
I'm watching an episode of TNG on BBC America about Troi falling in love with some boring looking guy. It's pretty much terrible.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Robo on December 29, 2012, 08:53:53 PM
Just watch the movie.  The shows are dumb.  The old movies, too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: treythemovie on December 30, 2012, 03:19:00 AM
I'm watching an episode of TNG on BBC America about Troi falling in love with some boring looking guy. It's pretty much terrible.
Well of course it is; its a Troi episode after all. Her character is the eye candy except she always keeps her clothes on and has nothing really going for her except for big boobs and a lack of competition.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 30, 2012, 10:36:31 AM
Bev Crusher was the best/hottest
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on December 30, 2012, 10:49:25 AM
the girl who spilled hot chocolate on picard is the best

taught me to thank my toaster
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 30, 2012, 11:14:48 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_nVEm5Yc3c
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 30, 2012, 11:17:52 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg_cwI1Xj4M
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on December 30, 2012, 12:08:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNbPUVq3Zkc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 30, 2012, 12:10:52 PM
Quote
true villain of the series, Captain Janeway.

brilliant  :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 30, 2012, 02:50:06 PM
Also I'm :rofl at how much of this show/universe was taken to build Mass Effect. It's not copy-pasting, its like taking the skeleton of Star Trek and painting over it with Bioware.

It's the king fish template. Just like Star Wars, LOTR, etc.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 04, 2013, 11:03:36 PM
Season finale, your anus is gonna be assimilated.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 04, 2013, 11:43:20 PM
Season 3 is also when the costumes changed from those lame tight fitting jumpsuits.  I like it when they stand up and tug down on the top half.  Plus Riker's fat in season 5, so the spandex wouldn't fly.  Not a fan of that weird captain's jacket in season 5, or how Picard keeps changing between it and the standard uniform.  And even though I haven't finished season 5 yet, I watched First Contact and Nemesis and the costumes there suck again.

First Contact and Nemesis both suck, btw.  I don't know if something big happens with the Borg between now and the end of the series, but First Contact ruins their allure.  They were legit scary in that first Q episode, even with the home depot make up. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Bloodwake on January 05, 2013, 04:27:03 PM
First Contact was the only good TNG movie. And this is including a film where Malcolm McDowell is the villain.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on January 06, 2013, 08:04:37 PM
Season 3 is also when the costumes changed from those lame tight fitting jumpsuits.  I like it when they stand up and tug down on the top half.

Picard Manoeuvre ftw!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 06, 2013, 10:55:41 PM
I watched TNG when it originally aired, bailed halfway through Season 1 because it was crap. I started watching again with Season 3, which kicked ass! Assuming that I'd missed something in Season 2, I went back and re-watched it later, but it turned out to have been A VERY GRADUAL IMPROVEMENT. Season 3 is the first good season of TNG.

When I get back to the USA, I'll watch DS9 in its entirety.

If anyone likes reading Star Trek stuff, Peter David has a series which is pretty good, New Frontier, featuring many of the popular recurring characters from TNG and DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 07, 2013, 02:08:00 AM
how far in to tng are you escha

shit is bananas in season 3 yo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 07, 2013, 02:44:39 AM
did you watch season 1 and 2? what did you think?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 07, 2013, 03:18:22 AM
I like season 1 and 2. While I find them thematically and cohesively inconsistent, they're still so damn entertaining. The cast really makes the show, and despite its problems, they have enough bond and chemistry to make the earlier seasons worth it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 07, 2013, 03:31:33 AM
Yup
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 07, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
If anyone likes reading Star Trek stuff, Peter David has a series which is pretty good, New Frontier, featuring many of the popular recurring characters from TNG and DS9.
New Frontier is probably the best Trek book series. The DS9 Relaunch is maybe the only thing close.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 08, 2013, 12:36:15 AM
If anyone likes reading Star Trek stuff, Peter David has a series which is pretty good, New Frontier, featuring many of the popular recurring characters from TNG and DS9.
New Frontier is probably the best Trek book series. The DS9 Relaunch is maybe the only thing close.

:dap

Yes, any Trek fan who needs moar need look no further than Peter David's books; New Frontier is good, but for main cast, his other books are also quite good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on January 08, 2013, 04:56:02 PM
fuck the cardassians are ugly. they look like humans covered in foreskins

Get used to their ugly mugs. They're the primary antagonists for most of Deep Space Nine.

Once you're ready to jump on that ship, prepare for a rougher start than what you experienced in TNG. The early seasons of Deep Space Nine are, by far, more tough to sit through than the first 2 seasons of TNG. I don't know if it's coincidence, but DS9 improved significantly for me once Sisko got the beard; hence why I refer to the better seasons as "post-fro Sisko".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 08, 2013, 05:43:50 PM
I was wondering about that.  At some point more than one star trek show were on the air, right? or is it really TNG > DS9 > Voyager

and The Inner Light is a confusing episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: treythemovie on January 08, 2013, 07:23:59 PM
Yeah, whats the deal with that? Should I finish TNG or concurrently start DS9 at some point?
You should finish TNG. For what overlap there is, DS9 effectively takes place after TNG ends.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2013, 08:19:44 PM
Deanna troi is the worst character ever.

I can sense annoyance in this post. Yar > Troi.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 09, 2013, 12:00:57 AM
Deanna troi is the worst character ever.

I can sense annoyance in this post. Yar > Troi.
No.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 09, 2013, 12:42:45 AM
Troi is written badly, but that-era Marina Sirtis is hot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 09, 2013, 01:06:06 AM
Wesley Crusher is by far the WOAT
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 09, 2013, 01:12:25 AM
Yeah, I remember back when UseNet was all the rage, and there was a group, alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die -- Wil Wheaton turned out to be an OK guy, but it sure is annoying having Wesley the Wonder Boy save the entire crew of professionals from utter disaster every week.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 09, 2013, 01:17:48 AM
Wil Wheaton got a lot more hate than he deserved, yeah. His performance as Wesley was never the problem, the problem was that his character was terrible and the writers wanted him to be something that everyone hated.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2013, 01:20:54 AM
Wes is just written badly because Roddenberry is a poof. Troi is just THERE and contributes NOTHING, has shit characterization, and has the worst episodes.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2013, 01:44:21 AM
he had sex with yar man
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 09, 2013, 02:04:46 AM
it's episode 2, the one where everyone gets space drunk.  it's the one where geordi cries about being blind.  and where picard and crusher almost go at it.


and I watched generations but it was boring so I messed around on my tablet during.  I thought I was going crazy because I'd look down, then up, and characters would be wearing different uniforms.  only thing I enjoyed in the movie was malcolm mcdowell's auto-gangsta style gun.  dude's so baller not even arthritis can stop him.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 09, 2013, 02:57:00 AM
i....i think Data just had sex
He is programmed in multiple pleasure-giving techniques.  ;)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 09, 2013, 12:47:24 PM
so why exactly do we hate Wesley again? apart from him being too smart

He's a little kid that constantly has to save a ship full of highly-experienced experts because only he knows what's wrong and how to fix it.

He was the equivalent of a 12 year old writing Star Trek fanfaction and inserting himself/herself as the main character:

Quote from: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/FanFic/ATrekkiesTale
“Gee, golly, gosh, gloriosky,” thought Mary Sue as she stepped on the bridge of the Enterprise. “Here I am, the youngest lieutenant in the fleet – only fifteen and a half years old.” Captain Kirk came up to her.
“Oh, Lieutenant, I love you madly. Will you come to bed with me?”
“Captain! I am not that kind of girl!”
“You’re right, and I respect you for it. Here, take over the ship for a minute while I go get some coffee for us.”
Mr. Spock came onto the bridge. “What are you doing in the command seat, Lieutenant?”
“The Captain told me to.”
“Flawlessly logical. I admire your mind.”
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 09, 2013, 02:09:35 PM
There was only one good Wesley episode:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W0ff2Xns5g
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on January 15, 2013, 02:59:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJessyuf8lA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 15, 2013, 03:06:03 PM
This is one of my favorites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGvYIZppmQc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 16, 2013, 02:07:10 AM
captain jellico seems like a huuuuuuge douche

Dooooooooooooouchie douche.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 16, 2013, 03:47:44 AM
gaius baltar was definitely inspired by Dr. bashir
Both of them :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 16, 2013, 12:56:06 PM
young picard in tapestry is awesome

they should make a show about young picard punching aliens and sleeping around
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 18, 2013, 09:19:39 AM
young picard in tapestry is awesome

they should make a show about young picard punching aliens and sleeping around

Yeah, that's one of my favorite episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 19, 2013, 02:49:26 AM
I 'finished' TNG.  In truth only saw half the episodes, but really enjoyed it and I'll go through those later on.  Final episode was an amazing way to end things (err, ignoring the movies).

Starting up Deep Space 9, so far it feels like Star Trek: Mall Cops.  Naturally there's going to be a shift from Enterprise exploring the universe with Picard (:bow2) to a space base with some new guy running things.  I like that o'brien is on the show.  He's one of the likable B characters from TNG.  And Bashir totally is a sincere Baltar.  Kira is nothing yet.  The arab trader alien is OK.  Sisko isn't anything yet.  Odo is cool; seems like a better security person than Worf or Tasha.  Dax is conceptually interesting, because it's a 20-something looking life form with several lives worth of accumulated knowledge, but it's hardly a character yet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ManaByte on January 19, 2013, 03:45:14 AM
I 'finished' TNG.  In truth only saw half the episodes, but really enjoyed it and I'll go through those later on.  Final episode was an amazing way to end things (err, ignoring the movies).

Well with the final episode the crew basically said they could make different choices to make sure that future turned out different. For example, in the All Good Things... future, they never let Troi drive the ship. The one time they let her do that, she crashed the thing and as such the three-nacelle Enterprise-D never existed.

Starting up Deep Space 9, so far it feels like Star Trek: Mall Cops.  Naturally there's going to be a shift from Enterprise exploring the universe with Picard (:bow2) to a space base with some new guy running things.  I like that o'brien is on the show.  He's one of the likable B characters from TNG.  And Bashir totally is a sincere Baltar.  Kira is nothing yet.  The arab trader alien is OK.  Sisko isn't anything yet.  Odo is cool; seems like a better security person than Worf or Tasha.  Dax is conceptually interesting, because it's a 20-something looking life form with several lives worth of accumulated knowledge, but it's hardly a character yet.

DS9 doesn't get face-melting awesome until around the last half of the third season into season four. At that time, Voyager was launching and all the distinguished mentally-challenged fellows who shit up Trek were focused on kissing UPN ass with that show so the DS9 people were allowed to make the show awesome.

Rick Berman wanted to do the whole Dominion War in four episodes. Since he was distracted with recycling bad TNG script ideas on Voyager, the people running DS9 made the Dominion War last FOUR YEARS. It took a nine-episode mini-series within the series just to tie up all the storylines at the end of the show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ManaByte on January 19, 2013, 10:17:06 PM
Odo gets awesome at the end of season 3.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on January 19, 2013, 10:38:37 PM
yea im pretty lukewarm on Ds9 right now for like the exact same reason you are. Odos character especially has no endearing quality to it. he just seems like a perpetual penis. my favorite chars as of right now are qwark and bashir pretty ehhhhhh on everyone else.OBrien was indeed a good pick for this. they should have also added in the guy living in holofantasies.from engineering.

Keep watching. I maintain that DS9 had the worst beginnings of any Star Trek series but the best finish. It sat idle while all the other karts flew past it, only to luck out with a series of blue shells and stars to cross the finish line 1st place.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on January 20, 2013, 12:03:37 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/3UtIA.jpg)
When the walls fell
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 20, 2013, 01:14:22 AM
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 20, 2013, 07:37:17 PM
yea im pretty lukewarm on Ds9 right now for like the exact same reason you are. Odos character especially has no endearing quality to it. he just seems like a perpetual penis. my favorite chars as of right now are qwark and bashir pretty ehhhhhh on everyone else.OBrien was indeed a good pick for this. they should have also added in the guy living in holofantasies.from engineering.

I tried DS9 for a few episodes last year; I think it was just about where they go through the wormhole, encounter The Founders? I ended up prioritizing other shows and games, didn't stay with it for exactly the reasons you've listed. And I recall O'Brien becomes a bit of lameness once Keiko shows up and starts emasculating him at every turn.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 24, 2013, 12:12:49 AM
Just don't get the hate of tng Season 2. niccas are.crazy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 24, 2013, 12:14:33 AM
Nog's got a pair of Ferengi trading skill storylines in the later seasons that I really love.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 24, 2013, 01:26:50 AM
i hate Nog so fucking much. little shifty cunt
hahahaha
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 25, 2013, 01:37:47 PM
I imagine I'm the only one who feels this way, but Bashir and Garak are my favorite parts of DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: jiji on January 25, 2013, 01:48:41 PM
I imagine I'm the only one who feels this way, but Bashir and Garak are my favorite parts of DS9.

Nah, they pretty much are the best. O'Brien-Bashir-Garak is DS9's great love triangle.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 25, 2013, 02:12:11 PM
I imagine I'm the only one who feels this way, but Bashir and Garak are my favorite parts of DS9.
you are not alone
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on January 25, 2013, 09:42:08 PM
I didn't care much for Dax either, or Sisqo's son now that I think about it. But Sisqo himself becomes super badass during the dominion war.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 26, 2013, 04:35:56 PM
STAR TREK MOVIES ARE ON NETFLIX. WRATH OF KHAN AND SEARCH FOR SPOCK GO GO GO
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 26, 2013, 06:03:47 PM
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 26, 2013, 11:08:37 PM
Just don't get the hate of tng Season 2. distinguished black fellows are.crazy
There's not hate, it's just not very good. It's better than s1, for sure, but that's not saying much.

lmao at sisqo's off duty clothes. wearing some mad max beyond the afrikaa bambataa thunderdome shyt
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 27, 2013, 11:59:09 PM
lwaxana troy again ajsbdnrjendhdn

Honestly, she's a great character. She elicits such a reaction from fans; ST:TNG needed its own non-defeatable heel character, and there she is...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 28, 2013, 12:53:16 AM
lmao at sisqo's off duty clothes. wearing some mad max beyond the afrikaa bambataa thunderdome shyt
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: ManaByte on January 28, 2013, 09:15:06 AM
lwaxana troy again ajsbdnrjendhdn

Honestly, she's a great character. She elicits such a reaction from fans; ST:TNG needed its own non-defeatable heel character, and there she is...

Read Q In Law by Peter David. Q marries Lwaxana, gives her the power of Q, but then dumps her. The Q prevent him from taking the power away from him so she proceeds to kick his ass all over the ship. It has one of the greatest Worf one-liners ever:

Quote
"She's really beating the stuffing out of him," observed Riker. "What do you think we should do?" "Sell tickets," rumbled Worf.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on January 28, 2013, 02:33:16 PM
im so sad that im 4/7ths finished with DS9 and only shit Voyager awaits me after

i'll have to watch the original series next

I'm gonna go Voyager -> Enterprise -> Original Series -> First Six Movies.  End where I started.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on January 28, 2013, 05:56:42 PM
I kind of gave up on Voyager midway through season 4. I'll come back to it later though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 30, 2013, 09:07:04 AM
lwaxana troy again ajsbdnrjendhdn

Honestly, she's a great character. She elicits such a reaction from fans; ST:TNG needed its own non-defeatable heel character, and there she is...

Read Q In Law by Peter David. Q marries Lwaxana, gives her the power of Q, but then dumps her. The Q prevent him from taking the power away from him so she proceeds to kick his ass all over the ship. It has one of the greatest Worf one-liners ever:

Quote
"She's really beating the stuffing out of him," observed Riker. "What do you think we should do?" "Sell tickets," rumbled Worf.

I think I've read most of the Peter David TNG books; they're very good.

I am starting to really dislike Worf. He learns nothing. He never changes. He's prone to being fooled and making the same and simple mistakes. Hell he even gets beat up sometimes. I liked him better in TNG.
Sadly, I think Worf falls prey to writers wanting to show how tough the monster is by having it best Worf. Instead, basically Worf just looks like he's the only person to get beat up all the time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 02, 2013, 01:07:46 AM
i think i agree with you momo. ds9 overall has better writing and even maybe dialogue.... but im gonna be honest. i think i like TNG better. the cast is just so much more memorable, the aesthetic more enjoyable, even a better sense of humor. i think DS9 is objectively better, but TNG is just special man. i cant even justify it tbh
My man :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 04, 2013, 03:14:16 AM
worf in by inferno's light :bow2

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 04, 2013, 04:25:21 AM
If you were any other man I WOULD KILL YOU WHERE YOU STAND

Worf :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on February 04, 2013, 05:53:26 PM
i think i agree with you momo. ds9 overall has better writing and even maybe dialogue.... but im gonna be honest. i think i like TNG better. the cast is just so much more memorable, the aesthetic more enjoyable, even a better sense of humor. i think DS9 is objectively better, but TNG is just special man. i cant even justify it tbh

The cast was endearing to me because each member represented or subscribed to the spotless morality of the Federation in their own way. They were always going forward to become better than what they were, valantly seeking to improve the lives of others without infringing on their natural rights or asking for anything in exchange outside of knowledge. I felt I could trust any of the cast members with my life.

DS9, on the other hand, spoiled the Federation's innocence and, by extension, those of the characters as well, by retrofitting Federation moral and political system with semblances of Machiavellianism, particularly during the Dominion War where favorable ends started justifying crude means. We've seen it with some of Sisko's decisions that resulted in the deliberate killing of unsuspecting individuals. We've seen it with the introduction of Section 31. The notion of a pure Federation was cast in forever doubt, and while some praised the gritty direction of the series, others like myself call it for what it is - a cop out to boost ratings. Because the Federation was supposed to be perfect and ideal but its purity was forever tarnished in the name of "realism" -- when, in fact, this realism is only applicable to today's world and today's people, not to those in the future who're, by Roddenberry's original vision, supposed to be more advanced, civilized, and enlightened.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 07, 2013, 11:57:04 PM
TOS is rather campy, but I'd still recommend it over most of Voyager. As much shit as I give Voyager it has it's moments, thing is you have to wade through buckets of crap to get there
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 08, 2013, 12:14:19 AM
i think i agree with you momo. ds9 overall has better writing and even maybe dialogue.... but im gonna be honest. i think i like TNG better. the cast is just so much more memorable, the aesthetic more enjoyable, even a better sense of humor. i think DS9 is objectively better, but TNG is just special man. i cant even justify it tbh

The cast was endearing to me because each member represented or subscribed to the spotless morality of the Federation in their own way. They were always going forward to become better than what they were, valantly seeking to improve the lives of others without infringing on their natural rights or asking for anything in exchange outside of knowledge. I felt I could trust any of the cast members with my life.

DS9, on the other hand, spoiled the Federation's innocence and, by extension, those of the characters as well, by retrofitting Federation moral and political system with semblances of Machiavellianism, particularly during the Dominion War where crude ends started justifying favorable means. We've seen it with some of Sisko's decisions that resulted in the deliberate killing of unsuspecting individuals. We've seen it with the introduction of Section 31. The notion of a pure Federation was cast in forever doubt, and while some praised the gritty direction of the series, others like myself call it for what it is - a cop out to boost ratings. Because the Federation was supposed to be perfect and ideal but its purity was forever tarnished in the name of "realism" -- when, in fact, this realism is only applicable to today's world and today's people, not to those in the future who're, by Roddenberry's original vision, supposed to be more advanced, civilized, and enlightened.

I like your thoughts, here. I'd heard it said before, but not this well, and usually by rabid Trekkies. It does dim the light a bit, to think that the shipmates and UFP may not always have the most pure intent at heart.

Then again, this was present in TNG to some degree, with UFP Admirals going rogue, covering up their dirty past, etc. But I honestly can't recall if that was during the DS9/TNG overlap, or discrete.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on February 09, 2013, 01:01:10 AM
Green alien girls. :drool
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 09, 2013, 02:52:52 AM
Diana Muldaur shows up a couple times.

Dr. Pulaski  :drool
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 09, 2013, 03:24:38 AM
In season 6 of DS9 and the space breeding ain't any less weird.  A half-ferengi, half-cardassian hellspawn better not show up. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 10, 2013, 01:35:34 PM
I forgot thow weird TOS Klignons are if you watched TNG first :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 11, 2013, 05:21:28 AM
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 13, 2013, 01:15:07 AM
does section 31 ever show up again? as much as I like the idyllic federation from TNG and parts of DS9, the thought that it's supported by men who do what's necessary is compelling.  the three members you see are all human.  I'm left wondering if it's an exclusively human run group.  A 'can't risk other species leaking the information' sort of thing.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 13, 2013, 01:22:44 AM
There's some books about it, and they play some parts in the DS9 Relaunch.

They're hinted at in an Enterprise episode or two, not directly referenced or anything but a whole "HEY REMEMBER THESE FELLAS? HUH? HUH? *WINKS*" deal. That would seem to imply they predate the Federation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 15, 2013, 03:03:34 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzUX_1jaO_I
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on February 15, 2013, 04:19:32 PM
does section 31 ever show up again? as much as I like the idyllic federation from TNG and parts of DS9, the thought that it's supported by men who do what's necessary is compelling.  the three members you see are all human.  I'm left wondering if it's an exclusively human run group.  A 'can't risk other species leaking the information' sort of thing.

Yes. Check out Enterprise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 17, 2013, 01:50:36 AM
They keep giving us these episodes where Tupac loses his shit because of some vulcan bs too, at least keep that gimmick to once a season smh

It was the first time a Vulcan had been seen on the bridge crew since TOS, and the writers were chomping at the bit to use it.

I'd put my money on rushed schedules or a lazy Head Writer; the same thing that has Wesley save the ship every other episode, and has Worf being beat to hell all the time. Instead of an exceptional moment which highlights the character, it becomes a constant, and ironically ends up defining the character as the opposite of what's intended (badass security office, hypercompetent crew who would not /normally/ be shown up by a somewhat bright high school student).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 17, 2013, 01:58:31 AM
I did like the concept of having to address pon farr away from the Alpha Quadrant. I don't think they figured out how to do it in any way that made much sense though. Like they skimmed the summary of Amok Time before writing either.

Enterprise's turn had the same problem.

Quote
Especially with Janeway, there is no fucking way someone's reliance on starfleet principles would make them turn down so many routes to get home quick.
It's not Janeway's adherence to Starfleet principles, the Prime Directive or anything. It's because she's the villain and stranded/kept them there because it made her the most powerful person among their "tribe." Everything she does over the entire series is based around this central goal of maintaining her power*.

I've never understood why people considered DS9 the darkest Star Trek.

*Except for keeping Harry an Ensign, that was just because she despised him.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 17, 2013, 09:10:44 PM
Gowron challenging Worf, after Worf handed him his ass last time they fought.  Gowron even fronts with "you'll regret killing me." come on...just shoot him with a phaser from across the room.  Worf ain't too bright, but he's in another league than the rest of the doofus Klingon race.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on February 17, 2013, 10:29:35 PM
The notion that the Klingon Empire is on par, technologically speaking, with the Romulans and the Federation is odd. I mean, they're a race of warriors, and they stress the warrior way of life even outside of the military institution, so the idea that there are competent scientists, engineers, and physicians in a society that isn't very conducive to non-violent avenues of intellectual advancement is peculiar.

What's even more strange is that the Vulcans, who are mentally superior to virtually everyone, are technologically (and therefore, militarily) inferior to all the major powers.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 17, 2013, 10:51:34 PM
I can buy the vulcan thing with the conceit that humans are more emotional, and therefore more creative.

The Klingon empire might make sense if, say, they created a weapon powered by a warp drive, and another advanced race sought to make contact, and the klingons murdered and stole their technology.  The cochran guy from First Contact made a warp drive from a nuclear missile, so there's some precedent there.  Although, ezria tells worf that it's been a very long time since the klingons weren't corrupt.  I haven't watched TOS or Enterprise yet, but maybe a long, long, long time ago the klingons weren't dumb brutes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 19, 2013, 02:25:30 PM
All in all DS9 was really good.  Still think TNG is better, but that's a show that appeals more to my sensibilities.

Easier to list my problems with it than everything I liked.  Didn't care for the maquis, even if it led to some good episodes.  Thought they were cheap, and the way they dressed was stupid.  Odo went back and forth between acceptable and annoying; overall the weakest of the cast, to me.  Everything about the pahwraiths and Dukat after his defeat.  In my mind Dukat's story was over when he debased himself in front of Sisko when they were marooned on that planet.  He didn't need to find space-satan and do all the cartoonishly evil stuff in the final season.  And after a point the stories about the Ferengi got tiring.

Actually I'll point out out part that surprised me: Jake.  Not that he was the best character or anything, but there were so many ways to ruin a 'son' character, and they managed to avoid falling into cheap traps.  I mean, if Jake turned out like Alexander, it would've been awful.

and voyager is making a bad first impression.  none of the characters stand out in a positive way.  tom paris is uncomfortably smarmy.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 20, 2013, 08:48:40 PM
Voyager was supposed to be about going back to the original series' type of drama, exploration of an unknown territory, and that type of bridge crew.
Paris, I think, was supposed to be the male/libido/scoundrel portion of Captain Kirk, while Janeway was the stern, authoritarian portion of Kirk.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on February 20, 2013, 09:14:48 PM
And I guess Neelix was supposed to be an anthropomorphic Tribble. :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 22, 2013, 01:23:33 AM
I'm in season 2 and yeah it's bad.  If I wasn't committed to watching star trek, I would've dropped it already. 

Deep Space 9 took some time to hit its stride and become spectacular, but it was always pretty good with great characters and nice ideas.  TNG got me hooked from episode 1.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 22, 2013, 01:34:53 AM
How many eps per day do you watch Escha?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 22, 2013, 01:36:07 AM
i finished voyager. It sucked. there were like 10 legit great episodes. 7 seasons of trash

almost afraid to watch enterprise
:bow

enterprize is worse imo :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 22, 2013, 10:53:14 PM
i was on season 4 and skipped to 7.
Doubt you want to go back but here's a few from season four, five and six I think are alright or better* or too stupid to miss or whatever you might go back for if a synopsis catches your fancy:
Year of Hell*
Message in a Bottle
Living Witness*
The Omega Directive
One
Hope and Fear
Night
In The Flesh
Timeless*
Counterpoint
Latent Image
Bliss
The Disease  :lol
Demon/Course: Oblivion
The Fight :poop
Someone To Watch Over Me  :-*
Relativity
Equinox*
Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy
Dragon's Teeth*
The Voyager Conspiracy
Pathfinder*
Blink Of An Eye
Fair Haven/Spirit Folk  :yuck
Ashes to Ashes
Live Fast and Prosper
Fury
Life Line*
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on February 25, 2013, 09:50:41 AM
Anyone else thought the relationship between Worf and Deanna Troi at the tail end of the series to be odd? It definitely set Riker fans at odds with the Klingon. But what was more bizzare is the fact that Riker and Troi married in Star Trek: Nemesis. I mean, how does Riker manage to get sloppy seconds from a son of Mogh?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on February 25, 2013, 01:33:10 PM
yeah, at first I thought it would be a 'what if' story in Parallels only.  Last episode of voyager I watched had Tom and Kes in a relationship, with Harry in a relationship with their daughter, despite the women in this scenario being like 3 and 1 years old respectively.  Similar situation there.

Then when they continued it into the very last episode, where one possible future had Troi dead, and that was a wedge between Riker and Worf's friendship? No one mentioned it in Generations.  Don't remember anyone mentioning it in Deep Space 9.  And in Nemesis, Worf is just 'there' not really fazed by the marriage  I guess he realized that every woman he ends up is doomed.
 
I was confused by Julian and Ezri's relationship, too.  It went something like: Ezri matters for a few episodes, sleeps with Worf, mind scan shows she's in love with Julian, and then they're together.  But the kernel of the relationship stemmed from Jadzia's feelings for Julian, which were outweighed by her feelings for Worf or something? sure, whtever.
 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 25, 2013, 08:48:50 PM
I try to ignore the Trek movies, at least as far as dealing with the whole bridge crew goes. The movies are about Picard and Data, to the unfortunate exclusion of the ensemble cast's dynamic, which is what really made for the best of the TV episodes.

There have been a few write ups about how weird the wedding stuff was, including one by Wil Wheaton, I think...

But, yeah, it's a weird left turn which ignores where the series was going, but that's mostly true for all TNG movies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 28, 2013, 06:40:20 AM
For TNG you just have to ignore any of that shit. You watch First Contact because it's badass. You watch Nemesis maybe because you want to see one of the best Trek space battles in the midst of one of the worst Trek plots.

Insurrection is a two-part TNG episode. Generations is dogshit, worst of all the Trek films, come at me.

That Moore chat relays how they confused All Good Things and Generations since they were being written at the same time. I can't imagine how. One was all the good ideas, one got all the bad ones.

I'll save my dumb ramblings about TOS movies until you guys get there or whatever. (VI is the secret best, shhhh.)

Just saw this for the first time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzUX_1jaO_I
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 28, 2013, 06:51:39 AM
I agree about First Contact and Insurrection.

Nemesis is a steaming pile of diarrhea, served on a silver platter of production value.

http://youtu.be/8ZjkHUrEuHc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 28, 2013, 07:07:44 AM
The production value of Nemesis sucks too  :lol

But dat battle. It doesn't even make sense but it's too stupidly cool.

I like some of the music too. And the commentaries where they're all trying to say that Stuart Baird wasn't horrible to work with even though he thought Geordi was an alien. (Racist?)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 28, 2013, 08:09:11 AM
Yeah, okay, it sucks in Nemesis, but its better than the tv show... :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on March 04, 2013, 03:59:19 AM
voyager got better, never great.  deeper I get into star trek, the more confused I get by the negative response to the 2009 film.

so far enterprise is HD, widescreen, and wtf is this intro?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 04, 2013, 10:24:48 AM
deeper I get into star trek, the more confused I get by the negative response to the 2009 film.

For me the appeal of Star Trek was never the action. It had action but it was never the action of most traditional action movies.  I think that 2009 film isn't really what I like from Star Trek. But whatever. It seemed very popular and any Star Trek film probably has to be more like that for mainstream audiences.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on March 04, 2013, 02:51:46 PM
I understand and mostly agree with both of you.  I like TNG and DS9 more than Star Trek 09, and a Star Trek movie that felt more like those would be swell.  But Voyager and most of the TNG movies, especially Nemesis, were in such a low place that Star Trek 09 comes off like a big step up from what came before.  I can appreciate it more as a fun movie with the Star Trek license, even if it's not totally faithful to Star Trek.  I dunno.  Maybe Enterprise will be really good and I'll retract this.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on March 04, 2013, 10:11:26 PM
decon chamber  :wtf


did gainan oil down riker off camera? or does this get phased out by the 24th century?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 04, 2013, 10:24:55 PM
decon chamber  :wtf


did gainan oil down riker off camera? or does this get phased out by the 24th century?

I am missing the reference. Was this in an episode, or are your referring to some Ted Danson action for Riker?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on March 04, 2013, 10:44:14 PM
decon chamber  :wtf


did gainan oil down riker off camera? or does this get phased out by the 24th century?

I am missing the reference. Was this in an episode, or are your referring to some Ted Danson action for Riker?

Bakula Enterprise had a "decontamination chamber" that they went through after away missions, which was just a blatant excuse to get T'Pol naked and all oiled up.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 04, 2013, 10:46:34 PM
T'pol or however you spell that oils down the engineer dude in Enterprise

I remember because the only thing I liked of the show was T'pol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 04, 2013, 10:47:05 PM
Boogie'd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 05, 2013, 01:38:35 AM
:fans_self

 :-[
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 06, 2013, 04:35:30 AM
deeper I get into star trek, the more confused I get by the negative response to the 2009 film.
I actually dislike Star Trek as a film more than I dislike it as a Star Trek film. If that makes any sense. (And like it more than Generations and V at the very least.)

II and VI and First Contact are all films I like enough alone (especially the first two) that get kicked up another level due to being Star Trek.

I dislike Star Trek for its dumb incoherent plot. And beyond that the action just isn't interesting enough to catch my attention. I do love many of the little Star Trek "touches" to it. I actually think Pine and Urban are better than Quinto. I kinda liked Pike. I hatteeeeddd Nero and everything involving him, especially since it wasted Bana and wrecked up the plot.

And I still think tying it to the original continuity is what introduced half the plot holes. Beyond that my "fanboy" hate is tied to the ship, it's too big, bright, etc. I loved the tight naval/sub versions that II, VI, First Contact and Enterprise show. (And the Defiant of course  :-*.)

I am kinda slowly getting excited for Into Darkness despite everything that's telling me no. I hope that with no pressure to establish their version and such they can just do something great that maybe pulls in Trek. That said, I haven't liked anything from any of these guys (except I used to watch Crossing Jordan :-[) and doubt that'll start here.

And the name, especially the name.  :-\

 :-\
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 08, 2013, 09:07:44 AM
Yeah, after The Hulk, and 2009 Star Trek, when watching HANNA the other night, I was completely surprised that Bana can act.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 08, 2013, 12:54:57 PM
Bakula Enterprise had a "decontamination chamber" that they went through after away missions, which was just a blatant excuse to get T'Pol naked and all oiled up.

Reminds me of this episode which at the time was touted as a big social deal by the marketing people but was really just a way to slip in some lipstick lesbian kissing in an episode.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rejoined
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbian_kiss_episode

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvfJRLTNmUI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on March 08, 2013, 01:00:16 PM
Could never hope to get the GF to watch Star Trek. That's like breaking someone into RPGs by having them play Wizardry first.

So, the past few nights, I've had her watch Battlestar Galactica. So far, she can tolerate it and she hates sci-fi with a passion. No goofy looking aliens for her to laugh at in BSG, so that's a big plus. The Cylons are perfect -- they're killer robots, she can understand killer robots. The tech-speech isn't overwhelming to her, either.

Hopefully, once we're done with this show and she becomes better acclimated to the theme of space travel, I can sneak a few TNG episodes into her TV diet. Who knows, maybe she'll even give Star Wars a try (she's never watched any of the movies). Sigh.

Wish me luck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 08, 2013, 01:13:23 PM
I've noticed females tend to like BSG more. It's relatively accessible. They generally have to have some innner nerd in them though to get into Star Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on March 08, 2013, 01:52:28 PM
yeah, BSG is mostly regular drama.

First episode of TNG is out there with Q testing the enterprise crew, freeing a captive space jellyfish, and that's without getting into the show's premise.  There aren't as many touchstones to ground TNG in our ordinary lives.

also, Enterprise is a really unengaging show.  TNG, DS9, and occasionally with Voyager, I'd be so taken that I solely focus on the episode instead of my work.  With Enterprise, nothing is particularly intriguing or entertaining, so I end up concentrating on my work.  Can't even muster up any criticism of it.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 08, 2013, 05:15:50 PM
It's well past time for the Joey in space then:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI8ezrK6Qjs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mandark on March 08, 2013, 05:56:38 PM
TNG is Barney Miller in space.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I've been repeating this for years hoping just one person would realize what a brilliant insight this is.  Validate me!
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nice cat but chicken on March 13, 2013, 07:35:07 PM
holy shit ray wise in who watches the watcher
(http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110619210057/memoryalpha/en/images/d/d9/Liko.jpg)
i wish he had been able to play the hulk at some point. him or klaus kinski would be fantastic.
this was a great episode all round, i love when they completely fuck the prime directive. i would totally worship the picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 14, 2013, 09:03:03 AM
Picard. Man, what a stud.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 14, 2013, 09:21:31 AM
I'd have liked to see Bakula in a Lord of Illusions sequel. That movie is severely under-appreciated.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on March 14, 2013, 04:15:58 PM
So I watched 'The Captains' last night, really interesting.


5)Avery Brooks. this dude is cool as hell but he's also weird as shit. he has this allegorical/metaphorical way of speaking sometimes that actually just makes him seem like Ben Sisko IRL. I feel like he might be a little crazy.

He was weird. He's like a former black militant turned music scholar.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: jiji on March 15, 2013, 11:45:37 AM
5)Avery Brooks. this dude is cool as hell but he's also weird as shit. he has this allegorical/metaphorical way of speaking sometimes that actually just makes him seem like Ben Sisko IRL. I feel like he might be a little crazy.

Seems like the dude spent a little too much time with the Prophets. I mean, he's cool as hell, but at the same time, crazy as hell. I don't know how he sobered up his demeanor enough to play Sisko. Unless the way he is in The Captains is something that's developed since he was on DS9.

And did anybody else cringe every time Shatner tried to make the conversation about himself and started to tell some unfunny, non-sequitur anecdote? The dude thinks he's likable and funny and relevant but he really is just That Guy. I watched the roundtable discussion disc that came with the TOS movie BD set, and Shatner does about the same thing there, but the editors didn't let him monopolize the end result.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on March 15, 2013, 12:07:15 PM
3)Patrick Stewart is just god.

He's amazing in anything.

"But it was too late. I'd already seen everything."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintendosbooger on March 15, 2013, 12:23:49 PM
3)Patrick Stewart is just god.

He's amazing in anything.

"But it was too late. I'd already seen everything."

Yes.

It was pretty revealing how he explained his early chemistry (or lack thereof) with the rest of the cast. How he regretted being so distant from everyone, before he finally allowed himself to build a strong working and personal relationship with them. In fact, you can tell in the acting from the earlier seasons -- Picard seemed so stiff, bitter, and downright unapproachable in those earlier episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 15, 2013, 01:22:18 PM
Patrick Stewart is GOAT man
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 15, 2013, 05:24:35 PM
There was a thing a few years ago with Stewart (with a mustache), Frakes, Shatner and Nimoy hosted by Whoopi:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9G5ciMqFNM

That guy has uploaded the whole thing (http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3D984C88FF830AE9).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 16, 2013, 12:50:17 AM
That's pretty cool, thanks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on March 16, 2013, 02:30:49 AM
SiSSSko is A prEEEty draMaTic guy.  back when I watched the captains,  it got me thinking avery brooks toned down his natural tendencies for the role.  dude's on another level.

Brent Spiner and Jon Frakes aged the worst out of the bunch.  It's harder on Data as a character.  Riker just needs to convince us he's a ladies man, and, uh, that episode where his clone happened to get chubby too, after starving on a planet or w/e.

You could argue that Sir Patrick Stewart looked old when he was younger, but he's still looking baller in his 70s.  So dignified.

 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: demi on March 29, 2013, 10:37:08 AM
All of Star Trek is free on Hulu until March 31, get yo Jedi on
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 10, 2013, 11:37:07 AM
I've mentioned it before but I don't like Deep Space nearly as much as certain pockets of the Internet do. I always thought I only saw 3 or 4 seasons of the show but I was looking at the episode descriptions last night on Netflix and apparently I stopped at the beginning of the final season. I'll finish it up then since I'm pretty close to the end.

I doubt I would be able to push myself to watch Voyager though. I saw 5 random episodes across the run of that show and I thought each one was worse than the last.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 11, 2013, 10:52:35 AM
Watched a number of Deep Space Nine episodes last night in the final season. The funny thing is even some of those I've seen and just forgot. I think mainly what it comes down to is I haven't seen the last few. Not sure why that happened back in the day.

Watching it though has sort of made me realize, my main problem with trek from that era. Familiarity breeds contempt. With each Trek show I became more and more tired of seeing the same themes and ideas repeated over and over in a very similar format. Basically I like each Star Trek show less than the prior one. And its probably not even an issue of quality (except for Voyager which I think stinks from my limited viewing), it's just how many times can I see a malfunctioning holodeck episode or something is about to explode so let's fix it at the last second episode. To be fair Deep Space Nine is less of an offender here as its more about relationships between characters but still it has that Formula Star Trek feel and that's about when the formula started to feel tired for me.

Despite not being a mega fan of the movie reboot, I would welcome a new Star Trek show now though. Enough time has passed where I feel like a TV show would have a different feel. The way I feel TOS feels different than TNG but I still really like them both.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 12, 2013, 12:01:54 AM
Yeah, I took to calling it Deep Space 90210, because it was always about the social drama between station regulars. Also, I hated the relationship, constant ragging, from Keiko to O'Brien. Put that woman in an airlock and vent it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 12, 2013, 12:31:24 AM
I've been mixing in some next generation episodes so I don't burn out. The thing is I'm only watching my favorite episodes or the ones considered the best so it sort of gives an unfair representation of how good next generation was. That nostalgia.

I haven't seen most of these since they aired unlike TOS which I saw many times in syndication and rewatched on DVD just 5 years ago or so.

I have a bad feeling I'm going to try to gut my way through voyager some day just to be a completionist.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 20, 2013, 02:34:35 AM
Yeah, I've got a similar feeling. I keep thinking I want more Trek, and "it can't be that bad!"

In the end, I always remember that I was much easier to entertain earlier in life, and Voyager still wasn't enough to keep me hooked.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on May 20, 2013, 10:16:12 AM
yeah, Voyager's last episode is barely linked to the series progression and you don't need to watch most of the show to 'get' the conclusion.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Show begins with them believing it takes 70 years to return home.  Every once in a while there's an event that pushes them forward, like Kes reducing it to 65 years or something.  Or when they could return, but don't, because Janeway's bad decisions.  Then in the last episode alternate future Janeway's cheats by giving them future tech, throwing them in a worm hole, and everyone wins.
[close]

And I tried going back to Enterprise.  Gave up 20 minutes later.  I will watch the original series one of these days, but the one-two of voyager and enterprise got me to back away from the franchise for now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 20, 2013, 10:29:02 AM
I put the finishing up on Deep Space Nine thing on hold because I was enjoying watching TNG. I'm probably about 3 to 5 episodes from finishing up all my favorites and then I'll go back to finishing off Deep Space.

It's been fun to rewatch that stuff. Some real classic TNG episodes and its easy to watch since it's not really serial and each episode is a one off. It's funny. I prefer a real serial storyline in my TV shows but I have to admit its easier to go back and watch really episodic stuff because you don't have to remember a bunch of plot stuff and it all stands alone.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MyNameIsMethodis on May 20, 2013, 10:29:31 AM
http://www.deathwaltzrecordingcompany.com/shop/star-trek-lost-in-space/

how many of u nerds are jealous i own dis
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 21, 2013, 02:18:21 AM
Isn't ST on Netflix for free, or was that just a limited time?

When I was in the USA last year, I started pouring through them, but didn't get far before returning to Japan.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2013, 01:18:12 PM
Watched the finale of Next Generation last night. You forget how damn good a finale that was. In general TNG when its at is best is better than I gave it credit for.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Eli Gulgin on May 23, 2013, 02:28:16 PM
Huh I watched the finale too just a few days ago. I almost cried lol :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 23, 2013, 09:33:00 PM
That is a damned fine finale to a show.

Too bad about those movies, huh?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on May 25, 2013, 09:39:43 PM
That is a damned fine finale to a show.

Too bad about those movies, huh?

I actually think Star Trek: Insurrection was a good TNG movie just because it actually felt like TNG. It has a lot of good character moments, it was basically about them exploring this new planet and helping this small race of people and not like a epic FATE OF HUMANITY HANGING IN THE BALANCE, it felt good. It wasn't a good movie movie, but a good TNG movie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 26, 2013, 10:21:58 AM
Sure, I can get with that.

But then Generations, and Nemesis make Encounter at Far Point look like high art.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 30, 2013, 02:42:37 AM
I watched Measure of a Man this evening. I caught feelings.  :'(

I'm back on DS9. I should have that finished up by the weekend.

And I decided instead of being a complete loser and watching all of Voyager, I'll just be a partial loser and watch the 10 or 15 highest rated episodes. That will save me a lot of time while still being able to get a sense of what the series offered.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 30, 2013, 02:52:12 AM
That's a pretty superb episode. Maddox was a great love-to-hate-him character. His arrogance was epic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 01, 2013, 11:55:21 AM
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.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 01, 2013, 12:41:45 PM
I've never found that series as interesting as a lot of internet people do. Different strokes and all that. I know my opinion is in the minority on that subject.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: fistfulofmetal on June 01, 2013, 04:29:02 PM
On season 3, episode 4, Who Watches the Watchers

I loved everything about that episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Phoenix Dark on June 01, 2013, 06:53:47 PM
Decided to give Stark Trek a shot. As a kid I used to sneak downstairs on Saturdays to watch the early cartoons; I'd always get up around 6PM, but the cartoons would start at 7PM. Next Generations came on around 6:30 or so, and I'd often find myself watching eps; it was interesting but I never really kept up with it. Likewise I had seen some of the original series thanks to my mom, but never got super into it.

I started on the first series, and last week I watched The Cage (netflix). It's not hard to see why that pilot failed; it's a very good episode, but very dense and throws you into the deep end of the pool. After that I watched The Man Trap, which is the Shatner pilot/reboot. Not as good as The Cage but pretty good nonetheless.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Eli Gulgin on June 01, 2013, 08:55:58 PM
Nah, TOS first or you won't appreciate it enough since you'd be comparing it with TNG the whole time. It just makes more sense to watch where it all began first as events and aliens have developed somewhat by TNG and it would be backwards to watch that first. I like going in chronological order anyway, I'm boring like that.

I should rewatch TOS again sometime soon.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Eli Gulgin on June 01, 2013, 09:24:50 PM
I never thought TOS looked dated. I mean okay it looks dated compared to scifi now but I've never had a problem with cheap sets and tacky wardrobe and whatever that was just normal for the time. Fuck me, I think I have a super great ability to travel back in time in my mind and imagine I'm watching old tv shows and movies at the time they were made, geez I'm so cool. No but really, watching something old and saying it's dated it's like no shit. Fucking Predator is dated and it's still one of the best movies ever. Or Hitchcock movies.

Oh and TNG is dated, the 80s haircuts, man. Beverly's hair in the pilot :-X The whole pilot is far worse than any TOS episode, thank Jebus TNG found its way later on.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on June 01, 2013, 09:25:34 PM
problem with starting at TOS is that it's uphill to TNG, slight dip to DS9, then a steep drop from there to the Reboot.

i'm currently ending on TOS and it's nice to enjoy a Star Trek show again  :heart
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 01, 2013, 09:32:23 PM
TOS and TNG both looked pretty nice once they shined them up for Blu-Ray. I've enjoyed rewatching both series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 01, 2013, 09:49:45 PM
TOS has always been my favorite. I like the origin stuff and I like the big three more than any other Star Trek characters. Certainly childhood nostalgia plays a part in that. As far as filler TNG is just as filled with it. Not that I don't like TNG.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: cool breeze on June 01, 2013, 11:04:45 PM
TOS has always been my favorite. I like the origin stuff and I like the big three more than any other Star Trek characters. Certainly childhood nostalgia plays a part in that. As far as filler TNG is just as filled with it. Not that I don't like TNG.

Filler/frivolous episodes live or die on the characters, imo.  TOS and TNG have great casts, so fillers are another excuse see them interact with one another.  That's ultimately why Voyager and Enterprise didn't stick with me.  Save for The Doctor, I couldn't care about the characters on either show.  Comparatively, I could watch Picard or Bashir do nothing for 40 minutes and derive some entertainment.

Some of The Doctor's episodes on Voyagers are terrific.  He made watching Voyager worthwhile.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 01, 2013, 11:27:15 PM
Filler/frivolous episodes live or die on the characters, imo.  TOS and TNG have great casts, so fillers are another excuse see them interact with one another.

Yeah that's my opinion. Looking back on Star Trek now, I like that it isn't really serialized and the episodes mostly stand on their own. For me good Trek shows are the ones where I can remember specific classic episodes and love to see those episodes again and again.


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 03, 2013, 09:13:45 AM
http://www.uproxx.com/gammasquad/2013/02/surprisingly-red-isnt-the-most-dangerous-color-you-can-wear-aboard-the-starship-enterprise/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 03, 2013, 02:33:15 PM
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. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 07, 2013, 11:07:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 10, 2013, 12:45:44 AM
It's hilarious how often the Voyager  is invaded by Aliens and then they completely lose control of their ship completely only to gain it back it again. And its different than in the other series where they just end up meeting a god like entity who is more powerful than them. I mean Aliens literally board the ship in voyager. Capture them. Sometimes completely kick everybody off the ship or have everybody locked up with guns pointing at them. And they still manage to recover the ship. And this has happened a lot so far and I'm only 4 seasons in.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 10, 2013, 08:47:58 PM
It's later revealed that those were all Janeway's holodeck fantasies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 12, 2013, 01:17:22 PM
I'm up to like Season 5 now. I still watch a lot of episodes but any episode that has a bad user rating I skip. like sub 7 score.


I think I can speak to the show now a bit more objectively. It's certainly the worst of the star trek shows I've seen. (I've never seen an episode of Enterprise). It's worse than TOS, TNG, DS9. That being said its also not as bad as I expected. That estimation probably stems from a number of things. I've skipped the worst of the episodes which would drag down my opinion. I've never seen the show so its fun to see new Star Trek and new characters. And certainly its been such awhile that I've watched any Trek that a bit of trek nostalgia is creeping in period.

The problems I mentioned earlier still exist and I'm sure will continue to exist. It's a formula show that has ambitions beyond being a formula show but doesn't have the creativity to stretch it there seems to be the main failing as an umbrella issue.

It's kinda fun to compare my expectations going in to what I think now. I was always told that Janeway was a really bad captain. I think she's quite good. Especially as an actress. If there are flaws with the character its how she bounces from upholding the prime directive to breaking it at the drop of the hat but that's more a writer's issue to me. I think she's more than solid. The doctor is also a very good character. The most unique and interesting character on the show by far played by a very good actor. In fact my favorite episode of the entire run so far has been "Latent Image" which is a doctor-centric episode and solely works because you buy into a great performance from him. Seven of 9 has been the most surprising. From the outside looking in the impression I got from the vocal Trek critics was that she was eye-candy solely to attract virgin nerds. The eye candy part is correct of course but she's also a very interesting character and honestly whether she or the doctor are featured is one of the influencing factors of whether I watch the episode or not. She's like a dark version of data. It would be more interesting if she was darker but that wasn't gonna happen on this kind of show.

The rest of the cast is either boring, bad, or vaguely competent. Honestly I think I have a soft spot for the show. I know its not the best Trek but there are enough episodes that remind me why I liked Trek that I just can't flat out hate it although I'm pretty sure if I had watched it when it was originally on I would be harsher on it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on June 12, 2013, 02:50:23 PM
Soo, the image macro for Stoney watching Voyager would read:

*skips all of the shitty episodes of Voyager*

*wonders why everyone thinks Voyager was so shitty*

Well, duh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 12, 2013, 04:11:30 PM
I don't wonder why everyone thinks its shitty. I'm pretty sure I actively understand why people think its shitty.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 12, 2013, 04:48:10 PM
if you skipped all the shitty episodes of voyager, you might have a season of television

I essentially use this as a rough guide

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112178/epvote?ref_=ttep_ql_5

Along with a number of best of lists to make sure I don't miss anything regarded as "essential".

Anything below a score of 7.0 is generally dead on terrible and I try not to watch it unless its an important plot related episode or its an episode that at least sounds interesting. A lot of the lower 7 episodes are also really bad which I say from experience.The earlier seasons were especially hit hard here.

Sometimes I get on jags though where even then I will watch a bad episode. I watched all of season 4 for instance and intend to watch a lot of the later season episodes since I've already watched far more episodes than I originally planned.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 12, 2013, 11:01:26 PM
if you skipped all the shitty episodes of voyager, you might have a season of television

Yes, I was just thinking that TNG, there are re-edited versions of episodes which show to theater audiences; they're that good. There are best-of collections, and whole arcs which are just made of win.

Then there's Voyager, where you could probably have a best-of collection on a single DVD.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 13, 2013, 03:25:40 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/OObv86T.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 07, 2014, 11:17:52 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/gITIfRO.jpg)
 (http://i.imgur.com/gITIfRO.jpg)

MANY MOAR:
http://imgur.com/gallery/0IkGI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 13, 2014, 12:17:30 AM
http://youtu.be/DsOE73pxpys

:rejoice :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 19, 2014, 12:30:11 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPoqNeR3_UA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Positive Touch on January 19, 2014, 12:49:19 AM
this is the most perfect thing ever
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 19, 2014, 01:35:33 AM
I'm very conflicted emotionally about the fact that YouTube listed it as "Recommended For You" on the home page.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 19, 2014, 02:11:56 AM
You're conflicted a video that has 1,216,591 views was recommended to you?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 19, 2014, 02:44:28 AM
Because the algorithm is illustrating that I've watched enough Star Trek videos and multi-hour videos like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXRAsUOblV4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXRAsUOblV4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh7lp9umG2I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh7lp9umG2I)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09m0B8RRiEE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09m0B8RRiEE)

To begin suggesting combinations for me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 05, 2014, 03:19:09 AM
Quote
"I think its home and its heart is really in television. That's really what Star Trek is - the core concept is really a TV show.

"I think the features are good and I really admire what JJ Abrams has done with the last two films - I think it's great - but the heart and soul of that franchise demands a return to television.

"The kinds of stories that you'll tell in the features space are not the kinds of stories that made that show so popular. The features all have to be action-oriented.

"They all have to have enormous stakes - the Earth or the Federation or the universe has to be in jeopardy - and the features always have to surround the Captain… and maybe one other character.

"The TV shows were morality plays, they were more thematic, they were examining society in different ways. Sometimes the stakes were just one crew member's life, sometimes the stakes were just one alien world or the Enterprise.

"You could do a story that was just about Data (Brent Spiner) or a story that was just about McCoy (DeForest Kelley) or about the characters who lived below decks on the Enterprise.

"The TV show is really what Star Trek is to me. I think the features are great, but I think it has to return to TV if it's going to remain an ongoing franchise."



Moore went on to admit that he would "love" to bring Trek back to television, so is a TV revival for Gene Roddenberry's great space odyssey just around the corner? Well… not quite.

"I'd love to do Star Trek again, in all honesty," Moore said. "But I also don't have a great new Star Trek idea.

"I'm not saying I know exactly how to do a new TV show - I don't. Maybe I shouldn't do it until I have that great epiphany!"

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/tubetalk/a548825/star-trek-the-sci-fi-sagas-heart-is-in-television-says-ron-moore.html
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 05, 2014, 08:49:55 AM
I'd be so much more excited by that guy's TV show than I am for JJ Abrams' nuTrek movies.

I mean, they're OK, but they're not really Star Trek feeling for me, just as Nemesis was.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 30, 2014, 03:22:58 AM
Found out you can stream/download all the TNG Remasters on Amazon Video, been watching some random season one.

God Awful Trek has never looked so good.  :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 30, 2014, 03:30:25 AM
Also, PREPARE FOR MAXIMUM ACCELERATION.

LET ME TELL YOU ALL AGAIN, MAXIMUM ACCELERATION.

I NEED TO WARN YOU, THIS IS MAXIMUM, NOT MINIMUM, NOT A LOT, NOT ALMOST, BUT FULL MAXIMUM ACCELERATION.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 30, 2014, 03:44:05 AM
Found out you can stream/download all the TNG Remasters on Amazon Video, been watching some random season one.

God Awful Trek has never looked so good.  :lawd

Another good reason for me to ditch my Amazon Prime account: all this good shit is not available from my current location. And before anyone chimes in about VNC or spoofing my IP, I just want the stuff to work; I am fully capable of torrenting this shit far more easily than they're making it, when I'm theoretically paying for it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 30, 2014, 04:34:30 AM
That stinks. I had seen the previews, comparisons and stuff but seeing these in 720p/1080p on a nice screen is just too much.  :drool

Last saw these when WGN was airing them every night off tape or whatever.  The higher quality somehow makes the 80's limitations seem less apparent in a lot of ways, probably the lighting differences. Except for some of the special effects they can't really do anything about like the cheapo tiny model cities being blown up or something. That damn purple hue.

Encounter at Farpoint is like 3GB or something, I'm glad I didn't queue them all up for download other than this one.  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 01, 2014, 07:35:21 PM
Need to go back and tell eight year old me I'm watching TNG on what's basically a PADD but probably better.  :omg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 01, 2014, 07:37:13 PM
I've been rewarching tng and I've been stuck on the crappy episode where Dr Crusher disappears from the ship on season 3 for about two weeks now. It is so bad
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 01, 2014, 07:51:21 PM
IIRC Patrick Stewart and Gates McFadden didn't get along well, which is why she left the show for a bit, and the horribad mostly-a-Bones-McCoy-because-she's-harassing-Data Replacement Doctor was used for a while. Knowing the actors didn't get along made it harder to enjoy the Picard/Crusher maybe-they-will angle, just the same way as for Anderson/Duchovny in X-Files.

When I go back and re-watch ST:TNG, it never involves season 1, and usually starts with s3. There were a few stinkers in there, but not many.

Plus s3 is where writers realized that the best way to make Worf look like a badass ISN'T by using him to show how badass the monster is by beating up Worf.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 01, 2014, 08:28:36 PM
I prefer Pulaski over Crusher. Crusher is fucking boring. And even though Pulaski is a take on Bones, I find her presence more interesting than Crusher's who has to protect her boring ass annoying son. Pulaski has a far more interesting storyline, particularly her relationship with Data and how it progresses. Crusher's main value is her relationship with Picard and the could be relationship shipping because that's the only interesting thing about her character. Shit character.

Still better than Troi.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 01, 2014, 10:01:43 PM
Troi's horrible and useless until later seasons. I enjoyed watching the stuff they set up with Will and Thomas Riker and, later, Worf. Then again, that fails the feminism test; she's only interesting because of her relationship with males. She also unfortunately is like the comic strip Cathy, in that interest is generated by her dysfunctional relationship with her mother.

:lol Christ, the show would have been so much funnier if Luwaxana had been the ship's counsellor. You could have had whole episodes where Picard is hiding in one of the shuttles to avoid her.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 01, 2014, 10:07:47 PM
Cathy :lol I hate that artists way of drawing mouths omg :rofl

No. I would not watch the show is Luwaxana were counselor. :goty2

It's funny how progressive they try to portray TNG but all the female main characters - aside from Yar, who DIES, multiple TIMES - are boring and regressive.

When can I start watching DS9 on my rewatch? I want to watch in chronological order and I'm post-Borg Picard so I guess I'm in the green?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on April 01, 2014, 11:57:48 PM
I wish they had killed Troi or Crusher instead of Yar, she was the best character in the first season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 02, 2014, 01:06:49 AM
Crusher. Would make Wesley less of a crying momma's boy. You kill her, you improve two chars
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on April 02, 2014, 01:23:34 AM
Just kill Wesley instead.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 02, 2014, 01:36:04 AM
Kill all three.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 02, 2014, 01:39:53 AM
No, I still want Troi tits
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 02, 2014, 02:45:45 AM
I wish they had killed Troi or Crusher instead of Yar, she was the best character in the first season.

...and Denise Crosby wanted to leave the show because she felt like all she ever said was, "Hailing frequencies open, Captain." I recall an interview where she later said she wished that she'd stayed put, that she felt she'd overreacted to her situation. I think the episodes where she was brought back though were some of the best.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 03, 2014, 02:04:18 AM
I am extra happy to be wrong! Glancing around, both the character and actress wikipedia articles, as well as the character's memory-alpha wiki article support your statement.

Thanks for the information!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 03, 2014, 02:23:20 AM
When can I start watching DS9 on my rewatch? I want to watch in chronological order and I'm post-Borg Picard so I guess I'm in the green?

Someone?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 03, 2014, 02:25:37 AM
It's on Amazon Prime Instant Video.

And apparently here? http://www.cbs.com/shows/star_trek_deep_space_9/

EDIT: Nevermind I guess, everything on that CBS link goes to some random Dynasty episode.  :lol

EDIT2: Oh god, I read "when" as "where", it's after Chain of Command apparently according to Memory-Alpha.

Oh, yeah, the Cardassian stuff in that sets it up sorta.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on April 03, 2014, 10:47:38 AM
Season 1 had that great episode with the nubian warlord kidnapping and marrying Yar because DEM WHITE WOMEN. Good times. I'm surprised it didn't get cancelled midseason. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 03, 2014, 12:04:14 PM
I love the episode where they go to the sex planet and welsey refuses to get laid. He trips over some sacred construction cone and they try to execute him. That episode is rad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on April 03, 2014, 03:10:30 PM
I love the episode where they go to the sex planet and welsey refuses to get laid. He trips over some sacred construction cone and they try to execute him. That episode is rad.

Another fabulous Season 1 episode, along with the one where everyone gets space drunk and Data and Yar bone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on April 03, 2014, 03:35:05 PM
TNG was probably different enough from all the other scifi shows on TV at the time that people weren't as hard on it then as they are now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 03, 2014, 07:07:21 PM
TNG was probably different enough from all the other scifi shows on TV at the time that people weren't as hard on it then as they are now.

It was less that and more that it was the beloved return of the king of american sci-fi shows. People were going to be inherently nicer to it initially based partially on that goodwill. Even still back then there was a decent amount of criticism towards it initially. 

Also critical revisionism tends to be more critical by its very nature than people originally were.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on April 03, 2014, 09:06:21 PM
I remember being a little kid and watching first run episodes with my dad and thinking every one was amazing.  :heart
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 03, 2014, 10:52:23 PM
I remember my intial impressions of TNG as being mixed but more on the negative side. My context was growing up on TOS. So by comparison I found the initial season of TNG kind of boring. And I didn't like the characters so much. Even Picard who struck me as a boring old man in comparison to the swashbuckling Kirk.

Of course the show improved leaps and bounds as it went on. But initial impressions are often meaningless. The first season of Babylon 5 is complete horseshit outside of the context of the setup. And I distinctly remember watching the first episode of Voyager and thinking it was pretty darn good with a really interesting premise. So... yeah. First impressions don't really matter a lot of the times.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: a slime appears on April 04, 2014, 09:48:34 AM
I remember being a little kid and watching first run episodes with my dad and thinking every one was amazing.  :heart

Yeah me too. The show reminds me a lot of growing up and being with my dad because of that.

I also liked watching Gargoyles because everyone on that show was from TNG.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 04, 2014, 10:14:48 AM
I love the episode where they go to the sex planet and welsey refuses to get laid. He trips over some sacred construction cone and they try to execute him. That episode is rad.
IIRC, the main writing staff fucked up so many scripts they got in the first two seasons, for example that episode started like this:
Quote
Writer John D.F. Black used his pseudonym "Ralph Willis" in the credits, because the televised episode bears little resemblance to his original first draft script. In Black's treatment, the colony of Llarof installed "punishment zones" to fight anarchy, however the zones are now enforced to abide the law, but for only those who are deemed not immune to them. An Enterprise-D security guard, Officer Tenson, protecting two children while on shore leave, happens upon a crime scene, and is shot dead by the policeman Siwel, who is also killed by his partner Oitap on the spot, for misinterpreting his duty. In his first draft, Picard decides not to help the rebels led by Reneg who fight against this system of council member Trebor. Finally, it turns out the rebels install a similarly totalitarian regime when they gain power. In the second draft, the rebel leader, called Reneg is put on trial and executed for treason. Picard muses on the topic of people having their right to decide their own justice without interference.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 04, 2014, 12:42:32 PM
I love the episode where they go to the sex planet and welsey refuses to get laid. He trips over some sacred construction cone and they try to execute him. That episode is rad.
IIRC, the main writing staff fucked up so many scripts they got in the first two seasons, for example that episode started like this:
Quote
Writer John D.F. Black used his pseudonym "Ralph Willis" in the credits, because the televised episode bears little resemblance to his original first draft script. In Black's treatment, the colony of Llarof installed "punishment zones" to fight anarchy, however the zones are now enforced to abide the law, but for only those who are deemed not immune to them. An Enterprise-D security guard, Officer Tenson, protecting two children while on shore leave, happens upon a crime scene, and is shot dead by the policeman Siwel, who is also killed by his partner Oitap on the spot, for misinterpreting his duty. In his first draft, Picard decides not to help the rebels led by Reneg who fight against this system of council member Trebor. Finally, it turns out the rebels install a similarly totalitarian regime when they gain power. In the second draft, the rebel leader, called Reneg is put on trial and executed for treason. Picard muses on the topic of people having their right to decide their own justice without interference.

To be fair I actually understand this one from a ratings perspective. I had to read through that a few times to actually understand what the topic was at hand. Where as the TNG version is basically sexy people in skimpy outfits and DON'T STEP ON THE GRASS OR YOU DIE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qur0uA9yivg

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 04, 2014, 12:45:53 PM
AHAHAHAHA Wesley running into that shit was more hilarious watching than it was in my head. For some reason I thought he ran into some weird foreign thing, when it was really just a small ass greenhouse with his blind ass. Fucking LOL.

"NO WES!"

:dead Ahahahaha Kicking and goddamn screaming in laughter.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on April 04, 2014, 01:10:04 PM
Probably the only episode that's worse is the one where Dr. Crusher has sex with a ghost:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S23pJ0aiyqk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 04, 2014, 01:12:28 PM
Quote
René Echevarria recalled, "I can still reduce Brannon to shudders when I go into his office and say, 'I can travel on the power transfer beam'. But the cast loved it. Every woman on the lot who read it was coming up to Brannon and patting him. Ultimately I think it was worth doing because it was campy fun and the production values were wonderful. The sets look great and everybody threw themselves into it. Gates did a wonderful job. It just got bigger and broader and to the point of grandmother leaping out of the grave. Just having Beverly basically writhing around having an orgasm at 6 o'clock on family TV was great. For that alone it was worth doing. We got away with murder."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 04, 2014, 01:13:40 PM
dr crusher episodes are the worst

at least troi episodes usually involve her crazy voodoo psycho powers
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 04, 2014, 01:22:27 PM
all the crushers suck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 04, 2014, 01:22:35 PM
I was someone who generally liked a lot of the more campier episodes in Trek History. Not necessarily stupid ones but ones where you could tell the cast was having fun with it. I think the tone of Trek is such that it can often get away with it versus say Galactica which always has to maintain a certain tone or the whole thing kind of falls apart.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 23, 2014, 03:50:38 AM
Was watching like one TNG episode a week for a bit then took off some time and when I came back to it for whatever reason added TOS and Enterprise to the list since they're all free on Prime. So how about some random thoughts?

-TNG Remasters look the best by far, even better than Enterprise (which seems like it's not really HD but upscaled), it's kinda crazy how good some of it looks despite budget and everything.
-TNG is also the worst by far early on, the characters suck, the pacing sucks, the plots suck
-ENT by comparison at least has a couple things going for it early on, the ship and crew is inexperienced and unready and overmatched, and the Vulcans are total dicks about this. Some of the little touches on far away from home ship life are far better done than on VOY's similar premise. It's unfortunate the show loses a lot of this as it gets eager about introducing familiar races for ratings purposes.
-TOS instantly has most of the characters there from Where No Man...the plots just range wildly from hokey to suspenseful to plodding, the pacing in particular is all over the place. Within episodes even.
-Weird thing I never noticed before about first season TOS or at least these first ten episodes or so, there are people in the corridors doing shit other than just walking around aimlessly. There's guys fixing panels, or stringing wires, or carrying random equipment around, and people standing around having conversations, or little things like Uhura telling a guy to fix her door, or random bridge members. The budget obviously really did a number on this in later seasons when it seems like the ship has maybe 25 people on it total. But the later shows never picked this thread back up to a level I thought worked aside from DS9. ENT actually does okay since it's supposed to be a small crew. Though all the shows suffer from the whole Senior Staff Does Everything.
-TOS has some weird as fuck scenes. And way more short segments of people just screaming or staring with dramatic music behind them than I remembered.
-Jolene Blalock in "Broken Bow" justifies everything about the unnecessary decon room and process.
-Best recurring "character feature" of TNG: Tasha talking about rape gangs and awkwardly forcing it into every conversation. And some kind of convoluted logic about how kidnapping on Generic African Planet isn't a big deal because rape gangs?
-Great terrible Naked Now dialogue:
Quote
"Are you saying that's why I feel so hot...so strange?"
"That's... that's a bit of adult reasoning, Wesley."
"So you mean I'm drunk! I feel strange, but also good."
-Great awesome Naked Now dialogue:
Quote
Capt. Picard: [entering Crusher's office with a little skip] Beverly.
Doctor Beverly Crusher: Yes, Jean-Luc?
Capt. Picard: *You* will address me as *Captain.*
Doctor Beverly Crusher: Captain? Well then, my dear Captain, *you* will address *me* as *Chief Medical Officer* or *Doctor.*
Capt. Picard: I will? That's true. I started off calling you Beverly, and of course, naturally, you. I'm still not thinking straight.
Doctor Beverly Crusher: Likewise. Where the hell was I headed?
Capt. Picard: If that's something you were going to test...
Doctor Beverly Crusher: [brightening] Yes, on *Geordi!* Come here.
-Horrific fan fiction found trying to search for that last quote: http://www.trekiverse.org/archive/2000/adult/tng/Scent_A
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Squiddy on June 23, 2014, 04:28:56 AM
Crushed is the worst character after betazoidan whose name I can't even remember.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 23, 2014, 07:11:15 AM
The episode were Yar gets kidnapped by Zulu warriors was :neogaf :gurl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Eli Gulgin on June 23, 2014, 12:57:57 PM
The episode were Yar gets kidnapped by Zulu warriors was :neogaf :gurl


I'm currently rewatching Stargate SG-1 and facepalmed so hard at a similar episode to the Zulu mess in TNG, but then it all made sense (and raised some questions) when I read some trivia (http://stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Emancipation) about it:

Quote
This is generally considered by critics as one of the worst episodes of the series. The Sci-Fi Channel (and possibly the production team) seems to hold it in similar disdain, because it is rarely if ever re-run in syndication.
Quote
This is the first of eleven episodes of Stargate SG-1 written by Katharyn Powers. She is also responsible for the very similar (both in story and reception) Star Trek: The Next Generation Season One episode "Code of Honor". Both episode feature a female officer being abducted and later participating in a fight to the death. Given the extremely negative fan and critical reception to that episode, it seems surprising that this one was made.


The trivia for the TNG Zulu fuckery (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Code_of_Honor_%28episode%29) is pretty funny too:

Quote
Jonathan Frakes referred to the episode as a "racist piece of shit". At a 2007 science fiction convention in Toronto, Canada, he told the audience, "The worst and most embarrassing and one that even Gene would have been embarrassed by was that horrible racist episode from the first season... Code of Honor, oh my God in heaven!"
Quote
At the 2013 Toronto Comic Con's "An Evening With the Cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation", Michael Dorn referred to this episode as "the worst episode of Star Trek ever filmed" to agreement from the rest of the cast and the crowd.

Let a sloot who turned her own xenophobic feminazi fantasies into the worst episode of a tv series do it twice brehs :snoop :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on June 23, 2014, 01:13:57 PM
I don't even remember that SG1 ep.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 23, 2014, 01:54:08 PM
She was probably secretly thirsty for the BBC. :drool
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 23, 2014, 07:04:46 PM
She was probably secretly thirsty for the BBC. :drool

Sure. Absolutely; it's a similar line towed by the republican senators who rail against homosexuality the hardest, and are then found sucking off some dude in a truckstop bathroom.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 23, 2014, 07:30:08 PM
Season 1 of TNG is pretty awful, season 2 is a little better but not great. Season 3 and on is pretty amazing, though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYy8o4nXZEY

:whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 25, 2014, 03:53:56 AM
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/database/kirks_shirt.htm

 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 25, 2014, 04:52:30 AM
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/database/kirks_shirt.htm

 :lol
Quote
Turnabout Intruder Janice Lester is in Kirk's body when McCoy orders him to report for a medical exam because of his (actually her) "emotional instability and erratic mental attitudes". In a way, this is the only topless woman we ever see on Star Trek.
  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 08, 2014, 01:23:45 AM
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/69037

I love Shatner as much as you can love an actor you've never ever met, but this seems like an awful idea.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 08, 2014, 01:34:15 AM
Please revive Trek. We got new Twin Peaks. I want to watch a new Trek with my dad one more time before he leaves this Earth.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 08, 2014, 01:51:49 AM
You guys are being too negative.

What if we're taking a detour through the Shatnerverse to get back to the Prime Trek Universe?!?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 08, 2014, 11:22:07 AM
If they bring back Shatner they need to work this into the script.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMV1bwXyi54
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on November 28, 2014, 05:53:03 PM
I am watching tng right now the episode where that scientist wants to take data apart to study him, at the part where he walks in and eye humps the shit outta data and data looks violated, and Riker is like what the fuck is going on.

 :heh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on November 29, 2014, 02:16:12 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGvYIZppmQc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 29, 2014, 02:33:56 AM
I am watching tng right now the episode where that scientist wants to take data apart to study him, at the part where he walks in and eye humps the shit outta data and data looks violated, and Riker is like what the fuck is going on.

 :heh
I don't remember the leg humping, but every time I see that episode, I wonder what the hell is going on. Data is a member of Starfleet. His status as an independent being should be inviolate simply based on that. They don't make computers members of Starfleet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 22, 2015, 01:59:28 AM
Quote
Scotty actor Simon Pegg will be givin' her all she's got, cap'n, behind the camera as well as in front of it on Star Trek 3.

Deadline reports that Pegg, who plays the USS Enterprise's chief engineer Montgomery Scott in the rebooted film series, will co-write the script with Doug Jung, the creator of the TNT series Dark Blue. The original Trek 3 script had been worked on by Roberto Orci, who dropped out of both directing and writing the film. (Patrick McKay and John D. Payne were also writers on Trek 3.)

Pegg's no stranger to screenwriting having co-written the "Cornetto Trilogy" with director-pal Edgar Wright and the sci-fi comedy Paul with Nick Frost.

Man this movie just seems to be cursed. I like Pegg. And I like Lin. I'm just not sure this movie will be anything like what I remotely want a trek movie to be.  (Not that I thought the first two were. So maybe any change is good.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TakingBackSunday on January 22, 2015, 02:22:36 AM
Pegg is such a huge Star Trek fan.  I have to imagine thats a good sign.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 22, 2015, 04:23:47 AM
Quote
Scotty actor Simon Pegg will be givin' her all she's got, cap'n, behind the camera as well as in front of it on Star Trek 3.

Deadline reports that Pegg, who plays the USS Enterprise's chief engineer Montgomery Scott in the rebooted film series, will co-write the script with Doug Jung, the creator of the TNT series Dark Blue. The original Trek 3 script had been worked on by Roberto Orci, who dropped out of both directing and writing the film. (Patrick McKay and John D. Payne were also writers on Trek 3.)

Pegg's no stranger to screenwriting having co-written the "Cornetto Trilogy" with director-pal Edgar Wright and the sci-fi comedy Paul with Nick Frost.

Man this movie just seems to be cursed. I like Pegg. And I like Lin. I'm just not sure this movie will be anything like what I remotely want a trek movie to be.  (Not that I thought the first two were. So maybe any change is good.)
Stoney, this is GREAT NEWS. Pegg knows his Trek, and will likely bring it more in line with what original trek fans enjoy about the series. I’m stoked!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on January 22, 2015, 04:34:25 AM
Definitely feels a bit cursed but faith restored a bit having Lin behind lens and Pegg writing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 22, 2015, 09:10:56 AM
Orci getting dropped is probably the best thing that could happen to the Star Trek reboot series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 22, 2015, 06:14:11 PM
Watch them go out with a good film full of Trekkiness right as the reboot franchise is collapsing in on itself.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 22, 2015, 06:33:43 PM
Watch them go out with a good film full of Trekkiness right as the reboot franchise is collapsing in on itself.
I’d be OK with that if the film’s success is enough to spur a new TV series, with Pegg as a consultant or Exec. Prod.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 22, 2015, 06:40:12 PM
I think this is a good thing. It's a test for new audiences and if it sales as many tickets as the last Star Trek's we may have our new Trek show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 07, 2015, 12:03:42 AM
Came to this via the King Abdullah clip, but they're actually pretty funny, especially Kate Mulgrew*:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx9QcXqdzjI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfqvcEHj0uQ

*Which shouldn't be a surprise considering her award-winning work on NTSF:SD:SUV:: I suppose.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 07, 2015, 02:19:24 PM
Decent read if you are a tos nerd like me.

http://io9.com/the-truth-about-what-went-wrong-with-the-third-season-o-1684057419
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 07, 2015, 03:52:46 PM
Decent read if you are a tos nerd like me.

http://io9.com/the-truth-about-what-went-wrong-with-the-third-season-o-1684057419

Quote
"I called him, told him I wanted to come speak with him, and then I went to his office to chew his ass out and to tell him that I thought he was letting everybody down... I went in there and I said, 'Gene, we've got tremendous script problems, and I really think Fred Freiberger could use your help.' Now, as I continue talking, out of the back of Gene's office comes Nichelle Nichols, who's wearing one of Gene's long cardigan sweaters, and NOTHING ELSE! No shirt, no pants, nothing... So now Nichelle says something like, 'Oh, I'm sorry, Eddie, I didn't know you were there.' I'm immediately going red and I'm completely flustered until I notice that Gene's just kind of sitting at his desk, smiling and enjoying the embarrassed look on my face."

 :win
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 07, 2015, 07:09:40 PM
Haven't read the piece yet but one funny thing I read about the third season is they kept cutting the budget but the set/prop guys kept coming up with cost saving measures (like they had originally with the transporter, etc.) and NBC came down and was like WE TOLD YOU TO CUT THE BUDGET when they had basically paired the shooting budget down to as low as they could.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
So they cut costs by getting rid of all the good writers.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 27, 2015, 12:15:56 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/simon-pegg-star-trek-3-784685
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 09, 2015, 11:05:16 AM
Rumor is this title got registered with the MPAA:
(http://www.tor.com/images/stories/blogs/15_04/BEYOND.png)

Also, GOG added some old Trek games: http://www.gog.com/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 09, 2015, 11:55:50 AM
I’ve been watching at least an ep a day of TNG while staying at my mom’s I’d forgotten how much I love this show.

I’m even enjoying the Dr. Pulaski episodes. There’s a whole run of season 3 stuff backlogged. Man, s3 is when it really found its footing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 23, 2015, 03:38:54 AM
http://youtu.be/DIw690VGt70
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 23, 2015, 01:58:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FKvQDZ3IWw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 23, 2015, 02:30:18 PM
ha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1IIdzCHgcM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 23, 2015, 03:33:05 PM
ha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1IIdzCHgcM

I'm pretty sure that's what hell sounds like.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 28, 2015, 09:16:42 PM
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3bg44u/i_am_michael_dorn_and_you_may_know_me_as_the/


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 28, 2015, 09:44:29 PM
I would rather bring back Data if they want to bring back a TNG character, Worf was unwelcome in my book on DS9.  :patel
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 28, 2015, 09:51:22 PM
Worf and his High Council discommendation thread that ran throughout s3 (and s4?) were groundbreaking. It was so awesome to see something like continuity appearing in the series. I happened to catch a few more episodes of that while in the USA and was enrapt.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 28, 2015, 09:51:47 PM
I would rather bring back Data if they want to bring back a TNG character, Worf was unwelcome in my book on DS9.  :patel

Wouldn't want to see Data without Brent Spiner, and he's too old at this point to still do a proper Data, unfortunately. Maybe in a very minor role or cameo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 28, 2015, 09:53:40 PM
I would rather bring back Data if they want to bring back a TNG character, Worf was unwelcome in my book on DS9.  :patel

Wouldn't want to see Data without Brent Spiner, and he's too old at this point to still do a proper Data, unfortunately. Maybe in a very minor role or cameo.

He got kinda fat too, fuck the whole thing give me some Q.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The actor probably got old and flabnsick too though.  :neogaf
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 28, 2015, 10:22:35 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
The actor probably got old and flabnsick too though.  :neogaf
[close]

(http://i.imgur.com/EVf1k0x.jpg)

 :fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 28, 2015, 10:32:10 PM
Everyone in Star Trek is old.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 28, 2015, 10:36:23 PM
Everyone in Star Trek is old.

Except Patrick Stewart:

(http://i.imgur.com/LSWA4Yo.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 28, 2015, 10:47:38 PM
They are not going to make a Worf Chronicles TV show. It's way too inside baseball at this point. But any attention being drawn to the idea of a Star Trek TV show, the better.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on June 28, 2015, 11:57:45 PM
I don't get why there isn't always a ST series going, same with staregate.  Shit can make money.  Maybe not big money but money.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 28, 2015, 11:59:21 PM
It's probably down to some studio bullshit between Paramount and CBS contracts in terms of the ongoing jj abrams' movie series versus detracting or otherwise limiting what can be done with new TV material.

I can't take John DeLancie seriously since he did that MLP documentary.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on July 10, 2015, 08:41:42 AM
Oh, man. Watching DS9, I had forgotten that I cannot stand the character interaction between Miles and Keiko. Good grief, what a dysfunctional couple. As much as TNG was all about yuppies in space pursuing their careers at the cost of personal relationships, DS9 shows the logical outcome of that philosophy by having a couple who are always at odds because of their professional pursuits.

:yuck

Why does the only married couple on the series have to be broken?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 10, 2015, 09:54:40 AM
Yeah miles and keiko suck

Hey let's get married and do some space traditional Japanese wedding or something

That makes sense
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on July 10, 2015, 10:08:46 AM
"Hey, let's be passive aggressive about fucking EVERYTHING."

"Hey, let's get angry at Miles about shit he can't control because I can't deal with my own emotions."

"Hey, even when you present reasonable courses of action, I'll just stay here to opt into shit that will make me miserable still. Because reasons."

Even so, just looking at Terry Ferrell makes most of the Miles and Keiko damage fall away. Damn, she is a beautiful woman. I was crushing hard from the first time I saw her, in that miserable Hellraiser movie where one Cenobite shot out compact discs.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on July 10, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
I don't get why there isn't always a ST series going, same with staregate.  Shit can make money.  Maybe not big money but money.

I would not bet the deal is that sweet. In truth I suspect the thing is that the movies can make a lot more money and much faster. At least it does now. It will always be time to pitch a TV show when the drought will come in.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brawndolicious on July 10, 2015, 06:08:17 PM
Plus it will be hard to make a multiseason show that appeals to the fans and the 18-35 group (the series did start like 50 years ago).

Hell tons of young dudes bitch about Janeway not cutting it when she had the biggest balls of any captain. It's easier to just make a movie that focuses on the adventures rather than the whole cultural exploration bit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 10, 2015, 06:24:39 PM
Even so, just looking at Terry Ferrell makes most of the Miles and Keiko damage fall away. Damn, she is a beautiful woman. I was crushing hard from the first time I saw her, in that miserable Hellraiser movie where one Cenobite shot out compact discs.

I was the opposite. I didn't really like her but I adored the cute little chick that replaced her.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on July 10, 2015, 06:37:00 PM
Nah Jadzia > Ezri everytime.

I'm #teamkira though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 10, 2015, 09:13:11 PM
Nah Jadzia > Ezri everytime.

I'm #teamkira though

 :respect

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on July 11, 2015, 01:10:14 AM
Major Kira walks like she has something in her butt. Which, you know, isn't inherently a bad thing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 03, 2015, 12:42:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvNdCjc-3Ps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 03, 2015, 02:31:48 PM
Season 5 is the best season of TNG. Darmok, Inner Light...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 18, 2015, 07:52:24 AM
good fucking god Kes what happened

(http://ll-media.tmz.com/2015/09/15/0915-jennifer-ann-lien-mug-1.jpg)

http://www.tmz.com/2015/09/15/star-trek-voyager-actress-jennifer-lien-arrested-exposing-herself-kids-mug-shot/
Quote
"Star Trek: Voyager" actress Jennifer Lien is behind bars after cops arrested her for allegedly exposing herself to 3 kids under 13.

We've learned 2 weeks ago Lien was at her Tennessee home when she got in an argument with her neighbor outside her house. She was angry that a small child was crying over a cut foot. 

Lien allegedly exposed her breasts and rear end to the 3 neighbor kids. Cops took a report and Lien denied exposing herself. But they didn't believe her and got a warrant for her arrest.

When cops went to Lien's house to arrest her she didn't go down without a fight. Cops say she refused to put clothes on, was carried to the police car and threatened to have them shot and killed.

EDIT: This must be insane Kes from the future:
Quote
In July 2012, Lien was arrested in Tennessee for domestic assault.

In April 2015, Lien was arrested in Harriman, Tennessee, and charged with evading arrest, resisting arrest, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 18, 2015, 08:05:18 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/HVwxDSM.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/tpLYtwG.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 18, 2015, 08:51:33 AM
(puke)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 26, 2015, 02:19:18 AM
That's so hard to un-see.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on September 26, 2015, 06:41:04 AM
rewatched this ep
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_Time_(episode)

 :neogaf :heh  :larry

spoiler (click to show/hide)
:brazilcry
spoiler (click to show/hide)
:lawd
[close]
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 26, 2015, 07:22:32 AM
rewatched this ep
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_Time_(episode)

 :neogaf :heh  :larry

spoiler (click to show/hide)
:brazilcry
spoiler (click to show/hide)
:lawd
[close]
[close]

I'm still crawling through season 3 so I'll save the synopsis for later.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 03, 2015, 02:05:25 PM
The DS9 tribble episode :bow2
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 05, 2015, 11:01:49 PM
Odo just lost his v-card.  Took five seasons. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 05, 2015, 11:22:32 PM
:lol :lol :lol she was married (but had her memory erased when she banged Odo)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 12, 2015, 01:50:19 PM
Transgender Quark :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 12, 2015, 02:02:02 PM
Haven't seen Kiko or the kids for like 2 seasons and the first think the chief does is loss his daughter down a time well?  SMH at O'Brien's parenting skills. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 12, 2015, 07:29:55 PM
The DS9 crew is in a baseball play off with Vulcans, in the middle of a war with the Dominion. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brawndolicious on October 12, 2015, 07:45:36 PM
I remember that. Odo was ice cold.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on November 02, 2015, 11:40:31 AM
http://www.startrek.com/article/new-star-trek-series-premieres-january-2017

We made it brehs :rejoice

Edit-

Quote
Alex Kurtzman will serve as executive producer for the new Star Trek TV series.

:kobeyuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 02, 2015, 11:45:30 AM
THANK YOU JES..
Quote
Alex Kurtzman
FUCK YOU SATAN
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on November 02, 2015, 11:47:18 AM
O yes.  O shit 2 years away.  O fuck 2015 is almost done; what have I one with my life.  These were my thoughts. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 02, 2015, 02:28:16 PM
Great that its going back to show format. 

Now we'll have to see if they actually understand the appeal of the franchise or if they will try to shove down our throats a tv version of those movies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on November 02, 2015, 03:51:24 PM
I'll take the Alex Kurtman Trek tv show over whatever they would probably do on their own tbh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 04, 2015, 01:33:35 AM
Kurtzman is currently an executive producer on Sleepy Hollow, Scorpion and Limitless. I like the last one, which he has no other credits on.

He and Heather Kadin seem to be executive producers together on a lot of stuff just to get it made for a friend/etc.

Scorpion has ten executive producers...of which one is the "developed by"/showrunner and another is Justin Lin of four Fast and Furious films and Star Trek: Beyond and who directed the pilot.

Now, I'm wondering what show has the most executive producers. CSI: Cyber has a decent amount:
Quote
Executive producer(s)   
Anthony E. Zuiker
Jerry Bruckheimer
Carol Mendelsohn
Ann Donahue
Jonathan Littman
Pam Veasey

Producer(s)   
Mary Aiken
Mike Azzolino
Matt Whitney

Co-Executives
Richard Catalani
Craig S. O'Neill
Kristie Anne Reed
Agatha Warren
Vikki Williams

EDIT: I think Grey's Anatomy probably wins:
Quote
Executive producer(s)   
Shonda Rhimes
Allan Heinberg
Betsy Beers
Debbie Allen
James D. Parriott
Jeannine Renshaw
Jeff Rafner
Joan Rater
Kent Hodder
Krista Vernoff
Mark Gordon
Mark Wilding
Marti Noxon
Nancy Bordson
Peter Horton
Rob Corn
Stacy McKee
Steve Mulholland
Tony Phelan
William Harper
Zoanne Clack

Producer(s)   
Ann Kindberg
Austin Guzman
Elisabeth R. Finch
Gabrielle G. Stanton
Harry Werksman
Jeff Rafner
Linda Klein
Mark Foreman
Mimi Schmir
Peter Norwalk
Stacy McKee
Tammy Ann Casper
William Harper
Zoanne Clack
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on November 04, 2015, 09:21:20 AM
Yeah, producer credits don't really mean much for TV shows, it's going to come down to the cast, story, and writing crew.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on November 04, 2015, 05:21:50 PM
http://www.salon.com/2015/11/04/star_trek_vs_peak_tv_how_can_the_campy_hopeful_space_drama_compete_with_game_of_thrones_and_the_walking_dead/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brawndolicious on November 04, 2015, 06:52:17 PM
It doesn't need to be dark or sexy at all for that kind of audience. Firefly and Dr. Who are really popular despite the other zombie/prison/medieval examples that article talks about. I think the main reason people watch these shows is for the self contained plots in each episode although having to wait 23 episodes to go through the main story arc of the season would be a legitimate gripe nowadays.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 04, 2015, 06:56:37 PM
There are multiple ways you can take a modern reboot. Yes, I doubt making something exactly like Next Generation for a modern audience would be a good idea but that doesn't exactly mean you have to go insanely dark. Although there does have to be tension in whatever form that takes and an ongoing over-arching plot line.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 11:51:01 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRVD32rnzOw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 14, 2015, 12:13:16 PM
:trash
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 12:17:21 PM
Like the others, it looks like it could be a fine popcorn movie that completely missed the point of what traditionally Star Trek is about. 

This whole movie reboot of Trek was doomed after the very first one which set the tone of what New Trek was about.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 14, 2015, 12:20:10 PM
(http://reactionimage.org/img/gallery/453038722.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 14, 2015, 12:31:06 PM
Looks pretty good.

Justin Lin stan for life.

People forget that movie Trek and tv Trek ARE NOT THE SAME THING. Movie Trek has always been blockbuster shit. The problem with the last two Trek films is that they're just not that GOOD. And in the case of In Darkness, pretty fucking bad.

But I trust Lin.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 12:34:16 PM
The better movie treks were still not action films. If you go back and watch The Wrath of Khan now, its like the slowest movie ever. Good traditional trek movies, while not exactly like the TV show are not action films. There is action in them but they don't drive the movie.

Which is not to say this can't be an enjoyable film. It's just frustrating that it looks like another straight up action movie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 14, 2015, 12:35:39 PM
I think Khan was just a product of its time.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rahxephon91 on December 14, 2015, 12:38:10 PM
Movie Trek has always been Blockbuster shit.

Except that one about aging and letting go.

That one about arguing against that.

That one that is a parallel for the Fall of the Soviet Union and a mans hatred.

That one that is a huge Moby Dick Homage.

and so on.

Star Trek movies, even TNG ones explored human condition themes just as much as the tv shows did, just on a grander scale. Thats something the Abram's movies missed completely.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 14, 2015, 12:39:38 PM
I always thought Star Trek IV was an outlier. The TNG movies were pretty Blockbuster, but I haven't seen them since I was a kid. That one with Kirk and Picard in the same movie is the exact thing I'm talking about.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rahxephon91 on December 14, 2015, 12:42:18 PM
And people don't like Generations. Yet, even that uses the Nexus as an exploration for someone trapped in the past. Thats the thing, Star Trek has always used sci-fi to explore human themes in it's storytelling.

I can't even tell wtf the Abrams movies were about.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 12:42:25 PM
The best three Trek films are Wrath of Khan, The Undiscovered Country, & The Voyage Home

Think about how different all those films are tonally from each other and such.

I wish they were inspired by those movies instead of just generic action shlock

Star Trek is naval films set in space. It's not about one character punching another character. Or if it is that is just one small part of it.

Star Trek movies should be more like Crimson Tide if they want to embrace a direction. No like actioned up versions of the old stuff just for the sake of action.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 14, 2015, 12:43:56 PM
I can understand that. I honestly just hope the TV series is more in the spirit of Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 12:46:29 PM
I can understand that. I honestly just hope the TV series is more in the spirit of Trek.

Agreed. And I think it will be if only for budget reasons. You can't easily do an action TV show every week on a tv budget.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 14, 2015, 01:05:33 PM
Really not feeling that trailer at all. Maybe the movie turns out to be a lot better, but I'm not holding out hope for it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 14, 2015, 01:23:48 PM
It's a sad day when the Independence Day trailer is more Star Trek than the Star Trek trailer.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on December 14, 2015, 02:36:51 PM
This looks dope. Can't wait to see it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Steve Contra on December 14, 2015, 03:05:28 PM


Star Trek is naval films set in space. It's not about one character punching another character. Or if it is that is just one small part of it.

Now I just want to rewatch Master and Commander
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on December 14, 2015, 03:06:27 PM
Master and Commander should have been like 20 movies.  What a great movie. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Steve Contra on December 14, 2015, 03:09:00 PM
I was just discussing the movie with my inlaws.  It's that rare movie that is actually "adult" without being about specifically adult themes (sex, violence etc.).  it just seems made for people with a bit more life experience.  So sad it never got a sequel :'(

spoiler (click to show/hide)
New Star Trek can't be worse than Abrams Trek though, even it looks not like Star Trek
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2015, 03:18:29 PM
I once was at a talk with Nicholas Meyer and his comparison point was Horatio Hornblower but Master and Commander works too. That should be the spirit of a trek film.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on December 14, 2015, 03:22:29 PM
are there any films that are in the same class as master and commander when it comes to naval stuff? submarines, space ships, whatever, etc.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 14, 2015, 03:31:29 PM
are there any films that are in the same class as master and commander when it comes to naval stuff? submarines, space ships, whatever, etc.

Hunt for Red October?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Steve Contra on December 14, 2015, 03:34:20 PM
Not even on the same level and I like hunt for Red October :bolo

Maybe Das boot?  Although it's been years.  Wake of the Red Witch was pretty good too, and it has John Wayne doing different for once.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on December 14, 2015, 03:37:23 PM
das boot is a good one. I haven't seen that since my wonderful junior high german class where all we did was watch movies.   :pimp

(this is also why my german has never been more than terrible :doge)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Steve Contra on December 14, 2015, 03:48:09 PM
Also Wake of the Red Witch has an amazing drawing of John Wayne that looks like Ted Cruz

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Wakeoftheredwitch.jpg/220px-Wakeoftheredwitch.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 14, 2015, 05:38:36 PM
I was pretty content knowing that no trailer I viewed this year could possibly be worse than the last Batman v Superman one. Well now Star Trek robbed me of that certainty. Good lord that looks TERRIBLE.

I'll pay to see it if the Sabotage scene features some type of Beats By Dre plug. As if Apple Music will be a thing in the year 3000 whatever.  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 14, 2015, 05:39:06 PM
This thread reminds me of what an absolutely superb movie Master and Commander was. The rare AAA blockbuster movie that isn't a constant orgy of over-the-top action bolted to dull characters and an insipid story.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 14, 2015, 05:55:38 PM
Sounds like I should check it out.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 14, 2015, 07:51:56 PM
Didn't Pegg write this one? If so, I'm still excited.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 14, 2015, 09:55:15 PM
I think he did. Which is a big part of the reason I'm excited and I think that they're trying to bring in viewers by making the trailer as action-packed as possible.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 14, 2015, 10:29:19 PM
I'm glad to see the Dark Elves finding work after Thor: The Dark World.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2015, 12:50:25 AM
I'm the most anal Trekkie maybe on here, and I actually kinda like it. It looks like a lot of it is set entirely in one planet/location. The last two films went to a new location/time period every two minutes. I'm hoping some of the more "scale" looking stuff is at the start and end of the film. To setup why they're crash landing on this planet. Which they hopefully spend 80% of it on, repairing the shuttle and running into the local species. (a.k.a. stealing from The Galileo Seven and like five other TOS episodes some of which in later years did it in reverse to save set costs) And then obviously the big battle to end it cuz you gotta do that.

Pegg said he and the other writer when writing the script were doing it while watching the entire TOS run almost twice over. So I can see why their brains were focused on recreating a location that looks like Vasquez Rocks and Bronson Canyon. And why they might snag the "trapped on a planet" trope.

The "Sabotage" thing might be a reference to the first film, it's what Kirk's playing on his NOKIA car phone/device when he steals the "antique" car and drives into that giant canyon in Iowa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeRghYqi090

The only question I have is if this turns out to be the best individual property of the reboot and beats out the well-written and plotted Star Trek: The Video Game. (The comics are a different, more positive thing.) It also doesn't seem as up its own ass as Into Darkness was.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2015, 12:51:56 AM
The three best Star Trek films are:
The Wrath of Khan - A "nuclear arms" submarine thriller. (Khan and Kirk never meet in person.)
The Undiscovered Country - A murder/conspiracy mystery, prison break film and cold war allegory. It also explores Kirk's (and other crew members) racism towards the Klingons. (And vice versa. Some of the blatantly racist lines were re-written, struck or moved to other characters after Nichelle Nichols and other black actors (like the one Admiral) refused to say them or be present because they were racist lines replacing distinguished black fellow with Klingons.)
Galaxy Quest - A big screen version of the TV show.

The Search for Spock and The Voyage Home are companion pieces for the themes of Khan, aging and dying. Even The Slow-Motion Picture touches on it during the gang back together, Kirk dying to take over command while pretending he's not, Sulu talking about his own command, etc. Hell, even The Final Frontier taps into the narrative arc of the crew, especially the three main characters, developing as characters/relationships.

First Contact is considered an action movie but there's actually very little extended action in it, it's more the race against time on the planet, and then the interplay between an Alien-type trapped on submarine film vs. Picard's Moby Dick obsession and Data's quest for humanity being exploited/a gambit.

Insurrection's original idea (as outlined in that unpublished book Fade In you can find or I can link) was supposed to be a rejection of the "darker" Star Trek that First Contact and the Dominion War represented, with Picard rebelling against The Federation betraying its ideals. It's still sorta there in the film, but it's all wack and shit with the 300 year old chick and the Son'a and so on.

Nemesis is the most actiony Trek film and it still has the best ship battles of the films, and the worst live-action scenes (dune buggy, shuttle in the ship, fight over the endless pit) of the films.

Generations is just a bad movie because it was written by the same two people at the same time as All Good Things and I think they accidentally put all their bad ideas in one pile and good ones in another. Also, Generations had all sorts of studio mandates including involving Kirk, how much screen time each actor was to have, etc. which tears the plot completely apart because it has to fit those things in, in ways that don't make any sense.

If you look at the themes of The Motion Picture and The Final Frontier and ignore their execution woes (due in part to no budget constrants/2001's recent release and then extreme budget constrants with loss of special effects staff) they're very Trekian. Gods, creators, sentient machines, non-explainable alien powers, etc.

Master and Commander should have been like 20 movies.  What a great movie.
It was supposed to be launching a series, but it was effectively a bomb. It's based off a series of like 20 books: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey%E2%80%93Maturin_series

Master and Commander is a god-like film. Not seeing the enemy throughout. And then the engagement is a quick and orderly battle in comparison to the rest of the film rather than an extremely long massive setpiece with overly grand strategy. (Their key ruse is...putting up a fake flag, then pulling it down two minutes later "SURPRISE WE'RE A REAL SHIP" and firing their cannons.)

That said, it needs a rifftrax. Kevin Murphy's pointed out there's not a single woman in the film but that's like the only thing they can make fun of. I strongly disagree, Russell Crowe has some incredibly strange reactions to things. (EDIT: There's also a fair amount of amusing "ooo me accent's slippin" moments.)

Regarding a sequel:
https://twitter.com/russellcrowe/status/198188938287001601
https://twitter.com/russellcrowe/status/11710830559109120
 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2015, 01:11:28 AM
Just noticed, if you don't count the ones on the title cards/Enterprise, there's zero lens flares in the entire trailer.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2015, 02:32:27 AM
I once was at a talk with Nicholas Meyer and his comparison point was Horatio Hornblower but Master and Commander works too. That should be the spirit of a trek film.
You can tell this with the theme he had composed for the film and is used throughout, I've always heard it described as "swashbuckling" and similar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABzyN4PoqnU

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nimoy had fun with his opening themes too and sell the mood of both films:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbBeOGJjTsw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct5-__9VTAY

And the feeling of scale and foreboding in VI's is stronger than anything I've gotten from the Abrams/Giacchino attempts at epic and "darkness" and so on...yet the film is still one of, if not the most, the funnier ones:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0yiiivbJFU

I always have loved how First Contact used the fanfare and then went somewhere completely different, it might be my real favorite Trek theme:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhoa7oWPPhk
[close]

Meyer was going to use The Undiscovered Country as the tag for II, but the studio wanted something more to the point, I'm glad he got to use it for VI which it fits far better and is one of my favorite film/game/whatever ": tags".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on December 15, 2015, 03:58:23 PM
Man, shame on the Beastie Boys for taking the check for this. They sued some small girls toy company of a parody of "Girls" in one of their commercials due to Adam Yauch being staunchly against using their music for advertising, but this flies? Lame.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 15, 2015, 04:16:33 PM
While using their songs in Star Trek movies is dumb, that's not actually how the girls science thing went down. The company sued THEM first.

http://www.spin.com/2014/03/beastie-boys-goldieblox-lawsuit-apology/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on December 15, 2015, 04:34:17 PM
I forgot about that, though that was a preemptive suit based on a threat of copyright infringement. I completely respect that, it just seems at odds with hearing Sabotage so prominently in a blockbuster trailer. I wonder if there's some kind of wankery with the licensing since it was used in one of the other movies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 16, 2015, 04:25:29 PM
For me its also an interesting contrast between how on tone the marketing for the New Star Wars was in comparison to this. Now however that movie ends up, they didn't feel like they needed to fast and furious up the trailers. They made it to spark nostalgia for older fans while still being somewhat modern.

This by comparison doesn't really pay much homage to what old fans really like about Star Trek. Obviously that's because the size of the fanbases but still, it probably also applies very much on the creative end for the finished product.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 16, 2015, 05:13:21 PM
I mean, here's the thing though- they got the Fast and Furious director to direct the new Trek. So, I understand that that's what they're showing off, because that's what he does. I expected it. I'm still upset about it, but whatever, I'm resigned to it. It probably won't suck but it's not gonna out Guardians of the Galaxy the actual next Guardians of the Galaxy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 16, 2015, 05:29:51 PM
The current box office size for Star Trek is as big as its going to get and that's with the maximum amount of dumbing things down and turning them into generic action movies.

So I guess my problem is more that the best they can hope to do is maintain what they've already done. It's not going to get any bigger, the dumber they make it.

I'm resigned to the fact that current Trek movies will always be what they are as long as they are on the big screen and the current environment is Star Trek needs to try to be as big as whatever is the current biggest franchise in movies.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 16, 2015, 05:39:25 PM
For what its worth I'm one of the rare people who prefers Into Darkness over the original reboot movie.

I think its generally faster paced. And is a better "modern" movie in the sense that the reboot for me is relying mostly on nostalgia to work its magic. I was actually curious where things were going in Darkness versus the reboot where everything was extremely obvious and took a long time to do the obvious. I know that opinion is not very common though.

They both aren't good traditional trek films but I preferred one over the other.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 16, 2015, 08:41:07 PM
I think one real problem with the recent Trek movies is they were given the budget and berth of a much larger franchise. They're spending $150-200 million on films that are only bringing back $250 million in the U.S.

The first six films in back then dollars they spent $12-35 million and made back $50-110 million.

They wanted to shoot Into Darkness outside of L.A. to save costs, but Abrams said no, and they said "okay." After the first one made $250 million U.S. on $150 million budget.

They're making that back on the international market now, but I've always felt like Trek's been killed by sprawling budgets and works better with forced constraints. Wrath of Khan was made on $12 million, The Motion Picture on $35 million. First Contact cost $46 million and two years later Insurrection cost $70 million. Khan and Contact are tight, Motion and Insurrection sprawl endlessly.

Enterprise became a better show when its budget got chopped after season one and two and they had to manage the location shots and reuse sets/actors much better which at times involved plot stretching.

I'm not sure the plots of the two recent movies wouldn't work better as say a six-parter on a TV show. Stuff like Khan and Undiscovered Country and First Contact worked better as films to keep up the pace and tension constrained within the two hours. The last two films were more like they took a bunch of episodes, trimmed out 80% of them and then jammed them together. We barely get anything out of Kirk at the academy before everyone flies off to die with Vulcan. They cut out all of Nero's entire backstory.

Kinda like trying to fit that ten-part arc that ends DS9 into a film or even two. You can do it and still hit every key plot point, but you lose a lot of the character stuff/etc. because ten minute scenes become 45 seconds and on to the next one. You can't afford Damar's sarcastic bouts with Weyoun, or Worf and Dax coming to terms, or any of the Garak "returning from exile" stuff they did when you also have to show how they finished off the war.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 16, 2015, 09:04:38 PM
Stoney, I actually kinda like Into Darkness more than the first film too. The opening part is actually great and wish that was longer, and it does way better showing off Kirk's "I don't believe in no-win scenarios" scheming. Him and Spock outwitting Khan's plan merely by bluffing and betting on what the other will do was exactly what they did to Khan four times in the original timeline. And way better than whatever they did to Nero in the first movie.

For trailer comparison:

This was the first trailer for the first film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PM1pvOzn_w

And this was the first for Into Darkness:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5gdbUC9mWU

And here's all ten originals + 2009 back to back apparently:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLseLSMlzsk
[close]

boo that just has a commercial for VI, actual teaser and trailer...EDIT: same for First Contact and Insurrection:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RERAc0ipha0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=638S8n2_Ab8
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W2Ehf4qrh4
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP8dH36Sc64
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bw4FGqQhSs
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 16, 2015, 09:11:10 PM
 :rofl

I forgot about the Search for Spock trailer completely spoiling the climax and how pissed Nimoy was.

Also, lol at how Insurrection looks like a completely different movie.

And it's kinda amusing to see how trailers have changed over the years via just one franchise. Made me realize voiceovers and title readings are basically dead. Nemesis is the first one that makes the trailer completely out of music and voice clips from the film/loops.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 16, 2015, 09:33:22 PM
:expert
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 16, 2015, 11:21:10 PM
Quote
[Elba's] playing someone named Kraal (which is Faraci’s guess at how it’s spelled) who, despite the Klingon-sounding name, is from a species we’ve never seen before.

Lin says that Kraal is going to question Kirk and crew about the Federation’s ideology:

I really like his character because he’s challenging the Federation’s philosophy, and it’s something growing up I wanted to see. He’s a character that has a distinct philosophy. Sometimes I watch Trek and I see utopia in San Francisco, and you think “They don’t have money, so how do they live, how do they compete?” Those are things that his character, in a way, has a very distinct and valid point of view about…when someone is really challenging a way of life, how the Federation should act, I can see – right or wrong – that this is a valid point of view, and that’s a point of entry.”
Quote
Many have noticed that Roberto Orci, John Payne, and Patrick McKay are listed as co-writers in both the trailer and a recent IMAX press release.  According to Lin, the film’s writers are Simon Pegg and Doug Jung:

The WGA has to figure it out, because I don’t know who those writers are, I never met them. I came on, I had an idea and then Simon and Doug came on. I had one conversation with Orci after I came on, and that was it.

When asked if any elements whatsoever were reused from previous scripts, Lin is very clear:

Nothing was refurbished [from the first script] because I don’t know what was done before I came on.


Ultimately, the script will go to arbitration and the Writer’s Guild will make the final call on who receives screenwriting credits, but it appears that the Star Trek Beyond script is exclusively a Pegg/Jung production.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 16, 2015, 11:49:36 PM
Avatar bet time.

People who think this movie is gonna rock have to change our avatars if this ends up being doo doo. To whatever embarrassing. Choose wisely.

People who claim this is gonna be Fast n Furious in space and is gonna suck change their avatars to splatoon/mlp/whatever for a month.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 17, 2015, 12:59:21 AM
Here's the thing, though- I totally think it's gonna be Fast and Furious in space, but I don't think it will suck because of that. It's just not what I *WANT* out of ST.

My whole point has been that you have plenty of avenues to see good dumb (I mean that in a positive way) action movies. I currently have no way of seeing new ST movies, and from the looks of things won't get that in Beyond.

Thus the disappointment.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on December 17, 2015, 01:00:56 AM
Also, for my money, this is the best ship battle from the original movies. Sometimes I'll just put it on whenever I have 5 or so minutes.

"I can see you, Kirk."

:lawd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPz-6HuM8Sc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 17, 2015, 01:07:26 AM
Back off! Back off!

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I love how in the film it cuts between it and the events at the conference/assassination setup.

Also sometimes while driving fast on the expressway I'll say "She'll fly apart! FLY HER APART THEN!" Especially in my last car which would shake when when accelerating at higher gears.

 :goty2
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 17, 2015, 01:23:06 AM
This is I think my favorite part of any of the Trek movies, especially 5:00+.

"Let them eat static."

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

*Goes to put on glasses, looks around at crew* "Damn."

The pacing of this entire film is amazing, I wonder how well you could get away with it these days with any big name franchise or if you really do need that ADHD film-making style with thirty cuts per minute for major movie fandom. (I remember complaints about Casino Royale's baccarat poker scene killing the pacing of the film when I thought it rather one of the most tension filled parts of the movie. Though I guess the Harry Potter and Tolkien movies did alright with a fairly slow pacing. Maybe the books protected those.)

"Mister Saavik, you go right on quoting regulations."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 17, 2015, 01:53:00 AM
For what its worth.

Quote from: Simon Pegg
"It was very action-packed -- yeah, it was surprising. I find [the trailer] to be the marketing people saying 'Everybody come and see this film, it's full of action and fun!'...

There's a lot more to [the movie] than that. I didn't love [the trailer] because I know there's a lot more to the film. There's a lot more story, and a lot more character stuff, and a lot more of what I call 'Star Trek stuff.'

But, you know, [Paramount has to] bring a big audience in; they've got to bang the drum. To the 'Star Trek' fans, I'd say hang in there and be patient."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on December 17, 2015, 04:12:49 AM
I believe in Simon Pegg and Justin Lin fuck all y'all. Hopefully the new tv show fills that void you're missing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 17, 2015, 04:56:12 AM
I had read like six months ago that both Lin and Pegg were recommended by the main producers to not look at any of Orci's third film work. And that Pegg wanting to write it was encouraged by Lin and everyone since he was a big TOS fan. Orci was pulling lots of power play shit after the first film apparently and even more after the second like trying to force Paramount into letting him direct, that's one reason why Abrams was wavering on coming back to direct Into Darkness (I assume another is that he was tired of hearing Orci's explanations of how fire can't melt steel) and it took four years to get made. And his former partner Kurtzman recently split off.

Pegg's comments are encouraging. So are Lin's about how they basically ignored the first two films and super blood and so on. Watch this wind up an only slightly blockbustered up version of a TOS episode that actually uses the characters as more than stand-ins, duds at the box office, gets a 70% RT score and leads to a HUELEN10 essay about how Lin has betrayed the franchise.

Pine was also making encouraging comments and re-upped to do more films, as did Quinto. Both after Pegg finished the script...

Let's start an irrational hype train brehs.

Star Trek is back y'all.
 :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on December 17, 2015, 05:05:54 AM
Yep watch it be the best, by far. Let them give Pegg and Lin exec credits for the tv show too. I'm not trying to see TNG/DS9 but in 2015 we already got movies and 10+ seasons of that. I'm not trying to see just old shit retold slightly differently s/o to The Force Awakens fans.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 17, 2015, 09:25:12 AM
Orci and Kurtzman needs to be stopped from working on movies.

Damon Lindelof, too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 12:54:48 AM
Saw it pointed out on a blog that the regular uniforms have changed. They aren't the form-fit tight tops with the insignia pattern over another tight black top anymore. Can see it clearest in the little joke part of the trailer with Spock and McCoy. They're more like TNG's later ones with a collar in terms of fit/material.

EDIT:
(http://static.srcdn.com/slir/w786-h393-q90-c786:393/wp-content/uploads/mccoy-spock-10-clues-from-the-beyond-trailer.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 12:57:37 AM
From the stuff they were filming in Dubai:
(http://trekcore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/stb-dubai5.jpg)
(http://trekcore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/stb-dubai2.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 02:50:11 AM
some OK dumb action flick franchise.
Dumb? DUMB?

Just action??? NOT ACTION/PSYCHOLOGICAL THRILLER?!?!?

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I trust in their complaints about the trailer.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
And the last two Trek's trailers showing everything out of context instead of giving away the plot like every other movie.
[close]
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on December 22, 2015, 10:02:44 AM
I don't think this is going to veer too far from the JJ movies and as such end up being rather plain and perfunctory, but calling the fast and the furious "some OK dumb action flick franchise" is an andrex tier opinion, wrath :ufup
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:08:07 AM
Fast and furious is :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on December 22, 2015, 10:14:58 AM
I know that justin lin has talked about wanting to make some chinese films (I believe he has specifically said he wants to remake shaolin temple?)  and I'm way more excited about that than his take on star trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:15:23 AM
I'll be honest, they're entertaining to me and I get their appeal I just never found them to reach any level near my favorite dumb action movies. Call me a hater just never thought they were that good. Then again I really enjoyed Expendables 2, so what do I know?

Fast and Furious movies are character based action movies that have character development and stories between movie to movie. For such a character based series director to be tied to Star Trek is only a good thing given that Star Trek is about the characters as much as the philosophy.

Fast And Furious is more than dumb action movies. They're movies that espouse a non-racial non-gender approach to family. It's unique in that it's one of the few diverse film series that treat the cast as equals and has a hopeful and positive take on those relations.

Much like Trek.

Distilling Fast and Furious as just dumb movies without looking at what makes them so approachable and so endearing is missing the mark, and I think Lin's positive philosophy could add a lot to the Trek dynamic, which again, is about the promised future where Americans, Russians, Blacks and Asians, and even aliens are treated equal under logic and shared experience.

Much like Fast and Furious.

It's funny how people claim that Justin Lin will make this one giant action fest when Lin's first F&F movie is one derided as have too little action and far too much character development.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 10:22:54 AM
I'll be honest, they're entertaining to me and I get their appeal I just never found them to reach any level near my favorite dumb action movies. Call me a hater just never thought they were that good. Then again I really enjoyed Expendables 2, so what do I know?
I can see the criticism for sure I don't disagree with being skeptical and I had my own doubts when Lin was announced. But the way both he and Pegg almost immediately took issue with the trailer's vibe and dismissed Orci's work, along with the good parts of the trailer in terms of setting, etc. I'm hoping this one can hit that middle ground it needs to, maybe setup even better future films (Pine and Quinto both got back on board with new contracts after doing this one when they were suggesting post-ID they were done with the films after 3) and help get the new TV series off the ground even if they're unattached.

I never really had the optimism for Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness as they seemed way too dumb action with Star Trek characters pasted over top from about half-way through the hype building for the first movie when J.J. said he'd never watched Star Trek and Orci/Kurtzman started talking about how they were making Trek fun and exciting for a change. Then the whole HE'S NOT KHAN, FOR REALS GUYZ.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 22, 2015, 10:24:34 AM
You are entitled to your opinion but I agree with none of that (aimed at mods help post). I think its all one big stretch.

Fast and Furious is not what I think of when it comes to Trek. It's not what I want when it comes to Trek. In fact its possibly the very last thing.


I will reserve my judgement until the film. But Justin Lin and the Fast and Furious franchise, no disrespect to either don't have any connection to me and trek and it seems like a terrible idea. We'll see how it turns out.   
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:29:23 AM
I like Lin and Pegg's transparency so far. It could go either way for sure. I'm not saying F&F is directly comparable to Trek. But there are things I like about both that both share and I'm deeply interested in Lin's and Pegg's approach to Trek. So I'm hopeful. But as with TFA pre-release,  don't mistake that for not also being cautious.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:31:47 AM
I'm just saying I think he has the capabilities. If he gets Trek, we will see the results. JJ never got Trek and it shows even if they're fun dumb Star Wars stuff.

Anyways, Star Trek premieres in two years. You have two years to brush up on your shit, Wrath. Watch TOS or its movie series. All of them are good to great.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 10:36:06 AM
Paramount telling Orci to fuck off followed by Pegg and Jung saying that they binge watched TOS multiple times while writing the script was when I converted from "sigh...they're going to do it a third time..." to "they may just save this reboot."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:37:39 AM
What's everyone TOS episode?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 22, 2015, 10:38:04 AM
Like I said before, I honestly don't really care about the movie. The TV version is coming back anyway and that's where Trek belongs and its arguably more important. The movies at this point are just an ego stroke thing for the franchise so that's its a "major" thing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on December 22, 2015, 10:41:20 AM
I agree.

The TV show is far more important. I hope they don't fuck it up but the stream only cbs shit is already a huge red flag.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 22, 2015, 10:53:27 AM
TOS was full of dumb action too, there just wasn't the budget or special effects.

I mean..."Arena" exists. "Space Seed" "The Enemy Within" "Errand of Mercy" and "The Alternative Factor" are in the first season too. Some are really good episode, but all have stupid as fuck and illogical action sequences. The third season especially has a lot of people running down corridors and then Kirk ('s stunt double) trying to karate chop them in the neck.

The problem with the two Abrams films was that they never fucking stopped, which is key to Trek's main difference. The only parts are when Kirk outplays Spock in the first one (with help from Old Spock...and even that gets interrupted with the goofy Scotty in the brewery tubes) and the stuff with discovering (and using) Khan's crew in the torpedoes in the second.

If the bulk of Beyond has an extended part with the main cast stranded in a busted shuttle on an alien planet, where they meet some of the natives for short action segments, that's "The Galileo Seven" which was early on and used the opportunity to flesh out a number of characters.

tl;dr: get hyyyype, even if they can't do something like II, III, IV and VI in this day of all franchises must be blockbusters
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 22, 2015, 11:12:44 AM
andrex tier opinion

(https://45.media.tumblr.com/bd8083962543267fe79c7aca08ed1afe/tumblr_ml89n7DIfm1s9pzsmo1_250.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 25, 2015, 07:45:01 AM
Just posting in support of Wrath. F&F is trash.
:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 25, 2015, 10:24:17 AM
Just posting in support of Wrath. F&F is trash.
:rejoice

 :bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 26, 2015, 01:17:29 AM
Bought my dad the entire original series on Blu-ray for Christmas, we went through some eps today and this show is fuckin' rad. :rock

He's had TOS on about 30 (official) VHS tapes he got 20 years ago. They're what got me into Trek originally. He's always been a TOS guy while my older sis and I were more TNG. We all love both series though, of course. (Older sis is the only one of us to have seen any of the other series.)

I've seen a good chunk of TOS but not all of it, TNG always seemed to be in syndication more when I was growing up so I always so more of that (and have probably seen 95% of that show.)

Excited to go through TOS with him over the next week. The Blu-ray look fantastic; 4:3 as God/Roddenberry intended, saturated as hell (dem colors brehs) with some redone effects (mostly space shots.) Might be a placebo, but I caught a TOS ep on Spike a few years back and the redone stuff was jarring as hell, but in this Blu-ray it feels appropriate. Could be my mind playing tricks but for the time being I'm under the impression this Blu-ray has different effects from the syndication a few years back. Probably wrong about that, but the point is, the BR looks fantastic to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 26, 2015, 03:30:00 AM
I'm just saying I think he has the capabilities. If he gets Trek, we will see the results. JJ never got Trek and it shows even if they're fun dumb Star Wars stuff.

Anyways, Star Trek premieres in two years. You have two years to brush up on your shit, Wrath. Watch TOS or its movie series. All of them are good to great.

Except ST V. No-one really likes V.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 26, 2015, 08:49:58 AM
The remasters got better with each iteration. The early TOS ones were gaudy and the altered frames really stood out, then they started to do them so they fit better and changes started more subtle, and a lot of the TNG ones don't really stand out if you've never seen the original episodes. They just look hott if you have an original to compare to.

Until Enterprise (I think), Star Trek TV series were shot on 35mm film, so they're 4:3 by default (and the remasters are fairly easy), originally they were redoing the space scenes for TOS/TNG in 16:9 but they changed that to fit the episodes. DS9/VOY were thought to have too much CG with the original files lost to be worth the cost, but apparently they found the original CG files and were doing testing starting with just running the sequences at higher resolutions.

I believe when it came time for the DVDs they did another quick pass over the early TOS remasters to clean them up a little. But, unlike say, Star Wars, the updates always were mostly focused on making the matte backgrounds not stand out when seen in HD, redrawing them to be "true" to the original vision, etc.

Arena's a great example because who the fuck knows what's going in the background of that original one. (And it clips over the edge of the set. :lol)
Original:
(http://www.exisle.net/mb/uploads/post-404-1161568594.jpg)

Remastered:
(http://www.exisle.net/mb/uploads/post-404-1161568703.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 26, 2015, 12:40:36 PM
I'm a huge tos nerd and I never went back and watched the remasters.

Some day.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 26, 2015, 01:51:18 PM
For a while they were free on basically every streaming service, they still are on Amazon Prime. Haven't checked the others for it specifically in some time but Amazon keeps e-mailing me about how I should finish watching season three.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 18, 2016, 02:18:22 PM
Back in the USA now, so I'm mainlining as much TNG as I can. Man, I love this show; it is so uplifting and hopeful. I really enjoy seeing all the interaction between the characters, which clarifies what was usually so wrong with all the TOS and TNG movies: it's just down to Kirk and Spock, or Picard and Data. The fun comes when the bridge crew are playing off each other, milking their individual quirks for reactions against each other.

I need to go back to DS9 when I'm back in Japan. I think the thing which keeps sending me away is the generally dark and dour tone, the lessened emphasis on humor, the constant threat of war with Cardassians or the Dominion, and so on. I know it gets better as seasons go on, so I want to at least get to s4 before determining if I can stick with it.

Also: Bev Crusher and Deanna Troi have some kind of tantric hold over my nostalgia-riddled hormones. My goodness. ::fans self::
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on January 18, 2016, 02:32:08 PM

I need to go back to DS9 when I'm back in Japan. I think the thing which keeps sending me away is the generally dark and dour tone, the lessened emphasis on humor

Interesting.  I agree that, episode-to-episode, DS9 has less emphasis on humour, but I think DS9 is the funniest Trek show when they do decide to turn on the humour.

Any Ferengi-centric episode, the baseball game episode, the Klingon bachelor party episode.  That shit is gold, Jerry!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 18, 2016, 06:48:56 PM
DS9 has plenty of humorous moments in its more serious episodes too imo, especially involving Garak just chatting with people. These are all from "dark" episodes IIRC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2q2ySAOyqo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cl66ilQCCNs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VhSm6G7cVk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t02v9EUHs30
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
westtxtapper 6 months ago
 We never do find out how is the spiced pudding!
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 18, 2016, 06:50:42 PM
Also: Bev Crusher and Deanna Troi have some kind of tantric hold over my nostalgia-riddled hormones. My goodness. ::fans self::
Quote
Braga noted the show was not popular among who he dubbed "hard-core fans". "I've come to notice that whenever you infuse a show with sexual themes, some of these fans seem to short-circuit. I mean, the weather array malfunction causing thunderstorms – it was fun!"

René Echevarria recalled, "I can still reduce Brannon to shudders when I go into his office and say, 'I can travel on the power transfer beam'. But the cast loved it. Every woman on the lot who read it was coming up to Brannon and patting him. Ultimately I think it was worth doing because it was campy fun and the production values were wonderful. The sets look great and everybody threw themselves into it. Gates did a wonderful job. It just got bigger and broader and to the point of grandmother leaping out of the grave. Just having Beverly basically writhing around having an orgasm at 6 o'clock on family TV was great. For that alone it was worth doing. We got away with murder."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 18, 2016, 07:36:47 PM
I find DS9 the funniest. I also like its cast the most. I like TNG but it's so dated to me and a product of its times. The more serial nature of ds9 appeals to me. Nothing really matters in TNG. I find DS9 pulls comedy off better because the character interaction is there in a place where it allows them to be in situations they just couldn't be in TNG's setting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on January 18, 2016, 07:45:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orj5rNe5AEE

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

The Ferengi pulling a Weekend at Bernie's to resuce Moogie.  :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 18, 2016, 07:48:56 PM
Ferengi own
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 18, 2016, 07:49:40 PM
I love in Deja Q how Picard and the rest of the crew start being dicks back to Q. And they never really respect him when he comes back after that even with his powers.

Oh, very clever, Worf. Eat any good books lately?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 18, 2016, 07:50:20 PM

I also don't understand why people think TNG has good character interaction or character development. You've got Riker the endless brown noser, Troi who has feelings, Wesley the I can do anything kid, Geordi the weirdo, Data the annoying Pinnochio. TBH, Worf and Picard are the only shining lights on the cast. The fact that the cast has zero drama within it as mandated by Roddenberry's stupid no internal conflict rule -  the core of drama storytelling - is icing on the cake. The only reason the cast gets okay-ish is because the show turns into something like House. It's comfort food. So you get used to them. But I can't really call the cast actually good and I found more interesting character interaction within DS9's first two episodes than the entire whole of TNG.

To be honest, only seasons 3-5 of TNG are really worth watching and I like it less and less over time. It really is a boring show and there's no reason at all the shows after it followed its template. It's not a surprise I didn't understand Star Trek in my early years based on TNG. Thank goodness for DS9.

I know people like TNG because it's not serialized and you can watch any episode in most any order, but that's exactly why I'm not big on it. Nothing matters. Nothing changes. Those are my final thoughts on TNG as someone who watched it for the first time in this age of serialized TV. I know others don't like DS9 for the same exact reasons I like it: it's slow and with an emphasis on character interaction and drama that builds over multiple seasons.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 18, 2016, 07:51:53 PM
Enterprise? Oh yes, weren't you one of the little people?

spoiler (click to show/hide)
You hit me... Picard never hit me.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 18, 2016, 07:58:34 PM
"I'm not Picard."

And thank God :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 20, 2016, 01:49:25 AM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Xv7TYve3L.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 20, 2016, 01:55:43 AM
Shatner's name is so big it just about makes the title of the book confusing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 20, 2016, 02:00:31 PM
Shatner still capitalizing on exploitation of his friends. Or, possibly, friend (singular) since Nimoy was apparently the only one who could stand him.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Am_I_Anonymous on January 20, 2016, 02:07:57 PM
What is the famous next gen "there are 3 lights" episode?


Also didn't Nimoy and Shatner have a falling out some time ago?


Edit: Yup

http://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/11182/Mr-Spock-Captain-Kirk-and-a-bitter-40-year-battle
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on January 20, 2016, 02:33:15 PM
I think one of the cool things about DS9's crew is you get the distinct impression that these people would not be cooperative or even friends with each other under any other circumstances besides deep space. Not even bar or academy mates.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 20, 2016, 02:57:11 PM
Yup. I love that. I love the work they put into the building the relationships too. Kira and Sisqo alone for example.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on January 20, 2016, 05:10:15 PM
O'brien and Bashir had a really fun stupid friendship too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 20, 2016, 05:24:24 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCPdmOuzYrM&feature=share

:leon
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 20, 2016, 05:26:33 PM
O'brien and Bashir had a really fun stupid friendship too.

Oh man that's a great example.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 20, 2016, 07:05:13 PM
What is the famous next gen "there are 3 lights" episode?


Also didn't Nimoy and Shatner have a falling out some time ago?


Edit: Yup

http://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/11182/Mr-Spock-Captain-Kirk-and-a-bitter-40-year-battle

I'd not heard any of that before, but it doesn't surprise me. I guess what I meant was that Nimoy was more diplomatic in dealing with Shatner than the rest of the actors. It sounds as though Shatner deserves every raspberry he could ever receive.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 29, 2016, 06:22:04 PM
Dudes, DUDES: transparent aluminum
http://www.nrl.navy.mil/media/news-releases/2015/transparent-armor-from-nrl-spinel-could-also-ruggedize-your-smart-phone
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 30, 2016, 01:34:25 AM
What is the famous next gen "there are 3 lights" episode?
THERE. ARE. FOUR. LIGHTS.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's the second part of "Chain of Command" as I think they're only captured at the end of the first part.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on January 30, 2016, 02:41:43 AM
THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!

Gets tortured and never mentions it again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus on January 30, 2016, 02:47:16 AM
Hm, it just occured to me that this might eventually be used for PC cases. :leon
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 09, 2016, 01:18:14 PM
https://variety.com/2016/tv/news/star-trek-bryan-fuller-showrunner-cbs-hannibal-1201700606/

Quote
“Hannibal” creator Bryan Fuller has found his next mission: showrunner and co-creator of CBS’ new “Star Trek” series.

A longtime fan of science fiction, Fuller began his career writing for “Star Trek: Voyager” (1997-2001) and “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” (1997).

“My very first experience of ‘Star Trek’ is my oldest brother turning off all the lights in the house and flying his model of a D7 Class Klingon Battle Cruiser through the darkened halls. Before seeing a frame of the television series, the ‘Star Trek’ universe lit my imagination on fire,” said Fuller. “It is without exaggeration a dream come true to be crafting a brand new iteration of ‘Star Trek’ with fellow franchise alum Alex Kurtzman and boldly going where no ‘Star Trek’ series has gone before.”

The new series is set to bow on CBS in January 2017, then move to CBS’ All Access digital subscription service. It will be the first original series to launch on a broadcast network but air primarily on an SVOD service.

https://twitter.com/BryanFuller/status/697118666752598016
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 09, 2016, 07:27:16 PM
Nice. Good to have someone in charge of it who is actually a fan of Trek after the JJ movies. Never watched Hannibal so can't comment on that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on February 09, 2016, 07:47:00 PM
Hannibal is terrific, I'm definitely most interested with Fuller involved.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 10, 2016, 02:24:25 PM
Hannibal is terrific, I'm definitely most interested with Fuller involved.
Pushing Daisies was also super charming and well crafted. This will be awesome.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on February 10, 2016, 05:43:03 PM
tumblr/twitter already in love with the idea of a fuller trek show because of something he must have said years ago in an interview?

(https://36.media.tumblr.com/8164e5b8fdc828939adf68a5b558049a/tumblr_o2ayqsI7ZS1tf70vho1_540.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: brob on February 10, 2016, 05:48:41 PM
Angela Bassett and Rosario Dawson   :like
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 10, 2016, 06:32:38 PM
Let's Go Boner Town!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 11, 2016, 09:23:59 AM
Don't know if anybody pointed it out but there is a pretty interesting documentary about the behind the scenes shenanigans that went on pre-production and during production of TNG on Netflix called Chaos on The Bridge.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
They were so fucked they had to steal food from catering for the show Cheers.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on February 11, 2016, 06:18:37 PM
Is that worth watching? I started it but realized I don't know if I have the fortitude to deal with an hour and a half of bloviating shatnerisms
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on February 11, 2016, 06:21:42 PM
It says tng
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 11, 2016, 06:43:29 PM
Yeah if you can't stand Shatner, you are kinda SOL cuz he narrates most if not all Star Trek Documentaries.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where else is he going to get work?
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on February 11, 2016, 07:12:59 PM
Oh. Lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on February 11, 2016, 08:23:28 PM
Yeah if you can't stand Shatner, you are kinda SOL cuz he narrates most if not all Star Trek Documentaries.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where else is he going to get work?
[close]
Huh, until just now I had thought he had been pretty well employed. I just looked at his credits and he still gets work every year but the biggest thing he's been involved in recently is a Stephen King scifi channel show. I guess his work in commercials fooled me into thinking he was more ubiquitous than he is.

I don't hate the man, but his narration style really gets on my nerves.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 12, 2016, 03:08:39 PM
Yeah if you can't stand Shatner, you are kinda SOL cuz he narrates most if not all Star Trek Documentaries.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where else is he going to get work?
[close]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmUdkiIdXZs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 03, 2016, 03:09:38 AM
http://therealstanlee.com/meyer-new-star-trek#

:hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 03, 2016, 03:35:22 AM
I wonder what exactly it means that they're going back to the old timeline, yet also considering continuing the Abramsverse Trek under the new direction Beyond is supposed to take.

Not that I have a problem with it, it's just kinda interesting in today's whole crossmedia franchise universe.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 03, 2016, 05:03:24 AM
Hopefully they ignore the temptation to cross promote or cross universe with those JJ movies at all.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 03, 2016, 05:05:17 AM
Article says no Abrams alternate universe stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on March 03, 2016, 06:02:17 AM
Pity, that's a good MBT
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mods Help on March 03, 2016, 01:46:15 PM
http://therealstanlee.com/meyer-new-star-trek#

:hyper

The only legitimate reaction:

:noah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 10, 2016, 12:11:09 AM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/03/10/star-trek-show-must-wait-six-months-to-air-after-to-star-trek-beyond
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 10, 2016, 02:20:59 AM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/03/10/star-trek-show-must-wait-six-months-to-air-after-to-star-trek-beyond

Yeah. We'd probably all be confused.

What a load of laundry.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 10, 2016, 04:17:05 AM
I imagine they mostly want to see if the current incarnation of the film franchise can stand on its own.

I also can't imagine that the TV series is ready to start airing already? Beyond could probably come out this spring but they likely want to avoid BatmanvSuperman and Civil War among others.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 14, 2016, 06:54:49 AM
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/04/13/the-new-star-trek-tv-show-will-be-set-before-the-next-generation
Quote
UPDATE! A trusted source has chimed in and told me that it looks like the show will be a seasonal anthology, which means the first season will be set post-Undiscovered Country. After that the entire Star Trek universe is potentially open. So those of you hoping for a post-Dominion War show... don't give up hope. That could come some day.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kelsey time...for two seasons!
(http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3496/9226/original.jpg?w=800&h)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 14, 2016, 06:55:24 AM
Also had to post this in here instead of GAF thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=200948128&postcount=497
Quote
Any anthology Star Trek is ruined when you consider that now that there is a series that could do, we will STILL never see a live-action Coutdown due to Nemoy's death.


:(
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=200948256&postcount=500
Quote
It's not just a tie-in comic.


It is the first half of the most emotional and (in my eyes) greatest Star Trek story of all time. I re-read the whole thing an hour before I watched XI in a theatre.

It was incredible, and I will never forget it.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=200948352&postcount=503
Quote
It is the 11th film, it will always be the 11th film.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on April 14, 2016, 07:09:54 AM
Please don't link to Huelen posts about Star Trek.

Every single one is evidence of brain damage.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 14, 2016, 07:14:26 AM
You only say that because you didn't read the comics! You missed two-thirds of the story!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on April 14, 2016, 07:21:21 AM
You only say that because you didn't read the comics! You missed two-thirds of the story!

Two-thirds of the most emotional story of all time!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 14, 2016, 04:05:23 PM
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/04/13/the-new-star-trek-tv-show-will-be-set-before-the-next-generation
Quote
UPDATE! A trusted source has chimed in and told me that it looks like the show will be a seasonal anthology, which means the first season will be set post-Undiscovered Country. After that the entire Star Trek universe is potentially open. So those of you hoping for a post-Dominion War show... don't give up hope. That could come some day.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kelsey time...for two seasons!
(http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3496/9226/original.jpg?w=800&h)
[close]

Hmmm... That could be interesting and an original approach.

But honestly I've always liked the ability to get to know a cast over years.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 14, 2016, 05:27:16 PM
Also imagine the first season of TNG over and over again
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 14, 2016, 05:39:13 PM
Playing devil's advocate if they suck one season, its not like we have to suffer through 8 more seasons of the same shit cast.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(Although generally speaking the problem with bad trek is poor writing. I don't care really super much about insane acting ability. )
[close]


At least people can die if its an anthology show. That would lend a certain gravitas to trek that its always missed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 26, 2016, 05:26:47 AM
Quote
two years into their famous five-year mission. And, truth be told, the voyage is wearing on them. “They’ve come to rest at a Federation outpost, a sort of diplomatic hub,” says Pegg, who worked with Doug Jung on the screenplay.

But their momentary R&R is interrupted by Idris Elba's blue-faced alien antagonist Krall, who instead of showing his distaste for the Federation's ideals and reach through a strongly-worded letter to his local council, decides to unleash violence upon the poor Enterprise and its crew. “What’s the point of it all?” says Pegg of the big question that drives Kirk and co this time around. “We’re gathering a great community within the galaxy, but to what end? What does it all mean?”

As for Lin, he, like Krall (without the guns or nasty attitude) is also in a dismantling mood... “This is the 50th anniversary,” he says. “I felt like it was important to really deconstruct the idea of Star Trek, the idea of the Federation and why it’s special. We’ll really be poking at a lot of different things.”
Quote
Yes. What’s interesting about him is that he has a real beef with what the Enterprise stands for. Krall’s a character who’s deeply steeped in hatred — in my opinion, a well-earned hatred — for the Federation. It felt quite political. There’s a relatability to what’s happening in our world. Not everybody’s happy with what everybody calls the good guys.



Krall is predatory. He’s not one for big speeches. He is one for going to get what he wants. If that means having to do it himself, outside of his army, he is not afraid to do that.
time to put that new trailer out already paramount
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 05, 2016, 10:33:34 AM
This new show is going be DOA

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/05/cbs-star-trek-netflix/481170/?utm_source=SFTwitter

Airs once a week on CBS version of netflix
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 18, 2016, 06:19:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXpPweAooeE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 18, 2016, 06:24:19 PM
This new show is going be DOA

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/05/cbs-star-trek-netflix/481170/?utm_source=SFTwitter

Airs once a week on CBS version of netflix

We knew this already
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 18, 2016, 06:25:21 PM
Like on may 5th when I made that post?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 18, 2016, 06:38:57 PM
Like on may 5th when I made that post?

Like when they sent the first PR announcing the series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 18, 2016, 06:40:32 PM
Not that it would air weekly instead of all at once like the netflix model, I believe.  Also if it is old news I don't care. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 18, 2016, 06:41:10 PM
Not that it would air weekly instead of all at once like the netflix model, I believe.  Also if it is old news I don't care.

Shut up, slut.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 18, 2016, 06:43:10 PM
Just saying if you're right I don't care, but if I'm right na na na-na na.  I'm right BTW.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 18, 2016, 07:40:31 PM
New logo is pertty awesome.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 21, 2016, 02:03:04 AM
http://imgur.com/gallery/RiF4Evf

 :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 21, 2016, 07:38:19 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvq3y8BhZ2s

I still don't like it but I'm not the target market so my opinion is rather pointless.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 21, 2016, 09:14:40 AM
 :rejoice

trek is back, lin and pegg did it brehs :whoo

dat warp shot at ~0:25  :lawd

kirk grabbing an old crashed ship to save the day :gladbron

spoiler (click to show/hide)
:neogaf :patel :expert

pls be gud
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 27, 2016, 01:06:39 AM
A small bundle of old Trek games for 80% off:
https://www.gog.com/promo/20160523_weekly_staff_picks_star_trek
Quote
Star Trek™: 25th Anniversary
1992 Adventure

Star Trek™: Judgment Rites
1993 Adventure

Star Trek™: Starfleet Academy
1997 Simulation

Star Trek™: Starfleet Command Gold Edition
2000 Strategy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 23, 2016, 08:03:59 PM
http://www.treknews.net/2016/06/23/the-abramsverse-is-no-more/

Pretty neat: "The Kelvin Timeline."

It makes sense because, well, we've had multiple timelines for ages. The Goatees and Sashes timeline, the Enterprise C timeline, even All Good Things, the TNG series finale, was essentially an alternate timeline.

Ah, TNG: the GOAT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ukG33mB5bw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 27, 2016, 10:43:49 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cl9wjZOWMAA2pHX.jpg:large)

(http://p.fod4.com/p/media/5c597eb60b/uF9MjJo3QIaijySXC4iL_Confused%20Christian%20Bale.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 27, 2016, 10:49:33 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MBXBMkcUNo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 27, 2016, 10:52:17 AM
For what its worth the song is fine and its actually probably the best trailer for the movie so far as I've thought the others sucked.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 28, 2016, 08:21:26 AM
Quote
Maurice Postal1 day ago
RiRi + Star Trek = smart marketing for a change.
:doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 28, 2016, 08:23:05 AM
It's been such an awkward move to try to make Star Trek hip.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 28, 2016, 09:12:48 AM
Quote
Maurice Postal1 day ago
RiRi + Star Trek = smart marketing for a change.
:doge

Only a rere would think that was smart.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 28, 2016, 03:42:37 PM
It's too loud for the rest of the trailer, it becomes kinda a big mush, especially when she starts singing. And it's out of tempo with the bulk of the trailer's pacing.

Actually, all three of the trailers have mixed the music too loud. The second one "worked" for me only because the music let in the dialogue. And even parts of it were mixed stupidly loud.

Still irrationally hyped for this and Suicide Squad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 08, 2016, 01:57:49 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-reacts-gay-sulu-909154
Quote
Takei wasn't overjoyed. He had never asked for Sulu to be gay. In fact, he'd much prefer that he stay straight. "I’m delighted that there’s a gay character," he tells The Hollywood Reporter. "Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate."

Takei explains that Roddenberry was exhaustive in conceiving his Star Trek characters. (The name Sulu, for example, was based on the Sulu Sea off the coast of the Philippines, so as to render his Asian nationality indeterminate.) And Roddenberry had always envisioned Sulu as heterosexual.
Quote
Takei first learned of Sulu's recent same-sex leanings last year, when Cho called him to reveal the big news. Takei tried to convince him to make a new character gay instead. "I told him, 'Be imaginative and create a character who has a history of being gay, rather than Sulu, who had been straight all this time, suddenly being revealed as being closeted.'"
Quote
Not long after Cho's bombshell call came another, this one from Lin, again informing that Sulu was indeed to be gay in Star Trek Beyond. Takei remained steadfastly opposed to the decision.

"I said, 'This movie is going to be coming out on the 50th anniversary of Star Trek, the 50th anniversary of paying tribute to Gene Roddenberry, the man whose vision it was carried us through half a century. Honor him and create a new character. I urged them. He left me feeling that that was going to happen," Takei says.

After that, all was quiet from Beyond until a few months ago, when Takei received an email from Pegg "praising me for my advocacy for the LGBT movement and for my pride in Star Trek," he says. "And I thought to myself, 'How wonderful! It’s a fan letter from Simon Pegg. Justin had talked to him!'" Takei was certain the creative team had rethought their decision to make Sulu gay.

That is until one month ago, when he received an email from Cho informing him that the actor was about to embark on an international media tour for Beyond. Cho said it was bound to come out that his character was gay, and "what should he do?" A disappointed Takei told Cho to go about his promotional duties, but that he was "not going to change" his mind on the matter.

"I really tried to work with these people when at long last the issue of gay equality was going to be addressed," Takei says. "I thought after that conversation with Justin that was going to happen. Months later, when I got that email from Simon Pegg, I was kind of confused. He thinks I’m a great guy? Wonderful. But what was the point of that letter? I interpreted that as my words having been heard."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on July 08, 2016, 02:17:44 PM
I'm fine with this.  I mean its the new timeline so things can change.  We just have to assume that the destruction of the U.S.S. Kelvin made Sulu gay.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on July 08, 2016, 09:39:45 PM
I'd like to see a montage of all the moments from the previous two Kelvin Timeline Star Trek movies showing Pine's Kirk thinking back on all the gay things Cho's Sulu was doing during them, a la Brooklyn Nine-Nine's "Does anyone else get a gay vibe?" reaction sequence.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 15, 2016, 05:23:53 PM
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_beyond/#contentReviews
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on July 15, 2016, 06:46:35 PM
Justin Lin knows how to build a blockbuster
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 16, 2016, 08:16:30 PM
Quote
Rating: Rotten

Ultimately, Beyond is a movie about characters - and character. But that's half the battle. The other half of the battle is... battle. And Lin, who has such a strong track record with vehicular mayhem, doesn't bring his "A" game.

Chris Nashawaty
Entertainment Weekly
 Top Critic
:derp
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 20, 2016, 12:22:16 AM
the score keeps going higher with each review was like 86% when I first clicked Stoney's link now it's up to 93%, this better not be an 2009 (95%) or Into Darkness (87%) style bait and switch job

spoiler (click to show/hide)
justin lin and simon pegg saved trek :rejoice

i knew if we just believed hard enough :preach
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 23, 2016, 06:23:18 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqm9HSYbf0o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mupepe on July 23, 2016, 06:27:43 PM
The first half of the movie is muddled with pacing issues and surprisingly poorly shot action scenes. By the 2nd hour though it finds its footing and action is pretty damn good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 24, 2016, 01:28:05 PM
Please be good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 24, 2016, 01:42:42 PM
I like the bronze ship. A nice change up.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: WanderingWind on July 24, 2016, 03:11:30 PM
i like the part where the enterprises and capt bones beat the bad guy with rap music and they were all surfing through the drones that made me think about drone warfare and how bad it is man this movie is deep anyway beastie boys RULE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 25, 2016, 02:12:38 PM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/5721854/ralph-mcquarries-lost-concept-art-for-a-star-trek-movie-in-1976-1977/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 28, 2016, 06:20:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_7Pz85XJ7Q
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 28, 2016, 07:25:03 PM
God fucking damn I love RLM.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on July 28, 2016, 08:31:41 PM
They.....liked it?

Hmm, maybe I'll have to give it a shot after all.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 06, 2016, 06:25:56 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIGxMENwq1k
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 06, 2016, 12:40:00 PM
TBF they kind of ignore the the backwater space concept a few seasons in where the statement that they can't get more was the first season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 06, 2016, 02:41:11 PM
TBF they kind of ignore the the backwater space concept a few seasons in where the statement that they can't get more was the first season.
They probably figured out that they could manufacture parts with the replicator, once power was no longer a primary concern.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 06, 2016, 03:17:37 PM
Yeah, there's lots of ways they could probably acquire the means to make them or alter others. It's not as rough to explain away as the shuttle thing. Maybe that's what the 100 crew members you never saw were doing, constantly making new shuttles. Why isn't there a video count of that?

I do like the part where they're like "oh, we changed all the torpedoes for this specific use" and then fire a bunch of regular ones.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 11, 2016, 10:54:02 AM
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1261188

 :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2016, 02:16:54 PM
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1261188

 :quark

Every single bit of info made my dick even harder.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 22, 2016, 04:01:54 AM
Wanted to marathon I to VI this weekend but only got up to III. I've seen Wrath of Khan and knew most of how I and III went down but otherwise hadn't seen them before.

Live-tweeted thoughts:



Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Jesus I get that they were excited to have a budget but this 20-minute shot of the Enterprise's exterior is just gratuitous. #StarTrekI

These uniforms are terrible. #StarTrekI

Also I never knew TNG ripped off its theme from this movie. #StarTrekI

Bones looks like shit. #StarTrekI

Considering the time these effects are pretty rad. Dig the sound effects for the cloud too. #StarTrekI

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqRcAH9WIAANMrW.jpg:large)

Spock is being kinda a dick. #StarTrekI

http://chaolwestfa11.tumblr.com/post/149159711879 #StarTrekI

Uhura's 'fro gives me life. #StarTrekI

This movie is goddamn strange. #StarTrekI

Well that was a thing. #StarTrekI



Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

And now... #StarTrekII

I want to tweet but I'm just too engrossed. Not my first time seeing #StarTrekII, but still.

Oh shit Reliant and Enterprise are meeting. itshappening.gif #StarTrekII

I don't understand the bibs. Then again I shouldn't be complaining after the outfits in the last movie. #StarTrekII

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

"Here it comes." One of the most epic and underrated lines in film. The music here too... phew. #StarTrekII

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqSLXRCWIAA4YRk.jpg:small)

From hell's heart, I stab at thee.

For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee! #StarTrekII

(http://imagesmtv-a.akamaihd.net/uri/mgid:file:http:shared:mtv.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/tumblr_me65c4jxnx1qh09nho1_500-1419978238.gif?quality=.8&height=288&width=500)

I swear I'm not tearing up. I swear. #StarTrekII

Now that's a movie. #StarTrekII



Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

This whole sequence of breaking McCoy out is soooooooo much fun, goddamn. First time watching #StarTrekIII!

Damn Nichelle Nichols being a badass. Whew. #StarTrekIII

That was a damn, damn good final fistfight. #StarTrekIII



I'd give I a 2/5, II a 5/5, and III a 4/5.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 22, 2016, 09:56:08 AM
Wrath of Khan is amazing; it was utter hubris of Abrams to essentially try to remake the best Trek film.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 22, 2016, 10:30:48 AM
Into Darkness isn't really like Wrath of Khan much at all aside from Khan being the bad guy. Which brings me to one other tweet.

How to make Star Trek Into Darkness suck much less:

- No magic blood
- Cumberbatch is one of Khan's people but not Khan
- No Kirk death/revival

No magic blood means we skip the filler sad family scene and jump straight to Khan blowing up the UK office on his own. Cleaner.

Cumberbatch should have been one of Khan's people. Not only does he look nothing like Ricardo Montalban physically but his entire acting stint as Khan was totally different too (I don't care if this was "explained" in a fucking comic.) If you make him one of the eugenics people then there's more of a threat for the audience (if he wakes up 70 others it'll be bad, but if one of them is Khan then ohhh fuuucck.)

No Kirk death means we avoid trying to redo the "KHAN!!!" scream, which is a plus. Axing the revival also fixes a pretty lame deus ex and fake-out.

I'd probably have been pretty happy with Into Darkness had it done this. It'd still be full of plot holes, but as a fun action movie I can look over most of them. These small fixes would elevate it from 2/5 to 4/5 for me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 28, 2016, 01:12:33 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReOw_2f4lpY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 28, 2016, 02:33:25 AM
Apparently, the production of Star Trek: The Motion Picture was a total mess almost top-to-bottom and was barely finished in time for its premier. The director's cut fixes some stuff, but I guess there was only so much they could do. Having said that, I still like it in a bid-budget 60's style scifi movie kind of way.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 31, 2016, 05:48:31 AM
(http://trekcore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/pegg-ma.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 02, 2016, 05:00:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Am_I_Anonymous on September 02, 2016, 05:23:30 PM
Man I watched some DS9 with my son last night. That space station captain of whatever is one crazy dude.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 03, 2016, 12:24:34 AM
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.
VI is the best. Let it be known. Handles two plots without seeming like they're two clear plots (here's something actually more like a 1970s political thriller you Winter Soldier fan dopes) but loses none of the wit and TOS character stuff that the crew had going way back. Insurrection tries to do something similar and falls flat on its face.

Only flaw is Uhura looking through those damn books. :wag

II's only flaw is the pacing at times, it can really drag when it doesn't need to. But it uses that slow pacing so well in every other instance. Otherwise it's perfect.

JJ's team was a fool to take Khan, Carol Marcus and some semi-equivalent of Genesis and ignore all the rest of the film. He couldn't even give us 15 minutes aping the old submarine battle dramas II rips off when the bad ship shows up! The contrast between I/II/III and 09/ID/BY in pacing alone is crazy. Even though Beyond slows things waaaaaay down compared to the first two. Difference in how movies are made these days. No lingering. No breathing.

Man I watched some DS9 with my son last night. That space station captain of whatever is one crazy dude.
Avery Brooks can be a little...off...at times. He's operating on some other wavelengths.

Because of the Prophets  :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 03, 2016, 05:27:30 AM
^to say nothing of the spirits
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty 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!"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 03, 2016, 06:06:26 PM
Never say anything good about NEMESIS.

Not even once.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 03, 2016, 08:25:52 PM
Never saw the final two TNG movies, that might be next.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on September 03, 2016, 08:32:48 PM
Insurrection and Nemesis are kinda garbo, unfortunately.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 03, 2016, 08:38:52 PM
Yeah I've heard. Still should probably see them.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 03, 2016, 11:40:24 PM
New Discovery news (kinda)

http://io9.gizmodo.com/bryan-fuller-explains-why-the-new-show-is-called-star-t-1786151607
http://io9.gizmodo.com/bryan-fullers-teasing-us-with-a-star-trek-discovery-al-1785023307
http://io9.gizmodo.com/star-trek-discovery-will-have-books-and-comics-coming-1786150672

:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on September 04, 2016, 10:34:53 AM
Insurrection and Nemesis are kinda garbo, unfortunately.

The only 2 I have not seen as well. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL2CCF5FDA9CEEBDB8&v=8ZjkHUrEuHc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 09, 2016, 11:31:02 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/5X5bBHE.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 14, 2016, 07:40:23 PM
http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/14/12921678/star-trek-discovery-delayed-may-2017

(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2013/02/frustrated.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 26, 2016, 07:31:38 PM
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/bryan-fuller-showrunner-star-trek-discovery-cbs-1201901398/

 :what
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Dennis on October 26, 2016, 08:26:02 PM
Well, that is not good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on October 26, 2016, 09:01:48 PM
Not surprised.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 26, 2016, 10:23:12 PM
What is it with "Ricks"?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 13, 2016, 11:22:13 PM
(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1478530046-20161107.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on November 13, 2016, 11:40:50 PM
Classic O'Brian
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 18, 2017, 04:37:54 PM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/01/18/star-trek-discovery-debut-pushed-back-again-james-frain-cast-as-spocks-father-sarek

On one hand take as long as you need.

On the other hand....

 :gurl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 18, 2017, 04:50:45 PM
This show was supposed to be out RIGHT NOW

Ffs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus 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.
(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1485272591-20170124.png)
(http://smbc-comics.com/comics/1485272990-20170124after.png)

Had to be done. :doge

Appreciate your thoughts though, as I still have fond memories watching reruns.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iydft5C4Jjg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 01, 2017, 03:46:06 AM
RESIST!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 26, 2017, 09:22:25 AM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/michael-dorn-had-a-good-reason-for-turning-down-the-cha-1794259001

http://io9.gizmodo.com/what-the-fuck-is-going-on-with-star-trek-discovery-1794639961
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on May 15, 2017, 05:37:55 PM
caught the "second skin (http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Skin_(episode))" ep of DS9 recently and man, even in full cardassian make up kira still the ds9 waifu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 15, 2017, 07:33:11 PM
caught the "second skin (http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Skin_(episode))" ep of DS9 recently and man, especially in full cardassian make up kira still the ds9 waifu

Fixed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 17, 2017, 05:36:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dxe_ugmIVM


https://streamable.com/pmp54

http://deadline.com/2017/05/star-trek-discovery-order-increase-15-episodes-companion-show-talking-trek-cbs-all-access-1202096297/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 17, 2017, 05:40:12 PM
http://www.cbs.com/shows/star-trek-discovery/video/LeDfVOm_JkJcYJF9ju2izuFJBnF_qJsG/star-trek-discovery-first-look-trailer/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 17, 2017, 05:56:34 PM
Is she supposed to be half vulcan?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 17, 2017, 06:05:08 PM
Based on content in the trailer and this below I would say yes.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAD2telXkAA2hmg.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D 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]

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on May 17, 2017, 08:32:22 PM
fuck prequels
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 18, 2017, 07:44:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dxe_ugmIVM


https://streamable.com/pmp54

http://deadline.com/2017/05/star-trek-discovery-order-increase-15-episodes-companion-show-talking-trek-cbs-all-access-1202096297/

This video is now gone. Even on YouTube, on the official channel, #1 on trending -- but it's gone.  ???
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 18, 2017, 07:52:04 PM
works for me

but lol at that garbage loop used on her name near the start
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 18, 2017, 07:59:30 PM
on the other hand, this looks like it could be seth mcfarlane's galaxy quest :rejoice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy9sKeCE8V0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 18, 2017, 08:09:42 PM
on the other hand, this looks like it could be seth mcfarlane's galaxy quest :rejoice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy9sKeCE8V0

The preview doesn't look promising, but I'll watch Adriane Palickilikcickci in just about anything.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 18, 2017, 08:36:30 PM
Star Trek comedy parody show

 :rejoice


Seth MacFarlane attached

 :trash
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on May 21, 2017, 11:51:42 AM
https://twitter.com/xXxADHDxXx/status/865788911309672449
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 10, 2017, 01:53:53 PM
Trailer reminded me of Stargate Universe for some reason.

Really wish this weren't a prequel.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on June 13, 2017, 05:32:23 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/mdMihd8.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 13, 2017, 07:19:35 PM
Geordi looking like a Dollar Store Rick James in that first picture. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 13, 2017, 11:55:19 PM
That's not actually LeVar Burton in the first pic, is it?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 14, 2017, 01:47:48 AM
https://twitter.com/levarburton/statuses/227898184578519041
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on June 22, 2017, 05:56:09 AM
https://twitter.com/swear_trek/status/877542062530453504
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 16, 2017, 12:44:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGx5JQVdTZ4

 :heart these kind of character moments, and in just three minutes

watching Chris Pine in Wonder Woman made me think back on AbramsTrek (especially since he was basically playing Kirk for half the movie or more lol) and how much more Beyond had anything even close to moments like this among the crew and Jaylah...but from the man behind the Fast and Furious franchise, what else would you expect...makes me wonder what's going to happen regarding the films, don't think I've seen anything in months outside of how Chekov won't ever be recast in memory of Yelchin (speaking of people who finally got some useful and enjoyable character screen time in Beyond) but they may just be running silent to push Discovery

I should watch Beyond again, haven't seen it since, saw Amazon advertising its FREE FOR PRIME MEMBERS STREAMING DEBUT the other day or it was somebody else, maybe it was Microsoft in which case I'll just...you know...x265BluRay of course sillies!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 16, 2017, 01:51:26 AM
Star Trek Beyond is up on Hulu.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 16, 2017, 05:32:44 AM
that vr star trek game shows how the dude at ops really would act: https://clips.twitch.tv/FaithfulIncredulousPotTBCheesePull
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on July 16, 2017, 08:19:41 AM
Star Trek Beyond is up on Hulu.

going to piratebay now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on July 16, 2017, 08:20:31 AM
O wait you said beyond not discovery.  who cares.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on July 16, 2017, 08:22:08 AM
O you were replying to someone else.  im an idiot.  IGNORE ME.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 16, 2017, 09:16:34 AM
O wait you said beyond not discovery.  who cares.
i don't come down to where you work and knock the multiple tentacles out of your mouth :bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on July 16, 2017, 09:19:32 AM
will no one save me from these tentacles?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 23, 2017, 05:20:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC7IMj7WFyE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 23, 2017, 05:25:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMKECRnZe2U
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on July 23, 2017, 08:01:38 PM
looks so much better than discovery

we live in a trash timeline
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 24, 2017, 12:22:36 AM
Imagine I told you in 2006 that the next good Star Trek film (and only one over a twenty year span) would be in a reboot universe of Kirk/Spock and from the guys who just put out Shaun of the Dead and Tokyo Drift

now I'm probably going to have to add that the guy behind the cancelled FOX cartoon Family Guy would put out a better hour of Trek TV and it'd hit the air before the next Trek TV series :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
couldn't say Trump is President, that'd be too unbelievable :doge
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on July 24, 2017, 01:09:03 AM
looks so much better than discovery

we live in a trash timeline

It's not really that crazy when you realize that the best Star Trek movie of the past 20 years is Galaxy Quest.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 24, 2017, 01:19:39 AM
:lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 25, 2017, 04:08:42 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f5BLSiyARs

 :rofl at trying to take the ship to warp
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 12, 2017, 05:41:06 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sns1Xj6L-Qc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 12, 2017, 05:48:44 AM
He says he's going to do a DS9 one in the comments, but with this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_z2nbcySC4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 12, 2017, 05:57:20 AM
please god no.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 10:56:24 PM
Bump this thread so we can talk about how TNG sucks and trigger tasty
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 10:57:24 PM
Funny enough, Trek and wrasslin is a good comparison. Gene was basically Vince McMahon in that he wanted his say in everything related to Trek and had to be the final word. Even as the world of sci fi evolved around Gene, he refused to change and kept on the path that was correct to him even if it was corny/hacky/old fashioned. Sure, Gene had plenty of people around him to help guide things to be a bit better and he had plenty of solid as hell hits on his own. But his refusal to change lead to plenty of complaints and upset fans.

Of course the Trek story was a bit different in that some excellent stuff came after Gene passed, but also Trek post-Gene hasn't been quite the same. It's definitely become a totally different product from his vision.
Even funnier is that the Trek that people associate fondly with Gene, namely the TOS seasons, Gene immediately passed the buck on shortly after they started filming and he wasn't even involved in the show after the first season. He was a toxic micromanager who could not compromise with anyone, even when his fandom and the network barely saved the show for him the first time, Gene would still go on the warpath over HIS VISION and ditched the show. When he wasn't even showrunner in the first place, somebody who couldn't even be credited since she was a woman like Dorthy Fontana did more editing than he ever did. And then he spent decades taking shots at the third season when the thing got trashed by budgets as hard as the Batman TV series did.

The best example of the budgets are not only how many episodes are set on the Enterprise, but watch one of the first ten episodes set entirely on the Enterprise and then any from the third season. The ship is populated up the wazoo in the first season, dudes working on conduits, dudes handing off documents to others, just chatting, etc. The third season feels like there's the bridge crew, Scotty and maybe five red shirts on the entire fucking ship. Even by "Space Seed" it feels like this. Khan conquers half the ship because there's nobody even there. :lol

All Good Things is a better TNG movie than any of the actual TNG movies. Solid gold.

Himu, that is what you should be comparing to the TOS movies IMO.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The ending scene where Picard actually shows up for poker, after being absent for the show's entire run... :delicious Possibly my favorite Star Trek moment of all time. Possibly tied with the Best of Both Worlds cliffhanger.
[close]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt3MVP3FizQ

That said, I love Q and Picard's final scene more:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-olnnGBJQV4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SmLHecAlDg
[close]

I actually love that Q and Picard got two great serious moments as the show wound down, especially how this one gets recalled in "All Good Things..." as part of Q's whole framework of lessons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeLrqLP1DJk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:00:02 PM
Nah. Ds9 has a more character focused thing. I love characters. I watched Trek in order. TOS first, then TNG, and then DS9. Has nothing to do with contrarianism. I just like what I like and I'm honest about it. :yeshrug

The TNG sucks thing was hyperbole for laughs. I don't think it sucks but I also don't think it's that good either.

Anyways, although it's crudely written with some typos and I can't edit it...but I don't feel like writing it again.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=193523987

Also, me on Lower Decks:

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=189716585

My problems with TNG has nothing to do with contrarianism. I truly struggled to finish it. I blazed through DS9 like it was nothing.

I definitely understand why you aren't into TNG as much as most fans considering what you want from Trek. It does have me curious on your opinions on Voyager and Enterprise though. For all its faults, Voyager feels to me like a show where you do get to know the characters and you can feel the crew grow closer together as a family. It's 100% not the normal type of Trek and truly has some awful episodes (the Rock vs  Seven wat) but it shows the extremes that a crew could go through and keep the ideals of the Federation intact, and how they fail at it as well. (thinking of episodes like Year of Hell) And it leads to the finale of Voyager being the best series finale they did. In the end Janeway will still sacrifice literally everything for her Voyager family.

Enterprise is a show with almost an entire crew that is exploring space for the first time and basically not having a goddamn thing to guide them. It's very rough but imo it's a fun take on Trek and I think it could have been so much better with more cash and more time invested into it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:01:17 PM

Quote
Seems like contrarianism because TNG is so beloved and DS9 is more overlooked.

Nah. Ds9 has a more character focused thing. I love characters. I watched Trek in order. TOS first, then TNG, and then DS9. Has nothing to do with contrarianism. I just like what I like and I'm honest about it. :yeshrug

The TNG sucks thing was hyperbole for laughs. I don't think it sucks but I also don't think it's that good either.

Anyways, although it's crudely written with some typos and I can't edit it...but I don't feel like writing it again.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=193523987

Also, me on Lower Decks:

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=189716585

My problems with TNG has nothing to do with contrarianism. I truly struggled to finish it. I blazed through DS9 like it was nothing.

For Tasty. Of course, I don't expect him to actually come at my actual arguments and instead he will take one line and then post a meme.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 11:04:18 PM
It's hilarious how poorly they explained Q not just sending Voyager home and also how he had more of a character arc in like six appearances than practically the entire cast. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:04:33 PM
Q on TNG :rejoice :rejoice :rejoice :rejoice

Q on every other fucking Star Trek show :kobeyuck :kobeyuck :kobeyuck :kobeyuck

Galaxy Quest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star Trek

Correct, but only because 90 minutes of solid gold is probably more valuable than a septic tank with 50x the amount of gold flakes floating in it.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:05:08 PM
It's hilarious how poorly they explained Q not just sending Voyager home and also how he had more of a character arc in like six appearances than practically the entire cast. :lol

People say TNG is a mixed bag and I'm like, have you seen Voyager? :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:05:29 PM
Also let's laugh heartily at the fact Enterprise ended with a TNG episode. :crowdlaff
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:06:56 PM
that fucking ending was some goddamn horseshit i dont want to talk about it :maf

but that theme :rejoice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBlXE_Knsbw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:08:05 PM
Nah. Ds9 has a more character focused thing. I love characters. I watched Trek in order. TOS first, then TNG, and then DS9. Has nothing to do with contrarianism. I just like what I like and I'm honest about it. :yeshrug

The TNG sucks thing was hyperbole for laughs. I don't think it sucks but I also don't think it's that good either.

Anyways, although it's crudely written with some typos and I can't edit it...but I don't feel like writing it again.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=193523987

Also, me on Lower Decks:

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=189716585

My problems with TNG has nothing to do with contrarianism. I truly struggled to finish it. I blazed through DS9 like it was nothing.

I definitely understand why you aren't into TNG as much as most fans considering what you want from Trek. It does have me curious on your opinions on Voyager and Enterprise though. For all its faults, Voyager feels to me like a show where you do get to know the characters and you can feel the crew grow closer together as a family. It's 100% not the normal type of Trek and truly has some awful episodes (the Rock vs  Seven wat) but it has shows the extremes that a crew could go through and keep the ideals of the Federation intact, and how they fail at it as well. (thinking of episodes like Year of Hell) And it leads to the finale of Voyager being the best series finally they did. In the end Janeway will still sacrifice literally everything for her Voyager family.

Enterprise is a show with almost an entire crew that is exploring space for the first time and basically not having a goddamn thing to guide them. It's very rough but imo it's a fun take on Trek and I think it could have been so much better with more cash and more time invested into it.

Thanks for understanding. It sucks because I actually really liked TNG at first but then the more I watched, it just kept going on and on. It also has 7 seasons compared to TOS' 3 and I just find it a big slog. Which sucks because again, there are so many great ideas in it and episodes that I love but I couldn't ever watch the series ever again. Don't think it's shit or anything but I really think it's flawed.

DS9 however, was made for me.

I haven't seen Voyager since I was a kid. I liked it then but I was a teenager and teenagers are stupid. I watched it with my dad every week along with that crazy cop show with the dude who has super powers so I have a lot of nostalgia for Voyager.

I haven't seen Enterprise and frankly after finishing DS9 I kind of don't have faith in another Trek show because I doubt any of them will be as good but I'll give it a fair shot after I give Voyager a fair shot.

Hopefully Voyager is serialized like DS9 and not episodic like TNG or I'll go crazy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:10:08 PM
It's hilarious how poorly they explained Q not just sending Voyager home and also how he had more of a character arc in like six appearances than practically the entire cast. :lol

Q is a bad character. I remember one TNG ep where they're Robin Hood and Q makes them play some game? God, that fucking show and its stupid bullshit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:10:27 PM
that voyager opening is solid af too

https://youtu.be/gX9FU8bmxQs

and yes, voyager is basically one giant story arc about the ship trying to get home. they find ways to fit in all the normal types of trek episodes and do plenty of exploring but the show does boil down to "we have to get home, together".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:11:53 PM
Yeah that's all I remember: the premise.

And yeah voyager has an amazing intro.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:13:35 PM
however tasty does have a good point in that voyager is the most inconsistent of the trek series. there's some truly unwatchable stinkers in that show :lol

edit: I also have a soft spot for voyager cause I'd watch it weekly with my uncle (also we'd watch The Pretender, what an awful show in retrospect) so I hope it sticks with you because of that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:16:09 PM
Yeah, I believe it. I think I remember it sucks for two seasons until seven is a regular? Idk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 11:16:49 PM
(thinking of episodes like Year of Hell) ...

Enterprise is a show with almost an entire crew that is exploring space for the first time and basically not having a goddamn thing to guide them. It's very rough but imo it's a fun take on Trek and I think it could have been so much better with more cash and more time invested into it.
I like Enterprise in part because it actually does these parts of Voyager better than Voyager did.

Year of Hell was proposed as an entire season of Voyager, and that's arguably what the third season of Enterprise became. Even if the Xindi were the worst idea ever.

There's an episode of Enterprise where they're headed through a nebula or something and the only thing that can protect them are the warp nacelles. Voyager did a similar episode but just had Seven and the Doctor active trying to make things creepy as everyone else slept. While on Enterprise they showed how they fit the entire crew into those, made a makeshift bridge to operate the ship, showed the chef going along handing out dinner, etc. and started to deal with how that kind of conditions would effect the crew, when they veer course wildly into some dumb action. Which was a real problem on Enterprise from day one.

Hell, Voyager even did as many "LOOK ITS KLINGONS YOU KNOW KLINGONS" and "LOOK ROMULANS!" and other garbage episodes of STUFF YOU RECOGNIZE ON TREK when they were supposed to be nowhere near any of those. (And Enterprise even at least took some concerns like never outright identifying the Ferengi, or getting a good look at them, etc.)

But then I also love the Bakula.

And Empress Hoshi. :uguu

And needing to decontaminate with T'Pol. :phil
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:17:01 PM
If anything this makes me want to break out my YouTube TV™ DVR recorded eps of TOS and watch em. :preach

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Or just watch it on Netflix. :doge
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 11:17:19 PM
Q is a bad character.
:mindblown :stahp
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:18:15 PM
Yeah, I believe it. I think I remember it sucks for two seasons until seven is a regular? Idk

Seven also sucks tho :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:18:48 PM
Yeah, I believe it. I think I remember it sucks for two seasons until seven is a regular? Idk
Sorta. After Seven shows up the show does change a bit. A lot more episodes become "How do we fit Seven into this episode?" :lol Astrometrics, fuck outta here. They even retconned shit to make NX-01 have astrometrics after that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:19:06 PM
Q is a bad character.
:mindblown :stahp

Q is only a bad character outside TNG. Otherwise he's a great foil to Jean Luc.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/10hexADl3Kl6SY/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:23:05 PM
I like Enterprise in part because it actually does these parts of Voyager better than Voyager did.

Year of Hell was proposed as an entire season of Voyager, and that's arguably what the third season of Enterprise became. Even if the Xindi were the worst idea ever.

There's an episode of Enterprise where they're headed through a nebula or something and the only thing that can protect them are the warp nacelles. Voyager did a similar episode but just had Seven and the Doctor active trying to make things creepy as everyone else slept. While on Enterprise they showed how they fit the entire crew into those, made a makeshift bridge to operate the ship, showed the chef going along handing out dinner, etc. and started to deal with how that kind of conditions would effect the crew, when they veer course wildly into some dumb action. Which was a real problem on Enterprise from day one.

Hell, Voyager even did as many "LOOK ITS KLINGONS YOU KNOW KLINGONS" and "LOOK ROMULANS!" and other garbage episodes of STUFF YOU RECOGNIZE ON TREK when they were supposed to be nowhere near any of those. (And Enterprise even at least took some concerns like never outright identifying the Ferengi, or getting a good look at them, etc.)

But then I also love the Bakula.

And Empress Hoshi. :uguu

And needing to decontaminate with T'Pol. :phil
Phlox is so awesome too. Basically all Trek doctors are great characters. Pulaski is secret top tier as well in TNG :mynicca Queen you had to at least like her, right? She's basically Bones!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:27:42 PM
Q is a bad character.
:mindblown :stahp

Anything overly supernatural in Trek is stupid to me. It's like a gag reflex, I'm sorry. Q episodes in DS9 are trash too. Right, like I want to see Q try to court Luwaxanna.

The only good Q episode I can think of is Tapestry.

Sigh. I just looked at a best of TNG list and these are some really good episodes. Maybe I'm being too hard on TNG. I love these episodes to death so maybe it's my expectation that the rest of the show match the quality of say, Inner Light. But it doesn't. And that pissed me off because that shit is too fucking good. I just don't know how to fucking feel about this show. On one hand...Chain of Command. On the other....Night Terrors.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:29:21 PM
Right, like I want to see Q try to court Luwaxanna
I know, everyone knows that she's supposed to be with Odo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:30:31 PM
So my favorite Trek character might be Kira. Don't kill me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:37:06 PM
Sisko is probably my favorite. DS9 is just full of excellent characters but he stands out. Running a station in the middle of nowhere with a son, somehow becoming a god to an entire race of people, dealing with a million clashing personalities in your crew and keeping civilians happy as well, getting involved in and eventually running a war against a new enemy, and realizing you gotta do some shady shit to make it happen all put together with Avery Brooks chewing the scenery like no tomorrow makes him perfect. :playa

Plus being a cajun cook as well, the dude can't be beat :delicious
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:38:13 PM
I think he overacts but yeah, good choice.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:39:10 PM
TOS has "supernatural" stuff out the wazoo too though. 🤔

Humans turned gods, a time portal god, literal Greek pantheon gods. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 11, 2017, 11:45:21 PM
on a side note, the Marky Mark classic flick The Big Hit also has Avery Brooks doing some excellent overacting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo_IAkl5LfQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 11:47:32 PM
Phlox is so awesome too. Basically all Trek doctors are great characters. Pulaski is secret top tier as well in TNG :mynicca Queen you had to at least like her, right? She's basically Bones!
Even Karl Urban's Bones has been immune from the Abramsverse!

And they should probably try airing clips of him ad-libbing in place of The Orville:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=injtFu2xs9o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 11, 2017, 11:49:18 PM
TOS has "supernatural" stuff out the wazoo too though. 🤔

Humans turned gods, a time portal god, literal Greek pantheon gods. :lol

I know it does. I don't always like it. Something about TOS sometimes makes it easier to digest because of how the characters act. Like the ep where the dude tries to become a God and Kirk fist fights him like a gangster. :lol Sometimes the supernatural can be fun or funny but I never find Q fun or funny. Just annoying. So I guess it's less supernatural elements inherently. I'm mixed on it in TOS. But I never really like the supernatural for itself. On my list of reasons for liking Trek it's probably at the bottom.

Sometimes it's tolerable, sometimes it's ugh.

This is probably my biggest problem with Star Trek as a franchise as a whole: it's just inconsistent. Say what you will about Simpsons, it was consistent for about 9 seasons. I like every Seinfeld season except arguably 1. I value consistency and Star Trek as a franchise has far too many ups and downs. :beli I know it comes down to executive meddling and creative direction changes or whatever.

The only Trek that did it for me the entire run is DS9 so far.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 11, 2017, 11:52:42 PM
Consistency is great of course, but sometimes it can lead to homogenization. Some of the more "out there" ST plots probably wouldn't have been approved if the producers had a more strict hand of things (think Roddenberry, but for weird ideas instead of "the human ideal.")

Also this is dumb to say, but the sucky parts of ST make you appreciate the great stuff even more.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 11, 2017, 11:57:10 PM
Looked to see if there were any clips from that Enterprise episode, "the Catwalk" and only found something from it that made the episode even more disturbing.

At some point between now and 2152 we lose headphones and volume control, just a heads up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPUOR4Xsr1Y
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 12, 2017, 12:00:23 AM
At some point between now and 2152 we lose headphones and volume control, just a heads up:
blame apple
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 12:01:26 AM
Consistency is great of course, but sometimes it can lead to homogenization. Some of the more "out there" ST plots probably wouldn't have been approved if the producers had a more strict hand of things (think Roddenberry, but for weird ideas instead of "the human ideal.")

Also this is dumb to say, but the sucky parts of ST make you appreciate the great stuff even more.

Well, I get that. But it feels like most people are into the out there stuff while I'm trying to watch for characters. I dunno. Why I like Trek seems to not be why others like it? Which is why I clash on it a lot.

That's true about the sicky parts but sometimes they're too hard to get past because they can get really bad. How Trek can go from top tier tv to b movie MST3K esque in a matter of episodes has never sat well with me and one reason I was looking forward to the new series was better quality control. And we know what's going on there. Sigh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 12, 2017, 02:16:20 AM
Watched the first episode of The Orville.

The critic reviews of it have been brutal. I assume that is based off of being able to view many episodes.

The first episode is not as bad as the reviews would lead you to believe. I'm not saying its great or even good. The first episode feels average but the reviews led me to expect dumpster fire.

It's exactly what you would expect it to be. It's a star trek clone that wants to you to take it seriously but also be funny.

It's not a family guy take on star trek. It's never as crass as family guy but its also never really as smart as it needs to be to really land  like it should. It feels like knock off b grade star trek.

I'm enough of a sci-fi space opera nerd that that level of quality is fine enough for me probably depending on where it goes but it doesn't exactly give confidence that it will ever be an especially good show. Just one of those shows that a genre fan might like.

Oh, the special effects are terrible. I don't care at all about that. The appeal of these type of shows are the ideas not the special effects to me. But just thought I would mention it, so your expectations are in check if you decide to give it a try.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 12, 2017, 02:53:32 AM
I see a lot of "this sucks because it's not this other thing I like" in this thread. TNG was reviving a beloved series for a then-modern audience, on a new network, at a time when geekery was not de rigueur like it is nowadays. It defined a good portion of what came after it, or at least set those parameters.

The first season sucks. The second season sucks slightly less. From the third season is when it really comes into its own, knows what it's about.

DS9 suffers similar stumbling blocks out of the gate. It's the grittier side of Federation Space, and it was meant to have a Casablanca or even Berlin during the Cold War feel to it. Eventually it gets there, and surpasses it, but it makes me feel like any Star Trek series struggles with itself except TOS, which is-what-it-is from the outset.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 03:20:51 AM
I see a lot of "this sucks because it's not this other thing I like" in this thread. TNG was reviving a beloved series for a then-modern audience, on a new network, at a time when geekery was not de rigueur like it is nowadays. It defined a good portion of what came after it, or at least set those parameters.

The first season sucks. The second season sucks slightly less. From the third season is when it really comes into its own, knows what it's about.

DS9 suffers similar stumbling blocks out of the gate. It's the grittier side of Federation Space, and it was meant to have a Casablanca or even Berlin during the Cold War feel to it. Eventually it gets there, and surpasses it, but it makes me feel like any Star Trek series struggles with itself except TOS, which is-what-it-is from the outset.

I like DS9 from the beginning. I liked all of season 1 except the awful TNG-esque episodes. Love season 2.

My problems with TNG go into more than wishing it was something it wasn't, although there is that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 10:24:45 AM
Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 12, 2017, 10:38:33 AM
Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."

It has iconic characters. A great captain. Its unique in relation to TOS after it finds its wings. And has a decent size number of classic episodes.

And part of understanding and enjoying any tv show is being partially aware of the era and context it was born. TNG was a great show in its day. I don't care if a person watches it now and applies a modern filter to it because that is inevitable. But judging any piece of art relative to its era and restrictions is also important.

Same as with TOS. A personal pet peeve of mine is when people overly criticize tos without taking into account the era. Not that those criticisms can't exist or aren't valid. But without talking about the era and context, its kind of missing the point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 12, 2017, 03:44:53 PM
Do I start with the 1968 pilot and just keep watching until it feels right to watch another spin off or is there some other order I have to follow to get into this?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 03:50:06 PM
Go in production order. Finish TOS then watch TNG. Then DS9. Go in order as there's an actual timeline and will help you appreciate storylines. Watch TOS movies after finishing TOS to bridge the gap between TOS and TNG.

Enjoy. Trek has flaws but man I love me so Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 12, 2017, 03:50:40 PM
Go in production order.

Thanks
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 12, 2017, 03:50:57 PM
Do I start with the 1968 pilot and just keep watching until it feels right to watch another spin off or is there some other order I have to follow to get into this?

I love TOS (The original series) but for younger people it may not be to your liking. You can just start with the TNG (The next generation) and watch others after that if you want.

TNG kinda sucks the first few seasons but it sets you up in the universe and lore that most of the other shows tend to follow.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 03:53:07 PM
I disagree with most young people on TOS. Watch TOS first season and see how you like it. If you don't like it, skip to the movies. If you like it, continue on. Decide for yourself on TOS.

Also the idea of skipping entire seasons for TNG isn't something I suggest because there are some great episodes in earlier seasons like Q Who, The Measure of Man, and Matter of Honor.

The best way to handle it, rather than skip entire seasons, is to consult an episode guide until you hit season 3. You should still watch the pilot to understand the premise and get introduced to the characters though I think.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 12, 2017, 03:59:07 PM
Maybe I just get the love for TOS more cause my wife is a "TOS>all" type of fan. Either way y'all got me about to start a DS9 rewatch tonight while I play Yakuza. Should be fun!


Also as far as watching order, skip the original TOS pilot and watch the rest in order. Trek is all about taking the good with the bad. Episode guides are good for subsequent rewatches, but you should watch it all for your first time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 04:03:16 PM
Yeah, skipping around...I'm not one for that. It feels... I dunno, wrong. Decide for yourself. People told me to skip all seasons 1 and 2 of DS9 and I loved every bit of those seasons (besides the TNG esque episodes). Sometimes what you like is different from everyone else. Trek is a YMMV thing, so skip only if you feel you have to.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 12, 2017, 04:57:22 PM
Just watched the TOS pilot. Interesting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 05:13:17 PM
how so
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 12, 2017, 05:18:37 PM
Just watched the TOS pilot. Interesting.

Which pilot?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 12, 2017, 05:22:39 PM
I assume he means The Cage. The restored version of TOS lists it as episode 1 now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 12, 2017, 05:54:50 PM
Yes, The Cage.

how so

The whole thing is rather sad. This race of super intelligent beings traps the captain in an attempt to use him for an Adam and Eve scenario with a disfigured woman who survived a shipwreck, and they're pretty much doomed to die because naturally, the captain won't stay under false pretense. Though I did enjoy how reality and illusion collided with each other (always have in fiction).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 06:02:23 PM
Yes, The Cage.

how so

The whole thing is rather sad. This race of super intelligent beings traps the captain in an attempt to use him for an Adam and Eve scenario with a disfigured woman who survived a shipwreck, and they're pretty much doomed to die because naturally, the captain won't stay under false pretense. Though I did enjoy how reality and illusion collided with each other (always have in fiction).

TOS is full of sad sci-fi stories like that. Part of why I love it. It can be depressing. Interested on your thoughts on The Man Trap. If you like The Cage, TOS may be your type of bag. I like The Cage as well.

Stories like that are a big reason I'm confused why people say TNG is an extension of TOS. TOS feels way more darker to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 12, 2017, 06:21:42 PM
Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."
Stoney said what I'd hoped to say, except better and more concisely.

The point about appreciating a work from the context of its time is also important, and I feel like you're not crediting TNG for setting up the world in which DS9 can happen. There is no DS9 without TNG.

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but the idea of continuity happening in a syndicated show blew my mind. I grew up watching shows which were designed to be re-run in syndication without a viewing order or context. There was never character growth, and references to previous happenings in the series were rare. Having TNG take place in a storyline with persistence was incredible for me and my fellow college geeks. Now that TV commercials even have their own continuity, and EVERYTHING on TV seems to be serialized, I think it's impossible to appreciate its origins.

One thing TNG does right that TOS does not is embrace the ensemble nature of its bridge crew. Pretty much everyone gets the spotlight for an episode or two during the any season, and in most episodes that spotlight lands individually or in pairs for the bulk of the episode. TOS tends to be The Kirk Show, or frequently The Kirk and Spock Show, but it was rare to follow Scotty, Uhura, or Bones through a story. Ironically, the big fuckup of the TNG movies is that they try to turn it into The Picard and Data Show every time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: WanderingWind on September 12, 2017, 06:24:43 PM
The only hard skippable episodes of TNG are the various holodeck episodes, The Outrageous Okona and any episode in which Wesley saves the day.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 06:35:51 PM
I agree that TNG spotlighted its crew better but I feel like I still TOS' cast more?

Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."

It has iconic characters. A great captain. Its unique in relation to TOS after it finds its wings. And has a decent size number of classic episodes.

And part of understanding and enjoying any tv show is being partially aware of the era and context it was born. TNG was a great show in its day. I don't care if a person watches it now and applies a modern filter to it because that is inevitable. But judging any piece of art relative to its era and restrictions is also important.

Same as with TOS. A personal pet peeve of mine is when people overly criticize tos without taking into account the era. Not that those criticisms can't exist or aren't valid. But without talking about the era and context, its kind of missing the point.

I understand and appreciate these things. I think I'm hard on the show but I still like it? It's like we have a bad relationship. I feel like TNG has too many holodeck episodes, and that the cast is too clean. There's nothing like how the show hinted that Bones is an alcoholic for instance. And although Beverly got more episodes dedicated to her than Bones, I like Bones more.

For the time, yeah, it's good. But I think my critcisims - using the holodeck as a story crutch, lack of serialized continuity between episodes, overly predictable episode format, and the cast being lacking are fair. I'll agree the characters are iconic but I wouldn't necessarily call them good or interesting, but that's an entirely subjective thing. I do like Picard though. And Worf. And Ensign Ro.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2017, 06:56:04 PM
Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but the idea of continuity happening in a syndicated show blew my mind. I grew up watching shows which were designed to be re-run in syndication without a viewing order or context. There was never character growth, and references to previous happenings in the series were rare. Having TNG take place in a storyline with persistence was incredible for me and my fellow college geeks. Now that TV commercials even have their own continuity, and EVERYTHING on TV seems to be serialized, I think it's impossible to appreciate its origins.

This is actually one of my complaints about TNG. It felt like nothing matters. It feels like a procedural like Law in and Order but in space. I actually think lack of contuity is one of its biggest flaws. TOS I'll give you, because it's a 60's show. TNG came out a decade after something like Roots. So I hold it to a higher standard. What contuity? For the most part there isn't much. Things don't matter. Picard can become a Borg and kill people and barely anyone mentions it again besides the episode where he goes back to his farm. After that he's cured and everyone forgets. They have a ship therapist and it would have been nice to see the occasional scene where she's helping Picard or someone sort their problems. But nope. PTSD cured in an hour, brehs. So for the time, yes, I think it's absolutely worth criticizing. Data makes a daughter and it's not mentioned again. This is why Worf is my favorite character on the show. His problems of family and honor are on-going. He mates with someone and then he has a son. He helps Kahless' clone. He helps Gahren get his seat at the head of the council. Characters who have feuds with his family come back. I love his character and I love his continuity. But Picard lives an entire life on a planet that existed 1000 years ago and it's mentioned in passing while flirting with a chick inside the reaches of the ship so they can be alone.

TNG is far too episodic.

More quotes from my time at neogaf that explain why I'm conflicted on TNG:

Me:

Quote
Parallels - another "everything is changing on the enterprise but I'm the only one who see it!" esque episode in the tradition of Remember Me and Phantasms. Not even my love for Worf saves this episode. I'm utterly fatigued with TNG and want it to end already. Episode is terrible. Solve the mystery! The mystery will be solved by the end of episode. Nothing matters.

I'm not sure if my idea of good Trek runs contrary to what others find to be good Trek or what, but I hated it. I've hated every episode I've seen in season 7 so far even going down the list of suggested episodes posted before.

Jeffzero:

Quote
I doubt your idea is totally removed from mine. You like strong characterization and ongoing story arcs that are given their just dues, right? Real "space opera" fare? That's me in a nutshell; there are just some assorted one-off TNG-style eps which I also dig

Me:

Quote
Yes!

One offs aren't inherently bad either. A good one off example would be The Survivors. Or the episode where there's a malfunction at a Federation monitoring post and an alien civilization thinks they're Gods. Or the one where Data has to convince a planet that is going to die to evacuate. Where the mystery is worth solving and isn't just a bunch of random bullshit.

Sometimes you need them to pad and give the universe texture, but it rarely ever really does. Honestly, I can't blame some people for thinking Star Trek is boring.

Me:

Quote
The Pegasus - solid episode with some chips in its armor. It is fully willing to grand stand and navel gaze a moral high ground despite the fact that the very illegal technology they moralize is so awful, actually saved them from doom. Never is this viewpoint considered with any authenticity and it fully encapsulates TNG's worst flaws: its pretentious view of order with zero consideration for opposing viewpoints despite its willingness to have philosophical episodes such as this. In this universe, black and white prevails under 100% certainty. Still a good episode despite that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 12, 2017, 07:18:23 PM
"The Cage" is great, I love that they put it as the first episode in the remasters on the streaming services so people will watch it. It has a lot of nice touches.

I actually think it helps the show "develop" as you go to "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and then beyond in not just the sets and effects and so on but in how it differentiates itself from other sci-fi contemporaries. The start of the show very much has a less powerful Enterprise and crew. Kirk has to legitimately bluff his way out of battles and situations. He has to figure out situations and how to exploit them.

That fades away as the series goes on.

Because of its age I always suggest you watch the whole first season and then if you're wavering, just watch the best rated episodes of the next two. And not ever the service's rating but something like imdb's plus a rather well known internet reviewers (even though he's actually kinda terrible imo) and especially a hardcore Trekkie:
http://www.jammersreviews.com/st-tos/
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/episodes/tos2.htm
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/episodes/tos3.htm
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/tos.htm
Quote
I have a long-term memory for everything related to Star Trek and it influences how I look at anything new. In this regard, I can explain the ratings as follows:

 10 points: among the best Star Trek episodes ever, simply awesome

 5 points: average Star Trek episode, quite a fun to watch but with some flaws

 0 points: among the worst episodes ever, almost a waste of time but at least it's Star Trek

I go as low as one or zero points, because a rating system makes no sense if there is an accumulation in the upper half and the lowest ratings remain unused.

Reason I suggest those two are that Jammer and Bernd (especially Bernd) have very different takes on Trek than the standard fan or imdb scorer. Much like here me, Himu, Andrex, etc. all have different takes on what makes great Trek great. There's often a general consensus, like everyone agrees on "The Best of Both Worlds" for example. But "Frame of Mind" has only recently risen beyond fans like Jammer and Bernd, it's still down around like 35th on imdb and I have an old magazine that ranked all the TNG's after it ended (have one for Seinfeld too) and it put it at like 101st and called it boring garbage, etc.

Not saying you should skip low scored episodes that sound interesting or sit there with these guys ratings on hand and chart everything but if you were not feeling it and did want to cut down the number of episodes, I personally don't have many complaints with using those to cut out ten episodes or so from each season as they'd probably jive with what I often would find myself zone out during. And you can use them for TNG season 1 and 2 too. Actually, they're great for TOS/TNG 2-3 and 1-2. And if you ever get to Voyager and Enterprise they're pretty good for slicing out episodes of Voyager seasons and the first two seasons of Enterprise.

The one lone exception I might make is like the first few episodes of each series I consider worth watching, even TNG's first four or five. I feel there's a value in experiencing how they first presented the series. In TNG's case their second episode being one of the most amazing decisions of all time. :lol (Voyager has an epic garbage second (or third) episode iirc too, Enterprise has a decent one I want to say where they first visit a planet, I forget what DS9's is)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 12, 2017, 07:31:06 PM
TNG is far too episodic.

I like TNG being very episodic in the same way I like TOS being episodic. 

Which is different than saying I wish shows today were more episodic. I like that shows today are serial. That makes them much more entertaining to watch in the here and now when you watch them as binge tv which everybody does nowadays.

But the downside of that being I find serial TV makes me not watch the shows as much in the long term. I can randomly plop out an episode of TNG and TOS and sit and watch it for 45 minutes and thoroughly enjoy myself.  I've always been able to do that since I was a kid.  Some episodes I've seen dozens of times in that regard. I don't have to overly concern myself with the context of that episode within the big picture. They are nice simple short stories in that regard.

The more something becomes serial the less inclined I am to pull out random episodes just to watch and enjoy because watching one of those kind of episodes doesn't feel complete in the same way.

So I'm glad TOS and TNG existed in a highly episodic era of television, even though I'm happy the current era of television is highly serial by comparison.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 12, 2017, 07:39:26 PM
And Ensign Ro.

:respect
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 12, 2017, 07:42:12 PM
Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but the idea of continuity happening in a syndicated show blew my mind. I grew up watching shows which were designed to be re-run in syndication without a viewing order or context. There was never character growth, and references to previous happenings in the series were rare. Having TNG take place in a storyline with persistence was incredible for me and my fellow college geeks. Now that TV commercials even have their own continuity, and EVERYTHING on TV seems to be serialized, I think it's impossible to appreciate its origins.

This is actually one of my complaints about TNG. It felt like nothing matters. It feels like a procedural like Law in and Order but in space. I actually think lack of contuity is one of its biggest flaws. TOS I'll give you, because it's a 60's show. TNG came out a decade after something like Roots.

That's an absurd comparison. Roots was a TV miniseries, adapted from a novel. It had a planned endpoint. TNG is an open-ended series. The only TV shows which had continuity at the time were soap operas, which were never designed to be syndicated, just made on-the-cheap, and run endlessly, serially.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 12, 2017, 07:57:29 PM
TOS is full of sad sci-fi stories like that. Part of why I love it. It can be depressing. Interested on your thoughts on The Man Trap. If you like The Cage, TOS may be your type of bag. I like The Cage as well.

I think you nailed it earlier when you compared TOS to Twilight Zone. A lot of the stories feel like they'd be at home there. Interesting tales of sci-fi/supernatural with a moral backbone to them, or sometimes just a twist you didn't expect.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 12, 2017, 08:00:29 PM
TNG does start to pick up the character/universe growth and stuff as the show comes to an end since they knew it was ending. Stuff like Troi trying to enter command rank and take her job more seriously after Jellico calls her out basically (and it's more subtle and used less often but Riker also starts down this path after Locutus and Jellico), fleshing out the Romulans AND Klingons and not going back, Worf becoming more than a dude to throw around, even Chief O'Brien actually becomes more than background filler, etc.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on September 12, 2017, 10:06:28 PM
O'Brien's always been my favorite TNG character. In a sea of moral paragons of humanity, he's just this average, hell, lesser than average workaday schlub. He's so out of place, I love it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 12, 2017, 11:50:15 PM
O'Brien's always been my favorite TNG character. In a sea of moral paragons of humanity, he's just this average, hell, lesser than average workaday schlub. He's so out of place, I love it.

I like O'Brien just fine, he's a relatable dude. He's good at his job, but he's not really got a stick up his ass about being on the Federation flagship.

His ball-and-chain, constantly hormonal, always angry wife — she can die in a fucking fire.

Which leads to my foremost complaint about TNG, which is that they're a bunch of yuppies who put their career before family, which I've found to be my ultimate source of personal fulfillment. They're always choosing to pursue their Federation career over any chance of real love, intimacy, or furthering their genetic or even memetic lineage. This, for me, is the worst message TNG can provide, particularly since their audience has its fair share of emotionally stunted or socially awkward viewers.

In a way, O'Brien and his happiness at work makes more sense when his shrew wife is the one waiting for him when he gets home.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I've not seen all of DS9. She may have suffered early character problems the same way Wesley Always Saves the Day, or Worf Always Gets Beat Up. Perhaps her bitchiness was meant to be a clever one-off by a writer and it instead turned up several times in a season…?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 12, 2017, 11:51:38 PM
They even showed him being racist towards Cardassians.

Plus he was also a veteran of over 200 battles, had the memories of a 20 year prison sentence implanted and died while sending himself back in time to replace himself. :american

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Which is arguably still not as weird as Harry Kim being a some alternate universe Harry Kim though.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 12, 2017, 11:54:31 PM
The Man Trap

First things first, Lt. Uhura (sp?)  :heartbeat :heartbeat :heartbeat :heartbeat


What a twisted tale of love. Clayton falls in love with the last of a shapeshifting alien species out of pity and the fact that it resembles his wife Nancy, who it killed, who also happens to be McCoy's old flame. As cheesy as some of the actions scenes were (can't help their age), I was really into it. The show seems to have found it's groove now that Kirk and his crew have centerstage, but I can't help but wonder if Pike and his crew will make a return somewhere down the line.

Definitely gonna binge this on the weekend.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 12, 2017, 11:58:28 PM
Nah, Keiko sucks in DS9 too

"Miiiiiiiiiiiiiilllleeeessssssss"

Shaddup >:(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 13, 2017, 12:03:38 AM
Nah, Keiko sucks in DS9 too

"Miiiiiiiiiiiiiilllleeeessssssss"

Shaddup >:(

She's really justabout unforgiveable.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 13, 2017, 01:21:00 AM
Poor Charlie.  :goty2

Last surviving member of his group, leaving him abandoned as a young boy. Given Godlike powers to keep himself alive, but he doesn't even know how to be human. Ends up going right back to the beings that "saved" him. He never stood a chance.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 13, 2017, 03:23:34 AM
TNG is far too episodic.

I like TNG being very episodic in the same way I like TOS being episodic. 

Which is different than saying I wish shows today were more episodic. I like that shows today are serial. That makes them much more entertaining to watch in the here and now when you watch them as binge tv which everybody does nowadays.

But the downside of that being I find serial TV makes me not watch the shows as much in the long term. I can randomly plop out an episode of TNG and TOS and sit and watch it for 45 minutes and thoroughly enjoy myself.  I've always been able to do that since I was a kid.  Some episodes I've seen dozens of times in that regard. I don't have to overly concern myself with the context of that episode within the big picture. They are nice simple short stories in that regard.

The more something becomes serial the less inclined I am to pull out random episodes just to watch and enjoy because watching one of those kind of episodes doesn't feel complete in the same way.

So I'm glad TOS and TNG existed in a highly episodic era of television, even though I'm happy the current era of television is highly serial by comparison.

You know what. I was in the middle of writing a rebuttal to this when I decided to look at the episode descriptions of seasons 3-6 on wikipedia. And...you're right. I'm wrong. I was being really hard on TNG. I think the final season or so probably left a bad taste in my mouth? I got utterly burned out on the show. As I looked through the episodes list, I kept saying,"man, I love that one. And that one. And that one."

I guess my love for DS9 (which I like about every episode on besides Move Along Home which is terrible) as well as the bad taste it made in seasons 6 and 7 (although they have the occasional great episode) made me judge it too harshly.

I don't mind episodic shows. DS9 for instance isn't completely serialized. I guess I was focusing on a handful (or two) of bad episodes or specific type of episodes I abhor (the crew gets turned into kids and everyone thinks they're cute and incompetent, let's watch them save the day!) rather than the kind of episodes I loved about it.

To be more positive and fair to TNG, I'm going to list episode I adore that aren't the typical Chain of Command, Inner Light, Darmok;etc. along with their description to hopefully give an idea as to why I love them.

"The Ensigns of Command" - Data (Brent Spiner) must persuade a stubborn colony to evacuate their homeland under threat of a powerful and mysterious race.
"The Survivors" - The Enterprise investigates the last two survivors of an annihilated world, as the entire surface has been transformed to dust except their one little house and garden.
"Who Watches the Watchers" - Counselor Deanna Troi (Marina Sirtis) and Commander William Riker (Jonathan Frakes) must rectify the damage done when two primitives from Mintaka III catch a glimpse of a Federation observation team and eventually conclude that Captain Jean-Luc Picard (Patrick Stewart) is a god.
"Suddenly Human" - Picard must help a human boy, raised by aliens, to decide his fate.
"First Contact" - Riker is hospitalized during a botched pre-first contact mission. Xenophobia results in increasing hostility toward his presence.
"Night Terrors" - The Enterprise is trapped in a rift, the crew succumbs to REM sleep deprivation, and Deanna has a recurring nightmare.
"Ensign Ro" - After an attack on a Federation outpost, Picard is sent to locate a Bajoran terrorist with the help of Ensign Ro Laren.
"The Wounded" - A rogue Starfleet Captain jeopardizes the Cardassian peace treaty.
"Hero Worship" - Data saves the life of an orphaned boy who begins to emulate him.
"Imaginary Friend" - A child's imaginary playmate takes on physical form and threatens the well-being of the Enterprise.
"I, Borg" - The Enterprise rescues a Borg survivor, whom Geordi names 'Hugh'. Picard plans to download a destructive computer virus to Hugh so the virus will spread throughout the collective when Hugh is sent back.

Season 5 is IMO the best season of the show.

I guess I'm saying that I think TNG would be way better if it ended a season earlier maybe. Season 7 drained me and season 6 wasn't the best either.

Nobody, don't mind me. I'm a negative nancy. TNG is great. I just have a tendency to fixate on specific flaws of something and can't see the forest because of a few really, really ugly and rotten trees. A personal failing of mine.

Sorry everyone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 13, 2017, 03:28:22 AM
O'Brien's always been my favorite TNG character. In a sea of moral paragons of humanity, he's just this average, hell, lesser than average workaday schlub. He's so out of place, I love it.

I love O'Brien but feel like he's underused on TNG besides The Wounded.  He shines the most on DS9 where he's fully used to his potential. I really wish Ensign Ro became a regular character. I love her.

Also you never really made the claim for why TNG is good. You just supported why it is a historically significant show. Historically significant doesn't necessarily mean "still good."

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but the idea of continuity happening in a syndicated show blew my mind. I grew up watching shows which were designed to be re-run in syndication without a viewing order or context. There was never character growth, and references to previous happenings in the series were rare. Having TNG take place in a storyline with persistence was incredible for me and my fellow college geeks. Now that TV commercials even have their own continuity, and EVERYTHING on TV seems to be serialized, I think it's impossible to appreciate its origins.

This is actually one of my complaints about TNG. It felt like nothing matters. It feels like a procedural like Law in and Order but in space. I actually think lack of contuity is one of its biggest flaws. TOS I'll give you, because it's a 60's show. TNG came out a decade after something like Roots.

That's an absurd comparison. Roots was a TV miniseries, adapted from a novel. It had a planned endpoint. TNG is an open-ended series. The only TV shows which had continuity at the time were soap operas, which were never designed to be syndicated, just made on-the-cheap, and run endlessly, serially.

Yeah you're right.
O'Brien's always been my favorite TNG character. In a sea of moral paragons of humanity, he's just this average, hell, lesser than average workaday schlub. He's so out of place, I love it.

I like O'Brien just fine, he's a relatable dude. He's good at his job, but he's not really got a stick up his ass about being on the Federation flagship.

His ball-and-chain, constantly hormonal, always angry wife — she can die in a fucking fire.

Which leads to my foremost complaint about TNG, which is that they're a bunch of yuppies who put their career before family, which I've found to be my ultimate source of personal fulfillment. They're always choosing to pursue their Federation career over any chance of real love, intimacy, or furthering their genetic or even memetic lineage. This, for me, is the worst message TNG can provide, particularly since their audience has its fair share of emotionally stunted or socially awkward viewers.

In a way, O'Brien and his happiness at work makes more sense when his shrew wife is the one waiting for him when he gets home.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I've not seen all of DS9. She may have suffered early character problems the same way Wesley Always Saves the Day, or Worf Always Gets Beat Up. Perhaps her bitchiness was meant to be a clever one-off by a writer and it instead turned up several times in a season…?

Keiko isn't that bad in DS9. She goes away to Bajor to be a herbalist. She becomes a teacher to the kids and is an inspiring figure imo. But yeah, she's horrible in TNG.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 13, 2017, 08:47:22 PM
Awww, thanks, QoI!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 16, 2017, 08:39:01 PM
The character analysis of Kirk in the back to back episodes of The Naked Time and The Enemy Within  :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 16, 2017, 10:26:44 PM
How are you liking Star Trek?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 16, 2017, 11:52:07 PM
How are you liking Star Trek?

Very much after 9 episodes. Some of the stories are a lot more tragic than I expected (the nurse's fiancee episode for example), but it's very engaging. The 2 episodes I listed in particular are just (http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wow.png). Bringing everyone's biggest feelings and traits to the surface is one thing but learning that Kirk never really knew how to love and the only thing he has to resemble love being the ship is crazy. Then examining the dichotomy of his leadership with the ying and yang of his "good" and "evil" sides that ultimately need each other to be an efficient captain had me captivated.

Maybe I've been starved for some good TV to watch but I'm really enjoying this, and I might finish all 3 seasons before the month ends.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 16, 2017, 11:53:27 PM
Sidenote: Miri is apparently the "shes actually 3000 years old" girl of the 60s  :teehee
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 12:03:05 AM
How are you liking Star Trek?

Very much after 9 episodes. Some of the stories are a lot more tragic than I expected (the nurse's fiancee episode for example), but it's very engaging. The 2 episodes I listed in particular are just (http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wow.png). Bringing everyone's biggest feelings and traits to the surface is one thing but learning that Kirk never really knew how to love and the only thing he has to resemble love being the ship is crazy. Then examining the dichotomy of his leadership with the ying and yang of his "good" and "evil" sides that ultimately need each other to be an efficient captain had me captivated.

Maybe I've been starved for some good TV to watch but I'm really enjoying this, and I might finish all 3 seasons before the month ends.

Yeah, TOS is interesting. It can be cheesy while at the same time making a powerful statement. Great, classic show.

And you see how much this show influenced things? Flip phones. Inspired by Star Trek portable coms. The diverse cast. All that shit. Such a groundbreaking classic of all classics.

Love TOS and feel sorry for anyone who can't get into it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 12:51:58 AM
Late but Star Trek beyond was GREAT.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 17, 2017, 12:55:41 AM
Late but Star Trek beyond was GREAT.

It's probably the best of the Kelvin Timeline films, but I found it problematic.

What'd you like about it?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 01:02:17 AM
It has the Star Trek adventure that I crave so desperately for. I loved Kirk's monologue in his data entry. Classic Trek, there.

It has a few snags here or there but it seemed to understand Trek of at least a particular side of it.

How was it problematic? I feel like the Edison reveal came too late in the movie and there were some loose ends (like the chick who held on to the object was brutally murdered and no one cares). Also, I'm not sure how Krall's powers worked or why he looked like a lobster.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 17, 2017, 02:14:50 AM
Finally getting to that DS9 rewatch. I forgot that Sisko punks Picard immediately upon meeting him :rofl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 17, 2017, 02:38:16 AM
It has the Star Trek adventure that I crave so desperately for. I loved Kirk's monologue in his data entry. Classic Trek, there.

It has a few snags here or there but it seemed to understand Trek of at least a particular side of it.

How was it problematic? I feel like the Edison reveal came too late in the movie and there were some loose ends (like the chick who held on to the object was brutally murdered and no one cares). Also, I'm not sure how Krall's powers worked or why he looked like a lobster.

Yeah, that'll do for starters, thanks!

As for what didn't work in Beyond that isn't already on your list:

BUT YOU'RE RIGHT!  It has a great sense of adventure and daring-do, the character interaction is fun, and the send-offs for Spock and Chekov are touching. I also loved the Captain's Log monolog from Pine, and I like him as Kirk. He is a different kind of Kirk, which is hilarious considering that Bones, Scotty, and Spock are by-the-book re-creations of the original characters.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 17, 2017, 02:40:01 AM
Krall (and the other two crew members) found life-extension technology that took from others but twisted physically those who used it.

The hole in that whole thing for me was where all his other dudes came from. I suppose he could have rounded them up over time with the offer of extended life and striking at the Federation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 02:52:51 AM
Yeah the movie is full of holes after you watch it but it's so fun while watching it I didn't mind.

Another thing is the who music to destroy alien ships thing. Straight out of macross out here what the fuck.

I think the reveal that it's a federation dude was a mistake because it makes none of the villains make any sense. How did he get that army? How did he get that technology? All they say is that he had infinite life. But nothing about where he got that military strength. All we can do is conclude that it was due to his war like mentality and they were spoils. But even then, how he came to be so powerful is a giant question mark.

Enjoyable movie but not original six films quality. But it doesn't have to be to be enjoyable. After Into the Darkness almost anything is better. But I'm so starved for Trek that I felt great watching it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 17, 2017, 02:59:41 AM
It was on the planet, left behind with drones and other equipment. He explains it in his last captains log that they find on the Franklin.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 03:07:15 AM
Ah.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 17, 2017, 07:33:32 AM
The other writer (not Simon Pegg but Doug Jung) said they had some other stuff in there about how the technology was all from a peaceful race as part of the theme about the corrupting of intentions but they stripped back stuff for pacing after realizing the length they were getting into with all the plotlines. And that fleshing out Jaylah was ultimately more interesting.

In a way the movie almost seems like a shot at Orci's nonsense for Into Darkness and his overall vision of AbramsTrek as this terrible place filled with lying duplicitous warmongers setting up false flags so they can slaughter billions on the regular and Starfleet becoming an advanced war fleet with conquest as its true goal. Orci's third movie would have been about the war against the Klingons he was setting up, especially in the comics which he partially edited. But his old partner, Kurtzman has thankfully transplanted that war into Discovery's first season!

On the plus side though, Kurtzman wasn't the rabid 9/11 truther of the pair. :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 17, 2017, 06:46:51 PM
Go from being a crewman on the SS Enterprise to being stuck on a ship with a talking baby alien brehs

Bailey  :snoop
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 17, 2017, 06:51:53 PM
PIKE  :crazy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 17, 2017, 07:31:23 PM
Thanks for the BEYOND insights and explanations. I agree, it's a fun romp despite its holes.

I'm more thankful, though, for the insight about something else that was bothering me: the Federation's "best" turning on their own. I think that had sat wrong with me since Into Darkness. Warping and twisting the vision of a "conflictless" Federation into something so political and murderously backstabbing sits wrong with me. There's a place for that kind of overarching paranoia, but it's not Star Trek.

Even in TNG, when there was strife among the troops, like Jellico, or that hot little blonde spitfire, Cmdr. Shelby, it was due to a tonal difference in command style. The one instance of actual betrayal in TNG is the result of physical invasion by mind-controlling worms.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 07:45:29 PM
Even in DS9, the security director who betrays them does so because he feels he's doing what's best for the federation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 17, 2017, 08:09:51 PM
Eddington? He was a terrorist, though.

Speaking of security officers, I forgot about this other one they had (Primmin). Been a while since I've seen S1 and it's really pretty good. I'm on Move Along Home now, the one where they get trapped in the weird alien game and it feels a lot like a TNG episode. However the crew goes at it a totally different way than the TNG crew would. Odo tells Starfleet rules to go blow, Quark figures out a way to make money at the same time, it's an interesting change from the earlier shows.

The whole show is a change from the very start in that the crew and the station are basically the underdogs the entire time and are basically always outmatched militarily so it feels like a big change from the shows focusing on the flagship being able to battle its way out of a lot of situations. Reminds me a bit of what I liked about Enterprise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 17, 2017, 08:19:19 PM
Oh shit it's the Nagus! One of my favorite side characters. Also seems to be the first episode where Rom is portrayed as a real dope and bad Ferengi.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 17, 2017, 08:36:34 PM
The Menagerie 1 and 2

All that just to give a mutilated Pike a send off to live with Veena in fantasy.

Goddamn this is depressing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 17, 2017, 10:32:54 PM
The Menagerie 1 and 2

All that just to give a mutilated Pike a send off to live with Veena in fantasy.

Goddamn this is depressing

I'll also agree with you and Queenie that there just weren't many depressing TNG episodes. It tended toward "The Federation's stance is correct!" on everything, even when it was a subjectively awful decision.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2017, 11:37:31 PM
Just felt like TOS was a deeper show with more vague outcomes of what was correct or wrong to do. TNG at times felt pretentious, as if the federation had all the answers. Very weird interpretation of the federation in TNG. But this also allowed it to have great episodes like  Measure of a Man. So it's double edge for sure and how you like it or not depends on your subjective opinion.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 18, 2017, 12:52:48 AM
Watched "Family" (TNG) last night, what a great ep. Takes place right after Best of Both Worlds and Jean-Luc's breakdown at the end with his brother his heartbreaking. It needn't be said that Stewart fucking nails it.

This also cleared up a lot of the haziness I had about Jean-Luc's family which I've had since Generations, lol.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 18, 2017, 12:53:57 AM
Family is excellent and the only time the show deals directly with the psychology of his time as a Borg.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 18, 2017, 01:04:55 AM
Also Roddenberry apparently wanted the Jean-Luc plot to be some kind of scifi adventure shit... :lol

What a crazy old coot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 18, 2017, 02:04:12 PM
https://www.avclub.com/new-trailer-confirms-star-trek-discovery-will-be-tv-ma-1798449704

:mindblown
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 18, 2017, 05:48:22 PM
https://www.avclub.com/new-trailer-confirms-star-trek-discovery-will-be-tv-ma-1798449704

:mindblown

To be honest, my first reaction is "WTF" and then I remember that they phaser-melted the top half of that one admiral on normal broadcast TV. Still, I'm un-sold that Discovery needs to be dark and gritty.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 18, 2017, 09:49:24 PM
Rated M Star Trek :mindblown
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 19, 2017, 02:27:13 AM
I don't give a crap about the rating. Just want a decent show. The last two treks sucked and it had almost nothing to do with what they were rated.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 19, 2017, 02:38:47 AM
Yeah I want a decent show too but still :mindblown
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 19, 2017, 04:14:41 AM

My knives are sharpened

My hairs are dyed black

My heads are like holes

Grimdartrek let's GOOOOOOO
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 21, 2017, 01:59:17 AM
Discovery impressions

https://talkiesnetwork.com/2017/09/20/star-trek-discovery-premiere-earns-positive-reactions/

https://twitter.com/ira/status/910352949129498627

https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/star-trek-discovery-buzz-premiere-reactions/?cmp=FBRT_EarlyReactions_StarTrekDiscovery

:hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 21, 2017, 02:04:12 AM
Post combining different Twitter reactions including from big trekkies

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/718lgs/star_trek_discovery_the_first_reactions_are_here/dn8x56s/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 21, 2017, 02:20:26 AM
So, Star Trek is not carried by anyone in Japan on streaming, and TOS is $10/season. I'm probably biting.

Enterprise is $20/season — is it worth it? I've never seen much of it.

I think I've got DS9 from The Internet Store at some point, and need to watch more of it.

Of course, they still want $30/season of TNG; ain't gonna bite just yet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 21, 2017, 03:23:23 AM
I would Internet Store Enterprise because if it doesn't click with you for the reasons that it's actually decent you've got less than two seasons of actual good plots. And that includes the third season arc (which is structurally sound as finally doing a single season "year of hell" type format but has plenty of misfired episodes throughout) and the fourth season's mini-arcs format.

Then again, at $80 for the whole thing, I still don't know. And I'm a bigger fan of Enterprise than most. It's very like Voyager in terms of if you just want Trek to throw on but you don't want to actually watch every episode unless it catches your attention knowing that you can skip two or three episodes in a row sometimes. Plus like Scott Bakula. SCOTT. BAKULA. And most of the cast is better fleshed out in two and a half seasons than Voyager did in seven.

I really like its aesthetics and use of character roles. It's not a pleasure cruise like TNG and VOY, they have jobs, it's a job. The ship is cramped and sparse even when they're at their best. They don't have a conference room, they crowd around the map/sensor table at the back of the bridge. When it gets BIG UPGRADES for the year long deep space mission of season three, it's not like Astrometrics or Seven's Borg Hive in terms of new sets. They get like a tiny prep/practice room for the armed soldiers they take on. And the captain loses his dining room. (Which sat three or four at max, but I thought had potential as a dramatic space.)

Even his ready room is a cramped workspace dominated by his desk. Sick bay is like the most spacious place on the ship because Engineering has the Engine sitting in the middle of it so they all are on walkways around it. The jumpsuits have pockets and zippers and crap.

It's funny because the premise is about how they're the first real space explorers for Earth but you compare how they go about it to all the rest, even TOS which was defining the concept for the show, and there's a real making it up as we go along and we do this because we're the only ones vibe more than it is this grand endeavor.

The show falters, especially in the first two seasons, when it tries to make the whole thing bigger than it is with this TEMPORAL COLD WAR THAT ARCHER WILL BLAH BLAH that gets dropped and then given a two episode send-off. Even from the first episode you can tell that Braga and co. pitched an idea they didn't actually want to do, they want to establish as much of Trek as we know it as possible as quick as possible and setup all this future crap rather than like Voyager deal with all the potential that lay in the base concept.

It's unfortunate that TNG was split between revisiting the core parts of Trek universe while also trying to boldly go. So they then split it by having DS9 stationary and thus stuck with everything that happens, while VOY is sent far away so it's forced to boldly go. And ENT should redo VOY but properly but instead drifts into TNG territory. From the very first episode too, they immediately fly off to the Klingon homeworld, which is like totally supposed to be really far away and talk to them like it no big thang, and also their idea of "boldly going" is time travel garbage that nobody ever mentioned before in Earth's backyard. (The whole Xindi arc has this issue but takes the franchise out of its comfort zone just enough to make it work.) People like the fourth season and I guess I do but it seems like it immediately falls into the trap TNG did, with yay, Vulcans and Khan-type people and Klingons and Romulans and this isn't really new and making it them but before isn't very interesting for most of the mini-arcs but I guess at that point they were just trying to save the show long enough to get to the fifth season and do the Romulan War and founding of the Federation as a send-off. (Which we instead experience as Riker on the holodeck back during TNG!)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 21, 2017, 03:46:07 AM
Quote
Disney had to pay Paramount seven figures to allow JJ Abrams to direct Star Wars Episode IX, to compensate them for getting out of the $10 million/year deal he's under with that studio.
:rofl :rofl :wag :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 21, 2017, 03:54:45 AM
J.J. is slowly becoming the savior of Trek after all. :lawd

Brought in Simon Pegg, recommended Justin Lin over Orci, bringing in a bunch of Disney (for some odd reason despite it being about Star Wars) cash so they can write off the insane cost of the first season of Discovery :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 21, 2017, 10:40:34 AM
Haven't had time to watch this week and I'm mildly upset about it  >:(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 21, 2017, 11:55:57 PM
Thanks for the write-up, Benji!

I'll wait on Enterprise, watch my already-queued DS9, and the newly-purchased first year of TOS.

I've got to say, Queen is right; the writing on this show is terse, efficient, and fun. The newly restored effects are also nice and subtle (TAKE A CLUE, GEORGE LUCAS), matching the tone and color palette of the restored film footage. Really nice.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 22, 2017, 02:08:42 AM
One other thing I kinda liked thinking about the main cast as a contrast to the others, even though it's their job and the show emphasizes that more than the Treks to come (or rather, Treks that came before) there's no Starfleet Academy. So Archer's crew isn't staffed by people who came up through any kind of preparatory system like everybody we've seen before, it's more like a crew of O'Briens than of LaForges constantly quoting by the book or whatever.

Tucker and Hoshi are on the ship because Archer knows them from the past and they're the best at what they do, and even then he has to really work hard to get Hoshi to come because she dislikes space. Malcom's background is coming up through the British program and then into the slowly forming Earth one but again he's seen as one of the best in his field which is why he's brought on. I forget where they get Mayweather from but so does everyone else I guess he pilots the ship so why not. T'Pol is on the ship because the Vulcans not only are more knowledgeable about where the Enterprise will be headed but she's also effectively a diplomat/spy for the Vulcans regarding Earth's motives. (One of the parts they do well early in the show is establish that the Vulcans aren't particularly respected by other races either for their whole looking down on inferiors and such, so the Andorians and Shran are initially hostile to the Enterprise due to the perceived connection until Archer shows he has his own agenda and isn't enamored with the Vulcans either.) Phlox is on the ship initially for the first mission because Archer trusts him more than the story he's getting from others and he sticks around because he finds it interesting.

The T'Pol fitting in slowly with the rest of the crew and living with humans storyline is handled better than the Seven iteration, especially since she doesn't have magic nanoprobes to solve every problem, and the way they shift her loyalties subtly to Archer and the rest of the ship and away from the Vulcan High Command makes sense even if it has to be done to keep her on the show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Cerveza mas fina on September 22, 2017, 02:39:57 AM
3 more days  :hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 22, 2017, 03:22:08 AM
3 more days  :hyper
I mean, we know it's going to be shit why get hyped?  :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Cerveza mas fina on September 22, 2017, 04:40:18 AM
I have read nothing about it. Just going to turn it on and see.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 22, 2017, 10:19:23 AM
The early buzz from people who have seen it has been positive. That means nothing but just putting it out there.

It also can't be any worse than those last three movies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 24, 2017, 01:15:39 AM
IIRC, Queenie's current got a bug up her butt about SJWs, but I loved this:

https://twitter.com/BlkNrdProblems/status/911762507907387392
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 24, 2017, 03:20:47 AM
Sjw is the last thing I'd use to describe trek
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus on September 24, 2017, 09:39:05 AM
I forgot what distinction you've made in regards to the term, but it bears mentioning that not everyone uses it the same way. It's very often just a generic and reflexive dismissal of progressive views and themes. Relevant examples. (https://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/white-genocide-in-space-racist-fans-seethe-at-diversity-in-new-star-trek-series/)

Reading the Urban Dictionary entries on the term is very illustrative. (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Social Studies Warrior) The first couple of entries describes very well what people who use it unironically assume about the dreaded Social Studies Warrior menace and why they feel justified.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Takes until entry 4 for 'cultural marxism' to make an appearance. :teehee And even then in a way that makes it look like the people who it's aimed at popularized it. :dead
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 24, 2017, 10:56:45 AM
Don't you people dare ruin this thread with that bullshit  :pacspit :pacspit :pacspit
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 24, 2017, 11:03:06 AM
TODAY!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: WanderingWind on September 24, 2017, 11:10:54 AM
This had better not suck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 24, 2017, 02:32:40 PM
IIRC, Queenie's current got a bug up her butt about Social Studies Warriors, but I loved this:

https://twitter.com/BlkNrdProblems/status/911762507907387392

I called the whining about Social Studies Warriors about six three months ago. I'd link it but I made a hideous typo in the post so I'll just quote benji's response to my post instead

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)

I knew it would happen, but it still kills me that the irony of whining about a Star Trek series pandering to progressives is completely lost on some folks
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 24, 2017, 02:37:17 PM
Btw the rollout for this is distinguished mentally-challenged. I only just realized today that they're airing it on CBS tonight in addition to the streaming thing, but I'm guessing that's a one off thing? I hear it's on Netflix outside of the US and CA so I guess I'll be VPNing the rest of the series cuz I sure as fuck ain't giving another dime to the people who bring abominations like Young Sheldon to life
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 24, 2017, 02:38:27 PM
Aside from Star Trek Beyond halfassing it, has any canon ST media touched "the gay?"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 24, 2017, 02:42:34 PM
Not in any real depth, but they've touched on gay stuff a couple times

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

I don't even know if this counts considering Dax itself doesn't seem to have a defined gender? I dunno
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 24, 2017, 03:09:12 PM
Yeah been reading up on it here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/homosexuality.htm

A lot of brushes and allegories. And then:

Quote
Lt. Stamets, an astromycologist played by Anthony Rapp, will be the first openly gay character in Star Trek.

Appalling it took this long, tbh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 24, 2017, 03:35:24 PM
I mean, I guess? The last Trek series started almost two decades ago and gay folks could only get married in one state by the time it ended. There hasn't really been an opportunity for Trek to address it (tho wasn't Sulu gay in the new ones?) for a decade and cultural attitudes towards gay rights have changed a lot in that time
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 24, 2017, 06:40:33 PM
Why in the fuck would anyone be shocked of people complaining about Social Studies Warriors ruining the new Star Trek? People blame Social Studies Warriors for Tekken 7 having less customization options than Tag 2 despite the fact the only real viable customization for female characters tends to have little range between "hooker" and "boring af but at least she doesn't look like fucking hooker". People blame Social Studies Warriors for everything.

And I don't understand how Beyond's scene is half assed? Seeing media treating homosexuality as normal and in not really necessarily requiring an hour long episode dedicated to it is far more preferable. Trek is at its most cringe worthy when they take a modern pet issue and do something like,"hey remember that topic in our world and time? Well this is how it is....in space!" Sometimes it works but for the most part it doesn't. I don't see any value in dedicating an entire episode to the topic and would much rather have a character have a long term same sex partner and the cast treats it like it ain't no big deal. Like in the aforementioned episode Seagrams posted. Not once is it mentioned that the two of them are "female". No, the objection here is that they're former lovers from past lives. Compare it to The Outcast in TNG (which I also like to be fair). One is nuanced; the other slightly preachy.

Anyways, anyone bitching about "progressive" values in Trek is a moron. The only objection I have is Roddenberry's atheism and how it impacted the shows approach to religion. Deep Space Nine was all the better for its portrayal of religion.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 12:27:38 AM
Sulu is gay in the Abramsverse but even though it got pre-release hype it doesn't actually get anything in Beyond but a brief shot of his husband and their kid(s?) when they're having the party at the end of the film. They might kiss upon greeting each other, I'd have to look it up.

On reflection I imagine I'd probably say something like "the gays having kids part is what's going to anger people more" if we went back and someone mentioned it.

Neal McDonough's character Lieutenant Hawk in First Contact who eventually gets borgified was canonically gay (and at one point was mentioned in the script in an off-hand remark as he headed off to die on the deflector dish) and one of the books they did to flesh out side characters from the TNG movies made it official for the canon that post-Nemesis Trek novels were using. (The novels use a secondary-tier canon that until a film/TV series preempts it, it should be considered canon and they altered the way they produced the books so that everything fit into this neo canon bible, etc. It starts with Garak's A Stitch in Time book, though it doesn't have the labeling. Star Trek: Online has a separate post-Nemesis canon that the developers made up. Personally, I prefer the novels canon as being more like extra seasons of Trek, especially the DS9 stuff, and would if given a new Trek franchise set post-Nemesis consider those to be canon while Morrison style also saying that everything is canon until I counter it. Especially since I would want to import some stuff, races mainly, from DC's Trek comics among others.) His ex-partner is also one of the crew members on the Titan.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: G The Resurrected on September 25, 2017, 12:30:18 AM
Production budget can't hide the fact this is shit. They should have aired both episodes instead of just one and handed this over to Netflix where it might be able to continue spending ass loads of money on a second season. Thankfully the Orville is around and by all accounts is more trek than this trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 12:35:02 AM
The funny thing is that a lot of TOS's "social justice" moments get credited to Gene and his refusal to bow down to the network. But had nothing to do with him. He wasn't even really that progressive for the late 1960s. I mean, consider his views on women. :lol

But the most famous moment, Kirk and Uhura's interracial kiss, not only was well after Gene left the show, but it wasn't scripted or intended as a BIG JUSTICE MOMENT rather it was supposed to be about what they were being forced into doing by the powerful alien of the week, and Uhura was the only female left on the cast at that point.

It was iirc actually Shatner and Nichols who intended on the kiss in the shot after the director/suits said something and they realized its importance, but it's not in the original cut aired, instead it's the compromise shot they did where you can't see it clearly, it's hinted at but Kirk's hand or something covers it. I don't remember if the remasters uses a different cut, but one of the alternate cuts has been available for decades. It's probably actually the one most people have seen, only out of the episode context. :lol

Even HE'S WHITE ON THE RIGHT SIDE is from the third season, two seasons after Gene left. That's TOS at its most fun ARE YOU GETTING THE METAPHOR YET?!?!?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 12:37:52 AM
looked up the Sulu clip from Beyond on the youtubes and this was the first result so you know i had to post it instead, especially when the guy says "i have no problem with the gays at all or lgbt, but my real problem here is this" and points to Sulu's kids :dead

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twIz6KnGV5o

i guess the greeting kiss got cut after all, probably has the Kirk reaction shot over that part
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on September 25, 2017, 12:46:21 AM
This sucked. It’s not Star Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on September 25, 2017, 12:55:20 AM
This sucked. It’s not Star Trek.

Yup. It's crap.

I understand that anyone in the position to make a Star Trek property these days has no clue how to make an actual Star Trek movie/show/whatever, but even just on the merits of "generic sci-fi show" this sucked. The production values were nice, a couple of the characters did interesting things, but overall this hits the unthinkable triple whammy of being a bad tv show while simultaneously shitting on what little good name Star Trek has left, AND being a cynical ploy to get people to sign up for CBS's streaming service. It's almost impressive in the terrible execution of it all.

I really don't understand why people find it so fucking hard to make a goddamn Star Trek show. Here's a revolutionary idea: just stick to what fucking works. Find a likable group of people, toss em on a fucking spaceship, task them to explore new and interesting worlds, and make it all kinda vaguely hope-y and aspirational. HOW FUCKING HARD IS THAT? IT IS GODDAMN PERFECTLY SUITED TO EPISODIC TV IN WAYS FEW SHOWS ARE, I MEAN FOR FUCKS SAKES YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE THE CREW EXPLORE A NEW GODDAMN WORLD EACH WEEK OR IF THAT STARTS GETTING TOO EXPENSIVE DO CHARACTER BACKGROUND EPISODES ON THE FUCKING SHIP, THIS IS SO NOT GODDAMN HARD FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: G The Resurrected on September 25, 2017, 01:01:48 AM
Let me introduce you to the Orville

It's a cheap Star Trek lite and is hitting on a lot of the cylinders. Someone with a lot of love for Star Trek has taken the time to make a better show for those of us that are looking for something like that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on September 25, 2017, 01:03:03 AM
I’d probably vote Republican before I willingly watch a Seth Macfarlane show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on September 25, 2017, 01:19:27 AM
Let me introduce you to the Orville

It's a cheap Star Trek lite and is hitting on a lot of the cylinders. Someone with a lot of love for Star Trek has taken the time to make a better show for those of us that are looking for something like that.

The Orville has been described to me as "TNG but with regular people and humor" which sounds like something I'd use in a torture sessoin if waterboarding wasn't cruel enough.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 25, 2017, 08:31:01 AM
Just got through watching both episodes.

Overall I liked it quite a bit. The positives for me were the acting which were probably better than any other trek show in the past. The lead character and the Michelle Yeoh were both very compelling. The "look" and the special effects of the show were also very good. It looks slick. And I prefer the look and lighting and feel it has over that of the movies by quite a bit.

It also sets a nice narrative and setup to lead into the current season. The ending was rushed and a bit too melodramatic but I understand they needed to lay the table to get to where they needed to go for the rest of the season.

If I have one biggish complaint, maybe, it seems like because of the omni-present threat of war, they won't have the ability to do random style Trek episodes where they meet a new alien race or something to set up a lot of moral dilemmas like TNG and TOS did. I hope I'm wrong and they still find a way to do those kind of episodes and still be a serial show.

The first two episodes were darker than typical trek but that's fine. It still felt like trek in spirit for the most part although it doesn't really feel like TNG. Those two episodes definitely made me more interested to watch more. I just hope they also add in those old school boring sci-show elements that trek is known for and why I loved it in the past.

So I'm interested. I liked it. I hope they can balance the serial nature and drama elements with a bit more sci-fi plotting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on September 25, 2017, 08:37:39 AM
The Orville is fine. It's not amazing or anything but its fine. You may not dig its humour but its heart is in the right place and its basically doing a shameless riff on TNG.

If you are a hardcore sci-fi tv nerd, I guarantee you've watched and enjoyed worse over the course of your lifetime.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on September 25, 2017, 09:00:13 AM
Stoney Mason: Wrong on STD, Wrong on The Orville, Wrong for America
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on September 25, 2017, 01:30:17 PM
I didn't hate, but I came away from the first two episodes much closer to Snorenado and TVC's side of things than Stoney's.

I just came away from the pilot asking....why?  The show looks competently put together, but I'm looking for more of a reason for it to exist than "ooh, it looks slick."  Are we really just doing a serialized show about when the federation first almost went to war with the klingons?

I hate the redesign of the klingons.  Klingons themselves don't need to be redesigned.  The movies-through-TNG-DS9-etc look is iconic enough it shouldn't have been fucked with.  Redesigning their costumes and ships and shit is fine, but I just don't like the new design of the race itself.

And those Dutch angle shots.  Ugh.

In the pro column, just to be fair:  I really liked Michelle yeoh's captain, and the coward alien dude.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 25, 2017, 02:30:03 PM
I don't understand the need for prequels exactly? If the concern was on the fact they didn't want to alienate new people why not base it after Voyager? ??? Like, a hundred years after the fact?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on September 25, 2017, 03:13:51 PM
Yeah prequels rarely work for me and star trek is definitely the franchise i don't think anybody wanted it from. Just go further into space guys come on it can't be that hard.

If you need a villain to drive the show you could do another changeling/hive mind race. This works because I don't think DS9 did enough with Odo/changeling stuff (yes I know they were running the dominion) while also being a bit related to what's going on in the world rn.

It being a prequel is the biggest offense to me. Just why, why would you do this. A franchise thats so much about the possibilities of the future, being our best selves...and you set in the past during the early days of a conflict that didn't really amount to much and ended anticlimactically.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 25, 2017, 03:48:10 PM
I don't understand the logic. Enterprise was the last Star Trek tv show. It was a prequel and bombed. So why do a follow up show that's also a prequel? ??? Is cbs stupid?

Not to mention Klingons are amazing and who tf wants to be at war with them again
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 25, 2017, 04:25:44 PM
I don't understand the logic. Enterprise was the last Star Trek tv show. It was a prequel and bombed. So why do a follow up show that's also a prequel? ??? Is cbs stupid?

Because Abramsverse was a prequel and did really well.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on September 25, 2017, 05:10:42 PM
watched 2 episodes... michelle yeoh was cool but now she ded so who gives a shit?

dunno how it is star trek, seemed like a big budget version of fucking stargate sg-1  :yuck

why they want me to pay them to watch this filth AND also receive ads? gtfo. of course smoothbrains love it and will pay for it because they are smoothbrains, so it will probably be successful. this is the future of star trek.

klingons look like california raisins mixed with mongoloids

 :donot
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on September 25, 2017, 05:39:21 PM
I don't understand the logic. Enterprise was the last Star Trek tv show. It was a prequel and bombed. So why do a follow up show that's also a prequel? ??? Is cbs stupid?

Because Abramsverse was a prequel and did really well.

Unfortunately, I think that was about the extent of the thought process that went into the setting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 25, 2017, 05:42:46 PM
I don't understand the logic. Enterprise was the last Star Trek tv show. It was a prequel and bombed. So why do a follow up show that's also a prequel? ??? Is cbs stupid?

Because Abramsverse was a prequel and did really well.

Unfortunately, I think that was about the extent of the thought process that went into the setting.

And also, they probably looked at Enterprise vs. Abramsverse and came away with the conclusion "We should do a prequel, but only as close to TOS as we can get away with. Hey look, Sarek!!"

I also think the showrunners and/or producers were a bit cowardly and didn't want to address a post-DS9 Trek universe. Too much "unknown." Let's stay in our comfy TOS era safezone!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 25, 2017, 05:57:31 PM
This is starting to remind me of Suikoden. Disappointing prequel comes out after sequel with major plot/story changes, every story after that is a prequel or side game until the franchise itself dies out with no answers of the story after the most recent timeline story came out. Both have names that start with S too. I'm telling you, don't fall in love with any thing long running that starts with S: Star Wars, Star Trek, Suikoden, Shenmue, Sonic, Stargate...S is cursed I'm telling you.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on September 25, 2017, 08:00:47 PM
I liked it and really like the new klingons.  Also the klingon writing was pretty tight. 

It's a shame that this isn't an anthology though.  Don't care for a multiseason prequel again. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boogie on September 25, 2017, 08:11:00 PM
I'm glad it's airing on basic cable in Canada so
I don't have to hum and haw about another stupid subscription service for this .
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 10:18:22 PM
When Bryan Fuller started this and it was basically just him and his staff figuring out ideas, it wasn't an always prequel, it was an anthology series that would jump around into eras of Trek we hadn't seen. Then Kurtzman and the rest got involved as he was bailing and it became Orci and Kurtzman's third movie pitch, a war against the Klingons. I'm pretty sure that's why Fuller ditched on the series as he didn't want to fight them over the prequel aspect and saw how it could still work before he realized they had shuffled him aside.

A prequel CAN work because there is a huge gap in the Trek timeline that is full of named events which don't have any fleshed out details but could be dramatic and interesting. The Tomed Incident for example is what took the Romulans from a powerful player in regional politics to shutting themselves up on the other side of the Neutral Zone until TNG, this is arguably the biggest untouched event in Trek lore since it made an entire Star Empire go hide for 80 years without the most powerful two neighbors knowing shit. The Enterprise-C's sacrifice at Khitomer (a last gasp of the Romulan Empire perhaps?) and the Federation-Cardassian War are two periods that leave the status quo we got for TNG and into DS9. There's also a war with the Tholians at some point. And some others, they're all mentioned as recent enough for TNG/DS9 crew to have experienced them.

And this makes sense if you take the Alpha Quadrant as we know it as TOS films end and TNG starts. In TOS the Romulans and Klingons were still far away and only at the end of TOS and in the movies did the Klingons start encroaching and battling with the Federation seriously over territory. While the Romulans had signed an alliance with the Klingons that at some point fell apart to such a disaster that they tried to wipe out the Klingons before hiding for 80 years. The Federation had expanded by the time TNG starts to reach Ferengi, Breen and Cardassian space. Which is opposite the Klingon and Romulan Empires on the maps.

Even though there's obvious parallels for the way the races act, if you take what Trek presents in terms of distance, the TOS takes place in Continential Europe, and TNG has them reaching quite deeply into Africa, Russia, the Middle East, etc. The Americas are the Delta and Gamma Quadrants. Or maybe the Americas are the Delta Quadrant and Far Asia is the Gamma Quadrant.

So that whole period between VI and TNG has the Federation expanding and expanding and causing tons of known conflicts with brand new races they're meeting. The seeming sudden collapse of one Empire and meeting another powerful one which a major war is fought with. Along with smaller events that are all termed wars by people who served. While the Klingon Empire is rebuilding from the events of VI, which the film speculates will take them decades. So the Federation was basically unchecked by the original TOS powers during this period except the Tholian War whatever that was.

Except they want to do prequels pre-Kirk for whatever reason. It would have worked with Enterprise but they got cold feet about limiting the scope of the ships travels, wasted so much time on the time travel bullshit and introduced the Xindi for no obvious reason when they had tons of races to use, namely the Romulans, and they had ideally setup the series as building to and ending with the Romulan War (which is a canon snarl) and the founding of the Federation. If the Xindi attack in season three is unknown, but the Enterprise heads out there to find out who's behind it and we get the first inklings of it being the Romulans, then season four introduces the Romulans as it did and also brings about the Vulcan Civil War as it did along with the first real teaming up of the founding Federation races, the show is using its most powerful thematic arcs to setup the conclusion of the series. They couldn't write this way because they rebooted the show twice instead. Then spent half their bonus season on AUGMENTS and then KLINGON AUGMENTS to explain away the forehead ridges rather than take what Jack noted was a potential storyline in the human/Earth backlash against aliens, especially after the Romulan attack ("unknown" still except to the viewer and maybe the Vulcans and maybe Archer finds out at the end of the storyline) and the Vulcan's constant bullshit for years.

Discovery makes zero sense taking place in the ten years before TOS, which we've already seen! The Cage! And TOS never indicated there was a major war with the Klingons that reshaped their entire society, only the Romulans. That's why the crew knows how to handle the Klingons in every episode they meet up, even has half-friendly ones like Tribbles, but the Romulan episodes are cloaked in guessing and spycraft. It suggested the Klingons as a race the Federation had scuffles with, but were generally handled, while the Romulans were an open-ended threat. The first episode we meet with the Klingons (Errand of Mercy) is setup with the premise that things have gotten so bad recently that they may have to actually go to war with the Klingons but in the end even with it forced on them they sign a peace treaty, which holds. Never again are the two at open war until DS9. Every instance of skirmish is either a setup ("Day of the Dove") or a rogue Klingon (III, V and VI...with Klaa notably being chastised for attacking the Enterprise for his own ends and VI being an outright conspiracy between all kinds of forces...III also was originally supposed to be the Romulans going after Genesis) compare to the Romulans or even the Gorn or Tholians who are never nothing but hostile and on the verge of total war with the Federation. With the Romulans backing down regularly, especially in TNG, because they're constantly probing rather than looking for an actual war.

Fuller's original pitch would have worked far better in terms of being what Trek needs in terms of a show that's full of familiar stuff, a show that has seralized seasons and a show that can also try new things for Trek.
Quote
When Fuller first met with CBS about the series, the company did not have a plan for what the new show would be. He proposed an anthology series with each season being a standalone, serialized show set in a different era, beginning with a prequel to the original series, then stories set during the original series, during Star Trek: The Next Generation, and then "beyond to a time in Trek that's never been seen before". Fuller compared this to what American Horror Story did for horror, and described the proposal as a platform for "a universe of Trek shows". However, CBS told Fuller to just start with a single serialized show and see how that performs first, and he began further developing the concept of a prequel to the original series.
This would have allowed you to do something like say a season where the Federation first meets the Cardassians, who are arguably the most un-Federation/human like race, and it descends into war. Throw in some mentions about a Chief O'Brien or even cast somebody to be a young him and that's all the connections you need, the rest you can do all new, get your war story (one which clearly was intense enough that it affected people we saw on TNG) and shit.

They could setup seasons based around where TNG/DS9 only spent a few episodes, the contingency side of the Federation. Especially in the wake of the Romulans reappearance in TNG. ESPECIALLY in the wake of the Borg attack and then the discovery of the Dominion. Section 31 operations paired with a ship that has plausible deniability but the captain is unsure about this all, and they could have the debate DS9 never let them (because they were bringing the series arc to a close) regarding how much of this is shattering Federation ideals. And how much has been how the Federation has always operated.

What about seasons where we go back to all those places the Enterprise fucked up and then warped away from? We constantly heard about how this or that race was applying for the Federation but then we'd find out their SECRET and Picard would lecture them and warp away. There's all sorts of stuff on both ends of that happening. Especially when they reveal themselves to lesser races and Picard becomes a god or whatever. Set a season around the people who have to clean up those messes or go through all the setup and planning. Even when they got a movie to do this with they fucked it up. If you take what we know from Insurrection it's clear it's not the first time the Federation has relocated races. Explore that.

You can do all of this in prequels. It's arguably the easier way to do it and better way, Enterprise originally set its first season date so it would be hemmed in by the Romulan War and Founding of the Federation which were two set in stone Trek dates. Only they had no idea how to fill the time to get there and were clearly not interested in really exploring the simplicity of the concept or the notions of exploring and first contacts. Thus why we have Klingons in the first episode plus the announcement of a massive TEMPORAL COLD WAR THAT WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING AND IS THE MOST IMPORTANT oh never mind look they're space Nazi's bye.
Quote
Kurtzman later added that the Federation-Klingon War story arc of the first season would not continue in a second season, saying "each season needs to be about a different thing".[78] However, he was not interested in a full anthology series because "I wouldn't necessarily want to throw [the characters] away at the end of the season for a new show",[79] and instead felt that the aftereffects of the first season would be felt moving forward: "The results of the war are going to allow for a lot of new storytelling that will be the result of everything that happens and the people that are left behind; the casualties, the things that have grown in Starfleet as a result of the war. That's what we'll inherit in the second season."

By the end of August, Berg and Harberts had developed a "road map" for a second season, and "the beginnings of one" for a third. It was also revealed that an average episode of the first season had ultimately cost US$8–8.5 million, making it one of the most expensive series ever alongside successful shows like Game of Thrones and Westworld, but also infamous failures such as Marco Polo and The Get Down. This increase in budget outgrew the original Netflix deal, but CBS still considered the series to be paid for already due to the number of new All Access subscribers that the show was expected to draw.
Quote
"The defining factor of Roddenberry's vision is the optimistic view of the future ... Once you lose that, you lose the essence of what Star Trek is. That being said…we live in very different times. Every day we look at the news and it is hard. It is hard to see what we see. I think now more than ever Trek is needed as a reminder of what we can be and the best of who we can be. Star Trek has always been a mirror to the time it reflected and [the topical question now] is how do you preserve and protect what Starfleet is in the weight of a challenge like war and the things that have to be done in war. [That] is a very interesting and dramatic problem."
—Executive producer Alex Kurtzman on the balance between classic Star Trek and new elements in Discovery
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 10:28:57 PM
 :badass
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 25, 2017, 11:05:40 PM
Jesus Benji sure does know his Star Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 11:41:06 PM
I almost looked up how to spell the race from the DS9 episode where Odo has to kill another Founder who's posing as an ambassador or something so he doesn't start a war and it's revealed they've already infiltrated all the Alpha Quadrant powers. Then I realized nobody would give a shit.

Tsenkski?
Tsenthski?
Tzenthzki?

Anyway, that's yet another of the races that TNG and DS9 mention at least one war having happened with them in the not too distant past. The period between VI and TNG was clearly not at all peaceful despite both the Klingons and Romulans being mostly removed from the board as adversaries to the Federation's expansionist policies.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Tzenkethi
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 25, 2017, 11:49:38 PM
One concept that almost assuredly would never be done but I'd love to see would be a season set within say the Romulan Empire or Klingon Empire or whoever. And that's it. No Federation.

But with lots of all the other races within those territories. It's silly that the show has always acted as if The Federation and The Dominion are the only star empires that we're to believe have multiple races within them. The Klingons and Romulans may dominate all the levers of power, just like the Founders in the Dominion or the humans and Vulcans do in the Federation (:teehee) but there's obviously other races in all that territory.

Even the Son'a are shown to have multiple subjugated races in Insurrection. And they were like the white trash tier of Alpha Quadrant powers.

Hell, actually now that I think about it, powers on Voyager were shown to have more diverse makeups.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 26, 2017, 12:40:39 AM
I mean I knew it would be shit (and when I said shit I obviously meant a shit star trek, not shit on it's own) and here it is. Seems like an okay time waster but it's not what I need trek to be, and yes I'm going to trigger some of you, The Orville is actually better trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 26, 2017, 01:44:53 AM
Go fuck yourself benji!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 26, 2017, 01:32:12 PM
Hey the President of the Federation is that weird dog nose alien dude in DS9 :maf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Though everyone knows the best President was Scott Bakula
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 27, 2017, 01:16:34 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Zc8Co2H3w
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2017, 01:20:09 AM
"except when she can't"

:lol Troi :lol

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2017, 02:26:26 AM
I liked the first episode.

Things I like:

- Good sense of discovery. We start on an alien planet with our two leads stranded on a planet. Classic Star Trek situation. Then we have contact with an unknown object that forces the Federation to see what it is. Exploring the unknown, that's what Trek is all about. I loved that and gave the show a sense of danger and adventure even if it was impossible for the main character to die then.

- Some good dialogue.

- Really good production values.

- Great monologue from first officer.

Things I didn't l like:

- The title sequence. Star Trek series opening with the ship not in the stars and space? What kind of fuckery is this?

- The design of the Klingons, holy shit. My favorite non-human ST race...butchered! The fact they don't have hair, the crazy face shape, it's all shit.

- The fact it's a prequel. It doesn't make any sense at all. What about Kitomer? Why the fuck would Klingon's team up for this? We have a long time between TOS and TNG and Klingon's and the Federation were at peace that entire time. Why is this necessary? This is stupid. I feel the show would have been so much better if it took place like 50-100 years after Voyager/First Contact. Keep the general outline of the show: Vulvan influenced human lead, Federation meets some new life form whose first inclination is for war. This would be interesting because it'd show Klingons and how their honor and combat lust has evolved over the years while still allowing them to have a new race of blood thirsty fuckers. The premise isn't bad. What's bad is the redundancies: another Klingon war isn't necessary, and if they wanted it to be a prequel making the villains Klingon isn't necessary.

- I balk at TNG's lack of drama, but that much discord between Federation officers makes no sense.

Still, I liked what I saw despite my complaints and look forward to episode 2.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on September 27, 2017, 09:12:24 AM
Vulvan influenced human lead,

So the lead is a Kirk/Riker archetype?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on September 27, 2017, 12:34:29 PM
can someone explain the sandstorm opening to me?

they say they can't contact the ship because of the storm, so they trace the federation symbol (I think?) into the sand, which is supposed to alert the ship to their location... except 1. wouldn't the sandstorm blow away the footprints?? and 2. how could the ship even see it as the planet was covered in clouds (in the scene it shows the ship literally appearing through the clouds...)

did I miss something or was this just shitty writing?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on September 27, 2017, 12:35:50 PM
Vulvan influenced human lead,

So the lead is a Kirk/Riker archetype?

lol no
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2017, 01:32:54 PM
can someone explain the sandstorm opening to me?

they say they can't contact the ship because of the storm, so they trace the federation symbol (I think?) into the sand, which is supposed to alert the ship to their location... except 1. wouldn't the sandstorm blow away the footprints?? and 2. how could the ship even see it as the planet was covered in clouds (in the scene it shows the ship literally appearing through the clouds...)

did I miss something or was this just shitty writing?

They had an hour until the storm would hit them. The footprints I can maybe see. But yeah, I have no idea how the ship caught it, but whatever.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on September 27, 2017, 02:08:02 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MnQcVLOCPE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rahxephon91 on September 27, 2017, 10:29:11 PM
Kind of sucks that they kill off Michelle Yheoh. Kind of wanted to watch it solely because she was in it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 28, 2017, 01:26:11 AM
Thanks, various dickheads, for including spoilers without spoiler-tagging it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 28, 2017, 07:29:02 AM
Quote
Alex Kurtzman answered a question about balancing what to keep from classic Star Trek with what new elements to bring in for Discovery:
Quote
First and foremost, the defining factor of Roddenberry’s vision is the optimistic view of the future. He envisioned a world where all species, all races came together to not only make our world better, but to make every world better. I think that is something that can never be lost in Trek. Once you lose that, you lose the essence of what Star Trek is.

That being said…we live in very different times. Every day we look at the news and it is hard. It is hard to see what we see. I think now more than ever Trek is needed as a reminder of what we can be and the best of who we can be. Star Trek has always been a mirror to the time it reflected and right now the idea that – the question is how do you preserve and protect what Starfleet is in the weight of challenge like war and the things that have to be done in war is a very interesting and dramatic problem. And it feels like a very topical one given the world where where we live now.
I keep coming back to this Kurtzman quote, been turning it over on idle moments since I came across it while posting that post. There's something about it that is incredibly fascinating to me as to how he sums his vision of the dramatic concept of this series.

And he's obviously way more successful than I am. Bobby Roberts is probably more successful than I am in any of this. But it seems like it belies a fundamental misunderstanding of not only Trek as a franchise (or really any series), but the history of the real world and also producing successful dramatic story. Even more than that his own notions of what Trek is supposed to be literally two seconds earlier.

I only have Kurtzman's Trek to go off of, but he comes off with desiring a fetishistic glamorization of war for its bad parts. "The things that have to be done in war." And in the other quote how the second season will bring with it from the war "the things that are left behind; the casualties, the things that have grown in Starfleet as a result of the war"

He says Roddenberry's vision is optimistic, which okay fine, but then he says "we live in very different times. Everyday we look at the news and it is hard." And it's like what in the holy fuck. Gene served in World War II even if most of it was in the US. The show came about literally a couple years after the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the two superpowers to nearly annihilate each other. A President had just been assassinated. The Civil Rights Movement had passed its glory days and was entering into the reaction period of the later 1960s. And that nuclear annihilation was hanging over everything. Even if we just take something dominating the media zeitgeist like the position of minorities for example, in the United States, it's terrible and imperfect and yes, hard. But it's a far cry from the events happening in the 1960's in the United States. It's a far cry globally from where we were as humanity in the 1960's. Practically nowhere is it as hard as then.

And then he goes on to talk about how you preserve Trek's optimism in the face of a war; how it has to mirror the times. But it can't.

We aren't in a war now.

Not a real one.

Not like the one or the world everyone associated with old Trek lived through before they got to Trek. Nothing on that scale. Just take the main cast ffs: George Takei spent time as a kid in an internment camp, his Japanese relatives died in the Hiroshima bombing. Jimmy Doohan fought in and was seriously wounded during D-Day. DeForest Kelley barely avoided having to serve overseas being just young enough to get to serve in the US. Both Shatner and Nimoy came from Jewish families that fled Eastern Europe because of oppression/war. Nichelle Nichols was not only black but a woman. And that's the actors who for the most part all had fairly charmed lives to get to their positions (even Nichols family was well off enough that her dad was a mayor! A black mayor in the 1940s!) while the rest of the people doing the show had all kinds of experiences. Literally everyone involved came through the Depression. You're probably not going to find anyone to write for, let alone star in the show today who has those level of experiences. There's only so many Rob Riggles around who can fall into the industry right after being a deployed Marine and even he (and John Oliver's awesome wife) didn't see the war of the type we're talking about for the show.

"The things that have to be done in war." DS9 dealt with this, and in the only way possible, an endless tragedy for everyone. Everyone's morals and morale is broken, an entire species has nearly been wiped out and the show makes us feel for them despite them being the bad guys from day one (and despite their two representative characters for the end story arc being the most blatantly grey or worse characters on it), another race was targeted for deliberate genocide (let alone what the Federation was going to let happen in the Gamma Quadrant as a result from the Dominion collapsing), pretty much all the main characters relationships have been shattered during and by the war and personal sacrifices are made to the very end. The Romulans aren't friends now because of the war and don't stick around to celebrate. The Klingons are putting on a brave face, but as the show multiple times indicates they are finished as a power, maybe for generations, because of the war and their ways. (Their entire government was overthrown just recently in a conference room by their new Federation ambassador.)

There's no optimism and "a reminder of what we can be and the best of who we can be" in weighing the challenge of war and "the things that have to be done." There can't be. War is inherently a failure, a disaster. Especially an intergalactic one.

You have literally the universe given to you and you want to explore war? You'll never explore it even on the level of something like Homeland has done. You can't deal with the consequences like you claim other than to revel in the suffering of certain characters. Real war tears apart societies on a level you can never do on a show where you want to keep the main cast and keep the main premise well past it.

And again DS9 already did all this and pushed it to the brink of where it could go before we tumble over an event horizon of no return. The Federation was literally prepared to commit genocide and bring about the collapse of an entire civilization that had the potential to kill untold trillions because it could not fight the war indefinitely. (And they didn't even know what havoc Janeway was unleashing in the Delta Quadrant at the time.) An idea which, by the way, you'll recall was already less successfully attempted by two "bad" powers. And for all the wartime ethics "In A Pale Moonlight" toys around with which Garak rightly points out has been a line they've crossed many times in the past and Sisko knew he would be crossing from the start, in the end, Sisko risks literally everything, trillions upon trillions of lives, on Bashir successfully getting the cure from Sloane's mind AND Odo being able to convince the Founders to end the war in exchange. DS9 had to end because they couldn't cover the aftermath of what they DID do, especially on Cardassia, let alone wrestle with what they nearly did.

If your Trek is premised on exploring "the things that have to be done in a war" because we "live in very different times ... the news ... is hard" and your previous Trek films featured a faction of the Federation determined to be prepared for the next war (after untold billions died to a Romulan ship from a future alternate timeline) that is utterly ruthless and prepared to slaughter anyone to pursue this goal pre-emptively then I'm not sure how your Trek is going to ever be optimistic or about exploration or about really anything but just brutal terrible suffering for everyone in just crudely and clumsily handled ways.

You can't do a Trek Band of Brothers then follow those same people into charting nebula, visiting planets full of drugs that blast everybody in the face and meeting aliens who base their entire society around a gangster novel. Let alone stop in the middle of it to play some baseball with jerkass Vulcan crews. Wait.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 28, 2017, 07:45:31 AM
Quote
Noting that the Klingons historically represented the Soviet Union, becoming friendlier with the protagonists of Star Trek as the Cold War ended, Harberts stated that in Discovery they and Starfleet would represent different factions within the modern United States, explaining that "what we really wanted to do too is understand two differing points of view and really explore it ... I frankly love what they represent. Not in terms necessarily of all the messaging, but in terms of learning about them and learning why they are who they are and making sure they aren't just the enemy. And then finding a way to come together. How do we bring everyone back together? What do we do? What does it take? It is a big challenge for us, but that is what season one is all about."
Quote
Berg elaborated that "one of the themes we are exploring is universal and is a lesson I feel like as human beings we have to learn over and over again—is you think you know ‘the other,' but you really don't. You have to sort of cognitively re-frame or break or deviate from your own point of view to really understand. You have to forget what you knew before. One of the big steps in that journey is how to understand yourself. You have to understand yourself before you can better see others. The show is called Discovery and it is called Discovery for a reason, because our characters are on a journey."
Quote
"One of the driving forces of this war was to not vilify either side. The show is often told from both points of view ... there are significant sections of the narrative that are purely from the Klingon point of view and in Klingon. That allows the audience to participate in the debate of who is right and who is wrong."
—Executive producer Akiva Goldsman on approaching the Federation-Klingon war from both sides
okay but what about the half of the season with harry mudd in it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 28, 2017, 12:20:47 PM
 :o
https://clips.twitch.tv/NeighborlyYummyShrewVoteYea (https://clips.twitch.tv/NeighborlyYummyShrewVoteYea)

 :playa
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 28, 2017, 07:59:41 PM
I liked about half of the first episode, and I'm gonna hold of going too in depth for now, but I have to say; this show is shot in seemingly the absolute most obnoxious way possible. The lens flares in shots that have no direct lightsource, the camera never sitting the fuck still ever, the CONSTANT dutch angles -  it's like if Vince McMahon was directing a big budget sci-fi show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Nobody on September 28, 2017, 08:16:02 PM
Space Seed  :whoo :lawd

I'm about ready to skip to the Wrath of Khan movie now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 28, 2017, 10:00:21 PM
IIRC their script for the third one got thrown in the trash and they broke up shortly after that, never to be heard from again
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on September 28, 2017, 11:57:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RVf01en-YA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 29, 2017, 12:45:21 AM
here we go bois
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: BobFromPikeCreek on September 29, 2017, 06:49:14 PM
Can't wait to watch. Mike's opinion is the one I've been waiting for.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 29, 2017, 07:53:04 PM
the CONSTANT dutch angles
The funny thing about this is that both TOS and Batman used these originally on purpose in a specific way. Batman used them to signify they were the villains scenes (Batman, Police HQ, etc. are straight) and Trek pulled them out for "weird science stuff is happening" to where even now I'm doubting my own memory as to how often they descended into them constantly by the third season.

Both shows have sorta the same budgetary arc and introduce a new regular to bring in the hip kid viewers (Chekov, Batgirl) and the third season essentially only has preexisting sets or some oddly shaped walls they threw together and painted. TOS got away with a lot because of the way they could reconfigure and shoot the same hallway set (to where this became standard practice on TV, let alone Trek) but Batman was stuck with that half a street set they couldn't change anything but the signs or something. Reminded me of Seinfeld before they got their larger New York street sets (and hijacked others from other shows) and you have that like half a block section of the street they reuse most notably in the episode where George and the other bald guy get into the parking dispute.
IIRC their script for the third one got thrown in the trash and they broke up shortly after that, never to be heard from again
Kurtzman is co-creator of STD and one of the writers. The only reason he probably isn't the showrunner nor directed any episodes is because he had to go direct The Mummy.

The only thing Orci's managed since they broke up was this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matador_(U.S._TV_series) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matador_(U.S._TV_series))

Kurtzman wasn't coming back for the third movie anyhow and Abrams was out because of Star Wars and not knowing how long that would take, so Orci wanted to write and direct it and pulled a powerplay gamble with Paramount thinking he had leverage which is what led to them asking Simon Pegg to do a script from scratch who was like "fuck yeah" and Orci still wasn't budging so Paramount was like, okay...we'll just go hire the Fast and Furious guy to direct. Orci got himself so shitbinned by Paramount they didn't even invite him in for producer credits STD let alone anything else, only Kurtzman.

But Into Darkness was always supposed to lead into a Federation-Klingon War under Orci and Kurtzman's outline which the comics were working off of. (That's why they're in the movie too, to introduce them.)

Until Pegg and Jung started completely from scratch, even beyond scratch since Pegg said they considered the whole Khan blood thing to be non-canon. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 29, 2017, 07:55:30 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/09/29/star-trek-discovery-divides-fan-base-with-controversial-nfl-protest-pic.html
Quote
The cast of "Star Trek: Discovery" caused controversy among their fans when they took a side on the heated #TakeaKnee debate.

One of the show's stars, Sonequa Martin-Green, posted the picture of the cast on Instagram earlier this week kneeling with the caption, "#StarTrekDiscovery #takeaknee."

The snap was met with a heated exchange from social media followers.

One user lashed out at the cast writing, "Hi! We are Star Trek Morons. We have no originality. We TakeAKnee because most NFL dimwits with 8th-grade level mentality do it too!"

Another said their actions turned them off from watching the series, "I'm a Star Trek fan but not of your show. #notwatching."

But someone defended the political stance, "Bravo Star Trek Discovery crew, I have a good feeling Gene Roddenberry would agree with you. And bye fake fans our show doesn't need you!"
Quote
kathyannsummers  This is sad. I had looked forward to watching this series but can no longer plan to do so. Hello, goodbye.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 29, 2017, 07:57:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RVf01en-YA
COFFEE STAIN

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Mike's theory that it actually takes place after DS9 and in the Abramsverse :lawd
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: WanderingWind on September 30, 2017, 12:47:45 PM
I disagree strongly that Discovery is beautiful. Throwing a bunch of color filters, dutch angles and stupid ass lens flares so Senpai Jones will notice you does not equal beautiful. It's straight garbage, visually speaking. Irredeemable garbage. Absolute fucking trash.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on October 01, 2017, 11:48:32 PM
no one watch the new ep yet?

I'm waiting it to come on a ... streaming service... myself  :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 02, 2017, 12:38:31 AM
^ It's already on streaming services lol. I'll watch it tonight
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on October 02, 2017, 01:14:26 AM
I watched it.. this feels even less like Star Trek than the previous 2 eps... the new captain is a total dick, and the science researcher is a dick.. EVERYONE IS A FUCKING ASSHOLE IN THIS SHOW..

I thought there would be some redemption arc with Michael or some means to make the audience root for her, but the first thing she does is act like a jerk (6 months after she was arrested) and breaks into a science project on the ship... 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 02, 2017, 01:21:08 AM
Even if it becomes more of a clusterfuck, it's star trek, i'm a trekkie. I'll hate watch it so I can slander it online at the very least.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 02, 2017, 02:03:34 AM
Even if it becomes more of a clusterfuck, it's star trek, i'm a trekkie. I'll hate watch it so I can slander it online at the very least.
As your attorney I'm required to inform you that it's only slander if it is not only damaging but also false.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 02, 2017, 02:06:00 AM
Even if it becomes more of a clusterfuck, it's star trek, i'm a trekkie. I'll hate watch it so I can slander it online at the very least.
As your attorney I'm required to inform you that it's only slander if it is not only damaging but also false.
As your attorney I'm required to inform you not to dispense legal advice to, let alone legally represent others on the internet as you don't possess a license to practice law in any "official" jurisdiction.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 02, 2017, 02:54:25 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx0xOgFDXFg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 02, 2017, 02:56:29 AM
In other news, The Orville continues to be great. Episode 3 and 4 are quite a bit better than the first two. Bore star trek thread #triggered
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 02, 2017, 03:27:53 AM
In other news, The Orville continues to be great. Episode 3 and 4 are quite a bit better than the first two. Bore star trek thread #triggered

It's early on both but I'm enjoying Discovery and Orville.

I think the first Orville episode was the worst by quite a bit. Episode 2, 3, 4 have been fine. The humour is still often hit or miss for me but the actual show is pretty solid. I like that Discovery isn't necessarily TNG 2.0 but if someone is looking for TNG 2.0, the Orville is serving that audience fine. The show has a point of view and a heart. That's pretty much all you can ask for when it comes to general entertainment.

Discovery episode tonight was enjoyable for me also.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 02, 2017, 12:16:12 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Things I liked
- The security chief


Things I didnt
- First mutineer? No. Fucking. Way. Stupid thing to just make the event more dramatic.
- The prison transport failing so miserably, do they not have standards?
- Letting the prisoners fight.
- Bitching over fucking seating and beds, fuck this petty drama
- Bad lighting during action likely to cheap out on effects
- Talking to herself in the tube, falling down into a Marvel superhero pose 
- Spore bullshit  :confused
- Shadowy starfleet shit  :picard
[close]
:six:
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 02, 2017, 03:13:43 PM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/10/02/quentin-tarantino-would-rather-direct-star-trek-than-star-wars?abthid=59d272ac334cba4e17000006


Almost certainly never gonna happen but I can dream.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 02, 2017, 03:23:29 PM
I'm with Rich. Michael is the worst Star Trek main character I've ever seen. Holy fuck.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
So the captain dies and you KILL YOUR PRISONER, and you're the person who came up with that plan so he's not turned into a martyr?!

IS SHE distinguished mentally-challenged? WHY DID SHE WASTE MICHELLE YEOH'S DEATH LIKE THAT?

Holy crap.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 02, 2017, 03:30:56 PM
"Now...we are at war."

What the fuck because YOU KILLED THE DUDE

(https://i.imgur.com/yS8To4U.gif)

I literally said,"BITCH, FIRST OF ALL--" when she said that

Ep 1 was ok and I liked it. Episode 2 WHAT THE FUCK
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 02, 2017, 03:41:25 PM
Also, given that these Klingons value their dead. WHY DID SARU NOT FUCKING BEAM HIS BODY OVER AND USE THAT AS THE CURRENCY TO SUE FOR PEACE

afaoisdfja;idf;aslkjflasjdf;asfa

This show is not Star Trek. Trek is about the details. I am going to give ep 3 a shot but I hope to GOD that it isn't a waste of my damn time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Cerveza mas fina on October 02, 2017, 03:49:30 PM
Really enjoying this so far, wife likes it too :)

Episode 3 was good stuff.

Nice that not everyone is cookie cutter good like in some shows
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 02, 2017, 03:52:13 PM
Am I supposed to empathize with Michael in ep 3? I'm not sure if I am but it's pretty hard to?

On the other hand, that Chief of Security is my kind of character. :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 02, 2017, 04:07:48 PM
Holy shit. Ep 3 is very Trek. Slow dialogue. Crew talking about shit. Mysteries. I hope this show isn't as bipolar as the first three eps. :lol Because I like ep 3 a lot. How did they go from ep 2 to this? :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Boredfrom on October 03, 2017, 11:59:42 AM
I decide to watch Star Trek, my only experience is some episodes from the final seasons of Voyager and DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on October 03, 2017, 12:35:29 PM
I decide to watch Star Trek, my only experience is some episodes from the final seasons of Voyager and DS9.

Watch TOS, TNG, DS9, Wrath of Kahn, and Voyage Home. Don't bother with the rest.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 03, 2017, 12:40:07 PM
ST6 surely? 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 03, 2017, 12:54:45 PM
I decide to watch Star Trek, my only experience is some episodes from the final seasons of Voyager and DS9.

Watch TOS, TNG, DS9, Wrath of Kahn, and Voyage Home. Don't bother with the rest.

Um. Star Trek VI.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 03, 2017, 01:11:14 PM
All of the Star Trrek VI are worth watching except maybe the first.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 03, 2017, 02:58:03 PM
VI is the best Trek film after Khan. :ufup

And sometimes I even feel its better.

Also, I mean if you're watching II and IV, you might as well stick the middle part in there with III. No, it's not great. Yes, everything on the Genesis planet is terrible. Christopher Lloyd clearly doesn't want to be in the movie. But Kirk rounding everyone up to hijack the Enterprise is awesome! The Excelsior dickwad of a Captain is great. Them playing an engine sputtering noise for STARSHIPS IN SPACE is the best sound effect ever used in Trek. Also, the trick they play on the Klingons on the Enterprise is old hat because everyone started using it, but Kirk did it first here and the way it's shown is great.

And again, I gotta throw in First Contact, especially for someone who is just getting into Trek. As a concluding arc to Jean-Luc's dealing with his Locutus experience, all the great fun that happens on Earth with the dual plotlines, "THE LINE WILL BE DRAWN HERE" and "you smashed your little ships" and the silly cameos. It's a fun dumb action romp at its core but yet it includes all those kinds of little Trek touches, of the films it's the only one to have something for all the TNG characters, even Lt. Broccoli. It immediately blasts into its plot, doesn't wring its hands over any of the time travel stuff (even has a throw back to IV's "how do you know he didn't invent it?" iirc) yet deals with how it will effect the Enterprise crew ("find an obscure location for us to live out") if they fail as they send off all the escape pods. The Borg Queen isn't even hot garbage like she is on Voyager, she's acting as a spokesperson for the Collective more than a weird individual leader with seemingly her own motives like she does on Voyager, plus she's dealing with a unique situation, how to assimilate Data, a non biological lifeform. And they tie it into Picard's story and ultimately his actions in Best of Both Worlds by her (or the Collective's) need for Data to be accepting of the assimilation rather than resist it. (And I want to say they may even provide a MacGuffin like they need Data for his access codes or something? Because the skeleton crew does hold down their advance rather successfully for much of the film and Data did do some kind of speed locking out earlier in it.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 03, 2017, 03:05:31 PM
VI is better than Khan.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 03, 2017, 03:06:22 PM
Then again, I feel like you could edit Nemesis down to a pretty enjoyable 45 minutes to an hour.

The opening shots (which are awesome), THE WEDDING, some inbetween crap to introduce Shinzon, cut out literally everything but the space battle, fin.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Maybe insert a joke flashback when Picard sends an order to Troi at the conn and when she looks down it's her crashing the D in Generations.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 04, 2017, 04:18:53 AM
Then again, I feel like you could edit Nemesis down to a pretty enjoyable 45 minutes to an hour.

The opening shots (which are awesome), THE WEDDING, some inbetween crap to introduce Shinzon, cut out literally everything but the space battle, fin.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Maybe insert a joke flashback when Picard sends an order to Troi at the conn and when she looks down it's her crashing the D in Generations.
[close]

(https://i.imgur.com/MvMavNP.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Human Snorenado on October 04, 2017, 10:34:23 AM
All of the Star Trrek VI are worth watching except maybe the first.

Uh, V is straight garbage.

Oh god, that's right. You're religious so of course you like it. ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 04, 2017, 10:53:53 AM
Why are you so mean about it?

I actually forgot V exists. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 05, 2017, 03:13:16 PM
All of the Star Trrek VI are worth watching except maybe the first.

Uh, V is straight garbage.

Oh god, that's right. You're religious so of course you like it. ::)
I can't even, you've gone too far here. It has the single greatest line ever scripted.

"What does God need with a starship?"

Actually, is the film really all that positive towards religion outside of considering it in context of "final frontiers"? Sybok is portrayed a con man who gets his comeuppance by being conned by the being he perceives as God. The Big Three (and Scotty) all reflect on their faith when confronted with it and ultimately reject it, especially Kirk, even Spock who is shown to be very eager to pursue religion throughout the TOS, and McCoy who is most positive towards it due to his inherent and pre-existing faith ultimately decides to side with Kirk and Spock over Sybok/"God" and is the one who addresses "God" (and earlier Sybok) with the most anger:
Quote
Sybok: Why? Why have you done this to my friend?
"God": He doubts me.
Spock: You have not answered his question. What does God need with a starship?
"God": [shoots Spock with lightning; then addresses McCoy] Do you doubt me?
McCoy: I doubt any God who inflicts pain for his own pleasure.
Though arguably this whole plotline messes up another one that takes more after II and is seen in the camping scenes, all the Trio scenes throughout, etc. although they do backwards fit it in with Spock and McCoy's "visions from Sybok" both relating to their family. Kirk states early on that men like them, they don't have families, and that he knows he'll die alone. And at the end Kirk admits they do, when he calls Spock his brother and suggests McCoy is one too.

But like everything, from the effects, to the direction of scenes, to the editing, the film is a mess. It never fully explores any of its plotlines. Shatner has in recent years actually stopped being as defensive about V and started to suggest he never liked the God plot but couldn't think of a better (and more like TOS) "Final Frontier" for the crew since it was initially supposed to be their final film. (Though he's always blamed things on the budget and studios he was required to work with more than anything. He's also refused to do a director's cut, the rumor was they even offered him one with new CGI effects like TMP got.)

Also, it's got this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEMRNpcYZ0c
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 05, 2017, 07:28:09 PM
I've been slowly watching s1 of TOS, and enjoying it. Watched Charlie X in one sitting last night and, Queen, you are right about that bittersweet stuff. That's a rough ending for an episode, and I was flummoxed trying to figure out how Picard would have reacted to it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 05, 2017, 07:48:45 PM
Yup. Really big on the tone of TOS. TOS is full of that type of shit where there's no right answer and the audience is left to their own conclusions about what was well and truly right. To be fair, TNG has the occasional Ep like this. The one where the kid tries to be an android aka Data to run away from his feelings after the death of his family one such episode. But it's rare. Most of the time TNG develops a moral delimma and it says,"no, THIS is right." There's much less room for interpretation in TNG usually as it's typically all about smelling its own ass fumes which can be good or bad depending your perspective and even depending on the episode.

This is why TNG is IMO the most comfort food Trek. And I think that's why it remains endearingly the most popular. At the same time I think a lot of modern audiences don't give TOS nearly the same amount of credit due to its aged production (I mean look at that awful set).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 05, 2017, 08:55:27 PM
TOS had a contemporary target that informed its first seasons episodes, much like Seinfelds "no learning, no hugging" was a reaction to other sitcoms, everyone involved in Trek did not want it to be Lost in Space which because of the two pilots and then the long wait for approval (plus the smaller scale of the community) they got to see much of the first season before they really got to work on Trek. The actors, Gene, the sci-fi writers who wrote the episodes (including Lost in Space's original head writer), etc. all saw Trek as enabling stories bigger than just the crew's stuff of the week.

Funny enough though, I don't know if you guys have watched much Lost in Space which also ran three seasons before getting cancelled and had increasing budget slashes (like Trek and Batman) as I never really had outside of a couple episodes but that one network that plays nothing but old shows had a Saturday Night lineup for a while that was Batman->Star Trek->Lost in Space->Get Smart and I wound up having it on a lot. Which is kinda irrelevant information but in any case I wound up watching quite a bit of it and like Trek it gradually descended into plot madness and guest stars and shit like Vikings showing up. And the best part is because they've got the two kid actors you can tell as they increasingly lose faith in the series. :lol

And also the whole Dr. Smith and Robot stuff was weird because they'd occasionally give them continuity or little mini-arcs, and then suddenly they're back to flanderized versions of their first season characters. Also the whole part where he tried to kill the entire family and everyone is just cool with this and the son becoming friends with Smith because they play practical jokes on him every now and again. (Including ones that are horrifying if the show was based on any actual science, there's one where they lock him outside the airlock with just an oxygen thing and HAHA HE'S SO COLD OUT THERE WE'LL LEAVE HIM A FEW HOURS.)

Plus the whole character became such a hit because he thought the lines were garbage and it wouldn't last so he started ad-libbing and playing over the top. Which, along with the kids and robot getting increasing air time, eventually upset the lead actor so much he quit acting all together. They considered doing a fourth season with neither the mom nor dad actors wanting to return (which would have saved more than enough to do the season), so it would have been the creepy murderous villain, a questionable robot, some kids and the pilot dude on the ship. Which totally should have been done.

By TNG, Gene's vision and control of what the Federation should be changed significantly. As did the writers he had access to. Gene re-wrote so many scripts that the entire writing staff left, Dorthy Fontana claims Gene shoved her aside for Tracy Torme, and the replacement compromise Maurice Hurley wasn't any better liked because he was doing the same thing that Gene got kicked upstairs for before the writer's strike hit. Michael Piller basically rebuilt the writing staff from scratch which is the real reason TNG changes so much with the third season. Piller though the development of the crew was as or more important than whatever goofy thing they'd run across that week that would never be seen again after Picard lectures it.

That's what I find most distinct about early TNG, and then as it starts to fall apart near the end, is how many episodes final acts are Picard lectures somebody. It's like Kirk and his shirt. Picard does a lot more listening in the middle seasons, unless it's Q or Wesley. He even does a lot of the fake out non-lecture. Or they play up his lecture like when he has to play a role for the Klingons, or when he's quoting Shakespeare to fake his love for Luxana or he's reading treaty terms so the hostile aliens will concede to his demands rather than take more of it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 05, 2017, 09:04:24 PM
TNG does a variation on "Charlie X" in "Suddenly Human" although the kid isn't a god.

DS9 also does a custody episode in "Cardassians" and Janeway dumps all those Borg kids off somewhere.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 05, 2017, 09:45:28 PM
The concern is less about the type of episode like Charlie X aka the scenario, but again, the tone. The audience is left to come to their own conclusion. Should Charlie be put of his misery as a danger to mankind? Or should they keep trying to quell his god powers and at least try to have him transition back into human society as his birth right? Or maybe they were right to let him go and let him be his with the kind that did that to him? It is possible to come to each of these conclusions - even killing Charlie - as ethically sound and justifiable. What is the right answer? TOS lets you decide for yourself in spite of what happens.

TNG doesn't do that. Like you said, it devolves into lectures about what's right and it often lacks the tact, subtlety, and depth that is presented in TOS.

A big reason DS9 is so good is that it reverts back to TOS styled story depth. The character of Quark himself is a great example. It's possible and fairly reasonable for someone to not like Quark due to his misogyny and greed. But we are also lead to the possibility of empathizing with him in spite of this. You have episodes where Jake goes on a battlefield just to get a story and witnesses true terror, war, and death. But he was also lead there through his own selfishness to put himself and Bashir willingly in danger just for a good scoop.  Essentially, it's possible to find Jake selfish and immature, but also empathize with him because of those very qualities. Jake isn't a perfect person much like how the scenarios in TOS aren't perfect scenarios with bow wrapped endings. And I find a lot of the time thinking,"was that the right thing to do?" at the end of the episode just like with TOS.

TNG is a great show but its tone is extremely different from other Trek shows. Where there always only one answer and you get a moral of the day lecture at the end of it.

I won't begrudge someone preferring TNG for that reason but for my own tastes it's a step below TOS and especially DS9.

At the same time this makes me appreciate it a little more. Because being different has its own virtues and merits. Which is why I'm willing to give Discovery a fair chance despite episode 2 being dog shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 05, 2017, 10:06:24 PM
I'm not sure any of those are possibilities for the crew of the Enterprise to decide, like most early TOS episodes they were essentially defeated. They had no agency in the decision or real solution, they were trying to buy for time.

In the TNG episode, Picard finds a loophole to leave it up to the boy. In DS9 Sisko simply orders him to the parents Sisko's chosen. Both had agency. Though I agree that Picard of a different season, especially the first one and a half seasons would have been less understanding.

Your comment at the end there reminded me of something I wanted to post earlier when it was mentioned, the first two episodes of Discovery are supposed to be effectively one two-part pilot episode. They were both going to air on CBS originally. At one point they even were talking about a two-hour premiere showing as a throwback to the prior shows getting that. I don't know what happened to that considering they released them both the same night.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 05, 2017, 10:29:06 PM
Anyways been rewatching DS9 season 5 and last night made it to the episode where Kira's surrogate cardassian father comes. I love Kira so much. So much depth to her. She's a better example of what I want out of Trek than Quark. Is it right to be a terrorist when your people have been enslaved, imprisoned? If yes, at what cost? But if you're going to be a terrorist soldier for the movement is it right to do the dirty deeds, killing innocents? Does this make you a bad person when the race that has enslaved you has killed millions? If so, at what cost? Is it right to hate them? To the point where you run away from your problems rather than facing them because every day is another battle? I love Kira. I always say Worf is my favorite Star Trek character but she sometimes takes that place easily for me.

I really can't wait for Star Trek Discovery episode 4. I can't stop thinking how fun a character the Security Chief is. What a fun ass bitch. "Vulcans should stick to logic." Yaaaaaasssss bitch! :bow :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 12:10:57 AM
My security chief is lighting up Reddit. People don't know what to think of her. She owns. I knew she'd be divisive. Lots to think about with this character.


https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/74ax62/starfleet_says_we_have_to_feed_the_animals_does/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 06, 2017, 12:25:05 AM
She's like the only thing I had in the like column for that episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 09:35:53 AM
Someone made a cool gallery of images from EP 3!

https://m.imgur.com/a/IatZ6
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 10:37:25 AM
My security chief getting more love :heartbeat :rejoice

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/74le8r/i_love_security_officer_landry_spoilers/

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/74m1c6/the_line_starfleet_says_we_have_to_feed_the/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 06, 2017, 12:20:46 PM
Jonathon Frakes directed an orville episode last night.

It was not good....but to be fair it was not good in the exact same way that TNG episodes were not good when they would introduce a random one episode love interest type which is what the episode was.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on October 06, 2017, 12:39:13 PM
So wait, in the opening she's on a shuttle to a mining camp with a bunch of other scrubs? So starfleet both lack their own military prison, and are not just cool with slave labor but subject their own members to it?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 12:45:28 PM
So wait, in the opening she's on a shuttle to a mining camp with a bunch of other scrubs? So starfleet both lack their own military prison, and are not just cool with slave labor but subject their own members to it?

???

:confused

This is nothing new. Tom Paris was sent to prison. Same place as Bashir's father.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Penal_colony

Federation is advanced but they still have prisoners. This is the era before TOS. Federation having a mining prison is perfectly in line with that era's federation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on October 06, 2017, 02:58:58 PM
I haven't seen TOS, but from that memory alpha article it makes it seem like the federation penal colonies were insane asylums?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 04:18:52 PM
Well, no. They were for all criminals and were used for labor or any other type of thing. Around the time of TOS they started to use more rehabilitative type of "punishment". But labor prison definitely fits the timeline of pre-TOS especially for a mutineer. By TNG they were able to successfully rehabilitate prisoners rather than use confinement;etc.

Even then. Ensign Ro in TNG was a prisoner I recall and that included labor work.

Speaking of Ro. Michael reminds me of Ro. Hopefully she gets as awesome.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 06, 2017, 04:35:07 PM
Jonathon Frakes directed an orville episode last night.

It was not good....but to be fair it was not good in the exact same way that TNG episodes were not good when they would introduce a random one episode love interest type which is what the episode was.



Is there an episode of the Orville where a leading female member of the crew gets abducted by alien tribals written by Katharyn Powers yet?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2017, 09:27:42 PM
Frakes has also directed a Discovery episode.

He also directed "Sub Rosa"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2017, 10:35:29 PM
Can't stop thinking of Discovery after ep 3. I'm hooked now. I might have to watch it again tomorrow. This is the first time I've ever had to wait week to week for Trek and it's maddening.

This article sounds great!

https://trekmovie.com/2017/10/06/exclusive-alex-kurtzman-on-pushing-edges-of-canon-and-planting-seeds-for-star-trek-discovery-season-2/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 06, 2017, 11:02:15 PM
Frakes has also directed a Discovery episode.

He also directed "Sub Rosa"

He also directed some nice episodes of Leverage, IIRC.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 07, 2017, 04:10:54 AM
They got him for Castle and Nathan Fillion geeked out on him. :lol

He's done some other stuff like Burn Notice, NCIS, Falling Skies, etc. so he must not be too bad of TV director. Though he doesn't have any "tells" that I've ever noticed like how some people shoot certain stuff.

I watched a youtube of him and Marina Sirtis at a recent con (which somehow continues to be a great comedy duo all these decades later) and they were waiting for her to finish a call or something so he was just talking about the last thing he had done which was direct some show and that led to him talking about how he quickly became more interested in directing than acting around his Trek days. Though I guess he's back doing voice acting now too, he said he really enjoyed doing Gargoyles back in the day. Plus they get mad residuals so he can do it all for fun.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 07, 2017, 04:29:27 AM
a few years ago they were showing the 1980's Patrick Swayze mini-series North and South in some marathon on some channel, it's about Swayze and some other dude's friendships up to, through and then after the civil war which they're on opposite sides of...and my parents were watching it, i didn't really know what it was and after a few minutes suddenly this handsome fellow strolls in:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0c/04/44/0c0444f0812df968a3562d39137b82df.jpg)
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/97/d3/95/97d3956294af71ae1631a37be4ac7881--handsome-man-hazard.jpg)

i was like, that Q and his time travel antics are at it again...then i remembered (http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Thaddius_Riker)!

Quote
Colonel Thaddius Riker was a soldier in the Union Army during the American Civil War.
...
During the campaign, Colonel Riker was wounded at the Battle of Pine Mountain, Georgia, in late June 1864. He was carried back from the front line by another soldier who was actually discovered, in 2372, to be a Q who eventually referred to himself as "Quinn". They were photographed together shortly after this incident.

Without the actions of Quinn, there would have been no William T. Riker, which would have allowed the Borg to assimilate the Federation. (VOY: "Death Wish")
:lawd making up phony canon

now, if you'll excuse me, i need to write this into the canon for after i get hired to save the franchise following Discovery bombing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SYQhybxurQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 08, 2017, 12:13:17 AM
Just enjoyed the About a Girl episode of The Orville.  I imagine people who were expecting galaxy quest are continuously disappointed, but as a current Star Trek with overtones of complexity from TOS, it is really starting to shine.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on October 08, 2017, 11:48:01 AM
Orville Ep5

it's definitely the weakest episode so far, not terrible though.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The practical joke was the real star of this episode. :dead
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 08, 2017, 11:49:42 AM
yeah it's the first time one of the jokes worked for me lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 08, 2017, 07:05:07 PM
We talked about Frakes, but Robert Duncan McNeill (Tom Paris) directed the second episode and Brannon Braga himself directed "About a Girl" which means more Trek directors than not.

Orville got hurt by FOX's advertising which made it look more like a comedy than it is and got us Galaxy Questers probably too demanding, it's still kinda stuck with too many longer jokes I think which maybe Seth feels he needs to do, it'd do better with lines/quips and the overall vibe of the crew than with longer setups like the elevator joke in the episode prior. I like the sci-fi stuff quite a bit actually, that same episode's twist was fun and very Trek.

I know Seth tried to downplay the advertising after and said he wanted to do a homage show to where I wonder if the writing isn't like him doing the serious-ish stuff and then having some low rent Family Guy castoffs punching up the scripts with the dumb jokes to meet FOX's expectations. Though Seth has to have the power at FOX to be able to take control of a show like this considering the interference he ran for both American Dad! and The Cleveland Show against the network.

It's doing ratings comparable to Empire's premiere season apparently so hopefully it gets an early renewal and they can start fixing it up like American Dad experienced. It's obviously his baby. And Seth obviously can bring in tons of names to guest. So it could be increasingly exciting as it goes on.

But man are some of the reviews both brutal and totally missing the point:
Quote
Liz Miller writing for IndieWire compared the series to Star Trek, calling it a rip-off and "Creatively, Morally, and Ethically Bankrupt". She criticized the lack of creativity, the blatant imitation, and was surprised that the show is "uninterested in being a comedy".
:rofl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 08, 2017, 09:38:12 PM
Orville got hurt by FOX's advertising which made it look more like a comedy than it is and got us Galaxy Questers probably too demanding, it's still kinda stuck with too many longer jokes I think which maybe Seth feels he needs to do

I think the humour of the show has basically been in line with the humour that Macfarlane has displayed in previous works. His humour is strongly based on referential style humour (remember that nostalgia thing we all remember fondly) or fish out of water style humour. (what if regular dudes were in the wild west with how much it sucked to live back then!)

And subtly is not a strong suit of his. The jokes are going to be broad and generally not over the head of any portion of the audience. I'm not insulting him with that. That's just his track record. And while its not my favorite style of comedy, when he's on his game with it, it seems to attract a certain audience.

Orville has mostly been fine in the humour department when it reduces the number of jokes in an episode. In a perfect world the jokes that are there would be a lot smarter but I just don't think that is his style or strength.

But like I said, I think the show is mostly fine in the humour department. They just need to dump the stuff that doesn't work as they move into the future. Like the green blob voiced by Norm MacDonald. Less is more in this regard.

Trek has always had a sort of stuffiness attached to it which is fine but the best possible compliement I can give MacFarlane is that his humour can serve to ground the show. Trek can often feel too clinical. And humour helps to soften that.

Galaxy Quest works because it was a satirical homage to trek. The Orville is not satirical. It is absolutely an homage to TNG. So they just need to find that right balance of humour so that it has comedic touches and elements without it being obnoxious. Most of the time I've been fine with it. Occasionally the humour is cringey but hopefully MacFarlane gets a second season to respond to the inevitable feedback.

Trek shows tend to improve by their very nature because they tend to amp up what works and remove what doesn't as they go along.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 08, 2017, 10:53:39 PM
Fairly mediocre episode of Discovery this week after enjoying the first three episodes quite a bit. Not Horrible. Just a meh one. Having to wait a week for serial style shows kind of sucks. Normally I just binge them after a season is done but I'm too big a trek fan to wait that long.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Jenkem on October 09, 2017, 02:13:15 AM
can't wait to hear queen's reaction to the latest ep    :picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 09, 2017, 03:07:17 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 09, 2017, 03:43:43 AM
I really liked ep 4.

Two legacies handed down. From T'kuvma to Albino Klingon. Georgiana to Michael. Today's episode was a story about legacy. I really thought it was very Trek-y. Michael is tasked with doing actions for war when she's an explorer at heart. At first I was wondering where they were taking the episode, but I really think it worked in the end. It felt like one of those one off episodes where there's a central theme in the episode and it tackles that. Pretty good episode although a step below ep 3. Still, we're on the right direction. one thing has to be said is that it felt episodic and not like a serial episode. That episode could have been in any ST series. Thumbs up.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Poor Tardigrade! :( Poor baby!  :'(

WHY DID THEY KILL OFF MY SECURITY CHIEF. NOW WE WON'T GET A "MICHAEL YOU WERE RIGHT, EXPLORATION AND PEACE ARE THE WAY WE SHOULD DO THINGS" SCENE FUCK WHY INTRODUCE AN INTERESTING CHARACTER ONLY TO KILL THEM OFF?!
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 09, 2017, 03:57:36 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/755vvq/this_was_the_most_star_trek_episode_yet/

Disagree as ep 3 is better but :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 10, 2017, 09:35:00 AM
Why is not one talking about discovery :(

Good thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/759sa4/its_not_darker_its_just_serialized/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 10, 2017, 10:10:59 AM
Why is not one talking about discovery :(

Good thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/759sa4/its_not_darker_its_just_serialized/

Thread's about star trek. The Orville's also about star trek.

…but in related news, I picked up a Netflix subscription today, and I can already see a mess of shows that I won't need to buy on iTunes now, just so I can keep up in Japan!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 10, 2017, 10:21:16 AM
Said nothing of Orville. Just commenting that it feels like Stoney and I are the only people watching discovery and talking about it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 10, 2017, 10:43:33 AM
Said nothing of Orville. Just commenting that it feels like Stoney and I are the only people watching discovery and talking about it.
To be more clear, Netflix is the channel for Discovery in Japan, so I'll be able to contribute shortly.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 10, 2017, 12:16:32 PM
It's fully serialized, and even using the ol' USA two-part season format, not going to watch it weekly but at the act breaks. Especially after the pilot.

The harder part is going to be pulling this off with the show that returns tomorrow. But it's the one that taught me this is the better way.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 10, 2017, 01:19:41 PM
Why is not one talking about discovery :(

Good thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/759sa4/its_not_darker_its_just_serialized/


its serialized so some people are going to wait to binge watch it, If you aren't using internet methods to watch it you would have to subscribe to that cbs subscription service to see it, etc. People will eventually watch it. It's Trek.


While its still very early in the season, my overall impressions are still quite strong. I enjoy it. The serial nature of it is also a big draw. We discussed this earlier and while I love the episodic nature of the old shows, a serial show is just the modern way to tell a story for modern audience. Its more engaging from a week to week perspective to see how things progress.

As far as the positives, the lead character for me has been the strongest positive from day 1. Some people like Burnham. Some people don't like Burnham. I'm firmly on the side of really liking the character from jump. She is a flawed character but a character that wants to do the right thing, is alienated from the crew, and is still finding herself. That's what your protagonist should be. They shouldn't be a finished product of awesomeness. They should grow and burnham gives room to grow and show conflict. The actress is doing a great job with the role imo, and its good for Trek that the main character isn't just the captain of the ship. I always thought Voyager blew what should have been a very interesting character in Tom Paris that was presented in the pilot, by immediately shaving off any conflict and just magically making everybody on voyager get along.

I also like the tone of this Trek. It does feel darker. It does feel more dangerous. And I appreciate that. The show just doesn't feel like a re-tread of that era of TNG/Deep Space/Voyager, etc. It feels like its own thing. With its own sensibilities. While I still want it to incorporate some more specific aspects of the old school trek, I've realized that I didn't want just another version of those old school shows. The Orville is fine and its an unabashed and unapologetic homage to TNG, but I would have been disappointed if this show had taken a similar route.

The show despite being in a long line of trek shows currently feels fresh and exciting and that's a very good thing for Trek. I stopped watching Trek on TV in the bad old days because it no longer felt fresh and it was no longer exciting.


As far as things I don't like or am questionable about....

I'm not sure about spending so much time on the Klingon side of the story. Not because the acting has been bad or anything. But mainly just because I'm not sure this show has the bandwidth to tell a Trek tale and also the tale of the enemy and do them both justice. Not saying it can't happen or that the goal isn't noble. I'm just wondering if by the end, the klingon story will feel fulfilling in the same way the federation story will most likely.

My other critique is one of my original ones. In such a strong serialized nature show, will they be able to create compelling side or one off content that the old trek was known for. With an impending timeline of destruction, its hard to spend the time and go off and do interesting side stuff. Everything is going to press into conflict with the Klingons. And maybe that will be the strong focus on this season. But at some point, I want there to be some down time, so they can do different kind of stories that aren't centered solely around conflict with the klingons.   

That's pretty much my opinion of the show so far. i personally don't care about things like redesign of klingons, or whether the show is committing enough to trek bible lore, or time period setting. My focus is mainly on whether the show "hooks" me or not. So far its hooking me. Hopefully that continues.

As I've said in the past I'm pretty happy with discovery and the orville for that matter. After a drought of Trek and those awful trek movies (my opinion), I have two shows that scratch that itch. I need to start watching the expanse. Lots of people seem to have good things to say about that show.   

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 10, 2017, 01:39:42 PM
My other critique is one of my original ones. In such a strong serialized nature show, will they be able to create compelling side or one off content that the old trek was known for. With an impending timeline of destruction, its hard to spend the time and go off and do interesting side stuff. Everything is going to press into conflict with the Klingons. And maybe that will be the strong focus on this season. But at some point, I want there to be some down time, so they can do different kind of stories that aren't centered solely around conflict with the klingons.
They don't intend on doing that. (That would not be fresh or exciting at all and give people a reason to skip episodes. It's also why they had Fuller leave for writing in too many distracting, allegorical or complex story elements.) This season is about the war with the Klingons. The downtime will be inbetween this season and next season. As next season, probably in mid-to-late 2019, will be a fully serialized season dealing with the outcome and effects of the war. The third season is intended to pick up from where that one ends.

The stuff you're looking for will be in the comics and novels. (The second of the latter will take place ten years before the show!)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 10, 2017, 04:26:26 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/75ggin/kudos_to_picard_for_handling_such_a_difficult/

:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 11, 2017, 02:48:38 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/75j486/tkuvma_was_right/do6p1xt/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/75j486/tkuvma_was_right/do6p1xt/)


 :salute
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 11, 2017, 06:20:52 AM
Watched the first episode of Star Trek: Discovery today.

I am loving it. I don't give a shit about re-writing Klingons /again/. I don't care that the tech is clearly more advanced than TOS. I don't care about them having the same robot on the bridge that The Orville has. It's fresh new Star Trek, and I am super excited to see so much care and energy, and having something serialized straight out of the gate.

Michael Burnham is a solid, interesting character, more nuanced and challenging than Tuvok's largely straight-up Spock imitation. The actress carries the role with understated grace. Saru is a fascinating take on biologically driven cowardice as a survival instinct, reminiscent of Larry Niven's Puppetmaster race. It's great to see Doug Jones get closer to center stage, even if he's still in a heap ton of make-up. I thought I saw Anthony Michael Hall as the holo-admiral, but it turns out to be a lookalike, Terry Serpico.

Going to watch ep. 2 soon. So far, so good…
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 11, 2017, 09:04:02 AM
Nobody liked ep1 and 2 and if for sure gets better after so if you already like it you'll be in love with it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 11, 2017, 10:56:40 AM
Nah. I liked ep 1 a lot. I hated ep 2. 3 and 4 are pure Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 11, 2017, 03:36:59 PM
I was bored so I watched the pilot movie for enterprise last night. I had never seen a single episode of that show. I was completely checked out of Trek at that point and just burned out on the whole franchise.

Its funny to watch now because its pretty clear they had kind of lost their way and had no idea who they should be exactly targeting as their audience. First of all that intro song.  :leon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPn-lTytfGo

An intro song and credits don't matter obviously but its just a sign that they were stretching hard to find their audience. It's like watching a Dr. Who episode from the disco era or something.

There is also a hilarious "sexy" shower scene that is just lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRRE9zA1C5Q

The basic concept of Trek in that era is actually interesting to me. And meeting a lot of the staple trek aliens for the first time is an interesting idea. At its core that's a pretty compelling idea to me. But you can tell the franchise is kind of running on fumes by this point and it can't match the ambition of the concept. Bakula seems okay as the captain. Dude is always likeable so I doubt he was the issue but since I didn't actually watch it, I'm not exactly sure what was its downfall beyond just general trek fatigue at that time.

I'll probably watch it along with discovery to fill that weekly void of waiting for the next episode.



Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 11, 2017, 05:01:28 PM
On season 6 of DS9 rewatch. The God-tier season. :rejoice

Rewatching it I can understand why people don't like it. It's very dark. It's not hopeful. Federation is pushed to making gray choices. It isn't the future you would like to live in like it was with TNG. And yet, that's why I love it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 11, 2017, 10:15:02 PM
came across the real new star trek release for the bore:
(https://i.imgur.com/zPLtaUG.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 11, 2017, 11:06:13 PM
came across the real new star trek release for the bore:
(https://i.imgur.com/zPLtaUG.png)
:teehee
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 12, 2017, 01:12:20 AM
i can honestly say i was not at all looking for this specific thing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on October 12, 2017, 03:05:48 PM
Watched a few more enterprise episodes. I'm surprised. I actually kind of like it. I was expecting a real dumpster fire. It hasn't been that. I like the era. I even like most of the cast.

Outside of the pilot most of the episodes have been random standalone "lets go meet aliens" type plots which tend to be my favorite in trek so maybe it helps that it plays into my bias of what I want. I like that they don't have a solution for everything and they aren't the most technologically advanced compared to some other races unlike in most of the other treks. I like that they have a complex relationship with Vulcans whom they seem to resent at this time period for holding them back.

Like I said, I never followed enterprise when it was on so I never followed the fandom to understand their reception but I had assumed it was just a bad trek show. I certainly like it more than early voyager and probably more than early deep space nine. Maybe it goes off a cliff or something with plotlines as it goes on though or something...

I know in general everybody was feeling Trek fatigue at that time. I definitely remember that because I felt that way. Maybe that played a good portion into its reception.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 14, 2017, 12:41:16 AM
Coincidentally, I've started watching Enterprise as well. I finally subscribed to Netflix here in Japan — it's only been here 2 years, but I thought I could get by on Amazon Prime. I WAS WRONG.

All the Star Trek, ever, is on Netflix. It's fantastic! I will probably diatribe all over this in the future, but I've had a long trek drought that is now being sated.

I'm only five episodes in, but Enterprise seems like a good show with a different direction from other Trek shows, with the possible exception of TOS. There's a grittiness and practicality to it, and again the occasional throwing of hands in the air when they don't know what to do. I like the cast, I think I'm going to be watching this instead of The Orville.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 14, 2017, 12:46:18 AM
When I said "all the trek, ever," it even includes Filmation's animated series that went two seasons. I had never seen it.

I started with s1e1 Beyond the Farthest Star - it is an incoherent mess. I will resort to a guide for any valuable episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 15, 2017, 03:55:27 AM
Due to my illness, it's been nothing but TV around here, and I'm up to episode 12 of Enterprise now. Bakula is great, the bridge crew chemistry is fabulous, they haven't done any more extraneous "decontamination gel" scenes (though they've taken every chance they can to show of Jolene Blalock's figure (not that I'm complaining)), and the stories have been good.

It's been, more than TOS and possibly more than TNG, an ensemble show. There have been episodes which allow a spotlight to fall on each of the main cast, and a few of the secondary crew have even come into it for a bit.

On that, a sad note: I was wondering why I haven't seen anything further from Kellie Waymire, who played Crewman Cutler. She reminded me of a friend from college. I googled and it turns out she's my age, or would be; she passed from a cardiac arrest in 2003. Good god, she would have been only 33!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 15, 2017, 10:15:27 AM
I loved Trip, T'Pol, Hoshi, Malcolm and Travis from Enterprise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 15, 2017, 10:39:57 AM
For Mr Nobody.

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/76hz91/how_star_trek_wasnt_at_all_what_i_thought_it/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 15, 2017, 04:08:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 15, 2017, 04:26:36 PM
the bridge crew chemistry is fabulous
I still don't know if this was intentional. But it is very different from TNG/DS9/VOY where the crew has just gotten together and they meet each other as we meet them basically. And on the latter two we go through an extended period of SHOULD WE TRUST SO AND SO even though they never actually give reasons not to. (Except Garak. And Seska.)

Bakula has pre-existing relationships with many of them most notably Trip and Hoshi which is why he gets them for the ship, Travis and Malcom are said to be the best available and it's clear that Malcom at least has been spending time with Trip (and Travis) on the ship prior to the series and has met with Bakula. Even Phlox is taken on board because we see Bakula deliberately choose him, and then he sticks around and he gets along with everyone. T'Pol is there in her Vulcan role, but she's never set off like Seven or The Doctor or early Data as they all try to make her part of the crew, or in other cases call her out for not being part of the crew, while she also is the one with the role of calling out the others for their lack of familiarity with the space/species/etc. they're exploring.

T'Pol arguably also is the only true "first officer" in the series since Spock (who technically isn't in that role for TOS but serves it in the films), as she serves as Bakula's sounding board regularly and they debate privately but present (usually) a united command front. Chakotay gets his balls removed immediately and Kira is often forced to acquiesce to Sisko until their relationship reached a point where they're basically in sync anyway when Sisko ranks up into badass. Picard casts around for ideas but often leans on the expert in the field and debates are rare. Riker's role was somewhat different as shown in the command structure of that ship among all of them really, probably because of Picard's style. I mean, after the first season or so when he's kinda weird.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 15, 2017, 10:11:55 PM
Yeah, exactly!

Beardless Riker is basically a Kirk stand-in, waiting to be reigned in by Picard's stately, by-the-book manner. I never understood what Chakotay was supposed to be, other than having a cool face tattoo, which is quickly superseded by 7-of-9's badass FACE DEVICE. Okay, to be honest, Chakotay suffered from the same thing Worf did: "show how tough the _____ is by having it beat up Worf!" In this case, "Show how tough Janeway is, she can override even this handsomely tattooed Native American refrigerator!"

I like that Archer consults with T'Pol frequently, she gives him the information she's allowed, and it is RARELY the thing Archer wants to hear.

I finished the "Dear Doctor" episode yesterday, with the beginnings of what would become the Prime Directive. It gave me goosebumps. I'm such a damned nerd.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 15, 2017, 10:13:35 PM
Holy shit, tonight's Discovery was fantastic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 15, 2017, 10:18:17 PM
Holy shit, tonight's Discovery was fantastic.

Ooh, a new episode! I have been wondering when the Netflix' "NEW EPISODE" banner would actually be true!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 15, 2017, 10:25:29 PM
The show is pure Trek! Tonight we had: ethical dilemma, badass captain, great character moments and drama. It felt self contained yet still pushed the serial storyline forward. It was utterly fantastic and the fact it's not on the air where it deserves and is hidden behind some fucking stream service pisses me off.

This is shaping up to be the best first season of Star Trek since TOS. Every episode is better than the last. I cannot wait for next weeks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff on October 15, 2017, 10:50:57 PM
I didn't really 'get' Discovery til the 3rd episode. I was still going to keep watching it, but ep. 3 gave me hope i would genuinely enjoy the show. At first i was not enthused, and thought it was going to shape up to be a low budget abrams-verse tv knock-off akin to a fairly generic syfy channel production with a high budget sheen and star trek branding. Glad the latest eps are proving that wrong  :hump

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I really thought the Security officer had potential alongside Michael. Felt strange to get rid of her so unceremoniously. I wasn't sad to see Michelle Yeoh get the boot, stiff af in the first few eps.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 15, 2017, 10:51:20 PM
I like that Archer consults with T'Pol frequently, she gives him the information she's allowed, and it is RARELY the thing Archer wants to hear.
One thing I thought they did well was setting up T'Pol's multiple and shifting loyalties, she starts off only telling them what they need to know and reporting back to the Vulcan's everything, but she slowly starts to recognize that she may have a more ideal and independent role to play. One of season four's better arcs is like the capstone of her character arc.

Quote
I never understood what Chakotay was supposed to be, other than having a cool face tattoo, which is quickly superseded by 7-of-9's badass FACE DEVICE. Okay, to be honest, Chakotay suffered from the same thing Worf did: "show how tough the _____ is by having it beat up Worf!" In this case, "Show how tough Janeway is, she can override even this handsomely tattooed Native American refrigerator!"
Well, the whole Maquis crew thing was mostly ignored, they were supposed to disagree and provide conflict. But Janeway and Torres finish each others sentences in the second episode, she's made chief engineer, and it's never brought up again except for a random episode where Tuvok can order them around due to lack of discipline, and then Seska's arc which was just stupid. They never did any serious kind of mutiny episode despite Janeway's endless opportunities for the other 170 people on the ship to go hey, wait a minute here....just that reveal of Tuvok's entirely sensible simulation program.

The funny thing with Chakotay was that he always came across as the more reasonable and patient commander who had made a principled decision to join the Maquis; while Janeway was impulsive and stranded both crews as a result and regularly made shady line crossing or proposals that Chakotay and Tuvok would meekly oppose in private but then support as the second-in-commands.

Robert Beltran has all kinds of interviews and stuff out there, especially after the show ended, where he talks about how terrible the character and show writing was and how bad it got with especially Chakotay or Kim. And I've seen Garret Wang say similar things and noted how Jeri Ryan was arguably the best of them all because she came in halfway through the show, given the role of Seven, essentially made into a co-star with Janeway and The Doctor, not to mention a blatant sex symbol, and that initially many of the cast kinda shunned her since she was getting stuff actually written for her as a character and Mulgrew was never particularly nice to her, but Ryan never complained and eventually won over most of them even if they still all hate the character of Seven, they were able to separate Ryan from Seven. You'll often see that in interviews, they're asked what they hated and all say Seven but quickly say something nice about Ryan. :lol

I think Robert Picardo is the only one who gives a different answer and admits it's because it gave him a whole bunch of extra scenes and a new aspect to his character being her mentor. I think I watched a panel once where he answered first and gives a non-negative answer about Seven and Wang cuts in with something like "yeah, because you got to spend a whole bunch of time with Jeri in that outfit, acting, unlike the rest of us" :rofl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 15, 2017, 10:53:31 PM
I didn't really 'get' Discovery til the 3rd episode. I was still going to watch it, but ep. 3 really gave me hope i would genuinely enjoy the show.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I really thought the Security officer had potential alongside Michael. Felt strange to get rid of her so unceremoniously. I wasn't sad to see Michelle Yeoh get the boot, stiff af in the first few eps.
[close]

I don't think there's much to "get". Eps 1 and 2 were pilots. 3 and up are the real show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 15, 2017, 11:24:38 PM
Hey buddy, that scientist has a name and it's Dr. Bob Kelso.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff 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).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 16, 2017, 12:41:49 AM
TOS s1 :ohhh

TOS s2 :gladbron

TOS s3 :kobeyuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 16, 2017, 12:48:26 AM
Yeah TOS is some of my least favorite trek, right there with Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 16, 2017, 12:50:05 AM
Jesus Christ I'm so triggered right now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 17, 2017, 06:08:19 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAqsU-BY58w
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 22, 2017, 11:23:34 AM
Tonight :rejoice


Also

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/77ylnj/how_many_stupid_star_trek_discovery_articles_can/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on October 22, 2017, 01:15:19 PM
Was there no new episode of orville this week?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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:
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 22, 2017, 09:00:24 PM
Saru owns
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 23, 2017, 01:04:59 AM
Sarek :zzz

Least fave Ep since 2.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 23, 2017, 06:28:32 AM
Re-watched Yesterday's Enterprise, one of my favorite TNG episodes. Jesus, what a great ep.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on October 23, 2017, 11:01:23 AM
Discovery got renewed already http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/star-trek-discovery-renewal-season-2-cbs-all-access-1202596182/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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/ (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 )
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 23, 2017, 11:51:51 AM
I thought holodecks were a new thing for the TNG time? 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 23, 2017, 12:24:18 PM
meh, episode with an obvious ending. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 23, 2017, 02:19:42 PM
meh, that episode did little for me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on October 23, 2017, 07:31:31 PM
I don't really like how they have a holodeck already.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Borealis 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu 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
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Borealis on October 23, 2017, 11:29:48 PM
Ep.7 trailer:

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

Muddy timeloops.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo 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 (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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 24, 2017, 04:35:17 AM
Cute pic of Discovery cast:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(http://insidepulse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Star-Trek-Discovery-EW-2017-spoilers-0-banner.jpg)
[close]

Looks like Japan gets Discovery episodes a day later, so I'll be watching this new one tomorrow.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: zomgbbqftw 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker 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).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 28, 2017, 11:58:40 PM
I really liked the Dear Doctor episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 30, 2017, 11:18:37 AM
Episode was straight garbage, get the fuck out of here cbs  :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je-w7Fat3sM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku 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.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore 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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je-w7Fat3sM

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."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason 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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je-w7Fat3sM

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.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 02, 2017, 02:09:07 AM
Came across what I thought was the first truly great episode of Enterprise. There have been plenty of good to very good episodes of the show but arguably not so many where I could easily put it in a time capsule and say this is as good as it gets for various reasons.

Dear Doctor was a very good episode and similar to the one I'm talking about. Shockwave both parts are very good episodes. But Cogenitor is to me what Trek is about. A good moral dilemma that is evenly balanced on both sides so its hard to feel good with whatever decision is made.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Cogenitor_(episode)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogenitor

I have a weird tick where if a piece of entertainment makes me tense, sometimes I'll just pause it and come back to it later right in the middle of the episode. It's odd. I wish I didn't do it, but its my way of dealing with an overload of tension. Sometimes just a minute is enough. Sometimes it takes 10 minutes. Sometimes I'll stop and come back to it the next day. This episode made me take three of those little breaks. I think this episode tensed me up because it telegraphs where its going super early so the tension builds to an inevitable easy to see climax that is still satisfying. But dealing with the tension the whole episode causes my little tick to surface.


btw this might be the shittiest trailer of all time for anything. If this is how they advertised the show, no wonder people tuned out. Completely misses the point of the episode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNYOdu59gew

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 02, 2017, 02:16:06 AM
 I’m still in season one of enterprise, and at the episode where the noncombatant members of the main foil Race are locked up in relocation camps. I got a nice giggle out of seeing Dean Stockwell and Scott Bakula on screen at the same time again in a new series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 02, 2017, 02:19:19 AM
I’m still in season one of enterprise, and at the episode where the noncombatant members of the main foil Race are locked up in relocation camps. I got a nice giggle out of seeing Dean Stockwell and Scott Bakula on screen at the same time again in a new series.

The funny thing is I've never seen a single episode of Quantum Leap despite it being sort of beloved among nerdom. Maybe I'll give that a try after I finish Enterprise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 02, 2017, 02:21:20 AM
I’m still in season one of enterprise, and at the episode where the noncombatant members of the main foil Race are locked up in relocation camps. I got a nice giggle out of seeing Dean Stockwell and Scott Bakula on screen at the same time again in a new series.

The funny thing is I've never seen a single episode of Quantum Leap despite it being sort of beloved among nerdom. Maybe I'll give that a try after I finish Enterprise.

 I’ve only seen a few episodes of it as well, but there are just a few veiled lines between the two of them that I thought were charming.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 02, 2017, 07:27:24 AM
I'm currently flicking through episodes of TNG that I hadn't seen in... at least a decade.  I just watched "Force Of Nature", which is that one about those two aliens with the sideways vagina foreheads warning Starfleet about warp drive destroying the space ozone layer. It was okay.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 02, 2017, 08:22:17 AM
Garrett Wang has been outspoken about that stuff for a very long time. Tim Russ and the rest of the Voyager people have regularly brought up tensions with Seven/Ryan, but Wang has always been the one to come right out and say it was Mulgrew being a bitch to her. And that was sorta how the whole cast bonded around Ryan was that they all hated how the show was being run and wanted to have there be no off set tensions between them and the newbie. I have heard that Mulgrew and Ryan have kinda made up and IIRC, she even mentioned not too long ago that she gave Ryan a hard time out of frustration with how the show was going and Seven's being shoved to the front past everyone who had been there on the show and she regretted not being more welcoming.

Enterprise was always advertised like that, even Voyager. UPN did a lot of ACTION ACTION ACTION THIS WEEEEEEEEKKKKK and then there's like a twenty second fist fight 40 minutes in and most of the episode is dialogue and technobabble. Voyager and DS9's promos always seemed like they were grabbing a ship blowing up from another episode and sticking it into the promo. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 02, 2017, 08:30:26 AM
UPN Star Trek trailers are like those ads for speedway events people joke about. Though if Enterprise actually had monster trucks and sprint cars in it, the show would have lasted 7 seasons.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 02, 2017, 08:30:43 AM
this was peak promo probably

trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7preE2hojM

the entire and only scene featuring The Rock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYUyTcoe0qw

The other 40 minutes of the episode don't involve the Rock's character at all.

ALSO: JEFFREY COMBS ALERT
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 02, 2017, 08:42:13 AM
I like how the only time Jeffrey Combs and J.G. Hertzler appeared on Voyager was in the episode with The Rock. It's more amusing that it should be.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 02, 2017, 10:04:31 AM
I like that Enterprise is like, "We can never have too much Jeffrey Combs. I know he's already on DS9, but how about we bring him in as a Tholian for Enterprise!?"

Two episodes later: "Let's also bring him on as a Ferengi!"

…but it's true: You can't have too much Combs.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 05, 2017, 05:41:53 PM
Finished up Season 2 of Enterprise.

It was okay. Probably not as good as season 1 for me. While I did absolutely adore that one episode I mentioned above, the season as a whole was missing some spark. It was basically the same as season one just with more meh episodes. They also seemed to drop the whole temporal time war thing that was in season 1. I mean it was barely in season 1 but outside of the first episode of Season 2, it was gone.

Instead they seemed to put in a minor plot thing about Archer and the Klingons having a beef but I never especially liked those episodes.

Readng up on the season after, this seemed to be a "controversial" episode as some people absolutely detested it, but I thought it was fine personally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Night_in_Sickbay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bkSS3mfH-U&


The episode I hated was this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanishing_Point_(Star_Trek:_Enterprise)

Made zero sense to me.

Apparently season 3 is darker and more serial oriented so we'll see what I think about that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 05, 2017, 06:08:42 PM
You're ahead of me!

I'll likely continue falling behind, so I'm grateful for your largely spoiler-free reviews.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 05, 2017, 06:17:38 PM
You're ahead of me!

I'll likely continue falling behind, so I'm grateful for your largely spoiler-free reviews.

lol. yeah, I tried not to spoil too much.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 05, 2017, 10:44:13 PM
Discovery episode was average/fine when it came to plot advancement but not so good when it came to plot logic. Looks like next week is mid-season finale until they bring back the show in January.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
So Saru just assaulted two Star Fleet crew members and basically committed mutiny. They had an opportunity to just paste over this plot wise and say the aliens controlled his mind like in plenty of other star trek episodes and purposely chose not to.

That's as "bad" as what Burnham did but I have a feeling they will just ignore that plotwise and that's weird.

The klingon stuff was interesting but once again I don't understand why they klingon women did what she did. I mean she was going to defect. Decides not to and assumes that the leader is an idiot. Seems like plot shenanigans just to keep her there for the big battle next week.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 06, 2017, 08:37:43 AM
Just about to wrap up s1 of Enterprise. Probably tomorrow. I enjoyed the four-episode chain of trying to get to The Pleasure Planet of Risa for their shore leave. Thought the Vox Sola episode had a nice twist on the creepy, Alien-esque episode, including some nice literary mirroring with the offended aliens storming off due to a cultural difference about eating.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 06, 2017, 11:55:47 AM
Just about to wrap up s1 of Enterprise. Probably tomorrow. I enjoyed the four-episode chain of trying to get to The Pleasure Planet of Risa for their shore leave. Thought the Vox Sola episode had a nice twist on the creepy, Alien-esque episode, including some nice literary mirroring with the offended aliens storming off due to a cultural difference about eating.

The episode about the alien monster was decent enough but I couldn't help thinking during most of the episode of those actors stuck in that silly looking webbing for the entire production lol.

Also here is a decent blog where they reviewed every single episode. Its fun to compare my thoughts to theirs after seeing an episde. And the good thing is that the reviews are done in the last couple of years. That's more interesting to me than what somebody thought when the shows first aired. The reviews are at the bottom of the page. Skip over the top portion as that is basically a review of the entire show overall.


https://them0vieblog.com/reviews-hub/star-trek-enterprise-reviews/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 06, 2017, 03:48:28 PM
The biggest crazy awesome Trek fanatic on the web did all his reviews in retrospect, as he's done all his reviews except the three new movies that way:
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ent.htm

He gave A Night in Sickbay one of the five 0's he's given to a Enterprise episode. Enterprise has as many 0 rated episodes as TNG/DS9/VOY combined. :lol And TOS/TAS only adds three more.

Though he does appear to be doing Discovery as it airs which makes sense:
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/dis.htm

Stoney, what did you think of The Catwalk episode where they have to hide out in the nacille's to avoid a storm? I really like that episode for doing some "ship world building" until they find somebody else on the ship and have to go a hunting for the last ten minutes or whatever. I thought it would have been more interesting to just keep with the drama/frustrations from being in such cramped quarters. (When even their regular ship locations are dinky compared to Voyager or Enterprise-D.) Enterprise to me always kinda had this problem, much like Voyager, where they've got a good premise but at some point they have to add in more garbage and the whole plot tips over.

Season three is mostly serialized, with subplots continuing from one episode to the next and throughout the season, it's not full on serialized though there's mini-arcs where what they did last episode leads directly into this episode. I'm not sure it's "darker" it's just that the show kinda delivers on the promise of what Voyager and itself could have been/should have been, as they head into unknown space and they can't pop back to safety, they have to keep going forward on this mission and where it gets "darker" is mainly the crew having to deal with this year long mission and its importance and what actions they're all prepared or not to take. It never really reaches that "Year of Hell" as an actual season level of despair.

Season four kinda splits the difference, there's no season-long plot. But there's a bundle of three or four or two episode arcs that are direct continuations from the prior episodes. And two of the arcs are related, and another pair share some thematic points.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 06, 2017, 04:58:39 PM
Stoney, what did you think of The Catwalk episode where they have to hide out in the nacille's to avoid a storm? I really like that episode for doing some "ship world building" until they find somebody else on the ship and have to go a hunting for the last ten minutes or whatever. I thought it would have been more interesting to just keep with the drama/frustrations from being in such cramped quarters. (When even their regular ship locations are dinky compared to Voyager or Enterprise-D.) Enterprise to me always kinda had this problem, much like Voyager, where they've got a good premise but at some point they have to add in more garbage and the whole plot tips over.

I'm gonna spoiler tag all of this so I don't spoil stuff for chrono.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Your bolded is dead on for enterprise. I like the show more than voyager (although Season 3 a few episodes in starts to resemble voyager) but they often ruin an episode that has promise by not knowing what to do with it beyond the initial setup

The first season was really good for me. Looking back on reviews people seem to hate the first season but I don't. I think its really fun and exciting and has a lot of energy. Of course there are mis-step episodes but I really do feel like their heart is in the right place. There is an optimism and energy there that works for me. It just doesn't feel like a rehash to me.

The second season is problematic. Because the stories start to feel very star trek formula and their execution slips. I started finding myself annoyed with episodes and complaining in my head about how they should have done something in a particular way instead of what they did.

How you wished the catwalk episode would have gone is kind of the reason I like A Night in Sickbay. I like when they do Trek episodes that are relatively low stakes and are just about how the crew get along. I understand the complaints about it, but I just like scenes where the doctor is asking archer about his sex life and stuff. When so many episodes are about the ship about to be blown up or some evil alien about to do something bad, I like those episodes where we get to see the crew in non life and death situations. Even silly ones.

I'm a few episodes into Season 3 and the change is pretty clear and obvious. The show is darker. It's completely serial. etc. That being said, I thought the first few episodes of it are kind of terrible. I know its supposed to improve as the season progresses and I'm sure it will, but it kind of shows that just being serial in and of itself isn't a fix for some issues. I'm aware that a decent chunk of people really like this season though and season 4 until the finale (which I remember even when it originally aired that everybody hated) apparently so it will be interesting to experience it myself.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 06, 2017, 06:22:48 PM
Stoney, you're a gem. Thanks again for the spoiler consideration.

Just about to wrap up s1 of Enterprise. Probably tomorrow. I enjoyed the four-episode chain of trying to get to The Pleasure Planet of Risa for their shore leave. Thought the Vox Sola episode had a nice twist on the creepy, Alien-esque episode, including some nice literary mirroring with the offended aliens storming off due to a cultural difference about eating.

The episode about the alien monster was decent enough but I couldn't help thinking during most of the episode of those actors stuck in that silly looking webbing for the entire production lol.

Also here is a decent blog where they reviewed every single episode. Its fun to compare my thoughts to theirs after seeing an episde. And the good thing is that the reviews are done in the last couple of years. That's more interesting to me than what somebody thought when the shows first aired. The reviews are at the bottom of the page. Skip over the top portion as that is basically a review of the entire show overall.


https://them0vieblog.com/reviews-hub/star-trek-enterprise-reviews/
I'll check that site out, thanks.

Allay those fears about trapped cast members, lieutenant! The shooting schedule almost certainly shot each of those webbed-up scenes at once. Scenes are commonly shot non sequentially so the set and makeup don't have to be re-lit, re-built, re-done.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 07, 2017, 06:17:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tof6DUdM7IY

lol

relevant because of the recent direction of the thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 07, 2017, 06:47:45 PM
:lol

Yeah, it fits, but DAMN that song is so late '90s…!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 08, 2017, 04:27:28 AM
like DS9 did halfway through its run, Enterprise also changed its theme song (as well as adding "Star Trek" to the title) with one that has an altered tempo and uses different instrumentation for the third and fourth season, just used youdubber with that video:
http://www.youdubber.com/index.php?video=tof6DUdM7IY&video_start=0&audio=LBUEQVS8kbQ&audio_start=0

actually lines up a little bit better with the imagery, including a stray cymbal when the ship disturbs the orange worm thing :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 08, 2017, 04:40:32 AM
Discovery's almost works as well for Enterprise, time offset because of the shorter credits for ENT:
http://www.youdubber.com/index.php?video=bbnTZREMEJI&video_start=0&audio=ZcTvrxwP6Is&audio_start=12
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 08, 2017, 08:48:31 AM
like DS9 did halfway through its run, Enterprise also changed its theme song (as well as adding "Star Trek" to the title) with one that has an altered tempo and uses different instrumentation for the third and fourth season, just used youdubber with that video:
http://www.youdubber.com/index.php?video=tof6DUdM7IY&video_start=0&audio=LBUEQVS8kbQ&audio_start=0

actually lines up a little bit better with the imagery, including a stray cymbal when the ship disturbs the orange worm thing :lol

I went and looked up s3 Enterprise theme song and was sad that it's barely changed. It's like Kenny Loggins on Xanax.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 08, 2017, 04:52:07 PM
I always thought voyager had a great intro and great music. The show never really lived up to it. gussied up version below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sns1Xj6L-Qc



Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 08, 2017, 06:28:01 PM
I'm trying to watch A Night in Sickbay right now, and it's really an odd-ball-out episode. Archer is being a whiny, defensive, unreasonable twit. It's out of character with the thirty episodes which preceded this. The Doctor is shown to be comic relief, but it succeeds only on making him out to be some kind of laughable freak, whose bodily secretions and waste materials are used symbiotically to keep the various creatures in his medical facility running. It's not funny, it's disturbing.

The Kreetassans are actually a great alien race, with their social mores being so different and their manners being so apparently unidirectional.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 08, 2017, 07:02:37 PM
lol yeah a lot of the fandom detest the episode apparently. I didn't but I understand why people have issues with it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 08, 2017, 08:33:56 PM
lol yeah a lot of the fandom detest the episode apparently. I didn't but I understand why people have issues with it.
It's just weirdly inconsistent! When I thought about the Kreetassans being offended about eating rituals, it made me think about how Korean youths can't drink in front of their elders, and have to go through a bit of dinnertable theater to "hide" their drinking, despite the fact that everyone knows they're drinking. Hell, the elders would be offended if they didn't drink; the younger people are relegated to this ritualized hiding.

And as for eating, just imagine how Archer and his crew would react if some race took them to their vomitorium, or a group toilet where bowel movements were a ritualized social activity. They'd be shocked.

So Archer's baby-ish attitude, which hasn't been his hallmark, is front-and-center during the episode, it's weird.

I liked the 0-star review of it. It's pretty accurate. I'll try and finish it over lunch.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 09, 2017, 05:49:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvPmDWodqIo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 10, 2017, 03:45:48 AM
Enterprise related so I'll spoiler it out for chrono

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Pretty deep into Season 3. Just finished episode 19.

So the thing is I'm very mixed on season 3. I think the highs are high but the lows are really low. Overall I have a lot of issues with it and some of those are thematic issues.

I don't know that I liked this direction for this version of Trek. It seems so clear to me that, this is a show that was envisioned to be one thing and it wasn't working so it was retooled to be something else and something to fit the times. Both in the sense of post 9/11 and a serial world where shows like 24 were exploding.

I understand why people latched on to it. Enterprise was definitely meandering in season 2. The show was losing appeal. And to make it something completely different and dark like this was probably super fresh to the audience watching at that point.

But to me a lot of it feels like try harding to make something dark. But its still not being done in a correct way imo. Like BSG was dark. And they embraced the darkness. Trek wants to be dark here but still be trek in that old school way of being Trek. And the two don't mesh. Often these episodes just don't mesh to me from one to another tonally or even within the same episode. I think the new show, Discovery, does this pretty well because its relinquished that version of old school trek.It was never meant to be old school. But enterprise was and so it just feels schizophrenic.

I just got through watching this episode.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_(Star_Trek:_Enterprise)

It's probably the best episode of this season so far. It has the enterprise crew do something horrible. Which is very powerful and brave in its way from a writing perspective because its not something you've ever seen a trek crew do. But because it still has that old school trek thing going on, it wants you to still view them as the heroes. Because ultimately they are doing the "greater good". It's not handled elegantly. The only person who challenges the captain is Tpol who apparently has been free-basing trellium to feel more human all of a sudden. It's the type of episode that BSG (Or Babylon 5) handled effortlessly but this show struggles on imo.

There is a lot of that this season. It's very clumsy in its attempts to be dark because it can't go full on. It's still that old Trek and its simply not a part of its DNA to be that morally grey. It wants to have its foot in both world without really sacrificing anything to get it. And ultimately that's unsatisfying in significant ways to me. If you want to do this kind of episode it has to have a cost. And not just the soul of Archer or the crew. That is a given. There has to be a tangible cost like someone dying on either side to drive it home. This show just can't go that far. So I kinda feel like if you can't go that far. Why even start to take the trip. Haven't finished the season of course so maybe that happens later....although I doubt it.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 10, 2017, 09:25:32 PM
https://twitter.com/akaWorf/status/928835480497655808

:heartbeat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 11, 2017, 02:51:14 AM
Enterprise related so I'll spoiler it out for chrono

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Pretty deep into Season 3. Just finished episode 19.

So the thing is I'm very mixed on season 3. I think the highs are high but the lows are really low. Overall I have a lot of issues with it and some of those are thematic issues.

I don't know that I liked this direction for this version of Trek. It seems so clear to me that, this is a show that was envisioned to be one thing and it wasn't working so it was retooled to be something else and something to fit the times. Both in the sense of post 9/11 and a serial world where shows like 24 were exploding.

I understand why people latched on to it. Enterprise was definitely meandering in season 2. The show was losing appeal. And to make it something completely different and dark like this was probably super fresh to the audience watching at that point.

But to me a lot of it feels like try harding to make something dark. But its still not being done in a correct way imo. Like BSG was dark. And they embraced the darkness. Trek wants to be dark here but still be trek in that old school way of being Trek. And the two don't mesh. Often these episodes just don't mesh to me from one to another tonally or even within the same episode. I think the new show, Discovery, does this pretty well because its relinquished that version of old school trek.It was never meant to be old school. But enterprise was and so it just feels schizophrenic.

I just got through watching this episode.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_(Star_Trek:_Enterprise)

It's probably the best episode of this season so far. It has the enterprise crew do something horrible. Which is very powerful and brave in its way from a writing perspective because its not something you've ever seen a trek crew do. But because it still has that old school trek thing going on, it wants you to still view them as the heroes. Because ultimately they are doing the "greater good". It's not handled elegantly. The only person who challenges the captain is Tpol who apparently has been free-basing trellium to feel more human all of a sudden. It's the type of episode that BSG (Or Babylon 5) handled effortlessly but this show struggles on imo.

There is a lot of that this season. It's very clumsy in its attempts to be dark because it can't go full on. It's still that old Trek and its simply not a part of its DNA to be that morally grey. It wants to have its foot in both world without really sacrificing anything to get it. And ultimately that's unsatisfying in significant ways to me. If you want to do this kind of episode it has to have a cost. And not just the soul of Archer or the crew. That is a given. There has to be a tangible cost like someone dying on either side to drive it home. This show just can't go that far. So I kinda feel like if you can't go that far. Why even start to take the trip. Haven't finished the season of course so maybe that happens later....although I doubt it.
[close]

The show wasn't ready to go there thematically yet. Season three is a funny bird because it's serialized and introduces so much yet it's also when Berman and Braga were checking out of the series as both were starting to look at other projects to move onto, but also wanted to do all this 9/11-War stuff that the season is sucking hard on. Manny Coto had just jumped on and was starting to take the show over. They also had the episode order and budget cut after the season opened with poor ratings (that only got worse) which is why they start dropping out all the "we're on this mission, but there's also stuff along the way we'll see" aspects of the EXPANSE for what's a pretty dumb mcguffin plot in the first place.

The episode you mention is a good one, I also like all the Degra stuff, maybe because of the actor. But the show never really does get away from what we talked about earlier regarding how they'll take a few steps in a direction and then suddenly run away from it. They even sorta treat the addition of the MACOs as Voyager treated its Maquis and Equinox crew. Relevant for a little bit, then abandoned as plot points and integrated as normal background characters/redshirts.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The episode where they're trying to con Degra, I wish they kept up the ruse on us longer and then we start wondering why Archer is acting weird, aligning us more with Degra, before revealing it's a simulation on the Enterprise and the whole plan to get stuff from him. That they made it all the way to the end of the first act before showing us their hand is decent for VOY/ENT era Trek but if they had pushed it just a bit longer and had the malfunctions and stuff without us, the audience, knowing what was going on, only the Archer character, it would have been a really great episode.

Regarding "Damages", apparently they also scripted a line for Phlox referencing his argument with Archer about ethics all the way back in the first season. But the line was cut. Which makes sense, as they probably forgot that they changed the original ending for "Dear Doctor" where Phlox would have disobeyed Archer in the end, since Paramount wanted it changed because everyone was supposed to follow the Captains orders. So T'Pol was the only one left in the episode to even question him.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 12, 2017, 03:50:03 PM
Finished up Season 3 of enterprise. I'm gonna take a break before I start Season 4. I inhaled a lot of enterprise in a short of amount of time so I'll give the final season some resting room. 

Pretty much all I said before still stands. There is a lot to like and a lot to dislike about Season 3. It starts off kind of as a mess but has a strong finishing end stretch. I mean you gain some benefits like the stakes being raised and more drama and urgency being added but I think you also lose a lot that makes Trek Trek. There is also a part of me that wonders if they would have picked Scott Bakula as captain if they knew where they were going to go with this show. Which is not to say that he does a bad job at all. It's just Bakula strengths are friendship and optimism.

On one hand its fun to see them throw him into hell to see how he would respond. But I bet they originally picked him because they had a very different vision of the show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 13, 2017, 02:02:40 PM
Good mid-season finale episode. First episode they actually gave some character to the security chief to flesh him out. I hadn't care for him up to this point because he just seemed too perfect with no depth.

Some thoughts 9 episodes in.

The look of this show is just amazing to me. This comes after watching a shit-load of enterprise in the last month and the orville. I don't say this to shit on those two shows because both of those shows use traditional TV style camera-work and cinematography. But Discovery just makes them look amateurish and old. The way the camera moves. The way they set up shots. It looks like a film. It often looks better than stuff that was in the last 3 star trek films. Not always. But sometimes. That's hella impressive for a TV show.

I think the tone is super dead on. It feels like a new breed of Trek. It feels modern. It feels progressive. It feels like its of its current age. It doesn't just feel like homage to old trek even though there is plenty of connections to the trek of the past.

As far as plotting I think its just been average. I would have liked some more twists or some more tricky stuff happening. I don't know that there has been a truly great episode yet. There have been plenty of good episodes. And for a first season of a Trek show, its been especially competent in that regard compared to the other shows. Hopefully it keeps growing like trek shows tend to do and really finds itself. I will say the serial nature of the show has worked and it hasn't been as narrow as I feared a serial Trek show would be.

I hope they continue to explore the crew and give other members time to shine. Lorca and Burnham, and Stamets are the core 3 characters so far and all of them are good but I want them to give more time for lesser members to shine also. I want to get to know the bridge crew for example outside of battle scenes.



Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 14, 2017, 01:42:07 AM
I REALLY like Discovery!

The visuals in the episode when they go down to the planet was easily the most beautiful Star Trek has ever looked to me. I adore the characters. I wish there were more on the doc, but I think we'll get it later. I really love the tone. It feels legitimate Trek but with more modern sensibilities without going overboard about it. I am also enjoying the fact the series is self contained and yet still has an episodic serial-based structure. I disagree with Stony about the plotting and find it just about right for my tastes. I am really impressed and can't wait for more!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 14, 2017, 03:32:53 AM
The visuals in this episode really reminded me of Mass Effect 2. The show seems clearly inspired by that title.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: desert punk on November 14, 2017, 07:20:59 AM
I'm only at episode 6 for now but Discovery is indeed a great show.

When I grew up the only time I was allowed to watch tv was for an hour or two in the early evenings. And the only Trek show that aired during that timeframe back then was Voyager. I didn't think it was a particularly good show even back as a kid tho I still watched it. But I think it was partly responsible for why I never really got into the other Trek shows later on.

When I got a bit older though, I really became enamored with the TOS movies. I re-watched all of them (except the first one) countless times (yeah, even the fifth one). I still do when I catch them on tv. That was Star Trek for me and even though I tried watching the other shows they never hooked me. But it ain’t Yoyager’s fault alone. The (perceived) lack of an overarching storyline just didn’t do it for me I guess. Babylon 5 fulfilled my needs for a serialized sci-fi show anyway.

But now I got exactly what I wanted from a Trek show. The overarching narrative with the war between the Federation and the Klingons is some epic and thrilling stuff (don’t really care that much whether it fits into the canon or not) without it being just a blunt spectacle, and they still find the time to properly exploring the characters. The actress playing Michael Burnham really impresses me but the others are fine too.

I’m not really a fan of the Klingon redesign tho. Don’t think the prosthetics allow for a wide range of emotions and expressions. And that they talk in actual Klingon constantly is really enervating. But other than that nothing really bothers me.

The show makes me want to try out DS9 for real. The parallels to Babylon 5 always interested me but I really don’t have the time to watch the whole show, so maybe I’ll look up some episode guide or something.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 14, 2017, 09:42:07 AM
Watch DS9. It has overarching storylines and is serialized. And fuck episode guides. Those things are stupid and suggest things like "just skip to season 3" while ignoring entire seasons worth of character development.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: desert punk on November 14, 2017, 05:20:03 PM
Yeah I'm not in favor of skipping entire seasons. Then you might as well ditch the show, especially if it's as serialized as you say it is. I just don't wanna waste my time with really bad or flat out boring episodes. So I was just wondering if there's guide listing those kinds of episodes so I can avoid them.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff on November 14, 2017, 05:56:29 PM
Good mid-season finale episode. First episode they actually gave some character to the security chief to flesh him out. I hadn't care for him up to this point because he just seemed too perfect with no depth.

I figured that was the point up until now, to seem too perfect/plain, to be intentionally unsettling and mysterious esp considering the Klingon capture. Burnum and Tilly talked about it a couple of times.

Discovery rules. Was keen to watch The Orville, but the number of idiots I've seen bitching about Discovery referncing how it's for sjws, then talking about how great The Orville is, isn't particularly selling me  ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 14, 2017, 06:38:49 PM
Honestly Disco haters just seem desperate at this point :idont It's like they want to hate Discovery.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 14, 2017, 07:48:46 PM
Discovery rules. Was keen to watch The Orville, but the number of idiots I've seen bitching about Discovery referncing how it's for Social Studies Warriors, then talking about how great The Orville is, isn't particularly selling me  ::)

I like both shows. I think Discovery is better than Orville but Orville is not remotely as bad as the critical reviews were. But yeah I have noticed a weird vibe from a segment of that community that uses some of the same code words as alt-right types to try to prop up that show and diss discovery. I have a feeling it comes from the fact that the lead character on discovery is a black women which probably triggers a certain type of nerd.

The show fortunately doesn't echo those sentiments. It's progressive in many ways like Discovery. The worf clone is married to another dude for example. (Although technically that race doesn't have females)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 14, 2017, 07:53:58 PM
Yeah I'm not in favor of skipping entire seasons. Then you might as well ditch the show, especially if it's as serialized as you say it is. I just don't wanna waste my time with really bad or flat out boring episodes. So I was just wondering if there's guide listing those kinds of episodes so I can avoid them.

Don't feel bad about using a guide. I still think a good guide should have you watching the bulk of episodes during a show run but for time reasons there is no reason to watch what many people consider to be the worst of something.

That being said, I often find myself being a bit of a contrarion and liking some of the episodes that the community widely derides.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: HardcoreRetro on November 15, 2017, 09:26:48 AM
I'm enjoying the original show instead. The outdated stuff people like getting upset about is basically the most charming thing to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 15, 2017, 08:07:01 PM
Shatner's acting was some of the best stuff when I rewatched it last year or so, with Spock deliberately emotionless it sometimes seems like he's the only person who gives a shit about the stuff happening. Also you can use the budget cuts to create a fun meta-narrative that he's becoming increasingly unhinged from the fact that his ship keeps losing crew members and entire sections of it disappear and that all the planets look the same yet nobody on his Crew let alone anyone in Starfleet seems interested.

You can expand that into a fun little franchise meta narrative explaining all the insane Admirals are the result of them taking the insane captains and kicking them upstairs like they do Janeway when she comes back from terrorizing the Delta Quadrant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 15, 2017, 10:51:21 PM
I think I'm in the mood to watch some of the trek movies. Most of them I haven't seen in forever although I watched the first one again like maybe a year ago. I'm one of those types who thinks the original motion picture is quite slow and boring therefore quite good. It feels unlike any other trek movie ever. Almost intellectual in a way the rest of the movies aren't. That's not a diss at the other movies. Just an observation.

 

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 16, 2017, 12:43:54 AM
Just, you know, do yourself a favor: skip NEMESIS.

TNG early spoilers just in case some of you are bitches.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well, didn't expect a major death so early on. Especially given some flashbacks show here and there.

R.I.P. Tasha Yar.
[close]
That actress has recanted her grievances about TNG, and is happy about that time in her life now. She wanted to say something more than just "Hailing frequencies open," week after week. She had a fantastic character, and I wish we'd seen what a season three or four arc for her would have entailed.

:teehee
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 16, 2017, 12:44:27 AM
Shatner's acting was some of the best stuff when I rewatched it last year or so, with Spock deliberately emotionless it sometimes seems like he's the only person who gives a shit about the stuff happening. Also you can use the budget cuts to create a fun meta-narrative that he's becoming increasingly unhinged from the fact that his ship keeps losing crew members and entire sections of it disappear and that all the planets look the same yet nobody on his Crew let alone anyone in Starfleet seems interested.

You can expand that into a fun little franchise meta narrative explaining all the insane Admirals are the result of them taking the insane captains and kicking them upstairs like they do Janeway when she comes back from terrorizing the Delta Quadrant.
I like your version of TOS universe. I'd happily read a benjiscreed if you put one together on the topic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 16, 2017, 01:50:14 AM
Nemesis is way better than the garbage that is Generations or even The Final Frontier or the remake of Nemesis, Star Trek (2009).

The opening is killer, and so is the space battle. The main problem is that it only has half a plot, and then they keep trying to do subplots and have Picard drive vehicles for some reason. Or have two main characters engage in the worlds worst fisticuffs over a randomly placed bottomless pit. Whatever, just watch the opener and the space battle on YouTubes.

I always liked the sound effects for the shields in that movie. Temporary disruptions where the fire hits.

The funny thing is Stuart Baird came into Nemesis on the upswing of his career into finally directing after being the editor on a bunch of huge blockbusters and with the patronage of Richard Donner, took the job even though he knew nothing about Star Trek or science fiction and it basically killed off his attempt to move beyond editing. While John Logan, was a huge Trek fan who came into writing it off of his prior luck with Gladiator and Any Given Sunday, and has since racked up a whole bunch of written by and screenplay credits on big things in part because of his patronage from Sam Mendes.

Ten years later they both wound up on Skyfall, Logan writing it and Baird editing it (after rebuilding his career with hits like Salt and Green Lantern). Logan also created Penny Dreadful and has since wrote Spectre, Alien: Covenant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 16, 2017, 01:53:38 AM
They cut like an entire hour out of Nemesis, including plot lines that are referenced in the final cut but were never shown. :lol

Quote
Stuart Baird was brought in to film Nemesis by executive producer Rick Berman.  ... He wanted to add energy to the action scenes and added some set pieces, such as the car chase. He called that scene a "signature piece" for the film which turns dark after the crew is put in danger by the inhabitants of the planet. ... Despite Frakes' being on the cast, and having directed the previous two Star Trek films, Baird decided not to seek his opinion on the direction of the film.
Quote
Actors LeVar Burton (Geordi La Forge) and Marina Sirtis (Deanna Troi) have spoken unflatteringly of director Stuart Baird, criticizing him for not watching any of the episodes of The Next Generation.[24] Sirtis has bluntly called Baird "an idiot."[25] Jonathan Frakes, while praising both the character of Shinzon and actor Tom Hardy (who played the role), said that if he himself had directed, as he had done with the previous two Trek films, he would have made the film less villain-centric and given more screen time to the regular Next Generation cast.

Quote
During production of Nemesis, a script developed by John Logan and Brent Spiner was in the works for a fifth and final film featuring the TNG cast that would have wrapped up the adventures of the Enterprise-E crew, with tie-ins to historical aspects of the Star Trek franchise. However, the poor performance of Nemesis at the box office convinced Paramount that the franchise was suffering from 'franchise fatigue', and the script was abandoned.
ugh that would have been even worse probably, Data and B4 were the worst parts of Nemesis, especially because they're the reason Picard is driving all that crap.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 16, 2017, 02:22:04 AM
You know more about this than I do.

But it's still a shitty, horrible movie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 16, 2017, 02:38:33 AM
It's far from the worst of the Trek films to sit through though. It's just generally blech. Generations, Into Darkness, Star Trek 09 and The Final Frontier are all easily as bad if not worse. All of those compete in their single minded desire to sap your entire will to live. Especially the first three as they drag on endlessly as if they'll never take pity on you and just end. Generations is so cruel it makes you relive the terrible events after an even greater pace killing incoherent stop and chat that lasts half an hour.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 16, 2017, 03:03:05 AM
Yeah, that's fair.

You kept referring to "The Final Frontier" repeatedly, and I thought, I have no idea which film that is… and when I googled it just now, I was like Oh, Trek V… Yeah, we don't want to talk about that one! :lol It's horribad. And, yeah, Generations is schlocky and lame, and wayyyyy to ego-stroking about the two captains, and emo-feely. No, thanks.

To tell the truth, just for the damage it does via retcon, I think I dislike FIRST CONTACT more than any other film. It's the goddamned BORG, the scariest villain Star Trek has EVER PRODUCED, and it turns it into a queen-bee-driven-collective rather than the unfathomable hive mind it had been in the series. And the queen wants a boyfriend.

In short, only ever watch II: Wrath of Khan, IV: The Voyage Home, and VI: The Undiscovered Country.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 16, 2017, 08:59:37 PM
heh Phlox was on Lucifer this week, i like when he pops up on shows
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on November 16, 2017, 09:06:29 PM
Data and B4 shit was the worst.  :yuck I wasn't a huge fan of the Borg Queen in First Contact but I actually liked the Janeway vs Queen dynamic in Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 16, 2017, 10:02:40 PM
Nemesis isn't the star cancer to me that it is to so many. Out of all the garbage films, I dont know why it specifically pisses people off.


EDIT: Posting from bed  :picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 16, 2017, 10:36:15 PM
I remember not hating nemesis as much as everybody. Not that it was good or anything but I remember when I left the theater, I was the only one not insanely pissed off at it in my group.

Outside of the infamous dune buggy chase, I don't legit remember any of it. Oh wait that's the shinzon one...

I have a feeling if I watched it now I would hate it just as passionately as most. Also it came at a time when the franchise in general just felt out of step and it was one of the deathblows.

The worst Trek movie for me that I can remember is Generations. I detest that one.

I also do not have a lot of nice things to say about that 2009 reboot movie. It always surprised me that people really liked that one. It's not a bad movie or anything. Just really average to me so I was surprised that it was so successful.

That being said, I'm the only Star Trek fan I know that likes Frontier so yeah my opinions on these things aren't really in step.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 16, 2017, 11:22:14 PM
I probably genuinely like (as in i'd rewatch it) at most 4 Star Trek films, shit's just whack on the whole. I'd rather watch Surf Ninja than some of that shit lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 17, 2017, 12:18:53 AM
I like all five tos movies to varying degrees and probably first contact so there is enough there for me to have a good time. 

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 17, 2017, 01:02:37 AM
Generations has long been my most detested of them all, it doesn't even a good premise of any kind. The entire thing is a giant nonsensical plot hole, even more both 09 and ID's plots which could be tweaked and fixed. There's no fixing GEN unless you decide that everything that happens after it is Picard still in The Nexus. The funniest part is that on the DVD commentary, Braga and Moore admit that they couldn't find an answer for why Picard couldn't go to literally any point and stop Malcom McDowell, he didn't need Kirk at all, let alone to go back and face a possible losing scenario. But they believed the rest of the garbage made up for it and compared it to The Terminator's plot hole. And were especially excited about crashing the D.

Nemesis completely fakes you out because it's got the best opening of the films:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhFkkNn7CdU

And right after this intro it goes to the Riker Wedding and then to the dune buggy scenes. While Janeway exposition explains what exactly happened in the intro and why we should care.

Tom Hardy has some minor decent scenes with Patrick Stewart at the one point, I think they have dinner or something, and Shinzon basically explains why he's such a dick and Picard is like okay this is obviously a trap because otherwise we won't have a movie so I'll be going then.

Luckily you can totally zone out until they get to the battle, enjoy that and then totally zone out again as if this had just been a high budget episode:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56iTxduUacs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSnzrxNIJd4
[close]
Until watching this I forgot that Shinzon and Picard have that second conversation and Shinzon's like "you're completely right and there's really no down side to me just taking over this Empire BUT THE SCRIPT SAYS FUCK YOU DAD ALSO I'M DYING BUT ALSO FUCK YOU AGAIN DAD, ER CLONE, ER WEAK ME"

Even in glorious 480p YouTube I'm loving those shield hits. :lawd And I still like that firing in a circle to locate them and the fact that they actually try and turn the ship's weakside away. Even after II pointed it out directly as a failure of Khan's tactics, Trek still spent the rest of its history having everyone lining up the same way and fighting on a 2D plane for the most part.

I like how the Diana psychic connection to Ron Pearlman is basically cut out of the film, but then that's the whole hook they use for this stupid scene where she locates them through the cloak.

Speaking of Diana, I like the short lingering shot after Picard orders the Diana Maneuver of the two ships wedged together. A better film would have sat on that for a bit longer instead of jumping back to Riker fisticuffs in a jeffries tube. They do a longer lingering version of the shot after Shinzon rips the two of them apart and with it what's left of the movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7G8cEgiupg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7G8cEgiupg)
Quote from: YouTube Comments on that part
"Damage report."
"Disruptors are down, and the cloaking device is lodged in the Enterprise's hull."
"What about the extremely delicate superweapon?"
"...Surprisingly, still operational, sir."
"Excellent.  Activate it while I double over in the horrible pain that defines my existence."
"Yes, sir.  Initiating Edgelord Array firing sequence."

Also, I love how many Trek battles have a moment where the person in command says "let's do an obvious trap" and someone else goes "WHAT?!?" and then the enemy ship falls for it. Hell, it's even in a bunch of TNG episodes. :lol

VI as a part of its determination to be the best film subverts it by Kirk ordering a physical backing off just for confusion, Christopher Plummer going "what?!?" and Kirk going "why did they stop?" then Plummer immediate fires at them again and blows a hole through the ship. VI :rejoice

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I love how the front of the bridge is blown off (because the Federation puts their bridges right up on top of the saucers except in the Defiant) and Picard just sorta looks at that dude getting sucked out and goes "medical teams to the bridge" like that wasn't a totally crazy thing that shouldn't happen so easily to ships that travel at above light speeds constantly and just fought a major scale war for three plus years.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 17, 2017, 01:17:51 AM
 :jeanluc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 19, 2017, 12:19:12 PM
Watched The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan in recent days.

I still like both of them for different reasons.

I understand the complaints about the motion picture with slow pacing and shots of space and ships that go on forever ala 2001 but I still like that movie. I think its a nice sci-fi story where the main plot would feel interesting even if it wasn't in a star trek movie. I like that its basically a space mystery story without any big bad guy doing evil deeds that needs to be punched in the face. I forgot how Kirk is kind of a dick in this one and seizes command of the ship without a hint of remorse so that was funny.

Wrath of Khan is also quite good and one of the few Trek movies with a big bad guy who needs to be defeated that works because of the history of Khan and the original episode. Khan therefore feels legitimate and you understand his beef. He isn't a paper tiger that is built up just to be knocked down. It feels personal and its rare that Trek movies can make that kind of confrontation. Meyers is also great at just making a good popcorn movie. The pacing and tempo feel lighting fast compared to Motion Picture. The movie has a great flow to it. Some parts almost feel like Alien. Some parts feel Trek. Some parts feel like the Horatio Hornblower. Meyer knows his job is to make a good popcorn flick that is less moody and slow than the motion picture and he delivers.

Some interesting bits I didn't know. I had no idea the motion picture budget was so massive. It was 46 million which is just mammoth in 1979 dollars. The budget of Khan was 11 million by comparison. Motion Picture made slightly more at the box office but that budget was a big albatross. 

Quote
According to Bennett, he was called in front of a group including Jeffrey Katzenberg and Michael Eisner and asked if he thought he could make a better film than The Motion Picture, which Bennett confessed he found "really boring".[22] When Bennett replied in the affirmative, Charles Bluhdorn asked, "Can you make it for less than forty-five-fucking-million-dollars?" Bennett replied that "Where I come from, I can make five movies for that."


This also tickled me. Kirk didn't like When Kirstie Alley cries at Spock's Funeral.

Quote
Kirstie Alley was somewhat uncertain if other fans would accept a Vulcan female and she endeavored not to make the unemotional female character seem too much like "a bitch," by concentrating on the emotionality of Saavik's Romulan heritage, which accounts for her crying on screen at one point. (The Making of the Trek Films, 3rd ed., p. 170) Nichelle Nichols said about the performance decision to show Saavik shedding tears, "That was Kirstie's idea, a beautiful touch." (Beyond Uhura, p. 251) However, William Shatner was alarmed by this behavior during filming and asked Meyer if he was going to "let her do that." (The View from the Bridge - Memories of Star Trek and a Life in Hollywood, hardback ed., p. 118) The director related, "[Shatner] said, 'Well, Vulcans can't cry.' I said, 'Yeah, well, that's why it's going to be so distressing when this one does.'"

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on November 19, 2017, 02:49:25 PM
The gutted budget really opened my eyes when I was reading about it a few years back. Crazy that such a classic can come from so little. Really inspired me and hammered home that better budget does not make a better movie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 19, 2017, 07:21:40 PM
 Two fantastic episodes of enterprise last night: one is the obvious HIV/AIDS analog episode, which neatly framed the arrogance and prejudice of the Vulcans, and then another arrogant Vulcan episode featuring my favorite Andorian, Jeffrey Combs, and a new favorite, Tall Hot Andorian Lady, played by the actress who was on TNG as Worf’s half Klingon fiancé and also a Vulcan too. :drool

Have to say, Wesley Crusher is a lot less annoying in the second season. Maybe the hatred is overblown.
I think there is a formal name for it in Star Trek fandom, but they had this problem with both Wesley and Worf. Several writer independently thought it would be a good idea to have Wesley save the ship. Several writers  independently decided a good way to show how tough that monster is would be to have it beat up the Klingon security officer. And result: Wesley is insufferable, and Worf looks easy to beat, as it happens every other week. 

I’m seeing a similar thing do this on enterprise: Malcolm Reed, the tactical officer, it seems like occasionally someone wanted to show a sensitive side of the tactical officer, but he instead comes off as overly emotional, whiny, pessimist.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 19, 2017, 07:27:32 PM
Wesley Crusher actually gets worse. Is he a space demigod yet?

IMO TNG S2 > S1
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 19, 2017, 07:32:03 PM
 He gets worse just before the situation sorts itself. But, yeah, that was just about the worst return to form in the entire series.

 I remember giving up during season one, skipping season two, then coming back for season three and thinking, “Wow this is amazing! I guess it got better!”

Then going back and watching season two, and realizing it was a very gradual improvement.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 19, 2017, 07:34:15 PM
Nog is Wesley done right.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 19, 2017, 09:00:27 PM
I forgot they remastered all the old TOS episodes. That gives me a reason to watch some of my favorite episodes again along with the movies.

For some reason I had completely erased that from my brain even though I remember being excited when it was announced all those years ago.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 19, 2017, 09:42:28 PM
I forgot they remastered all the old TOS episodes. That gives me a reason to watch some of my favorite episodes again along with the movies.

For some reason I had completely erased that from my brain even though I remember being excited when it was announced all those years ago.
They're pretty neat. The actual updates to effects are subtle, and completely in-line with the aesthetic. The only place I found them noticeable are in the final credits, where the type treatment over the episode's live-action still imagery is less crisp than the treatment displayed on still images of the effects.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 20, 2017, 05:11:52 AM
The updated matte paintings for backgrounds are less obvious than all the CGI space crap or any space blasting but do more for the show and fit better.

The infamous example I've mentioned before being the opening shot from "Arena":
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/a/a7/Cestus_III_outpost_destroyed.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/640?cb=20081207054547&path-prefix=en)(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/b/bd/Cestus_III_outpost_destroyed%2C_remastered.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/640?cb=20081207054604&path-prefix=en)

the tinfoil background in the original even clips over the fortress wall :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 20, 2017, 05:23:32 AM
The TNG remasters did a lot of that kind of subtle stuff you wouldn't think of, along with the major impact from simply moving up the original film to HD, that made shit sparkle.
(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint.jpg)(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint-r.jpg)

(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/hideandq/04a-hideandq.jpg)(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/hideandq/04a-hideandq-r.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coax on November 20, 2017, 05:34:50 AM
The TNG remasters did a lot of that kind of subtle stuff you wouldn't think of, along with the major impact from simply moving up the original film to HD, that made shit sparkle.
(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint.jpg)(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint-r.jpg)

Looking at it the color of the original helped the doorway blend with the ground, but maybe it's not supposed to look that, I'm no Star Trek geek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 20, 2017, 05:51:35 AM
It all generally looks better in action.

That particular scene stands out because it's in the pilot and in the original all the trees and river and stuff are lifeless most of it even frozen, while they're moving in the remaster. It's also supposed to be this big pilot scene about how realistic the holodeck is and so on.

TNG they also did a lot of editing out of visible equipment, re-framing or filling in the edges/ceilings of the set that were visible, etc. One instance I remembered from seeing it back in the day they removed the visible hands of someone who reaches in to take the glasses they set on a table so they don't knock them over while Riker gets his lovin' on with the lady. :shh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 20, 2017, 09:25:56 AM
The TNG remaster is really good. The new visual effects are so good that you don't notice that they're new effects, which is what I personally want from this kind of thing. The end result is a show that looks like an incredibly clear and sharp version of what I thought I remembered watching back in the 90s on TV or VHS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 20, 2017, 11:38:06 AM
I watched a couple of remastered tos episodes last night and its nice.

I think a remaster of those interests me more over TNG simply because of how old it is.

Its also just fun to watch tos again anyway as its my favorite trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 20, 2017, 06:33:24 PM
http://startrekdom.blogspot.ie/2007/05/in-shadow-of-spock-great-shatnernimoy_06.html

I have to watch Galaxy Quest again.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 21, 2017, 03:13:21 AM
I know the post is from 2007 but the part at the bottom about how they deny the feud actually changed in the years before Nimoy's death, and the instances I saw Shatner actually was the more remorseful one. (I guess he's also privately tried to go around and not apologize but apologize to all the others though Takai keeps changing his mind on whether or not Shatner has apologized.) That it wasn't until they were doing the movies that he began to appreciate how important both Spock and Nimoy, along with DeForrest, were to his own performance and his own stardom.

We all know Shatner directed V because he had it put in his contract after III that he got a film for every one Nimoy got, Nimoy did IV so Shatner got V. But I saw an interview in more recent years where Shatner says he should have never done that, that Nimoy was a better director of the whole cast and not being in that role let him focus on his performance. Whereas Nimoy had the ability to compartmentalize the two roles much better. Also Shatner admits he didn't really understand the roles of a film director compared to a TJ Hooker episode director. Outside of stuff he was producing like TekWar Shatner never directed again until this last decade when he got into doing documentaries, whereas Nimoy actually directed legitimate box office movies for a time.

Most of the stories from the cast infighting and jealousy are really about that third season (and part of the second) when the whole edifice of the show came crumbling down. They knew it was dying. Which was part of why Nimoy was the least willing to accept his Trek stardom for a long time. He had become too tied to it.

That Roddenberry story is illustrative of why they pushed him off TOS, the films and TNG. If they had that meeting the next day Roddenberry might have changed his mind.

Actually some of the stuff I'm thinking of might have been in that recent oral history of Trek. Shatner in that does a lot of reflective "we should have featured Sulu and Uhura more" stuff. I think that "star" meeting is discussed and Shatner says something about how he was too dumb to realize that Trek was the star.

I think TNG's success really changed Shatner and Nimoy's impression of the franchise and their own roles in it. They were the most negative by far towards TNG when it began, though they've kinda whitewashed that since, but then quietly started to accept it as a legitimate heir.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 21, 2017, 03:14:42 AM
This book:
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81ZGifS47IL.jpg)

I haven't read the second half actually, should look into it:
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91x3APiDihL.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 21, 2017, 03:54:55 AM
I haven't fully read the second book yet, but what I read was pretty good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 21, 2017, 04:02:35 AM
I need
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 21, 2017, 07:29:39 PM
Watched Searched for Spock and Voyage Home.


I didn't remember anything from Search for Spock outside of the fact that David dies. This one was a tough re-watch for me. It's boring for a really long time. The whole setup and kid spock again on planet is boring to me. McCoy having Spock's mind is handled in a goofy manner. The movie only picks up its energy when the confrontation begins between Kirk and the Klingons when he arrives at the genesis planet and that's an hour into the movie. The drama and follow through with that is good but then that ends and they go revive spock. That part is fine. It's emotional enough even though you know what's going to happen every step of the way.

This one isn't as good as I remember it from my memories. It's mostly boring. It's slow in the frustrating way without an overly interesting premise to carry it through like the motion picture. If you are not a die-hard Trek fan this seems like it would be pretty much unwatchable as the main thing holding it together is your fondness for the characters. It's a very inside baseball Trek movie. I don't imagine myself going back to this one in the future whereas I can always pop in Trek 1 and 2 and find some enjoyment.

Voyager Home is really just an excuse to get the crew in a fish out of water situation in the 80's. The plot is sort of meaningless at best and ridiculous at worse. I didn't really pick up on that the first time back in the day. That being said,  its a fun romp. It's clearly written as a comedy. The clear intent isn't to be some piece of trekian sci-fi but an adventure to enjoy with characters you like. It's probably the most balanced Trek movie in how it handles the cast. Everybody is given something fun to do that shows some of their character. It's kind of amazing in a way because it shows how broad Trek and movies were back in the day. That you could take the franchise and say lets make a comedy adventure movie and have it work is pretty crazy. You couldn't have done that with any Trek show since then or the current batch of Trek movies. It just wouldn't work and the general audience wouldn't accept it imo. But in that time and with those characters, you absolutely could. The movie works better than it has any right to with its premise and its still legit funny.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 21, 2017, 08:37:17 PM
McCoy having Spock's mind is handled in a goofy manner.

It's also strange, because one of the reasons for the Vulcan Nerve Pinch is that Nimoy felt it was strange if Spock got physically violent, so what if he could pinch a nerve and due to some alien energy applied at specific places, Spock could just quietly knock enemies out…? So the canon reason McCoy's nerve pinch doesn't work is that he's not Vulcan. He's a human trying it, so it doesn't work.

As a consequence, I was stunned in ST:Discovery when a human managed to pull off a nerve pinch in the very first episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 21, 2017, 09:46:44 PM
There are a few scenes where Spock's Katra speaks through Bones and its supposed to be a little spooky but it was just eye-roll inducing every time they do it.

I'm also watching tos episodes when I can squeeze them in but I won't bother commenting on them as much as the enterprise seasons.

I'm watching them in production order which is interesting. I never did that before. I watched TOS in syndication like any kid did in that era. You watched what ever random episode happened to be on that day. So even though I've seen every single episode many times, it was always in a random stew. So the development of the show and how it sort of built on itself and adjusted itself over time is a new thing to me.

Like Yeoman Rand and the original purpose of her character and the shady stuff that happened to her and how she was forced to leave the show is completely new to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/04/star-trek-actress-grace-lee-whitney-who-alleged-sexual-assault-by-tv-executive-dead-at-85/

Watching each episode and then reading information/reviews on each one is teaching me stuff that is old news to others but new to me because outside of just watching the show I never dabbled in the behind the scenes stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 21, 2017, 10:36:36 PM
I decided on my last rewatch production order is better. I never liked aired order, but there's also "stardate order" and neither one feel right. Production order like you said, the show actually develops.

I've mentioned it before, but like you I always saw random TOS episodes until later in my life, the most interesting thing to me in the first half of the first season (production order) is just how lively the ship is. Crewmen working on things. Dudes carrying a pipe to somewhere. Uhura talks to a guy in the hallway and it's just little chat chat/flirting that doesn't mean anything. Random extras will be in the turbolift when main characters get in to take it to the bridge or whatever. "Redshirts" were more than just guys to killed on the away mission. Actually, IIRC, redshirts have a pretty good survival rate even on those in the first season. A decent number of random one episode crew members are in the episodes. And even if they're silent roles you get Kirk sometimes addressing them by name or they come over and huddle with Kirk/Spock/Sulu as they plan whatever escape or thing.

By the time you get to the third season, feels like there's 20 people on the whole ship. And other than Scotty they all hang out on the bridge.

Reading Memory Alpha's entries after are good for that background info as they quote from most of the old production books that are out of print. The Compendiums had a lot of stuff, TNG has some really detailed episode pages on MA.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 22, 2017, 09:41:23 PM
The real problem with The Borg is that they had to create an even more frightening and ruthless villain to ever seriously take them down, Kathryn Janeway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 22, 2017, 10:44:49 PM
The borg were cool. Voyager just ran them into the ground so that I don't want to see them for a long long time. I'm glad discovery can't use them because of the time period.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Although that didn't stop enterprise.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 22, 2017, 10:52:56 PM
Enterprise didn't do it as badly as I feared they were going to, but it was still one of their more poorly handled reference to the lore episodes. Compare to the Ferengi one where they never really get a good look at them or anything, assume it's some kind of space pirates, etc.

BUT, they could have:
Quote
Writers Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens pitched a story to be used for season five of Enterprise which would have followed up on the events in "Regeneration". They intended to bring actress Alice Krige back to Star Trek as a Starfleet medical technician who makes contact with the Borg seen in this episode. This was to result in the creation of the Borg Queen first seen in First Contact, which was played by Krige
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 23, 2017, 12:20:17 AM
Enterprise didn't do it as badly as I feared they were going to, but it was still one of their more poorly handled reference to the lore episodes. Compare to the Ferengi one where they never really get a good look at them or anything, assume it's some kind of space pirates, etc.

BUT, they could have:
Quote
Writers Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens pitched a story to be used for season five of Enterprise which would have followed up on the events in "Regeneration". They intended to bring actress Alice Krige back to Star Trek as a Starfleet medical technician who makes contact with the Borg seen in this episode. This was to result in the creation of the Borg Queen first seen in First Contact, which was played by Krige

That might've been cool. I've had a soft spot for Krige despite the Borg Queen misstep, because she got naked in a horror movie I saw as a kid, which affected my adolescence in unexpected ways.

Thanks for the spoiler-tag, Stoney. Someone had already spoiled that for me, even before benji danced too near it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on November 23, 2017, 01:28:21 AM
Enterprise didn't do it as badly as I feared they were going to, but it was still one of their more poorly handled reference to the lore episodes. Compare to the Ferengi one where they never really get a good look at them or anything, assume it's some kind of space pirates, etc.

BUT, they could have:
Quote
Writers Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens pitched a story to be used for season five of Enterprise which would have followed up on the events in "Regeneration". They intended to bring actress Alice Krige back to Star Trek as a Starfleet medical technician who makes contact with the Borg seen in this episode. This was to result in the creation of the Borg Queen first seen in First Contact, which was played by Krige

That might've been cool. I've had a soft spot for Krige despite the Borg Queen misstep, because she got naked in a horror movie I saw as a kid, which affected my adolescence in unexpected ways.

Thanks for the spoiler-tag, Stoney. Someone had already spoiled that for me, even before benji danced too near it.
As much as I like Alice Krige, and I don't mind the Borg Queen, that episode would be a bit too fanwank or Small Universe for me. After reading a bunch of the episode synopses they were pitching, I feel ENT season 5 was going to approach fanfiction levels of callbacks. I wouldn't have expected a 2-part Code Of Honor prequel story to happen, but I'd be less surprised than I'd like to if it did happen.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 23, 2017, 11:54:00 AM
The real problem with The Borg is that they had to create an even more frightening and ruthless villain to ever seriously take them down, Kathryn Janeway.

Anytime I've heard Janeway brought up it's almost always to hate on her  :lol I'm actually thinking of avoiding Voyager because it's the trek show that I remember seeing advertised, watched an episode of once and hated it to the point of avoiding watching Trek till now.

Then again, I was like 8 then.

Voyager rightfully gets beat on. And for me its the least interesting trek show of them all. But Mulgrew is a very good actress. And whatever inconsistencies that people feel Janeway has may or may not be valid, she is still an interesting character and captain.

I wouldn't fault anybody for skipping Voyager but she is not the problem with that show and the actress was the best actor on it imo. The problem with that show is a fundamental disconnect from the premise of the show and the reality of the show. It's a show that needed to be darker and gritty but it wasn't. It was a show about hitting the reset button as often as it could.

At minimum it should have been tonally as dark as deep space nine. But it wasn't. Season 3 of enterprise should have basically been generally what voyager was like. A hard trek into an inhospitable environment. 

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 26, 2017, 03:16:16 AM
I am up to season three of enterprise, and just hit what I think is the second stinker episode in the series so far. Extinction: The one where in airborne virus converts any race into an now-extinct race of sac-breathing, primate-like aliens.  The idea for the virus was interesting, but the idea that the airborne virus has no effect it has nothing to work on, as well as having a guardian race that affects to contain the virus, but gave absolutely  no warning and no kind of bacon or sign that the planet is quarantined is the first of many plot holes.  Actually, if they wanted to make it such a dark show, why not have the containment race instead be a hunter race that previously hunted this race to extinction, but now required them to make their own prey beasts?

I’m also noticing in season three that Captain Archer is being written as shorter tempered, less tolerant, and more obsessive.

 Overall though, I think the show has a better hit to miss ratio than next generation. Some truly fantastic episodes, including First Flight: a bottle episode adding history and rivalry between Archer and A G Robinson.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 26, 2017, 11:34:46 AM
I’m also noticing in season three that Captain Archer is being written as shorter tempered, less tolerant, and more obsessive.

That increasingly becomes the case as the season goes on. This is basically the 9/11 season.

As far as that extinction episode, I think its just weird when Trek does those de-evolution episodes where everybody has to wear shitty make-up and act like cavemen. I'm pretty sure next gen had one of those episodes and I remember thinking it was weird there too.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 26, 2017, 12:11:27 PM
Watched Trek 5 & 6 over the holidays.


I still like Star Trek V: The Final Frontier for specific reasons. Probably not as much as I remember liking it. It's still probably the 2nd worse one (The worst for me was search for spock) out of the original six movies but it still crosses over into something that I would re-watch in the future if bored.

Basically I like two aspects of it that allow me to enjoy it. I like the idea of a zealot who kidnaps the crew to find god and instead finds an evil powerful alien entity. That is classic trek material. This movie also has a strong emphasis on the relationship between the triumvirate of Spock, Bones, and Kirk. And that is the defining relationship of TOS so I get enjoyment out of that.

I understand the complaints. It's a messy movie. There is a lot of dumb stuff in it that waters down those two core ideals of the movie. Sybok being Spock's brother is dumb and unnecessary. The way everybody just flips, even people on the crew who have been with Kirk their entire careers is handled clunky. The way the great barrier is built up as these unbreachable thing that suddenly they are able to breach for no explainable reason other than the plot saying so is incredibly lazy. Basically there is a lot of bad stuff here. But for me those two big good things are enough to find the journey worthwhile despite all the admittedly bad stuff.


Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country's first half is maybe the best first half of any of the Trek movies. The setup and idea is great. Playing off the Klingon's killing Kirk's son and his mistrust of Klingons is good stuff. And the plot setup of the murder and the little mystery that ensues are very good.

The second half is a little lazy by comparison. Christopher plummer has all the elements of a great bad guy for example but it never feels like that confrontation is as epic as it should be. Kirk shows up at the end and saves the day and gives a little speech that feels more fitting as an end to a trek episode than what was really the end of the TOS franchise (ignoring Generations).

It tries though and it goes for all the nostalgia touches and if its not the perfect sendoff its a least a good one. The best thing I can say is that the movie is memorable. For whatever reason, this is the one of these movies that I could remember beat for beat the most. There are trek movies that come after this that I literally can't tell you one thing that happens in it off the top of my head, but this one I had a strong memory of for some reason.
 

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 26, 2017, 10:10:27 PM
VI and First Contact have the advantage of using twin plots that I'm surprised Trek films haven't used more often as its easier to fit the whole crew in. You have stuff going on on the ship and then stuff going on with others on a planet. VI has the whodunnit on the ship while Kirk and McCoy are in the prison and escape on the planet, FC inverts it by putting the action scenes on the ship. Kirk and Spock thus both get to shine. In FC they split up the ensemble pretty decently so that Picard gets Worf (and Beverly for a rare instance of the doctor entering self destruct codes) to help fight while Riker get Troi, Geordi, Broccoli, etc. for some comedic stuff.

Beyond had a similar feeling when the crew was scattered upon landing and it was jumping between them all. And IV did have the stuff like Scotty's "hello computer" and Chekov asking for the nuclear wessels, etc.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 26, 2017, 10:27:16 PM
Watched Enterprise's Twilight episode last night, effectively this series' Yesterday's Enterprise. Very enjoyable, through-and-through. I felt like I got a whole tour of those characters' lives and motivations. I'm sad that they didn't touch on Mayweather though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 26, 2017, 11:50:26 PM
Watched Enterprise's Twilight episode last night, effectively this series' Yesterday's Enterprise. Very enjoyable, through-and-through. I felt like I got a whole tour of those characters' lives and motivations. I'm sad that they didn't touch on Mayweather though.

Yeah that was a good episode. Jolene Blalock was really good with T'pol imo when she was given good material. (which wasn't always the case)

You also are fortunately by a few episodes I hated.

Rajiin was an embarrassing and sexist episode imo. Everybody comes off incredibly dumb in that one. One of the worst episodes of the show.

Impulse was the zombie vulcans they went to rescue on the ship. Silly episode.

Exile was a beauty and the beast episode but in this case, the beast was a stalker, harasser alien with not a single redeemable quality and predictable plotline.

I did not like those three episodes and it sourced me a bit on the early part of the season, but it never gets that bad again during the season imo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 27, 2017, 12:16:07 AM
I kinda really want to see RedLetterMedia re:view both STD and The Orville after their respective first seasons.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 27, 2017, 12:32:42 AM
I think Blalock did the best Vulcan since Nimoy really. Which isn't saying much. Tim Russ is a great actor and funny guy but Tuvok was such a crappy stereotype most of the time.

Enterprise kinda drifts past it because it wasn't in the plans truly until the fourth season, but I don't consider a spoiler as they had adopted it before they ever explicitly said. But the Vulcans on ENT are not the fully logical followers than Spock and forward practiced, they were only partially there and distrust Earth still. Which at this point should be obvious to both you guys.

Even still they point out that T'Pol has stronger emotions than most Vulcans because they hadn't yet figured out how to square the duplicitous actions of the Vulcan High Command with Trek's later characterization of the Vulcans, this is arguably the best part of the fourth season. Also, T'Pol's dealing with nothing but humans and her...later indulgences help keep her on edge.

They were clearly trying to go for a Kirk/Spock dynamic, and oddly to me, I think they actually nailed it better than intended. Because we came into Kirk/Spock when their relationship was established, we get to see Archer and T'Pol develop theirs. From the antagonism early on, with her playing know it all and keeping stuff from him, while he tries to be the brash adventurer. And even by the second season they've already come to establish that trust and her as his primary adviser with the understanding they'll disagree; plus she starts to disobey the Vulcan orders and chooses Archer and the crew many times.

They also did better probably having just worked on trying to integrate Seven into the crew, so the stuff like having T'Pol go to Movie Night initially on suggestion (from Phlox and Archer I think? I know Phlox was shown as it being one of his favorite things to do on the ship) but then of her own volition thereafter and even talks about the movies with others works much better than some of the haphazard crap they did with Seven, really treating her like an ignorant child rather than having a different social framework.

I also liked that they tweaked her sarcastic and facetious comments from being biting and critical of the crew to more friendly and joking, but Blalock/T'Pol still plays them entirely straight so the crew can't really tell. There's a later Voyager episode where Tuvok does the same thing and Tom Paris makes a comment about how he thinks that was a joke and Tim Russ just stays straight-faced, but they never made it part of the character like T'Pol. (To be fair TOS played around with this, especially McCoy and Spock. But they never had established the characters differently and moved towards it, which made ENT different. If anything they instead soften McCoy after having made him too stubborn (and borderline racist) against Spock rather than alter Spock.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 27, 2017, 12:55:00 AM
Quote
One influence on the Ferengi was what Herb Wright described as Gene Roddenberry's "sex fetish." In early first season discussions between them about developing the Ferengi, Roddenberry let Wright know it was his intention to make the species well-endowed. "He wanted to put a gigantic codpiece on the Ferengi," Wright stated. "He spent 25 minutes explaining to me all the sexual positions the Ferengi could go through. I finally said, 'Gene, this is a family show, on at 7:00 on Saturdays. He finally said, 'Okay, you're right.'"

 :leon
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 27, 2017, 01:03:31 AM
Yeah, I always remember McCoy being a racist (specist?) southerner, and am kinda boggled that he's meant to be so charming.

Watched Enterprise's Twilight episode last night, effectively this series' Yesterday's Enterprise. Very enjoyable, through-and-through. I felt like I got a whole tour of those characters' lives and motivations. I'm sad that they didn't touch on Mayweather though.

Yeah that was a good episode. Jolene Blalock was really good with T'pol imo when she was given good material. (which wasn't always the case)

You also are fortunately by a few episodes I hated.

Rajiin was an embarrassing and sexist episode imo. Everybody comes off incredibly dumb in that one. One of the worst episodes of the show.

Impulse was the zombie vulcans they went to rescue on the ship. Silly episode.

Exile was a beauty and the beast episode but in this case, the beast was a stalker, harasser alien with not a single redeemable quality and predictable plotline.

I did not like those three episodes and it sourced me a bit on the early part of the season, but it never gets that bad again during the season imo.
Rajin was really bad; like, really in-poor-faith fanservice bad. The slave merchant has just a bunch of females on display; my first thought honestly was, "Wait, all the races are male dominant? Why aren't there scantily clad buff dudes around?" Which is probably my UC Santa Cruz background working overtime, but still. The slave merchant also looked like he was cosplaying a Dragonball Z character, you know the one. They even had to put the woman in a different revealing suit in the final scene. It also had the weird bit where Archer enters the jail cell with someone who can disrupt brains, and with no other guards present he leaves the door open behind him. Baffling.

The space zombie vulcans in Impulse were going to happen since they Chekov's gunned them before leaving earth. I was happy to see it wasn't something they unleashed on the whole Enterprise crew, as I'd feared. Blalock worked pretty well with the script she had, I felt. But, yeah, dumb.

Exile's Beauty and the Beast was so utterly transparent that I was relieved to see just how creeped out every member of the crew was by him, and enjoyed watching it play out appropriately rather than the original really stalker-ish, male-chauvinist manner of the faerie tale. But overall still a middling/poor episode. I remember there were a few Crusher/Troi episodes where some fanboi alien gets fascinated and has to be shut down. I never like them.

But that Extinction episode was just stunningly workshop-acting "now you're a gibbon" bad. It was as bad and dumb as Cogenitor was surprising and smart.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 27, 2017, 01:12:14 AM
At least Gene lived long enough to see his wife perform oo-mox on a Ferengi. Then Picard recite Shakespeare sonnets to her.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 27, 2017, 01:13:33 AM
Quote
In 2012, Ronald D. Moore remembered Gene Roddenberry performed a rewrite on "Ménage à Troi" and added a questionable description of fruit during the picnic scene on Betazed; "Mrs. Troi reaches into the picnic basket and brings out an oskoid, which is a long cylindrical piece of fruit with veins going down the side and offers it to Riker to take a bite."

Director Robert Legato remembers, "The script was written by Gene Roddenberry's secretary [Susan Sackett, along with her partner, Fred Bronson], and Gene's wife [Majel Barrett] was in it, so he was on the set all the time. It made me nervous. The first day, when I had to get out there and tell everyone what to do, I looked out the corner of my eye to see how Gene was reacting. But they were so nice. Gene was so supportive, and Majel was great; if you want to try it three different ways, she will.
excellent
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 27, 2017, 01:16:22 AM
If I wrote for The Orville, I'd find it hard not to mine these old episodes pages for rejected content.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 27, 2017, 01:16:46 AM
Came across what I thought was the first truly great episode of Enterprise. There have been plenty of good to very good episodes of the show but arguably not so many where I could easily put it in a time capsule and say this is as good as it gets for various reasons.

Dear Doctor was a very good episode and similar to the one I'm talking about. Shockwave both parts are very good episodes. But Cogenitor is to me what Trek is about. A good moral dilemma that is evenly balanced on both sides so its hard to feel good with whatever decision is made.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Cogenitor_(episode)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogenitor

I have a weird tick where if a piece of entertainment makes me tense, sometimes I'll just pause it and come back to it later right in the middle of the episode. It's odd. I wish I didn't do it, but its my way of dealing with an overload of tension. Sometimes just a minute is enough. Sometimes it takes 10 minutes. Sometimes I'll stop and come back to it the next day. This episode made me take three of those little breaks. I think this episode tensed me up because it telegraphs where its going super early so the tension builds to an inevitable easy to see climax that is still satisfying. But dealing with the tension the whole episode causes my little tick to surface.


btw this might be the shittiest trailer of all time for anything. If this is how they advertised the show, no wonder people tuned out. Completely misses the point of the episode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNYOdu59gew

I went back through the thread to find this, which I tried to only skim when I first saw it, due to possible spoilers. Hot-damn, that is a seriously inappropriate trailer. :lol

I'm surprised that you felt the ending was telegraphed. I knew things were not going to go well, but I didn't think things would go that far. No-one is innocent in that episode, except "Charles," which is kind of the whole point.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
I honestly expected Archer would grant asylum and that they'd have no further contact with the more advanced Vissians, maybe humans forgoing their free technical advice in favor of being "right" in granting asylum. Nope.  :'(
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 27, 2017, 01:30:17 AM
Oh when I say telegraphed I meant more that this was going to head to a breaking point between the races rather than the specific ending. You keep waiting for the family to kind of blow up at Trip and such. But that episode was handled much smarter than that. That specific ending is a gut punch which I wasn't expecting but that's what makes it great. 

They didn't cheat the episode like I thought they would. Where the aliens learn the folly of their ways and just give in to the morally superior humans. They gave the very worst example of what could have happened instead of giving one or both sides a happy ending. And that final reveal between Trip and Archer is just great.

It's a much better prime directive cultural contamination episode than they generally do because its personal and it has a big cost. It's not abstract.

At first I found myself annoyed by Trip overly involving himself in their culture and then you root for him as you really understand the situation and then dat ending. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 27, 2017, 01:42:24 AM
If I wrote for The Orville, I'd find it hard not to mine these old episodes pages for rejected content.

I'm pretty sure they do....

I'll always say I like the orville and I'm a firm believer in the idea that sometimes execution is more important than originality but every SINGLE orville episode has been a remix of combined trek episodes. And I mean every single one.

One of my hopes for that show going forward is that they truly find their unique voice and not just remix and sample trek plotlines. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 27, 2017, 09:52:43 AM
Christ, that religious suicide bombers episode was a little on-the-fucking-nose, don't you think?

It's even more offensive because they went so far out of their way to make all the religious aliens effectively caucasian. Yeah, yeah, they're suicide bombers because of a weird, meaningless differentiation between two religious sects — but whatever you do, don't make any of them brown, that'd be beyond the pale (so to speak).   ::)

Then I got Jeffrey Combs again in a wonderful Andorian appearance that also progressed this needlessly complex Xindi plotline. I liked it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 28, 2017, 03:30:23 AM
Harbinger s3 e15
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kind of a weird, one off episode with character growth“ but otherwise annoying. Trip and T’pol finally experience the combination of the sexual tension that has been a hallmark of the relationship the season. That’s great, but then T’pol seems  to uncharacteristically refuse to take responsibility for her own emotions, consequences of her actions, etc. Still, kind of titillating to see that much of JoLene Blalock’s butt.

The other part between the Marines and Malcolm was tremendously telegraphed, and further cements Malcolm as a petty officer more than a lieutenant.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 29, 2017, 03:25:09 PM
Watched Generations. Man you feel acutely aware you wasted two hours of your life when you are done with this one.

 :goty2


It sucks. Really badly. So much worse than any of the prior six films. Might as well point this out right off the bat.

Quote
Moore described Generations as a project with a number of required elements that the film "had to have".[13] Berman felt that including the original cast of the previous Star Trek films felt like a "good way to pass the baton" to the next series.[12] The studio wanted the original cast to only appear in the first minutes, with Kirk only recurring at the end of the film. Other requests included a big Khan Noonien Singh-like antagonist, Klingons, and a humorous Data plot.[13]

Quote
Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley declined to appear as Spock and Leonard McCoy. Nimoy (who was offered the job of directing the film) felt that there were story problems with the script and that Spock's role was extraneous[6]—"I said to everybody concerned [...] that if you took the dozen or so lines of Spock dialog and simply changed the name of the character, nobody would notice the difference."[7] The Next Generation producer Rick Berman said that "Both Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley felt they made a proper goodbye in the last movie [Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country]".[8]

The script fucking sucks. The movie is constructed in the way a lame TV episode is in that everything blatantly sets itself up so on the nose so you can connect the dots. Kill picard's nephew early in via dialogue. Pay it off later in shitty Dickens-esque nexus xmas scene. Give Data emotion chip. Pay it off later in shitty enterprise scene where he finds spot and sheds tears. I mean a good script has setup and pay-off but its subtle. This movie hangs a big sign on everyone's neck and says, HEY DUMBFUCK, here is the pay-off for that stupid thing we set up earlier! There is nothing subtle in this film.

Data's "funny" emotion scene stuff is so broad and so embarrassing. Picard is given emotional scenes that aren't earned and make you cringe. Malcolm McDowell and his character suck. The only reason we are even supposed to care is because they need to drop in a plot point that a nearby planet we never see is gonna be destroyed so better save those people! They destroy the enterprise in a meaningless combat scene with klingons just to up the stakes even though none of this has any weight or consequence to it. It's just there to pad out time and have action.

This is the real first time you see the limitations and the burn out in that era of Trek start to begin imo. You have a movie that feels like it would have made a bad episode. It doesn't look or feel like a motion picture and it has none of the scale of one. There is also a blandness here that was always a little bit there in TNG. Don't get me wrong. I love TNG. But at its worse there was a blandness to the show because some many of the characters were disposable and didn't really have distinct personalities. TOS had a lot of flaws. It was campy and corny at times. But it was never bland. It may have had some bland minor character but it knew to spend 90% of its time focused around the personalities of Kirk, Spock, and Bones who weren't bland. This movie just sucks and it's in unfortunate era of time, that they just couldn't let go of TOS and try to embrace what made TNG good. Instead this movies serves no one well. Both TOS and TNG come off looking bad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 29, 2017, 05:13:19 PM
I finished s3 of Enterprise. The Xyndi War was an interesting way to spend a season. Good recurring villains, consistent peril, the continuity of having the ship maintain its condition over the last 4-5 episodes: all of these felt accomplished, and new to the series. Somehow I couldn't wait for the situation to be solved. I binged more of this season than I've done for any other show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 29, 2017, 10:06:40 PM
I had my share of issues with Season 3 but giving it a season long arc definitely gave the show a momentum that the prior trek shows hadn't had.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 30, 2017, 12:22:42 AM
Definitely.

I'll admit to being so accustomed to the one-and-done format of Trek that Enterprise managed to surprise me repeatedly by leaving the ship in increasingly bad shape. The first two times I was waiting for some kind of time-loop to manifest, or for Daniels to come in and wave a magic penis around and have it reset. NOPE, just a completely f'ed up ship, struggling to complete its mission. Pretty awesome.

The Xyndi reveal, the Expanse's true nature, that was some pretty good stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 30, 2017, 06:55:25 PM
Watched "The Emissary" earlier and never expected to find a klingon girl to be so attractive.

On the first episode of the third season and TNG really improved. Didn't expect a clipshow to end the second season though.
What's a clipshow?

That Emissary actress is Suzie Plakson, and she is fantastic. She was also a Vulcan in TNG at one point, nails it, and goes on to play an Andorian in Enterprise, which is also pretty great.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on November 30, 2017, 07:11:44 PM
Quote
"Shades of Gray" is the 22nd episode of the second season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek: The Next Generation, the 48th episode overall. It was originally broadcast on July 17, 1989, in broadcast syndication. It was the only clip show filmed during the series and was created due to a lack of funds left over from other episodes during the season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on November 30, 2017, 07:14:52 PM
Watched "The Emissary" earlier and never expected to find a klingon girl to be so attractive.

On the first episode of the third season and TNG really improved. Didn't expect a clipshow to end the second season though.
What's a clipshow?

That Emissary actress is Suzie Plakson, and she is fantastic. She was also a Vulcan in TNG at one point, nails it, and goes on to play an Andorian in Enterprise, which is also pretty great.

They just show clips from previous episodes. IIRC, there was a wraparound where Riker almost gets killed by some aliens and then he has "flashbacks" while he clings to life. The reason for it was there was a writers' strike near the end of the season, and they had to cut it short.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 01, 2017, 03:21:20 AM
The writer's strike is also the reason for the episode "The Child" which was a recycled Phase II script, like The Motion Picture was. I think it contributed to another "recycled script" episode that season too.

It's also why the second season is four episodes short. Well, five actually, because that one's a clip show. (The 22* episodes of season two are the lowest for a non-premiere season of Trek until Enterprise's fourth season. All other seasons of Trek have 26 episodes except for TOS and ENT season three which have 24 and ENT season four which has 22.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on December 01, 2017, 03:54:55 AM
Voyager is pretty bad, but it's not nearly as awful as I remember.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 01, 2017, 07:09:06 AM
Voyager has some truly great Trek. (Like, to take a example from someone who has moved up in the world since....the Bryan Fuller written episode "Living Witness")

But almost none of it requires it to be on Voyager. Swapping a lot of VOY's best for TNG's worst could be done to make one great show and one garbage bin for example.

And outside of The Doctor, everyone has drastic characterization problems to where nobody truly progresses. And ultimately part of that is the shows main problem, it never lets itself dare chase any premise out of a safe little box that resets the characters, the ship, the torpedo count, the shuttles, etc. at the end of the episode. So you mainly get a lot of disappointment that makes it seem even worse than the mostly mediocre it is.

VOY is building off TNG because DS9 couldn't do the same kind of stories, it was tied into its local part of the universe, so there is some advancement in considering premises and ENT built off VOY in a similar manner but the prequel premise added its own problems.

"Dragons Teeth" is a perfect example of all of Voyager's inherit problems within a good Trek episode. Nothing requires it to be the Voyager crew, TNG could do this episode with a few parts changed around. But the central premise, the discovery of a landmark technology from a "lost race" whose society and civilization were ruined by hostile powers who have already butted heads against the crew provides the opening hand, then you get the turn, that the "lost race" was defeated because of their past actions and now they plan to seize Voyager (or the Enterprise) to begin the rebuilding of their empire, and finally the river, where the ships escape and Seven/Janeway acknowledge they most likely reignited a major interstellar war after hundreds of years of peace.

But Voyager as a show can't follow up on this, it has to continue its relentless travel towards the Alpha Quadrant. And unlike ENT, or "Year of Hell" or even the Equinox, we're never allowed a ship that's truly hurting, low on resources, etc.

They screwed up with the Kazon because there was no reason for a race that scavenges for parts to be such a long term antagonist across so much space, especially a particular tribe of this race and your former crewmember (who had a baby!) and then overcompensated by going in the other direction with everyone but The Borg. The one time it somewhat worked was when they had the Hirogen for only a period of a season as semi-recurring in small groups or solo, and they had to ruin that by capping it with not only a two-part Holodeck episode centered around World War II starring a whole host of Hirogen, but then suddenly three years later run into one of these same faction of the Hirogen's outposts. (I'd also like to point out that in that Holodeck episode, at the end of the first part (or at the middle if it's viewed in the two hour format, I dunno what's on the DVDs/streaming, it originally aired as two hour format then reruns were split), they use actual explosives to blow a hole through multiple decks of the ship. Nobody seems much to care. The very next episode starts with Tom Paris in the holodeck pretending to be a 1950's car mechanic.)

The Delta Flyer alone makes a mockery of the show's potential as showing a true journey into the unknown, but then there's the fact that they REBUILD IT COMPLETELY after losing the first one.

And everything about the Maquis crew immediately mocks the shows premise of having to integrate them.

I won't take credit for the idea as a whole, but I did start in the little GAF TrekTalk orbit the joke about the show actually being about a villain and Janeway is that villain character. I've since seen articles and stuff expounding on that reconsideration of Voyager from that perspective and how it makes it a totally different show. I was mainly working off Janeway's constant double standard with Federation Rules that always fit whatever she wanted including more than once basically suggesting genocide*, along with the fact she kept Harry Kim an Ensign for the entire run while promoting other characters.

This joke is only really seriously added onto when you consider how her actions in the Finale are arguably one of the most questionable or vile acts ever shown by a Starfleet Captain, let alone main character of a series, on screen, especially when compared to the poignancy of the Kim/Chakotay/Doctor episode where Voyager is frozen in ice that explores a similar theme. Janeway's motivation is sacrificing untold trillions or more so that Tuvok can get home quicker for an eventual treatment for a future illness. During which she breaks every rule in the book, informs people in the past of their future, TAKES WITH HER ADVANCED WEAPONRY, alters decades of history at that point, all to speed this up, something she had just a year prior in our time chewed out and destroyed the Equinox for daring to do on her watch. Oh, plus the other half of her motivation is just to stick her dick in the eye of the Borg Queen (no Cream avatar) and probably plunge the Delta Quadrant into horrific warfare for centuries*.

*To be fair, significant levels of the Federation leadership (along with the Cardassian and Romulan leaderships earlier) were also willing to commit genocide of The Founders and plunge the Gamma Quadrant into chaos to win/prevent the Dominion War. So Janeway was seemingly cut out to be more of a high ranking insane Starfleet Admiral of the Week than a series helming Captain anyway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 04, 2017, 09:56:44 PM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/12/05/tarantino-might-make-a-star-trek-movie

Quote
File this under today's most unexpected news - a new rumor suggests Quentin Tarantino is planning to make a Star Trek movie at Paramount.

Sources close to Deadline say that Tarantino has cooked up a "great idea" for a Star Trek movie, and after sharing his idea with JJ Abrams (who 'rebooted' the series in 2009), a plan has reportedly been put in place to assemble a writer's room to begin building a script. If all goes to plan, Tarantino may direct the film, with Abrams attached to produce.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 04, 2017, 10:19:44 PM
:thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 04, 2017, 10:21:55 PM
I'm all for it. I can finally see Quentin do sci fi.

Also, I'm having discovery withdrawal.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on December 05, 2017, 06:21:23 AM
I'm curious if it's going to be this idea. I'd be okay if the Kelvin timeline jumped to their version of TNG.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzNnfKT6IrM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on December 05, 2017, 02:03:30 PM
so any guesses to what charlie brooker and co. are gonna try to say with this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgTtyfgzGc0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 05, 2017, 02:50:30 PM
so any guesses to what charlie brooker and co. are gonna try to say with this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgTtyfgzGc0

Is this the dark, R-rated Galaxy Quest we were denied?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 05, 2017, 04:00:41 PM
Meth Damon tho :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on December 05, 2017, 08:19:33 PM
so any guesses to what charlie brooker and co. are gonna try to say with this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgTtyfgzGc0
It'll be a holodeck episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 06, 2017, 02:55:46 AM
It's hard to imagine a Tarantino style approach in a Trek film (not a knock. I adore the man). But ANYTHING is better than what those last three films were going for.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 06, 2017, 07:41:31 AM
Just finished "Yesterday's Enterprise" and I loved it. Might be my favorite episode so far.
:respect

That is one of my all-time favorite episodes, too! Jesus, what a fantastic story, and they don't even renege on the ending. There are a few more upcoming references to its repercussions in TNG, so look forward to those.

I want a model of the NCC1701C more than any other Enterprise.

Look forward to my other favorite one-off, "Lower Decks."  :heartbeat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 06, 2017, 08:04:01 AM
so any guesses to what charlie brooker and co. are gonna try to say with this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgTtyfgzGc0

I don't think I'm ready for that. It looks like Galaxy Quest fucked the Orville, but it's Black Mirror so the baby's going to be a horror film.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 06, 2017, 08:06:00 AM
It's hard to imagine a Tarantino style approach in a Trek film (not a knock. I adore the man). But ANYTHING is better than what those last three films were going for.

Those were serviceable SF action films.

They just weren't particularly Star Trek, despite two actors doing fabulous imitations of McCoy and Spock.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 06, 2017, 09:54:18 AM
Just finished "Yesterday's Enterprise" and I loved it. Might be my favorite episode so far.

Glad you enjoyed it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 06, 2017, 10:00:55 AM
I think Tarantino can definitely make a great Trek film. I imagine it'd be a spy type fun Trek film with adventure maybe. I haven't known him to fuck with science themes or philosophy except for maybe kill bill vol 2 and Pulp Fiction I guess. He's my favorite director but I have no idea what route he would take. He could take the Breathless route that is more expository dialogue and make it a more character based approach ala Deathproof, or maybe a more fun spy/infiltrator/thief type story like Jackie Brown or Reservoir Dogs. But I think that he has the potential for a mind fuck Trek as well (ala Pulp Fiction). Too many good options. And that's just limiting him to types of films he's done already. Maybe he'll surprise us.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 06, 2017, 11:10:31 AM
It's hard to imagine a Tarantino style approach in a Trek film (not a knock. I adore the man). But ANYTHING is better than what those last three films were going for.

Those were serviceable SF action films.

They just weren't particularly Star Trek, despite two actors doing fabulous imitations of McCoy and Spock.

They are fine/standard action movies. Honestly, I would have less of a problem with them if they weren't Trek movies but some other franchise of space action movies. I just don't think they capture what is good about TOS outside of surface stuff.

I'll probably have more to say about them when I rewatch them as I continue through all the movies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 06, 2017, 01:48:17 PM
I liked the first one. Say what you want but it's what made me plunker down and watch Star Trek tv after not liking Trek most of my life. You guys may not like the new movies, and I think they're flawed too. But they (re)introduced a new generation to Star Trek. Before that movie I kind thought Trek was stupid and boring. I went to see Generations, Nemesis, and other Trek films in the theater with my dad (a Trekkie) as a kid. I watched TNG's final episode the night it aired. I watched Voyager almost every week with my dad and the show went in one ear and out the other. I never really had a relationship with Trek. The first movie was a nice re-introduction and I was now old enough to appreciate and even fall in love with Trek.

This speaks nothing of the films' quality (although I still like it after becoming a seasoned Trek vet) but in these discussions about how oh so bad the new movies are, that element is never mentioned much less respected. So there's that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 06, 2017, 04:37:25 PM
I fully acknowledge I may be overly harsh on those new movies. Probably in a way that I'm generally not when it comes to fandom. Star Trek TOS is one of the few things I tend to be overly nerdy about in a purist kind of manner. Purist in tone I mean, not in lore canon and stuff like that.

I think those movies are fine for people new to the franchise or casual fans, (or if you just like them). The first one I went to see with my brother and my nephew and they fall into that casual/new group and they enjoyed it. So I understand they have appeal to people and those movies aren't just made for nerd purists like me.

My issue which is only reinforced after having re-watched the first 6 movies is that they don't reflect the things I value in TOS specifically and Trek in general. Oh, the names are there. The people acting like the characters are there. It's like watching an alien facsimile. It's certainly an approximation of TOS but it never feels like the spirit is there. The plots are complete throwaway. They are less diverse than the show or the old movies in tone. The relationships don't grip in the same way. They are decent/good modern circa 2010 action movies but poor trek movies to me. They are neither different enough to really seem fresh nor consistent enough where it feels like something actually like the tos show or movies were. They aren't bold movies that risk much even when they try to ala Vulcan genocide.   

There are reboots that are new but capture the essence of what the old thing was or improve it. The new MST3k reboot for example. BSG re-imagining. I think Discovery is a better reboot of trek than those movies. It takes more chances.

The best thing I can say about Taratino coming in if he does, is however it turns out, is that I know whatever he does will have a vision. It will have a unique take on the world and not just feel like a cobbled together thing to try to please everybody.
 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 06, 2017, 06:35:43 PM
I don't usually care about that, though. The new movies absolutely made Star Trek more popular, and somewhat more acceptable fandom wise. Being the butt of the lol geeks joke for so long repelled people from ever wanting to touch the series, myself included. Trekkies themselves didn't help. I don't really care for the whole introducing a new generation angle anywhere mostly because when it comes to anything that has already been popular or somewhat popular for decades that's not all on whatever new installment reaped the benefits.

That's why reboots, soft reboots, etc. are an easy sell and are further relied upon by corporations. When something has gone on long enough it'll inevitably reach a point where less people are inclined to start because of the time sink. Why start Star Trek when there's 5 shows, a cartoon and ten movies to catch up on? A reboot with all the recognizable characters everybody has seen referenced and/or parodied everywhere without the decades long continuity but with high production values isn't the hardest sell.

Feels like it has less to do with the movie itself and falls more along the lines of praising the producers for knowing how well to sell a product.

I just don't think the first JJ film is that terrible and the third one is enjoyable fun.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 06, 2017, 06:36:48 PM
I fully acknowledge I may be overly harsh on those new movies. Probably in a way that I'm generally not when it comes to fandom. Star Trek TOS is one of the few things I tend to be overly nerdy about in a purist kind of manner. Purist in tone I mean, not in lore canon and stuff like that.

I think those movies are fine for people new to the franchise or casual fans, (or if you just like them). The first one I went to see with my brother and my nephew and they fall into that casual/new group and they enjoyed it. So I understand they have appeal to people and those movies aren't just made for nerd purists like me.

My issue which is only reinforced after having re-watched the first 6 movies is that they don't reflect the things I value in TOS specifically and Trek in general. Oh, the names are there. The people acting like the characters are there. It's like watching an alien facsimile. It's certainly an approximation of TOS but it never feels like the spirit is there. The plots are complete throwaway. They are less diverse than the show or the old movies in tone. The relationships don't grip in the same way. They are decent/good modern circa 2010 action movies but poor trek movies to me. They are neither different enough to really seem fresh nor consistent enough where it feels like something actually like the tos show or movies were. They aren't bold movies that risk much even when they try to ala Vulcan genocide.   

There are reboots that are new but capture the essence of what the old thing was or improve it. The new MST3k reboot for example. BSG re-imagining. I think Discovery is a better reboot of trek than those movies. It takes more chances.

The best thing I can say about Taratino coming in if he does, is however it turns out, is that I know whatever he does will have a vision. It will have a unique take on the world and not just feel like a cobbled together thing to try to please everybody.

I completely agree Discovery is a better reboot. I'm still grateful for the first reboot film though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 01:29:30 AM
Trek 09 does literally everything wrong, has a horrible nonsense plot full of dumb spectacles and undermines any good parts by slamming its head into the wall every ten minutes.

Into Darkness is really an amazing example of how to shoot a film off a one page outline of scene descriptions. (Somebody told me that FILM HULK dude wrote like a 30 page essay on this flaw in films with ID as the main example, so I'll just assume he said anything I could from now on.) Although I rarely see people point out my favorite part...when he's in the brig and goes "My. Name. IS KHAN." like anyone should know what that means. Even better it's not even fucking relevant to the plot that he be KHAN. :lol (Runner up is when Spock calls up Old Spock to ask "who's Khan?" and Old Spock just says "he's very dangerous one of the most I've ever met" or something which is like total great help there, we all already knew that.*)

Beyond is great, Idris is quite wasted, the whole "debate" he's supposed to offer Kirk is kinda lost on THIS version of the franchise and stuck onto the end unnecessarily, as is all the stuff about the planet changing them and whatever. But THE ENSEMBLE, everyone is part of this movie. And they're split up, so we get pairs time that works well to finally give us stuff outside of Spock and Kirk, and then as they come back together, and it doesn't even degrade at that point, the Ensemble keeps on chugging with everyone seemingly part of it until Kirk runs off to get his shirt torn. Really the twist with Idris' character and plotline undermines what would have been a stronger point they could have fleshed out with him just being an alien who distrusts the claims of the Federation, especially the Abramsverse version, and has a desire to call attention to it, make his people a victim of Khan's weapons or something. It's not until the very end of the film that he even gets to articulate his dispute, and it's not even justified, it's selfish and his plan is petty revenge. (The ending is almost too TREKIAN with Kirk trying to appeal to his better nature, and argue in favor of the Federation/Humanity (odd conflation but shhhhh) and its goals rather than Kirk simply pointing out that he doesn't even believe his own bullshit and then building some kind of rudimentary lathe to mangle his body horribly in ways that shouldn't be allowed to be shown on screen.)

*I just realized they could have tossed in another but real sly Wrath of Khan call back there, Old Spock could have offered the tip that "his pattern indicated two dimensional thinking" and Spock could have raised his eyebrow like he just thought of something which is the plan he pulls off later which is the only decent part of the film. But that would have been a smart call back rather than slapping Trek names on a half 9/11 truther story.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 01:47:58 AM
I don't usually care about that, though. The new movies absolutely made Star Trek more popular, and somewhat more acceptable fandom wise. Being the butt of the lol geeks joke for so long repelled people from ever wanting to touch the series, myself included. Trekkies themselves didn't help. I don't really care for the whole introducing a new generation angle anywhere mostly because when it comes to anything that has already been popular or somewhat popular for decades that's not all on whatever new installment reaped the benefits.

That's why reboots, soft reboots, etc. are an easy sell and are further relied upon by corporations. When something has gone on long enough it'll inevitably reach a point where less people are inclined to start because of the time sink. Why start Star Trek when there's 5 shows, a cartoon and ten movies to catch up on? A reboot with all the recognizable characters everybody has seen referenced and/or parodied everywhere without the decades long continuity but with high production values isn't the hardest sell.

Feels like it has less to do with the movie itself and falls more along the lines of praising the producers for knowing how well to sell a product.
I mean, yeah, there's a reason they did Kirk/Spock/Scotty and all. Though I think TNG has almost reached a point now where you could do it.

I think though that Trek can be sold as a concept like Star Wars is being, the jedi, the force, etc. sell it, not dependent on Luke or even really Vader anymore. They seem to have introduced a new set of characters for a new generation just fine.

I also think there's a value in "my crew" as for most of us it was truly TNG with the films of the TOS more than the TOS episodes probably. Some poor souls probably "came in" with Voyager as "their crew" they first watched. Now people are getting Discovery...maybe.

So I'm not sure that the Star Trek films necessarily need Kirk/Spock or even a rebooted Picard/Data/Worf. The new films actually haven't been blockbusters compared to the movie industry itself. They've outperformed the TNG films easily, but the TOS films did comparatively as well as these are doing. Toss out V ($101 million), and the old five TOS films made $132-271 million in adjusted dollars in NA. The new three have done $158-288 million. Both ID and Beyond did better elsewhere than in NA which is something to consider.

So I'm not sure you can't, in some way, create a new film only crew that's unique and for a new generation who have these adventures... just not at a $200 million budget which the next one won't be getting anyway unless Tarantino somehow can just demand it, and not pull in $300+ million at the box office that these are doing worldwide because that's just what the name does I guess.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 01:55:50 AM
As a side note, I guess Quentin probably has the clout to throw out the already planned film with Kirk's dad Thor coming back.

He's right in that video about how the obvious thing is remaking the TOS episodes which were held back by the format and budget and tech, which they had done a bit of in the reboot set comics. I think the second pilot, "Where No Man Has Gone Before" is an obvious place to start.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 07, 2017, 02:14:06 AM
Didn't say it's laudibke because of that. Just that that aspect is never given merit is all.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 02:24:18 AM
Seems kinda not really measurable and certainly something I wouldn't argue for why I like/dislike them. So it's tough to give it a prominent place of merit.

Have the films (especially after the first one) really spawned a bonanza of new film themed merchandise like toys and stuff? (I really have no clue.) Other than the video game which hurt Into Darkness at the box office by being at least three times as enjoyable. (Source: J.J. Abrams. And myself.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 02:29:55 AM
speaking of which, totally nailed that first season lineup of action figures for TNG:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JokTF78d6VQ/Tzc7eVucl2I/AAAAAAAAMo4/sTwos8yFKiw/s1600/galoobaliens26.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 02:34:44 AM
They were making these before the show premiered and during its first season, so they didn't know what characters would be popular, they wound up producing so many Riker's that they were giving them away in all sorts of stuff. The "bearded" version was literally just drawn on with a marker as a way to sell excess inventory during the second season lol:
(http://trekcore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/bearded_riker.jpg)

I wish they had drawn on the picture too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 02:43:17 AM
NOPE

RAPE GANGS

THE RAPE GANGS
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 07, 2017, 02:47:46 AM
she also jumps into the frame and waves at the end of the episode before the one where she dies because it was filmed after, which is fun

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/7/7d/Denise_Crosby_waves_goodbye.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20161128030429&path-prefix=en)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzKEglSelBY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on December 07, 2017, 02:26:06 PM
Tasha Yar was a much better security officer than Worf.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 07, 2017, 02:38:14 PM
worf is a better character tho
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 07, 2017, 02:42:56 PM
Worf never even fucked a robot, the coward.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on December 07, 2017, 04:46:02 PM
http://deadline.com/2017/12/quentin-tarantino-star-trek-r-rating-mark-l-smith-the-revenant-drew-pearce-lindsay-beer-jj-abrams-1202222161/

R-rated and Tarantino hopes to direct. I still think the latter might just be something he's teasing so he could have more control over negotiations on the project. If he was really interested in directing, I think he'd want to write it himself. Then again, maybe him not writing this will be his excuse on how this doesn't count towards his 10 movies.

I want a Shatner cameo, bad. I want Shatner and Sam Jackson to interact.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 08, 2017, 01:36:20 AM
I'm LOVING the fourth season of Enterprise! Two consecutive three-part episodes? :heartbeat

It's so neat, they kind of gave them the heroes' welcome that almost could have been the end of the show. Then they get into the xenophobic backlash against all brown people aliens due to a terrorist act, even after we've emerged successful. Hell, Starfleet doesn't even try to permanently occupy The Expanse, so they've got wiser heads than our own in charge.

4, 5, 6 are all Dr. Noonian Soong focused, with hints of Khan (including specific camera shots!), 7, 8, 9 are internal turmoil on Vulcan, with nice analogs between Israel and Palestine. And I love the background Vulcan stuff. I remember T'Pau is referred to as a great spiritual leader of the Vulcans that saved them from some heavy stuff. All the interaction between Vulcans and Andorians is so good. Cmdr. Shran is a great character, and I'm sad that I won't see him again when this show ends.

I'm going to be so bummed when this is over.  :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 08, 2017, 03:28:09 AM
Then there's even more good news! Pretty much the entire season is two or three part episodes. Maybe a few single episodes in the mix, including the Finale.

It's actually an interesting format for a show. Can't really think of another show off the top of my head that's done that continuously.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 10, 2017, 10:50:12 AM
Re-watched First Contact and Insurrection.

First Contact is a good movie. It has the Borg which Next Gen always excelled with. It's has that star trekian plot of lets do Time Travel (and ignore all the contamination issues this would cause)

It's generally a solid, entertaining movie and probably the best film of this era of Trek. The idea of Picard being haunted by his time as a Borg is a good idea even if I think the writing of it isn't handled in the best manner. Like randomly calling Worf a Coward. And the whole Picard as Ahab thing maybe needing a lighter touch since he behaves very different than he ever did on the show. It's still mostly an exciting movie with good action. And its a major step-up coming after generations if you can ignore that stuff.

I also actually like Insurrection. It would have been a nice 2 parter episode which also of course serves as a valid complaint tossed at the movie. It feels more like television in scope and scale than a movie. That doesn't bother me but I understand the complaint that perhaps a movie should be something grander in vision than an extended episode.

The most common complaint of course is why Picard's sudden change of stance from Journey's End to this episode. Whether a person agrees with Picard and what he did during this conflict or not, it is a jarring change since the episode philosophically is essentially the same. The fact that Picard doesn't even mention this is disappointing writing. It could have served to head off this valid complaint. He should have made a speech commenting on his regret at doing what he did in the past. Maybe showing the consequences. Instead the writers give him a generic speech about sins people have committed in the past. It's like the writers were either afraid to make Picard less heroic or were too embarrassed to admit they were recycling an episode plot for a movie. Unfortunate.

Outside of that, I kinda like the movie though. But like I said, I'm judging relative to a tv episode versus a movie. How you view that divide probably effects how you feel about the movie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 13, 2017, 01:14:10 PM
And I finished up the original run of movies by watching Nemesis.

So of course Nemesis is not a good movie but for me its not the whole trainwreck that Generations is. Generations is unsalvageable imo. There is almost nothing good in it. Nemesis has a few moments for me that work (the ending with data which I kind of liked and a few other moments)

The movie falls apart the moment Shinzon is introduced. He's an awful villain with the most ridiculous convoluted backstory ever. The idea that he has been treated like shit by the Romulans but still willing to do their bidding is odd. His mind rape fascination with Troi is completely unmotivated and embarrassing. The remans are an unnecessary plot point just to create some monster of the week villains.

Just watching the movie from moment to moment is a decent enough experience in a way. It's just once your brain actively engages you immediately realize how dumb the plot is. They try to create a decent moment when Picard tries to tell Shinzon he can still change. This is what should have been far more the focus with the Shinzon character. A battle between loyalty and what a true person's inner nature is. Instead they have poisoned the well too much by having him commit mind rape and and work underneath the romulans who have treated him like shit.

There is kernel of an idea there in what makes the man. Nature versus Nurture. But they blow it all in their need to create another big bad guy just to knock down by the end of the movie. And this is one of signs of what is the true issue of these later Trek movies for me. All of these movies are now about punching the psychotic bad guy or women at the end of the movie and killing them. There is no more possibility to do stuff like in Voyage home or the Motion Picture or even final frontier. The diversity of plot is gone. They are now all setups to beat a generic villain. Now that is a Star Trek plot. But its not the only Star Trek plot when you look at the old movies and tv shows. But for modern movies they started to feel like that was the only way to do it. From my mind's eye, that philosophy continues over to the recent movies also. But we'll see. I'll watch those final three next.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 13, 2017, 01:44:04 PM
Nemesis had like 45 minutes cut out of it that spent more time on all the characters, it's where Wesley appeared, Shinzon's whole deal is explained more including the Troi stuff. They had to cut it to keep all the action like the JEEP and then the escape from inside Shinzon's ship and the stupid fist fight with Riker. Which was the studio's priority to help make the franchise into a blockbuster series!

Though the deleted scenes (which is only half the material still) on the DVD are not particularly great and some of it is even worse than what made the cut, there's some decent stuff with Picard getting a moment or two with each of his crew members. Like the B4 stuff at the end has more callbacks to a cut scene between Picard and Data that would have been earlier. Shinzon has an earlier introduction with Ron Pearlman discussing their plot and stuff which they cut so his REVEAL comes to the crew at the same time as the audience. Even though all that stuff was in the trailers, as was practically the entire final battle.

Also like some recent movies, a lot of the trailer lines are all in the deleted scenes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 13, 2017, 03:56:53 PM
Do any of the deleted scenes explain why Shinzon hid B4 right next to Bartertown or why the away team forget to wear their spiked shoulder pads to the dune buggy chase?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 14, 2017, 01:11:52 AM
I'd heard about the goofy episodes of Enterprise which explain why Klingons look different between TOS and TNG (Actually Search for Spock, but…) — I'd been dreading it, but it was actually pretty good. I've been a fan of John Schuck for years, and this was a good role for him. Also fun seeing a darker side of Starfleet with the espionage stuff.

Unfortunately, it was a great two-parter followed up by a weird piece of out-of-place fanservice, Bound, where Orion Slave Girls get the boys on Enterprise to fight each other! Let's face it: all of s4 is fanservice, but it's not been SEXY fanservice with uncomfortable gotchas and ha-ha-ha-women-are-manipulative-tramps themes. It was like some inept, woman-hating screenwriter said, "This should keep those lefties in check! I've written a turnaround in the third act!" Prurient awkwardness is the worst look for us geeks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 15, 2017, 03:03:28 AM
Rewatched Star Trek reboot 2009.


So giving it the best benefit of the doubt I can I think half of the movie is okay/fine and I think half of the movie is a mess.

The okay bit is the first half where its all basically just character building. Spock and Bones are done well. I've always been slightly less enthusiastic about Pine's version of Kirk, but I'm fine with acknowledging it as take on the character. I wish the entire movie was this with a much lighter plot

I would really potentially like that movie and their first adventure into space. Something where Bones and Spock and Kirk go on an away mission on a planet and you get to see the characters conflict with each other. Basically get in later in the movie and start faster rather than needing to show me kid kirk driving fast car off a cliff.

I understand why they took the plot the way they did. It's all dramatic for Vulcan to be destroyed and for Spock to have to play off of that. I just wish personally wish things were smaller in the first movie. The lead bad guy is a pure plot machination. Nemo is barely in the movie. His justification is silly thin. His is so poorly characterized and designed that he's indistinguishable to me from the other bad guy romulans he is with. He is as stock and generic and unmemorable a villain as you can put on the screen. He is only there to serve a plot point.

Nimoy shows up and delivers his usual gravitas and care into the role and its fine, even though it's a transparant/cynical attempt to lend importance and credibility to the film. This is the stupidest part of the movie. Spock dumps Kirk randomly into space at the exact point where he finds future spock. Spock then plot dumps the rest of the movie to Kirk since he's futureman. It's really dumb and only remotely "works" because we all respect Nimoy and just say fuck it whatever.

The rest of movie feels like any generic action movie of the last 10 years. It's one long action sequence that while it propels itself also feels confusing and just generally kind of boring to me at least. Nemo also has a dumb line where he says he should have killed Spock instead of his dumb Bond-esque decision not to kill spock right away and instead let him hang around and "suffer" the same way Nemo has. It's always great when writers give lines to their characters to sandpaper over the plotholes.

I get I'm in the minority on this one. This movie got excellent reviews and a lot of the general public and even hardcore star trek fans still like this movie to this day. It still baffles me a bit. Re-watching something like Wrath of Khan or Voyage Home make me admire those movies more. This just doesn't feel remotely like something that is on the level of those things. It's not a horrible movie by an means. It's fairly competent by modern movie standards. I just think that's a low bar to judge something on. I think the characters and actors are fine. But you need a decent or interesting plot for that to hang on to let them showcase their skills and for me that isn't this movie. Or it is maybe for only like half of it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 15, 2017, 03:05:16 AM
A lot of people like me like it for the first half. The second half is definitely not good but it's servicable and fun. Which definitely isn't a high bar but not Nemesis tier either.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2017, 05:14:46 AM
I doubt you're in the minority here Stoney. (Also, "Nemo" :lol)

I think it's even worse than average because it drops every single premise that makes it unique (they spend what...20 minutes at Starfleet Academy?) to go chase a Romulan in a big ship, which was done better in Nemesis. And they could have avoided a shit load of the plot holes by simply having it be a straight reboot instead of tying it to time travel and the old universe. Which doesn't matter because Nero never really explains it to Pike other than he's pissed at Spock, OLD SPOCK DOES in a flashback montage. (Thankfully a Romulan irrationally pissed at a crew member is new ground too...oh...wait.)

If they had altered it so Nero is just an angry Romulan dude who happens to come across this red matter shit and let it be a straight reboot they probably could have written the whole thing better. Even could have left in the whole Kirk opening by having it be some test Nero did back then, and the reason why nobody ever finds out about this for 25 years is that it took that long for Nero to stabilize it or whatever so he could fire it at Vulcan. With the whole prior event being an accident rather than a blatant and recorded attack that Starfleet doesn't seem too concerned about. And the only person to ever connect the dots is Kirk because he happened to be in the "wrong" place at the right time twice. (His birth and when Uhura comes into the dorm talking about the Klingon chatter.) If Nero is more of a terrorist Shinzon-like with a superweapon on an actual mining ship you can also justify a bunch of the shit like WHY DOES NO ONE CARE ABOUT THIS MASSIVE SHIP, WHY IS THE ENTIRE FLEET GOING ANYWHERE, WHY IS EARTH NOT BEING DEFENDED, etc. because nobody except the Enterprise crew is aware that it's got the superweapon on it and him putzing around the galaxy with it is more plausible.

The desire to ram all the old stuff into a reboot rather than exploring the new stuff is the same core problem Into Darkness has, on top of being even worse written. It also completely ditches all the premises it starts with to be mindless instead.

It's incredible that it takes until Beyond before anyone except Kirk-Spock-Uhura/Scotty interact for more than a few seconds or have an actual conversation other than some Kirk-McCoy set-asides. Kirk probably spends more time with Khan than he does his crew. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 15, 2017, 05:15:02 AM
Do any of the deleted scenes explain why Shinzon hid B4 right next to Bartertown or why the away team forget to wear their spiked shoulder pads to the dune buggy chase?
Yep, replicators can't make pig shit. Weird flaw nobody has worked out of the system.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 19, 2017, 11:11:07 PM
Yesterday I saw both The Last Jedi and the series finale for Star Trek: Enterprise

I was really happy with TLJ, and pretty sad over the ending of Enterprise.

The Terra Prime stuff with Peter Weller looked like it would be a new organization to pursue action against. The increased emotion between Tucker and T'pol was fantastic - actually teared up a bit, but anything about parents and kids does that to me. The two-parter made sense, had clear and appropriate levels of government focus, and actually started giving Mayweather a few things to do, like show off his piloting skills and interact with a woman-of-questionable-intent.

Then we get to "These Are the Voyages…"

It's meant to be a send-off for Enterprise, but it's a hook back into a TNG episode. Both Frakes and Sirtis look older and heavier than they did during the series, but Frakes is enjoyable to watch as the never-before-seen "Chef." Instead of focusing on what made Enterprise work, they retreated to what worked best for Trek most recently, which is Next Gen. Though, since ENT was canceled, obviously it didn't work enough.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Killing off Tucker that way was inconsistent bullshit with the tone of the rest of the show. There was NOTHING that hadn't been faced better, previously. Bringing back Shran for the show was cool, and at the same time the duplicity of why they needed that gem, why the privateers were able to catch up with a WARP FUCKING SEVEN NX-01, how they were able to transport directly onto the ship, in warp…
[close]

It was just a dumb way for things to unravel just so they could kill off the fan-favorite character. All that other stuff is left unaddressed, mainly as highlights between historical footnotes for the TNG crew to peruse and say, "Yeah, the ENT stuff is, like, still super-important even now. I had to memorize Archer's speech in grade school!" — and then yet leave that speech unheard by the audience.

It also is shot fairly poorly and cheaply - there's a battle in what clearly looks like a hastily set-dressed warehouse, because I guess most of the budget was blown by Union/Guild workers retrieving the TNG hallways and a portion of Ten-Forward.

Gah, I am annoyed. I think ENTERPRISE is as good as TNG overall, and its final season is now my favorite season of Trek, with the exception of that self-serving and petty series finale.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 19, 2017, 11:13:11 PM
Wow. I gotta catch Enterprise now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 19, 2017, 11:47:08 PM
You totally should.

The first season is pretty good, out of the gate. Other Trek shows take some time to get up and running, but this was enjoyable from Day One. Season 3 is very clearly a shift to talk about post-9/11 stuff, which I felt was too on-the-nose. At the same time, it's the first completely serialized season of Trek, which I enjoyed.

With the falling ratings, I understand that Brannon/Braga kind of threw it to a husband and wife team who loved trek and gave them free reign -- but it was too little, too late. Well, shit, it's not even "too little." Season 4 is awesome if you're into Trek lore. So many callbacks, references, and just a bunch of fun.

One last dig at the series finale, which I found in a review: "But ultimately, I can’t hate this episode, because it’s scripted by Berman and Braga, and going into it, I never even had the slightest glimmer of hope that they would rise to the occasion and pull off something worthy of the end of a franchise. Hating this episode is a bit like hating Michael Bay for making big, dumb, loud movies. Hating this episode is like hating your dog for pooping on the carpet. I mean, he’s a dog. What else did you expect him to do?"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 25, 2017, 09:55:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ToQ7wAwZ8w
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 25, 2017, 09:56:31 PM
better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C75dPdKIzmE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 25, 2017, 10:00:18 PM
The Wrath of Khan one was hot as fuck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on December 26, 2017, 02:19:09 AM
lol at the trailers.

I think I like the motion picture more.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 26, 2017, 02:21:58 AM
Motion Picture one was fantastic. Wow.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 26, 2017, 03:45:08 AM
maybe the only changes i'd make to really modernize it is to use some kind of popular song and carelessly reveal more of the plot like directly show Ilia's whole thing when she becomes a probe, plus oh, more shots of the klingons from the start of the movie as if it's a grand battle scene

setting up spock's line and the last shot of the trailer being the ending was :delicious
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 04, 2018, 11:54:15 AM
First time seeing this, saw it on reddit earlier :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2hs0oZ6JuQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 04, 2018, 12:12:18 PM
http://variety.com/2018/tv/features/star-trek-ds9-25th-anniversary-interview-1202648047/

Also discovery is back this week.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2018, 10:09:56 AM
Oh hey, so star trek was on last night and they revealed the incredibly obvious
spoiler (click to show/hide)
different universe, socially awkward girl is captain and tyler = klingon
[close]
stuff, yay.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on January 08, 2018, 10:13:17 AM
Kira with white hair - OMG i feel old now. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2018, 12:13:42 PM
https://youtu.be/DpHbLewg79c

:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 08, 2018, 12:40:36 PM
meh episode of discovery last night.

I think its a little early in the run of the show to go full on
spoiler (click to show/hide)
mirror universe for extended time.
[close]
That's a plot mechanic you generally save for later rather than earlier since you generally want to build out the universe before you do it. We'll see where it goes.

Stuff happened in the episode in the form of the expected.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(reveal of Voq)
[close]
And unexpected when he
spoiler (click to show/hide)
killed Doctor.
[close]
but it felt mainly like a setup episode which is why it felt meh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 08, 2018, 12:49:38 PM
https://youtu.be/e5Did-eVQDc

Thought this was a fun listen also.

Also related.

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/09/star-trek-discovery-klingon-language-translation-1201880882/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2018, 01:22:21 PM
When Mike and Rich say Discovery is not for Star Trek fans what they really mean is that it's not for TNG fanboys it seems.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2018, 01:59:51 PM
Eh, I'd encourage you to watch some of DS9 at least, not going to cape for Enterprise like some here and wont pretend Voyager isnt 60%+ rage inducing episodes but DS9 is legit. TNG is my favorite and I go back and watch it and DS9 eps often.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2018, 02:14:11 PM
I dunno, I'm new to Trek but I can definitely say neither Discovery nor The Orville appeal to me. If I were to be more honest neither Voyager nor DS9 are shows I'm keen on starting. I've reached the 6th season of TNG and plan on watching TOS plus all the old timeline movies(good or not) and I'm fine leaving it at that.

DS9 is the best Trek. That would be a mistake. DS9 is a complimentary show to TNG. TNG is "this is the future, that future is an utopia". DS9 is "so you've created an utopia, how do you make it stay that way? What next?"

https://youtu.be/TREQGl54BU8
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2018, 02:32:20 PM
Also season 7 of TNG sucks balls. Godspeed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 08, 2018, 02:46:51 PM
Opinions are fun and all because we all get to share them and have one and debate and despite what people think there is no wrong answer on that kind of stuff.

Lots of hardcore forum types love Deep Space Nine. I've never liked that show remotely as much as certain segments of trek fandom do. I understand why they like it.

But it never had that effect on me. Which is not to say I hate it or anything. I just don't generally want to go back and watch episodes of it relative to other shows.

Deep Space Nine also reminds me a lot of Babylon 5 for whatever reason, and I much prefer Babylon 5 so that doesn't help either.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 08, 2018, 03:22:25 PM
So when are they going to put Discovery, on netflix or hulu?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 08, 2018, 03:45:24 PM
So when are they going to put Discovery, on netflix or hulu?

Not until the CBS streaming platform fails. I mean its an attempt to sell the CBS streaming platform in the US at least.


It is on Netflix in a lot of countries outside the US.

https://www.inverse.com/article/36006-star-trek-discovery-cbs-all-access-stream-netflix
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 08, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
 Yeah, it’s on Netflix here in Japan as well. It’s the main reason I picked up Netflix, to be honest.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 08, 2018, 11:35:13 PM
Deep Space Nine also reminds me a lot of Babylon 5 for whatever reason, and I much prefer Babylon 5 so that doesn't help either.
why not both dot gif

the flame wars over those in the day :lawd

JMS still sucks despite Babylon 5, he also gave credence to the STAR TREK RIPPED ME OFF argument even though the production timelines would have made it impossible and the shows were pretty different once you got past the SPACE STATION core

DS9's entire structural premise as pitched as a new way of Trek was "what if you can't warp away at the end of the week? and what if the majority of characters were not Federation officers?"; which is why I sometimes set it off as different because some people don't want to explore the Trek universe in that way... which is part of what made reading your and chrono's recent escapades into ENT interesting because of how over its four seasons it did most every kind of "Trek on a ship" you can do

its inspirational premise of Bajor/Maquis/Cardassians (which was put into TNG to launch DS9...Kira was originally Ro) they slowly drifted from in part because the writers were tired of it being compared to Israel/Palestine (because it didn't make any sense for the Cardassian Occupation to be framed that way, the entire storyline is more obviously inspired by the fall of the Soviet Union especially with The Maquis factored in) and in part because the suits said MORE KLINGONS! MORE SPACE BATTLES! LESS RELIGION! LESS POLITICS UNLESS IT ABOUT WAR WITH KLINGONS! (before they (especially Berman) came back later and said "WHY SO MUCH WAR? CAN'T WE END THIS DOMINION STORYLINE IN A TWO-PARTER OR SOMETHING?!?" even though the Dominion storyline wound up doing as much development for the Klingons and Romulans as TNG had)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Hot Slice on January 08, 2018, 11:47:11 PM
So when are they going to put Discovery, on netflix or hulu?
The real question is, when will DSC be a product and not a service? I want to be able to buy. A license to the season on iTunes or BDs eventually.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2018, 11:49:08 PM
even though the Dominion storyline wound up doing as much development for the Klingons and Romulans as TNG had)

More imo. At least for the Romulans.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 09, 2018, 12:00:14 AM
DS9 did most for the Ferengi imo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvFYBkesqGU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 09, 2018, 12:08:12 AM
my favorite thing that DS9 added for the Ferengi was their hilarious useless gigantic bureaucracy and all the stupid rituals

actually now that i sit here and think about it for a minute, they sorta used the Ferengi's whole culture to mock the nonsensical rigidity that Trek had inserted into areas of Cardassian and Klingon culture :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 12:09:17 AM
IMO that's not even an opinion, Momo. That's a fact. Generations Ferengi were fucking embarrassing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
DS9 has so many cool races fully fleshed out. Ferengi, Cardassians, Bajorans, that fucking yeerk like race that Dax is a part of (Trills), Klingons, Jem'hadar, the Founders, Romulans, even humanity itself. Everyone gets a nice slice of development in DS9. I loved every episode of that show besides 2-3 eps. I wish there were a Best Quotes video for DS9 like there is for The Wire. Easily one of my favorite television series'.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 09, 2018, 12:25:14 AM
Deep Space Nine also reminds me a lot of Babylon 5 for whatever reason, and I much prefer Babylon 5 so that doesn't help either.
why not both dot gif

the flame wars over those in the day :lawd

True. I definitely don't want to present it as a false dilemma like you must choose between the two. And I didn't watch either when they originally aired. Well that's almost true. I watched half of like DS9 back when it originally aired but bailed on it as I just didn't enjoy it. I never watched Babylon 5 when it originally aired. I finished up both in within the last 8 years or so.

And you may absolutely have something in that my bias with Trek is that I don't necessarily favor a Trek that is mainly rooted in one spot by a space station with one specific conflict defining the show. I probably do like the trek shows that give me a ship to warp around the galaxy and do different adventures every week.

I do think Deep Space Nine improves in the later seasons especially the final stretch and certain things like how ferengi were treated as less of a joke than in TNG. It's just when I think of Deep Space I flash to so many episodes like Jake and Benjamin playing baseball or something that just made me groan.

There are just a healthy number of Deep Space Nine episodes that are boring for me. It just never lit a spark in my imagination the way some trek shows do or Babylon 5 did.

I respect Ron Moore a lot. I just think I like his work post Deep Space Nine like BSG.

One day I'll rewatch it and perhaps form a slightly different opinion.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 12:29:39 AM
Jake and Benjamin don't really play baseball together in any episode besides the season 7 baseball episode (which is amazing). They do go to the holosuites to watch games a lot though but it's really never shown. At most, the majority of the series, you have Sisko's baseball on his desk. They spend more time at his dad's restaurant helping out than they ever do playing baseball together in terms of actual screen time. You might be thinking of false memories of what you perceive DS9 to be more than what it actually is. Just a thought.

Early ds9 gets too much flack.

Season 1 is really good for a season 1 Trek and season 2 is imo one of the best seasons in Star Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 09, 2018, 12:40:41 AM
Me saying them playing baseball is me meaning them interacting during boring shit. The same way I have images of lounge singers on the show or other boring stuff. I'm not specifically talking in the sense of episode 212 and a name. I just meant that as a general vague memory of the show. I mean it was 20 years ago we are talking about since I've seen those early season episodes.

There is a lot of Deep Space Nine that is boring for me. I could go through and look through the early episodes on imdb and tell you which ones I think are boring for a few seasons in but that's ultimately what I mean. It's why I stopped watching.

Which is not to say that's the only opinion to be had on early Deep Space Nine. I'll just say I didn't care for it. If I rewatch it again and suddenly think its better than I remember then cool. But I stopped watching because I didn't care much for what I was seeing at the time.

It's better in later seasons was certainly my opinion when I picked it back up later. Thought still not close to being my favorite trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 12:50:18 AM
I understand some people aren't big on certain kinds of DS9 episodes, whether it be Ferengi episodes, or Bajoran lore episodes. I personally loved those, especially the Bajor ones. I think the Bajorans are the most fascinating race in Trek history, even more so than the Klingons. They're full of contradictions and depth.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 09, 2018, 12:53:09 AM
A lot of those dumb DS9 episodes later on were how they paid for the wars literally, like the baseball episode against the Vulcans, or the casino heist on the holodeck, etc..

And the early on bad DS9 episodes seem to feel more of a trying to figure out the purpose of the show, something other Treks never needed because the purpose was the ship's journey. Even the good ones or semi-decent ideas fall apart because they aren't quite sure where to take the idea. The Dominion wound up giving them that purpose and something to center everything around, the Dominion threat on the other side of the wormhole. They tied Sisko's role as Emissary and the Prophets to it, the Cardassians to it, they brought in the Klingons using it, etc.

A lot of those early Gamma Quadrant race episodes aren't much better than Voyager and TNG's equivalent "new race of the week" stuff early in their runs.

Voyager had a similar issue except that it went the wrong direction in leaning on first the Kazon and then the Borg. With the Hirogen for half a season. Rather than focusing on what was the true constant in their series, and what TOS/TNG did, the crew. Especially the fact that half of it were Maquis soldiers or revealed as spies/murderers. I'm still beyond baffled that they never did a mutiny episode or even the semblance of a mutiny plotline. Other than Tuvok's holodeck program, in like the last season or whenever.

DS9 had a really big advantage that the other Trek's never did of building up a HUGE cast of recurring characters that no other Trek could do and bringing them on easily. Garak most prominently. But Nog, Rom, Dukat, Weyoun, Martok, Damar, Keiko, Kasidy, Admiral Ross, Eddington, Gowron, Kai Winn and the other Bajorian politicans/religious figures, etc. None of those were regular cast members (Quark was) but each one appeared in so many episodes many of them feel like members of the main cast even if just for a season or two like Eddington or Ross.

A show like Voyager had the recurring cast of...Naomi Wildman. For 17 episodes. Half as many as Garak alone. Even Q only appeared 8 times on TNG!

Shran appeared 11 times on ENT and was going to become a regular if it had a fifth season. But he was going to have become a crew member to justify it, even though many of those DS9 recurring characters like Nog or Garak were on DS9 they didn't have to be in order to show up for an episode as Dukat or Weyoun or Martok show. As they could literally come to DS9 for the episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 09, 2018, 12:54:33 AM
I think its cool that everybody has their favorite trek and it shouldn't be the same. I like that Deep Space Nine has a dedicated crew that loves that show passionately.

Those fans might burn me out a little ;) so I tend to throw some snark their way.

but I think its cool that the universe is broad enough to support fans of each show.

Outside of Voyager Fans. Fuck them.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
teasing
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 12:56:31 AM
 :preach TREK :preach
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on January 09, 2018, 11:07:06 AM
It's hard to compare TNG and DS9 since they're such different shows from a few fundamental points.

1. The motivation of the crew of the Enterprise is basically go explore the universe, acquire knowledge and lend a helping hand when appropriate. You kinda find out some of the characters individual motives for joining the crew, but the first episode starts out with them getting derailed on the way to a trade station, and ends with Picard going "lets go sightseeing 'round the universe y'all!" Everyone seems real chummy and the Enterprise itself seems like a pretty cushy ship with some nice digs and decent amount of amenities. DS9 introduces Sisqo by killing his wife, thrusting him into single fatherhood, putting him in charge of a fucked up space station at the center of a race war where everything is broken, and making him a deity to a bunch of weirdos he's never met before. Right out of the gate, there's a different weight to the shows.

2. After a while, there's a kind of big difference in the tone of the acting of each show. There are some overwrought moments in TNG, but the later parts of DS9 are filled with semi-campy scenery-chewing by Sisko, Dukat, Winn, and Garak. That isn't really a criticism on my behalf, cuz I really like a lot of those scenes, especially ones with Dukat and Odo. But the shows feel a lot different, especially towards the end in that regard. There's some goofy stuff like Picard getting mad and yelling at a mute, distinguished mentally-challenged version of himself for an hour in TNG, but nothing quite as over the top as shit like the Fire Caves scene at the end of DS9. Bonkers, almost silly, and thoroughly enjoyable.

3. The structure of each show is a lot different. Apart from a few non-consequential storylines and the Borg stuff, there isn't a lot a through-line for TNG. Crusher and Picard occasionally talk about their personal history, Troi and Riker flirt and probably fuck a lot off screen, Geordi stays keeping his dick dry, but for the most part interpersonal relationship between characters aren't the main focus of the show. It's mostly them bouncing around from planet to planet, getting in single-episode adventures that usually ask and answer a question or otherwise lead to an easily summarizable moral. DS9 focuses a lot more closely on the relationships between characters from the start, and keeps it up the whole way through, but besides that the actual story structure changes a lot too - being in a central, static location let the show explore stuff like how tensions between the Cardassians and Bejorans played out and how Sisko handles being an Emissary to a group of people he's almost completely unfamiliar with. From a purely narrative perspective, too, DS9 had a lot less 'contained' stories than TNG, to the point where the end run of the show is like a seven episode arc about The Dominion War. I like that stuff, but towards the end I found the density of it a little overbearing and wouldn't have minded if they threw a story of the week episode or two in there to break it up.

In the end they're both really good, but TNG edges out DS9 for me personally. I think if I did a tally I'd find TNG probably has more 'bad' episodes, but in general I think it has higher highs and lower lows than DS9 and I prefer the lack of constraints and sense of exploration afforded to the crew of the Enterprise

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on January 09, 2018, 11:09:58 AM
And to think, the next time I touch a woman, she'll have no idea that the fingers running through her hair have also recently committed the heinous act of nerdery that is typing up an essay length carepost about a Star Trek on an internet message board  :cody
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 11:10:07 AM
"There's some goofy stuff like Picard getting mad and yelling at a mute, distinguished mentally-challenged version of himself for an hour in TNG, but nothing quite as over the top as shit like the Fire Caves scene at the end of DS9. Bonkers, almost silly, and thoroughly enjoyable. "

Barbara Crusher. Fucked. A. Space. Ghost.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on January 09, 2018, 11:14:19 AM
Uh sure, but I'm talking about the acting specifically. DS9 doesn't have anything as ungrounded as Data getting fucked with by Mark Twain, but the word 'subtle' is not in Avery Brooks' acting vocabulary
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 11:21:36 AM
Ah. I know what you mean. He can't seem to do a dramatic scene without sloWLY RAISING HIS VOICE LIKE THIS.

As for me. I have a complicated relationship with TNG. In my heart of hearts, I love it. But I find the lack of interpersonal character drama, relationships, and chemistry to get a bit old by the end of its run. I think it works for 6 or so season but by 7 it's just kinda running on fumes. Like, the show keeps trying to convince us of Ryker and Troi's romantic escapades but they have literally zero chemistry and this is an OLD relationship we're supposed to buy into and it won't stop showing up. It's great for that adventure of the week sci-fi storytelling that I love. But for my tastes it also lacks the more deep sci-fi storytelling like truly questioning ones beliefs and putting them to the test. I think DS9 does this better. As much as DS9's acting would be over dramatic at times, I prefer the more grounded situations in the show than the crazy antics that happen in TNG. Lord knows I cannot take another single Data Sherlock Holmes episode.

So I love TNG, I love its cheese cake, and I love its spirit of adventure. I love its conceit. I love the premise. But for me it's best taken in gulps. I definitely think TNG has far more "bad" episodes than DS9 and that impacts how I view the series, but in the end I view them both as brother and sister series: they're two shows that are so categorically different that they seem to help each other improve. Without TNG, it's hard to come to appreciate some of the hard rough edgeness that happens in DS9. But without the hardness of DS9, it's harder to appreciate the utopia that we come to love on the other side of the quadrant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on January 09, 2018, 11:46:22 AM
I hear you, they're kind of vanilla and chocolate companion series, complementary and I get why people prefer one of the other.

Voyager is the strawberry of the three - not terrible, per se, but vastly inferior to the other two and understandably underconsumed
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 11:49:22 AM
Don't you DARE compare Voyager to strawberry ice cream DA GAWD
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 09, 2018, 02:20:44 PM
Rum and Raisin > Choc Mint > Blueberry Cheesecake >>>> *
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 09, 2018, 02:41:57 PM
Surprisingly when you meet people in real life Voyager has a lot more fans than you would expect. I think its because it attracted a younger demo and many of those people are now entering older ages. I know voyager is also popular on nextflix streaming.

(https://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/266840_60_news_hub_multi_630x0.jpg)





Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 04:25:39 PM
My dad loves Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2018, 05:17:19 PM
deleted
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 12, 2018, 04:59:48 AM
I am still trying to work my way into DS9 — I don't know why, it just doesn't resonate with me. It's difficult, coming off from the final season of Enterprise, which I enjoyed so much.

Watching Discovery now, just finished Lethe, gotta catch up with the rest of you dudes. Lorca appears to have some stability issues.

Treats:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/Tgd0kog.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 12, 2018, 12:38:58 PM
Watch the documentary called "The Captains" Avery Brooks is fucking out there.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Still the best trek show/captain  :patel
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 12, 2018, 03:17:58 PM
I am still trying to work my way into DS9 — I don't know why, it just doesn't resonate with me. It's difficult, coming off from the final season of Enterprise, which I enjoyed so much.

Watching Discovery now, just finished Lethe, gotta catch up with the rest of you dudes. Lorca appears to have some stability issues.

Treats:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/Tgd0kog.jpg)
[close]

DS9 resonated with me from ep 1. Some people say it resonates with them later. IDK, keep watching. Season 2 is much better.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 12, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
DS9 starts slow but by the time you hit Season 2 it's in full swing and hits much better cause you got to know all the characters in S1
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 12, 2018, 06:05:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5zQIKeh9B4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 14, 2018, 10:30:56 PM
Good episode of Discovery. It's setup but the good kind of setup where shit happens and has consequences but still leaves many avenues open. Makes me excited for next week and the rest of the season.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I was about to be mad when I thought they were going to prolong the Ash/Voq reveal to Burnham after his planet freakout but they just delayed it to the next scene which actually worked better dramatically.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 15, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
S01E11 (last night's ep) - What a :zzz fest, everything is happening super predictably
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 17, 2018, 07:33:44 PM
https://imgur.com/gallery/zM6f4

 :-\ :heartbeat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 19, 2018, 11:00:05 PM
Lots of DS9 articles this year to reflect on anniversary

http://www.vulture.com/2018/01/deep-space-nine-revolutionary-depiction-of-black-fatherhood.html
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 20, 2018, 12:20:00 AM
Jake's whole heading down his own path thing was interesting, considering to that point we'd been shown EVERYONE WANTS TO GROW UP TO BE STARFLEET for the most part, especially Wesley (Alexander barely existed in both series), and he was decidedly, not.

Nog obviously went that route, but for him it was a similar rejection of his cultures norms, though I thought they did him and Rom interesting too in that Rom was so opposed to Nog not following the Ferengi path, and in the end they both become engineers for Starfleet and Bajor respectively instead. Well, until the end for poor Rom. :lol

I liked that Nog and Rom both latched onto Chief O'Brien.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 20, 2018, 12:55:07 PM
Chief O'Brien is the sassy gay den mother we all wish we had.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 20, 2018, 03:22:49 PM
DS9 is really special to me. In other Star Trek's they feel far removed from their culture. But here on DS9 is a black single father, who not only is in tune with the history of his people even hundreds of years later in a time of unparalleled achievement, but also respects and even embraces his own roots. There's a lot of reasons I connect with DS9 but that's one of the biggest.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 22, 2018, 05:00:02 PM
Interesting episode of discovery. Individually may be not amazing but nice pieces of world building and plot reveal to set up the table for the final stretch in the
spoiler (click to show/hide)
mirror universe
[close]
. I was confused about a couple of things but second rewatch of the episode gave me some understanding.

Pet Peeve. I wish the episode wasn't so short. Not because longer necessarily equates to better. The episode did what it needed to do. But it was like 37 minutes. Without the constraints of network TV and forced ad revenue I'd like to see episodes be a few minutes longer. Not for more to be revealed or anything but just in general for more scenes.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
And extra scene with burnham and georgiou
[close]
just to have them interact with each other would be good stuff because both actors are very good. Let them stretch their legs with a few extra scenes. Same with other actors.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 25, 2018, 08:54:54 AM
Sorry to continue DS9 love in but it's a good thread comparing TNG to DS9.

Topic: "Does anyone else feel like the TNG Ferengi and the DS9 Ferengi were like two totally different species?"

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/7ssvp9/does_anyone_else_feel_like_the_tng_ferengi_and/

Great comment about TNG's willingness to be lazy in its writing and to use alien races to show humanities superiority.

Quote
I think this sort of thing made DS9 the most progressive Star Trek show. TNG would wax philosophical about how racism is bad, etc, but then depict every alien race as a really superficial monocultural stereotype of one or two character traits.

DS9 inverted this completely by breaking these molds in every way and doing the exact opposite of what you'd expect if you judged them by the stereotypes.

TNG, for all its high-mindedness, was frequently backwards, or maybe naive. Look at Worf. He's different. That's the basis of most of his storylines. To be fair they stress that 'different is okay' and that accepting difference is important. But honestly, Worf was raised by humans, he has all the education and experience a human has, but... he's different.

Imagine if this were a story about a black dude. Yeah, this black dude went to white people schools, and he got all this education and shit, but he's still a black dude and therefore different by nature. We should be accepting of his black dude ways, but let us never forget he's very different because he's a black dude.

TNG was almost there. The ideal of treating everyone as equals and respecting everyone's way of life is great. But they missed the mark by being accidentally racist, by creating these races and saying 'they behave like X or like X' which is, really, a very prejudiced thing to do.

Deep Space Nine is the most progressive show for these reasons. Feed DS9 a race that's supposed to be greedy capitalists, it spits out Ferengi Starfleet cadets, Rom selflessly joining a resistance and becoming a good father, and Quark time and time again choosing friendship and morality over profit (even if he never stops bitching about it).

Cardassians, they're all a race of tyrannical assholes, right? One of the finest episodes of Star Trek - ever - is in the first season of DS9, and everyone here knows what I'm talking about - it's Duet, and this 'typical Cardassian tyrant' turns out to be a low-level non-combatant that is so haunted by the atrocities of his government that he's willing to pretend to be basically Space Hitler just so he can be killed and let a lot of people rest easier knowing they beat the Bad Guy. And Dukat - the actual Hitler of the whole affair; he's broken and constantly seeks approval and forgiveness from everyone around him, leading, at one point, to him creating a cult just to gather around people who actually like him and don't think of him simply as a butcher and tyrant.

DS9 did this over and over, and it even inverted it with humans - Jake, son of the Sisko, he's gonna join Starfleet right, to please his old man? Nah. Jake's gonna be a journalist. Nog comes to Sisko, and it's squeaked out that he's doing this because he's afraid of being a loser like his father... so he's turning to Sisko, of course, as a father figure....

I'm rambling at this point, but yeah, you're right:

DS9 treated the Ferengi much more differently than TNG did.

Why; because TNG was high-minded with sci-fi concepts and used alien races to stand in for elements of humanity. Alien races were metaphors for human behavior.

But then DS9 came along... and it took those TNG stereotypes and broke the fuck out of them. It's Star Trek at its most progressive. And it wasn't even insulting about it... when you saw Nog breaking out of his greedy capitalism, you also saw him teaching Jake wisdom about the 'Great River of Commerce'. In TNG the Ferengi were portrayed as backward losers, but Nog brings wisdom that makes you respect other cultures and ways of thinking. TNG never would have done this, the Ferengi were merely representative of Bad Capitalistic Humans and that's where the nuance ends. DS9 basically unfolded and subverted racist ideas from TNG.

And that's why DS9 is really the best, smartest, most progressive, most thoughtful Star Trek.

TL:DR, TNG used foreign races as shortcuts for human nature. DS9 challenged the very idea of limiting someone based on their race. DS9 fucking rules and it's one of the best television shows ever made, and fuck anyone who disagrees.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 28, 2018, 06:14:33 AM
I'm caught up on Discovery.

e12 spoilers:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Mirror Universe being handled more seriously than any other time we've seen it, and yet, and yet, they still managed to put the one Vulcan in a goddamned goatee. :lol

Giggled in surprise when "Captain" Tilly called on her Chief Engineer (Lorca) who dropped into a Scottish accent for the role. I love how many of the old sound effects are used throughout the show.

Holy shit at finally revealing Tyler's condition, but as much as they telegraphed that, it was a series of jabs leading to the haymaker coming in from Lorca. Holy goddamned shit.

And I'll also admit I covered my mouth like a 7-year-old and said "NO FUCKING WAY!" when Tyler ganked Dr. Hugh. Truly surprising.
[close]

I'm really enjoying the show. There is so much intra-ship conflict that it sorta feels like not-star-trek, but I'm sure enjoying it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 28, 2018, 10:01:26 PM
Good episode. I don't follow any spoilers so generally most things are a surprise to me. I didn't realize this was the episode
spoiler (click to show/hide)
they would come back from the MU. I also didn't expect them to bring back Philippa
[close]

Overall I would say the handled the
spoiler (click to show/hide)
MU
[close]
stuff  better than I expected. I was skeptical going into it but I found myself compelled into it more than I expected. I didn't know about the
spoiler (click to show/hide)
mirror Lorca
[close]
stuff so what I thought was just going to be random adventure in
spoiler (click to show/hide)
MU land
[close]
was more connected than I thought which was nice.

The show has had a nice momentum the 2nd half leading from episode to episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 29, 2018, 01:49:01 AM
Only one thing surprised me (pleasantly so) but this is all pretty much happening as theorized. I've come around a bit and i generally enjoy the show now, I would more if it didn't have Star Trek on the tin though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 29, 2018, 06:50:07 PM
https://youtu.be/1W1_8IV8uhA

 :whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 05, 2018, 12:53:08 AM
Just finished Discovery episode. Slower set-up drama episode but I liked it. Sonequa Martin-Green really nails her scenes in general and in this episode in particular.

I wish there were two episodes left instead of one. I'm fine with the setup here for the finale but if that last episode is only like 45 minutes I feel like its going to be overly rushed. I'd prefer like a 2 in 1 episode or at least an especially long final episode. We'll see next week I guess.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 05, 2018, 01:29:48 AM
Just finished Discovery episode. Slower set-up drama episode but I liked it. Sonequa Martin-Green really nails her scenes in general and in this episode in particular.

I wish there were two episodes left instead of one. I'm fine with the setup here for the finale but if that last episode is only like 45 minutes I feel like its going to be overly rushed. I'd prefer like a 2 in 1 episode or at least an especially long final episode. We'll see next week I guess.

Since they're being nonstandard in length, what chance is there that it may be a 90-minute finale?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 05, 2018, 01:44:54 AM
Just finished Discovery episode. Slower set-up drama episode but I liked it. Sonequa Martin-Green really nails her scenes in general and in this episode in particular.

I wish there were two episodes left instead of one. I'm fine with the setup here for the finale but if that last episode is only like 45 minutes I feel like its going to be overly rushed. I'd prefer like a 2 in 1 episode or at least an especially long final episode. We'll see next week I guess.

Since they're being nonstandard in length, what chance is there that it may be a 90-minute finale?

I have a feeling its a low chance just because the first two episodes are really one episode but they still felt the need to carve it up into two episodes.

Plus the show airs on TV in certain markets of the world.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Hot Slice on February 05, 2018, 02:42:33 AM
Yeah, if it were a special duration, we would know by now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 07, 2018, 12:10:55 PM
https://youtu.be/qkTR4l62Duk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 08, 2018, 02:33:08 AM
:lol

That's kind of charming!

Also, I wonder how serious they were about possibly keeping Captain Jellico if Patrick Stewart had gone hardcore on salary negotiation. That would have been a very different style of Enterprise.

In some ways, it would have looked like Lorca's Discovery.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 11, 2018, 09:45:17 PM
As far as the episode it was kinda a meh one unfortunately after a really good run of good episodes. As I feared there was too much for that final episode to resolve in 45 minutes. It should have been a two parter.
spoiler (click to show/hide)
One part to solve the Klingon crisis. And one episode to solve the post-crisis state of the world.
[close]
By doing so much in one episode it feels rushed. You could have had the same solution and same post resolution state. But you needed more scenes and more space to convey that content. The same way the season begins with a 2 parter. The season finale should be planned as a two parter. Hopefully they pick up on that reality in future seasons.

As far as the season as a whole, I can say I really enjoyed it. The show just had an energy and a momentum with its serial nature that I really took too. There is nothing wrong with the standalone episodes of the past era of trek but it didn't lead to an urgency of watching for me. Trek was something that I watched and would enjoy but it was also kind of a whenever I got around to it kind of thing. Discovery for me became something that I looked forward to the entire week to see the story progress and that's a nice feel.

I like the cast. Burham, Lorca, Saru, Tilly, Stamets and Michelle Yeoh all did good stuff. The show definitely has a more action adventure trek than the TNG but I like that change. My favorite Trek was always TOS and there is something in the spirit of Discovery that feels more like TOS than TNG. So for me that is a good compelling thing. It feels like more of an adventure.

My complaints are a couple of things. I want to see them meet more aliens. One of the big parts of the appeal of Trek to me is going across the galaxy and meeting new races that present new dilemmas. I know that is slightly more tricky when a serial plot needs to connect episodes instead of it just being random adventures but that needs to happen more as we move forward.

Second complaint is that the show needs to have a few lower stake episodes where we see the crew in their downtime moments. It's one thing to see Saru, Burnham, Tilly, etc when stakes are high and near death is around every corner. But you also need those quiet moments and episodes where you see the crew during downtime. What are these people like during off-hours when they just live their lives? You need some of that to also balance out with the high tension stuff.

Final complaint is that we need to know some more random people on the ship. It can be bridge crew. It can be engineering people. It can be whoever. But you have to build out the ship world a bit. The ship has to feel like its full of people we occasionally run into and these are actual people with independent lives and interests.

That's all stuff they can improve on for me and will make the show deeper and richer. All that being said, I really enjoyed the first season. Can't wait for the show to come back with new stories. I really liked it. Good potential and relative to other trek first seasons I had more fun with this one compared to the other shows outside of TOS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on February 24, 2018, 11:00:23 PM
http://www.puppetmastergames.com
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 24, 2018, 11:50:41 PM
lol. Discounting whether the game is any good or not, are there really enough fans to make something like this viable. I mean I know Star Trek online has been going for a long time now but this....
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on February 25, 2018, 12:50:54 AM
I like how they have captains then seven of nine, genuine respect, they sure know the star trek audience  :rollsafe
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 25, 2018, 03:26:17 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNESMHuFrrU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO0K3MEv8_c
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 28, 2018, 02:56:30 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYt-OI7LlTk

lol. I used a guide on voyager so I skipped a lot of the dreck in season 1 and 2 like this but now I want to watch it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 28, 2018, 08:18:07 AM
lol. Discounting whether the game is any good or not, are there really enough fans to make something like this viable. I mean I know Star Trek online has been going for a long time now but this....
this has been up on Steam/iOS/Google Play/etc. for a while: http://store.steampowered.com/app/600750/Star_Trek_Timelines/

and this has been in "beta" for a while:
https://startrek.gamesamba.com/

they've actually jumped into F2P quite a bit now that i think about it, there's star trek trexels: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.yesgnome.startrek&hl=en

and star trek WRATH OF GEMS: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=air.com.gi.startrek
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 28, 2018, 08:33:49 AM
Online must make them big bucks compared to the cost, they pulled in LeVar Burton to do a bunch of voice work/face capture/etc. for the latest "season" i saw, always intended to play more of that but it's one of those endlessly slow first ten hours or so F2P MMO's unless you just skip to the seasonal events

i kinda wish that CBS would take a chance on a Master of Orion/Civ clone, now that the license is all in one place instead of split between TOS and TNG like it was between Microprose and Activision

i played way too much Birth of the Federation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Birth_of_the_Federation) while being anal about its inaccurate canon, even the free fan-remake Supremacy (http://www.startreksupremacy.com/) doesn't resolve the timelines right, even if it does eliminate my favorite gaming memory leak until that PS3 Skyrim situation came about

Elite Force were pretty legit games too, especially for the time, as FPSes they're pretty close to Half-Life rip-offs than most other stuff in the era
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 28, 2018, 08:49:55 AM
then again, i played all the way through that new Kirk 2013 Star Trek game and enjoyed it way more and thought it was way better scripted than the Abrams films that it caused box office troubles for (source: JJ)

i'm not going to lie and pretend it's not complete jank, especially since my steam account has a bunch of screenshots i took of the bugs and random jank, but the "gaming journalism" treatment of that game was amusing especially as i doubt anyone played it for very long since it wasn't horribly buggy to unplayable levels, never crashed on me and a lot of the videos i saw from "professionals" were from them not paying the slightest attention and missing obvious on-screen directions...it's one thing when GB's Quick Looks do that, but a lot of the reviews were calling it confusing and hard to figure out and it's linear as all fuck and blatantly obvious what you have to do until a certain point where it actually opens up, gives you multiple objectives and you can see where at one point the game was intended to be much more than it became probably due to deadlines...

one reason i think a lot of the reviews didn't play through is they don't mention how many things the game forgets about, especially abilities it gives you for the combat like hacking into panels to put up forcefields and force the enemy to move around them, etc., the levels just sorta stop having any of that in them...but the reviews are all just "animation sucks, bugs, things clip!!!, bugs!, STUFF CLIPS THROUGH WALLS!, CAMERA SUCKS IF YOU MOVE IT WRONG! PLUS SO MANY BUGS"

but then i also love jank-ass jank games, also completely breaking the Spock AI (since i played as Kirk) to where it would stop functioning altogether by doing minor sequence breaking provided much amusement

spoiler (click to show/hide)
non game breaking lovable jank examples:
kirk's weapon decides to cloak for some reason: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=179665038 http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=179664913
kirk's weapon fires out of its side for some reason: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=142946084
pair of enemies randomly freeze during massive shootout around this whole area: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=144858198
a waypoint from the start of the mission never goes away even through multiple cutscenes and like an hour of total time: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=144857949
you can maneuver the camera to see inside heads and it's great: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=144857872

actual one of the few game-breaking moments that were mostly my fault, i needed Spock's help to get through a door farther on in the level, but because i jumped down from this beam to the floor instead of taking the intended lengthy route across the wall (the yellow bars on the back wall are ones you do wall climbing on) and then across some platforms to come back down, he broke and stayed up there no matter how many times i called him...until i ran back up and physically pushed him off (because i wasn't going to do all that stupid wall crap)
(https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/597002598287946175/E8F3651E83320FAB789F0655EAAAB649FF98557F/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside%7C1024%3A576&composite-to=*,*%7C1024%3A576&background-color=black)


because it's right after these screens, a huge budget AAA major title also sometimes gets janky, in far more disturbing ways:
(https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/595864569197816340/638F278604D54B8357DF2D10932D771F80582F92/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside%7C1024%3A576&composite-to=*,*%7C1024%3A576&background-color=black)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 13, 2018, 01:18:38 AM
That 360 movie game wasn't amazing but it wasn't bad. I played through it co-op with a friend online and enjoyed it. The space jump segment was annoying as fuck though. Both players had to pass the whole thing to continue on and I feel like we spent a goddamn eternity on it for that reason.

I spent a couple of months with ST Online and really liked the game, but it really pushes the "spend money" angle but almost all MMOs do now so that's just how it is. They made some changes to the away mission that made combat feel better as well. Plus I'm way into having your crew down there and customize them. I dropped a few bucks to get a Borg crew member and came very close to buying some ships too but they really threw the ship upgrades at you left and right. Plus you can customize and decorate your ship and captain's quarters so that was a whole other addiction. So of course I gave my crew all DS9 uniforms and had the Defiant-style bridge as my bridge. :lol

I'd spend a lot of time just rolling around on the star map and just getting into battles with Borg cubes or whatever else was out there rather than doing the episodes too, cause the game can be pretty nice looking at times, especially the ship stuff.

(https://i.imgur.com/8SJkdQL.jpg?1)
(https://i.imgur.com/sQfreuA.jpg?1)
(https://i.imgur.com/fhzi1m3.png?1)
(https://i.imgur.com/9Xs1EjS.jpg?1)

Now I'm tempted to re-install this weekend :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 13, 2018, 02:40:04 AM
I used to play STO on PC, might get it on console now, how's the controls for console?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 13, 2018, 10:35:19 AM
Never played on console but I was using a 360 controller on PC for a bit and that was pretty good. Ground missions played sorta like Gears and flying the ship was pretty smooth, but not as smooth as mouse. I imagine they've improved it since 2015 though.

And looking at those pics, I realize I haven't played STO since I got my new PC so now I have to reinstall to see what it looks like on newer than decade old hardware :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 05, 2018, 07:39:17 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJamIRDPpzU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 05, 2018, 09:35:11 AM
I love Quark, his episodes are among the most fun in DS9.

Although I hate his mother

DS9 is so fucking good Ive seen all episodes too many times now..

now its time to pick and choose some quality voyager episodes.

Ive not seen TNG.. but going back to it is so hard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 05, 2018, 02:37:13 PM
Quote
“I don’t think Quentin is going to direct it,” Pegg told the Happy Sad Confused podcast. “Because he’s got his California movie [Once Upon A Time In Hollywood] to do and then I think only doing one more film after that. And I doubt, I don’t think he could get around to directing a Star Trek in two-three years.”

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/star-trek/272338/quentin-tarantino-star-trek-movie-might-not-happen-says-simon-pegg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 05, 2018, 08:50:55 PM
Quote
“I don’t think Quentin is going to direct it,” Pegg told the Happy Sad Confused podcast. “Because he’s got his California movie [Once Upon A Time In Hollywood] to do and then I think only doing one more film after that. And I doubt, I don’t think he could get around to directing a Star Trek in two-three years.”

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/star-trek/272338/quentin-tarantino-star-trek-movie-might-not-happen-says-simon-pegg

Between this and the Rey-Rey's Lineage comments, Simon Pegg's talking a little too much about other people's bizness.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 10, 2018, 05:44:46 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhTNWBRZYR8
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 10, 2018, 05:17:56 PM
https://trekmovie.com/2018/04/10/nana-visitor-says-she-wanted-to-be-captain-janeway-explains-why-shes-not-on-the-orville/

lol

I always really liked nana visitor. I'd still like to see her in more stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff on April 19, 2018, 07:58:06 PM
Been on a marathon of DS9.  I've watched a few eps before, and I liked them but I didn't think i'd take to it as much as i have. I found the beginning slow and wanting, events could've heated up a lot faster in the gamma quadrant; e.g why Sisko didn't get a ship like the Defiant a lot earlier considering they controlled the ONLY stable wormhole allowing instantaneous travel to another part of the galaxy really baffled me.

The pinnacle so far, and now favourite Trek season, was 4. I've never really felt affected by a Trek episode before, but a few episodes in S4 got to me. 5 and 6 mostly held up the high quality, but season 7 is waning already. I'm keen to see who Ezri makes out with first, but her handling has been pretty average. I was anticipating getting some insight into Trill, as she went through some post-join training to ease her transition. Instead she's just thrust back into Starfleet, and expected to deal with a huge psychological change with next to no preparation. Sisko is losing the fucking plot, i barely care and am just waiting on the next lazy deus ex machina event to save the Alpha quadrant, and tbh I don't dig the Pah Wraith x Wormhole Alien thing. They also got a little too heavy handed with the use of time paradoxes. But y'know it's all a dream anyway so whatevs right  :P. Overall i love how wild DS9 is, far from perfect, but it's got a lot of heart. Odo >> Data.

edit; less nonsense rambling on Ezri :p Nicole de Boer tho :shaq

(http://www.treksinscifi.com/babedaily/babes/2008-09-12-Nicole_DeBoer.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 20, 2018, 02:38:43 AM
Kinda curious, how do north americans pronounce 'de Boer'?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 20, 2018, 08:01:38 PM
Kinda curious, how do north americans pronounce 'de Boer'?

"de banana"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on April 26, 2018, 06:49:10 PM
https://news.avclub.com/paramount-says-2-new-star-trek-movies-are-in-the-works-1825574378
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on April 29, 2018, 07:29:18 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/FsSkffu.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2018, 04:26:50 PM
Quark and Odo's Tsundere for each other :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 05, 2018, 11:29:38 AM
The Bajoran/Cardassian conflict in DS9 is clearly an allegory for Palestine/Israel and i don't care what the writers say. Kira was talking about fasting because it's when the prophet did blablabla, shit was obvious.

Then who do the Ferengi represent.

 :jawalrus
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 05, 2018, 11:37:48 AM
I'm teasing.

I never honestly looked up what the writers were going for with the Bajor/Cardassian thing. As I kid, I always assumed it was another Nazi Germany parallel but yeah the Palestine/Israel conflict also seems fitting in certain aspects.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 06, 2018, 02:58:20 AM
the writers were trying to downplay it because it was the only attention the show was getting, and it wasn't intended to be a parallel with any specific historical occupation they took from lots of various ones to construct it

iirc the maquis were intended to be more of one
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 06, 2018, 02:13:01 PM
He got better as it went along. By better I mean he was given better material. I didn't like him much in the early years but they did some interesting stuff with him as it went on.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on June 14, 2018, 06:07:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/jzHM0bT.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on June 14, 2018, 08:50:53 PM
LOOOOLLLLLLLLL Alex Kurtzman is EPing Discovery now LOOOOOLLLLLLLL
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 19, 2018, 03:35:37 PM
http://ew.com/tv/2018/06/19/alex-kurtzman-star-trek-series/

On one hand cool there is a resurgence of interest in Trek.

On the other hand, let's not run it into the ground again please.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 20, 2018, 11:34:57 AM
That's it for me and star trek I guess. It's been a good two decades, but I'm not watching any of alex kurtzman's green lighted drek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on June 28, 2018, 07:49:13 AM
https://trekmovie.com/2018/06/27/star-trek-discovery-wins-best-streaming-series-saturn-award-martin-green-wins-for-acting/

Nice job Discovery.

Not so keen on a lot of the Patrick Stewart rumours but I would truly dig a new animated show. That would solve a lot of problems inherent in the budget of any sci-fi show and also allow more alien interaction kind of stories.

As far as new content I will take it on a piece by piece basis and judge it that way. There is definitely a danger to having too much Trek on TV because it starts to run out of new material to push but since I like Discovery, I'll keep an open mind.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 28, 2018, 08:25:58 AM
'The latest Trek show beat out genre entries from other steaming services including Altered Carbon (Netflix), Black Mirror (Netflix), The Handmaid’s Tale (Hulu), Mindhunter (Netflix), Philip K. Dick’s Electric Dreams (Amazon / Sony Television), and Stranger Things (Netflix).'

How the absolute fuck? Are the judges drunk? lmao
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 01, 2018, 05:59:11 PM
http://jamestkirkbourbon.com/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 12, 2018, 04:24:47 AM
random trek clip of the day, mainly for the last 20 seconds and how matter-of-fact they are :lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuyjhM1vL9I

also Q's haircut :picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on July 12, 2018, 05:27:40 PM
"...I'll alert the crew."

 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 20, 2018, 09:19:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=&v=yDIlBDRkPDI

Quote
This afternoon at the Discovery panel at San Diego Comic-Con’s Hall H, co-creator and current showrunner Alex Kurtzman announced Star Trek: Short Treks, a series of monthly short-form stories that will function like bonus content and air on CBS All Access in conjunction with the larger Star Trek: Discovery series. CBS says Short Treks, which will air in installments of about 10 to 15 minutes, is “an opportunity for deeper storytelling and exploration of key characters and themes that fit into… the expanding Star Trek universe.”


Among the planned episodes: a Harvey Mudd episode directed by (and, of course, starring) Rainn Wilson; a sidebar for Ensign Sylvia Tilly (Mary Wiseman); an episode starring Aldis Hodge (AKA Jack from the Black Mirror episode “Black Museum”) as a man stranded on a deserted ship; and, best of all, a much-needed deep dive into Lieutenant Commander Saru, the first (and evidently only) Kelpien in Starfleet.

“There is no shortage of compelling stories to tell in the Star Trek universe that inspire, entertain, and either challenge our preconceived ideas or affirm long held beliefs, and we are excited to broaden the universe already with Short Treks,” Kurtzman said in a press release. “Each episode will deliver closed-ended stories while revealing clues about what’s to come in future Star Trek: Discovery episodes. They’ll also introduce audiences to new characters who may inhabit the larger world of Star Trek.”

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/20/17596472/star-trek-discovery-short-treks-season-2-spock-number-one-comic-con-sdcc-2018
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 20, 2018, 09:30:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB6mt2ptFmM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 20, 2018, 09:30:40 PM
@ that trailer: :larry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on July 20, 2018, 09:37:32 PM
Full admission, I don't even watch trailers anymore including that one. They give away too much in all formats for my taste. I post them though because I know other people don't have my same sensibilities on that kind of stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 20, 2018, 09:41:48 PM
Full admission, I don't even watch trailers anymore including that one. They give away too much in all formats for my taste. I post them though because I know other people don't have my same sensibilities on that kind of stuff.

I do the same sometimes, no worries.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 20, 2018, 11:03:02 PM
They really made Pike look a lot like Mitt Romney. Though I guess he already kinda did. Either way season 2 already look to be a big improvement.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 20, 2018, 11:19:22 PM
THIS IS THE POWER OF MATH, PEOPLE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 04, 2018, 05:30:16 PM
https://twitter.com/SirPatStew/status/1025840545216823296
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 05, 2018, 07:01:09 AM
Star Trek : The last generation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 05, 2018, 01:31:55 PM
This is almost certainly going to turn out in way that nobody wants, but Patrick Stewart is great in anything so I'll watch it probably.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 05, 2018, 04:07:53 PM
It’s Picard. It’s Stewart. To turn down seeing him as Picard one last time? Hell no. Must watch for me even if it’s flawed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 05, 2018, 05:24:52 PM
This is almost certainly going to turn out in way that nobody wants, but Patrick Stewart is great in anything so I'll watch it probably.

I'll of course watch it, but yeah generally speaking I'm not a fan of rehashing rather than creating something new. But as you say Stewart is generally good no matter what and I'm a Trek fan so its a mandatory watch.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 05, 2018, 08:38:38 PM
I just want goofy early-90s space adventures with Captain Picard, please.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 05, 2018, 09:00:30 PM
I just want goofy early-90s space adventures with Captain Picard, please.

I want a serious serialized, philosophical Star Trek with Picard.

More ‘Darmok’ Trek and less ‘Q teleported a Marachi band to the 24th century’ or ‘we’ve turned the officers of starship Enterprise into children hahahahaha isn’t this funny - no it isn’t’ Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 06, 2018, 11:20:10 AM
I'll just keep rewatching TNG, but I'm up for more Sir Pat anytime.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 06, 2018, 12:37:27 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCKQp1sGVRQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 06, 2018, 02:50:43 PM
I really want this new Star Trek to also have Ian McKellen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCMCifwQVC8
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 06, 2018, 02:59:26 PM
Make new things. Jesus, make new things. :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 07, 2018, 10:44:37 PM
Rewatching Voyager for the first time since I was a teenager in a few weeks and I'm going to take you all down with me.  :doge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCKQp1sGVRQ

TNG isn't my favorite Star Trek. But this really made me emotional.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on August 07, 2018, 10:55:27 PM
Fuck this dead franchise if it’s not giving me Kirk.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 07, 2018, 11:29:19 PM
you just want to see shatner shoot his 87 year old load.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on August 09, 2018, 04:30:09 PM
https://twitter.com/bilrac/status/1027198064728186880
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 10, 2018, 07:40:22 PM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-trek-4-chris-pine-chris-hemsworth-talks-fall-1133802?utm_source=twitter&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=Direct&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral

Quote
Pine was due to reprise his role as iconic sci-fi hero Captain Kirk, which he has inhabited for three movies, while Hemsworth was to have played his father in a time-traveling adventure. (Hemsworth played the role in the prologue in the 2009 movie that rebooted the franchise.)

The deal points came down to the usual suspect: money. Pine and Hemsworth, among Hollywood’s A-list when starring in DC or Marvel movies, are said to be asking the studios to stick to existing deals. Paramount, according to insiders, contends that Trek is not like a Marvel or Star Wars movie and is trying to hold the line on a budget.

The actors, according to sources, insist they have deals in place and that the studios are reneging on them, forcing them to take pay cuts as they try to budget a movie that is following a mediocre performer.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 10, 2018, 09:05:27 PM
I'd bitch at Paramount always being so fucking stingy with this series, but their stinginess led to the second-best Trek movie so ehhhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 10, 2018, 11:39:23 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 10, 2018, 11:50:00 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

No more Kirks please.

Make 👏🏻 new 👏🏻 things 👏🏻
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 10, 2018, 11:51:07 PM
Honestly now that Trek is back on TV, I don't really care what happens with the movies. Let em do whatever they want.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 10, 2018, 11:52:48 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

No more Kirks please.

Make 👏🏻 new 👏🏻 things 👏🏻

I'm all for new things but let's be real. They aren't making new trek movies with crew no one has ever heard of. Trek movies only exist on the back of established characters.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 10, 2018, 11:59:37 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

No more Kirks please.

Make 👏🏻 new 👏🏻 things 👏🏻

I'm all for new things but let's be real. They aren't making new trek movies with crew no one has ever heard of. Trek movies only exist on the back of established characters.

This is exactly why Discovery should never have been a prequel. Goddamnit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 12:08:30 AM
Prequels are the worst. It’s like, who cares unless you’re a die hard and want to know to know more lore?

I feel that way despite liking discovery.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on August 11, 2018, 12:29:36 AM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

No more Kirks please.

Make 👏🏻 new 👏🏻 things 👏🏻

I'm all for new things but let's be real. They aren't making new trek movies with crew no one has ever heard of. Trek movies only exist on the back of established characters.

This is exactly why Discovery should never have been a prequel. Goddamnit.

Even if Discovery had been a future show, it is highly unlikely imo movies would have been made of it. Trek in the movies only works if the characters are basically ingrained into pop culture. TV Trek can be successful and profitable but it doesn't fit into the mainstream of pop culture that way in the modern world.

As far as old stuff, I'm fine with Trek exploring past timelines with new characters. I'm less a fan when the older major characters come to dominate those storylines for a number of reasons.

All that being said, rather than hard and rigid rules, I tend to judge something based on whether I like that specific thing or not rather than the preconceived notions I might bring to the table initially.

Which is why I won't prejudge the picard led trek show or the new season of discovery going with Pike and crew despite how those things tend to make me skeptical.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 12:34:27 AM
I didn’t know Star Trek was that popular before the motion picture. I thought the motion picture is what made Star Trek mainstream. I thought Star Trek while having its fanbase wasn’t that popular in its initial run or even reruns?Could be wrong.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 01:24:26 AM
Hearing how my dad told it, Trek didn't really take off until Wrath of Khan, though there was a dedicated but small base before that. The movies kept it alive until TNG cemented the franchise overall (after like, the first 1.5 seasons.)

I'm not convinced a smaller-budget Star Trek movie with a new crew wouldn't be money, but who honestly knows anymore.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 01:32:24 AM
Yeah as far I know, trek had a base but was decidedly cult until the movies.

Trek isn’t Star Wars. I think it can subsist post-Voyager in film form and people would dig it if it were good. Trek doesn’t have the same obligations as other franchises of its caliber due to its emphasis on adventure and all the different races. It has no obligation to Jedi or Sith. All you need is the Federation.

In fact I think film is the best way to launch post-Voyager Trek timeline. Because it’ll give non die hards a reason  to check the tv show.

I think Stoney is doing the mistake many have done and that’s,”if it worked for tng it should be the basic template the rest of the series.”
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 01:40:22 AM
Speaking of TNG I have a hankering for Darmok.

If there’s one episode that I feel embodies what Trek best represents that I would use to get anyone new to Trek to watch and hopefully fall in love with the premise it would be that one.

GOAT Trek ep imo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 01:43:33 AM
Darmok's great, but like... urge to list wars rising. :doge

Best of Both Worlds, Unification, Yesterday's Enterprise, Inner Light, The Pegasus, Chain of Command...

Though I think Family is my personal TNG GOAT. It's so hard to choose.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 01:47:03 AM
Is Family the one where Picard gets a family and...*tears fall down cheek*

No wait that’s the one here he visits the farm. Another GOAT.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 01:48:33 AM
Yeah it's the farm ep with his brother and nephew, with that great heartwarming ending Generations proceeded to take a big steamy shit on.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 01:58:03 AM
For me what makes Star Trek great are a few components:

- adventure
- cheese
- drama
- hope for the future, for humanity, for goodness
- communication and understanding between those different than us

For me, the episode that excels at all these elements the best is Darmok.

It’s got adventure. Picard is stuck on a planet being attacked by an unknown force without being able to beam out.

It’s got cheese. Darmok and Jalad in Tanagra is so cheesy and has fueled so many memes. It’s cheesy as fuck. When the walls fell.

But it works because it takes itself seriously while being self aware how ridiculous this all is because the stakes couldn’t be higher and Picard has to find a way to communicate with this stranger.

And somehow despite all the barriers, despite being attacked by an unknown enemy. Despite the stress they find a way to communicate in spite of their differences which gives us hope we can achieve almost anything and perhaps be able to extend a hand to others different from us.

Perfect Trek episode. 10/10. If anyone I know is interested in Trek I suggest they watch that and see if they like it. If they do, I know we’ve got a fellow Trekker. :jawalrus
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 01:59:12 AM
Yeah it's the farm ep with his brother and nephew, with that great heartwarming ending Generations proceeded to take a big steamy shit on.

I think Lower Decks is the better series finale. :yeshrug

I remember watching TNG series finale the night it premiered. I was very, very confused.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 02:07:38 AM
You mean All Good Things?

Although it's a great finale (especially the ending poker scene) it still functions pretty well as a standalone ep I think.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 02:08:25 AM
I love the poker scene.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 02:08:35 AM
I wish I could talk like this about Buffy and Angel here with someone (other than benji.) :'(

I wanna do an Angel rewatch soon, maybe I'll make a thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 02:09:27 AM
I love the poker scene.

Since I watched episodes out of order in syndication, it wasn't until my third or fourth rewatch of the ep that I realized it was the first (and only) time Picard showed up to play poker. It's touches like that which really elevate a show to a cut above.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 02:12:02 AM
I’ve watched Buffy but it’s been a while. I can marathon it for you. Or should I watch Voyager first? *evil smile*

And yeah it shows that Picard learns there’s more to life than duty. Quite a great scene. Still prefer Lower Decks. :p
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 11, 2018, 02:13:26 AM
I don't even remember that one. :lol Maybe it's time for a TNG rewatch. :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 02:15:43 AM
Ahhhh something about TNG. I love DS9 and it’s my favorite Trek and what I consider the best of the franchise but something about TNG is like a warm glass of a milk. Or a scratching a really deep itch. The penultimate in comfort food tv.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 11, 2018, 05:54:31 AM
Yeah it's the farm ep with his brother and nephew, with that great heartwarming ending Generations proceeded to take a big steamy shit on.

I think Lower Decks is the better series finale. :yeshrug

I remember watching TNG series finale the night it premiered. I was very, very confused.

Oh, holy shit, LOWER DECKS. 

What a fucking wonderful gut-punch that episode is. Just amazing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 11, 2018, 05:55:35 AM
I wish I could talk like this about Buffy and Angel here with someone (other than benji.) :'(

I wanna do an Angel rewatch soon, maybe I'll make a thread.

Make the thread. I'll finish the series and watch with you.

But I won't be buying the s8 comics, be forewarned.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 11, 2018, 09:39:58 AM
I think Lower Decks, when combined with the upper officer staff poker scenes edited in, would have been the best tng finale.

It takes the story full circle. It’s called The Next Generation, right? Well, here’s the current generation of Star fleets best: Picard, Riker, Worf, Crusher, Troi, Data. But juxtapose that with the next generation of star fleet officers and their struggles. The risks of command. But also the fruits. The junior officers are playing their own poker game, then transition to the older guys and for the first time Picard walks into play. Then, dun dun dunnnnnn....where no one has ever gone before. Fade out. All Good Things feels too Picard centric to be a series finale for my taste.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 12, 2018, 04:21:50 AM
"All Good Things..." takes the story full circle too. The Q and Picard story about the trial of humanity's right to exist that began in "Encounter at Farpoint" and was extended into "Q Who?" with The Borg, etc. As well as showing that the family fell apart because of some event, and it's hinted that it was due to Picard's declining mental health and the death of Troi without him to hold it together. And it's through that trip into the Q future that Picard, who has rejected family to this point, realizes that the D senior staff has become his family and so he finally joins them to make up for whatever failed in Q's scenario. (This arguably is what harms three of the four films, and Nemesis most of all, because the family is sidelined when throughout all of TNG, they were there to help and back up emotionally Data and Picard or whoever was having the problem of the week. That doesn't happen in Nemesis. Compare to The Undiscovered Country where despite the Kirk and Spock plotlines, everyone gets a chance to do something for the swan song.)

"You just don't get it, do you, Jean-Luc? The trial never ends."
"See you... out there!"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 12, 2018, 04:37:15 AM
I didn’t know Star Trek was that popular before the motion picture. I thought the motion picture is what made Star Trek mainstream. I thought Star Trek while having its fanbase wasn’t that popular in its initial run or even reruns?Could be wrong.
The Motion Picture happened because Star Trek became popular enough for one.

Star Trek did decently in its original run, and because there was less metrics back in the day, the letter writing campaign (and Roddenberry leaving) helped get it a low budget third season when NBC was leaning towards cancelling it.

Where Trek blew up was that those episodes were repacked and syndicated like crazy, it was in the early 1970's like a few years ago when you could always watch Seinfeld every night. Trek created the syndication market for hour TV shows essentially.

So even though Paramount was intending to launch a network (that became Fox, and Paramount then launched a later network, UPN, with Voyager) with Trek: Phase 2 as the headlining show, even when that fell through they looked to first-run syndication as a follow up. (TNG turned this into a legit thing that made huge money for a period.) A confluence of factors led to Phase Two being reworked into The Motion Picture. (The largest being that unlike the other shows, sets/models were already being built and they had spent millions developing the series, which included a two-hour pilot script.)

But Paramount clearly didn't have total faith in it, which is why they slashed the budget to pennies, even for the era, and gave the show over to a non-fan who rebuilt it into Wrath of Khan, The Search For Spock, The Voyage Home and The Undiscovered Country creating the first "shared and developing universe" multi-arcs that TNG and DS9 would build off of.

TMP nearly killed Trek and got Roddenberry kicked off it again. The studio hated it, it cost so much in the end that Paramount didn't significantly make money on it even though it's the highest grossing Trek film ever. (The "budget" figure of $46 million doesn't include the Phase Two costs.) Khan saved the franchise. This process would repeat with TNG. (Which also used reworked Phase 2 scripts early on. Riker and Troi for example are stand-ins for Decker and Ilia. Xon became Data.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 12, 2018, 04:40:32 AM
Amusingly enough, after factoring in inflation, Khan's entire original budget was the same as how much they spent on three episodes of Discovery in the first season. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 12, 2018, 10:29:04 AM
All Great Things does come full circle but it’s still too Picard centric for me. I wish there weren’t more emphasis on the group.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 12, 2018, 05:12:59 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

I'd honestly like to see Abram's universe get expanded into TNG
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 12, 2018, 05:22:51 PM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

I'd honestly like to see Abram's universe get expanded into TNG

I had that thought a loooong time ago (basically when Trek 09 came out.) It might be cool to see but I can tell they'd fuck it up like the TNG movies -- having a guy shave his head as young Picard even though TNG explicitly showed him having hair in his youth. :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 14, 2018, 01:57:36 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/star-trek-discoverys-young-spock-will-be-played-by-eth-1828334110

REMEMBER SPOOOOOOOOCK

WELL HE'S HOT NOW, YOU'RE WELCOME
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2018, 06:02:06 PM
Gul Dukat GOAT
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2018, 06:05:09 PM
Tbh all the cardassian characters in DS9 are great
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on August 14, 2018, 11:56:04 PM
I was about to say, Damar has an impressive character arc over the course of the series. And Garak? :delicious
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 12:00:36 AM
Damar is :lawd

Then you've got Dukat's daughter too.

And Kira's relationships with Cardassian's.

Wew the character development on that show.  :whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rahxephon91 on August 15, 2018, 12:07:23 AM
Chris Pine's Kirk is pretty great, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone else take over the role.

No more Kirks please.

Make 👏🏻 new 👏🏻 things 👏🏻

I'm all for new things but let's be real. They aren't making new trek movies with crew no one has ever heard of. Trek movies only exist on the back of established characters.
Why not though? Why wouldn’t that work? Because it hasn’t been done before? Maybe the problem is that the movies have too much of a reliance on established characters. I think they should try a movie series with a movie only crew, but they won’t.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 12:08:59 AM
This just got me thinking. Is there a single character in DS9 (major or minor) with a regular role that doesn't have an arc? i can't think of one.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 15, 2018, 02:15:41 AM
Back when they did the JJ reboot I suggested a number of places that the whole "showing Trek to a new generation" thing was bupkis, especially since it was more like Star Wars, and doubly so because everyone at this point "gets" Trek through the caricatures. This has even spread into TNG at this point with all the Picard memes and stuff.

That if you really wanted to give Trek to a new generation you would do it just like TNG did, like VOY did, and like ENT tried. Each generation should get their own crew to "grow up" with.

All of us here know Kirk/Spock/etc. and a lot of us even prefer Sisko/Garak/etc. but by and large we "grew up" with the TNG cast, they were our first and the ones who brought us into things every week. Those of us who started a little bit earlier with the Trek films didn't get them every week so it wasn't the same experience as what TNG would bring.

Guardians is proof you can take characters nobody knows and make it a billion dollar franchise. The Abramsverse films had the old characters, and ran through all the beats like McCoy is onry, Spock is logical, Kirk is reckless, KHAAAAAAAAAAN!!! but they didn't exactly sell anybody on it as a franchise or an universe that exists outside of their hijinks until Beyond. And by that point, people had tuned out the reboot. The reboot wasn't even necessary except that they were so adamant about keeping it tied to the original canon and bringing in Nimoy. I have a long carepost here or on GAF about how had they not tried that it would have eliminated half the plotholes, if they made it just "unseen adventures with Kirk/Spock" or whatever. In CANON there's seven years of the crews missions that have never been explored outside of the second-tier canon comics and novels. Beyond arguably fits into this fairly well, while the other two films don't. Discovery is now mining the Pike years, and Pike in ST09 also fits the "canon" they wanted to preserve so hard.

Abrams/ENT/DIS have a similar problem in that they're trying to tell stories pre-TOS when our real lives are advancing faster than anything. Which was why VOY visits LA had to ignore the global war supposed to be happening at the time. When TNG kicked ahead 80 years, while in real life moving ahead two decades, it let it stay ever so ahead of us. Now it's antiques, PADDs have less capabilities than iPads and Kindles. (Link to scene I can't find where Riker hands Picard like ten PADDs to read because apparently tabs were lost.)

When ENT went back, it had to deal with not only our real world advancement, but also the fact that it had to look "older" than TOS, until they just gave up and said "okay, we have transporters again" because it was too story restricting.

But I've digressed. The other key TNG got from the time skip was that it could rework the galactic scene. Klingons were now friends? Where were the Romulans? Meet the Ferengi! The Borg! The Cardassians! The Bajorians! (The Dominion!) ENT and DIS are playing in established waters. And then when they do something decent like the Xindi arc, it's something that you think someone might have mentioned in the future. And the show never got to the Romulan War, and when it started hinting at it, it was fighting with the prior canon establishing that in-person contact was never actually made between the two sides and that the weapons were lower tier than what the show had already used in season one. You get that in our modern treatment of recent history, but never to that extent to where the historical records are somehow getting worse.

So kinda like that proposed cartoon series, what they should have done was jump ahead 50-100 years, still have all the races we know and love stopping by, but with a new diverse crew, new aliens, etc. Basically what TNG did and DS9 went hardcore about. The New Frontier books are arguably a better template than VOY which filled up the show with Borgs, Vulcans, Klingons, etc. and never seemed to understand the concepts of distance. (Kazon space for two years! When they're a nomadic scavenger set of tribes? Okay!)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 15, 2018, 02:16:43 AM
shut up nerd

"MUH CANON" lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 02:28:27 AM
Agree with benji and rah. Abrams making his films set to original Trek was unnecessary. But he is Abrams, and therefore a hack. So there’s that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 15, 2018, 02:46:41 AM
As bad as Irdis Elba's villain is, he's at least established within the Trek universe of the films, someone from an earlier/another ship lands on planet and shit get weird. TOS and TNG did these kinds of stories all the time. "We're checking in on this science team who was supposed to... HOLY SHIT WOMEN RUN A PLANET WHAT IS THIS?!? HOW CAN THIS BE?!?"

It just got all amped up to a revenge plot where he's going to wipe out billions because it was a film and you always need such stupid meaningless stakes nowdays. By comparison, Nero is a time-traveling/dimension hopping dude with a God Ship that wipes out the entire Federation fleet and vaporized Vulcan; SuperKhan "false flags" and Robocops insane yet somehow secret ship is out of the blue Orci political fanfic.

Beyond was also the first time they actually gave all of the crew something to do, and opportunities to build their characters rather than rehashing Kirk/Spock (and new star Girlfriend Uhura) tropes. Kirk and Spock spend barely any of the film together except when they're planning the planet escape. I think it works out better as a third film if the first two films had established new characters rather than going "YOU REMEMBER SULU, HE ASIAN, SO HE GOT A SWORD! (ALSO NOW HE GAY CUZ IT THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY...but only for a brief shot!)" Or even "new versions" of Kirk/Spock/etc. for our new grittier world where Obama is drone striking people without trial.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on August 15, 2018, 09:50:37 AM
Give me a show about the weird cow faced President of the Federation in DS9  (or whatever president really, even Red Forman or Scott Bakula).  Future West Wing :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 15, 2018, 10:05:42 AM
The President of The Federation is a main character in some of the post-Nemesis novels.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/4/47/Articles_of_the_federation.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20050902062649)
Quote
Following the surprise resignation of Federation President Min Zife after the disastrous Tezwa affair, Nan Bacco of Cestus III has won a hotly contested election to become the new chief executive of over one hundred fifty planetary civilizations and their colonies. But no sooner does she take office than the Romulan Star Empire falls into chaos. With tensions already high, a Reman refugee ship is sighted approaching a Federation outpost, its intentions unknown.

As the first year of the Bacco Administration unfolds, the Federation Council is slow to work with its new president, and not always supportive of her policies or her appointments to key council positions; a successful first contact suddenly becomes a diplomatic disaster; and the sins of President Zife prove difficult to lay to rest...as one celebrated Starfleet officer's career reaches a turning point.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Nanietta_Bacco

the "canon-ish" novels introduce like five of them altogether and I think four of them are assassinated/attempted, which is roughly the same percentage as the ones who appear in the show/films :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 15, 2018, 11:09:01 AM
The President of The Federation is a main character in some of the post-Nemesis novels.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/4/47/Articles_of_the_federation.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20050902062649)
Quote
Following the surprise resignation of Federation President Min Zife after the disastrous Tezwa affair, Nan Bacco of Cestus III has won a hotly contested election to become the new chief executive of over one hundred fifty planetary civilizations and their colonies. But no sooner does she take office than the Romulan Star Empire falls into chaos. With tensions already high, a Reman refugee ship is sighted approaching a Federation outpost, its intentions unknown.

As the first year of the Bacco Administration unfolds, the Federation Council is slow to work with its new president, and not always supportive of her policies or her appointments to key council positions; a successful first contact suddenly becomes a diplomatic disaster; and the sins of President Zife prove difficult to lay to rest...as one celebrated Starfleet officer's career reaches a turning point.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Nanietta_Bacco

the "canon-ish" novels introduce like five of them altogether and I think four of them are assassinated/attempted, which is roughly the same percentage as the ones who appear in the show/films :lol

I can't believe that you also follow IMAGINARY politics to this level of detail.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 15, 2018, 11:09:59 AM
Quote
That if you really wanted to give Trek to a new generation you would do it just like TNG did, like VOY did, and like ENT tried. Each generation should get their own crew to "grow up" with.

This has always been my sticking point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 15, 2018, 11:54:03 AM
The President of The Federation is a main character in some of the post-Nemesis novels.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/4/47/Articles_of_the_federation.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20050902062649)
Quote
Following the surprise resignation of Federation President Min Zife after the disastrous Tezwa affair, Nan Bacco of Cestus III has won a hotly contested election to become the new chief executive of over one hundred fifty planetary civilizations and their colonies. But no sooner does she take office than the Romulan Star Empire falls into chaos. With tensions already high, a Reman refugee ship is sighted approaching a Federation outpost, its intentions unknown.

As the first year of the Bacco Administration unfolds, the Federation Council is slow to work with its new president, and not always supportive of her policies or her appointments to key council positions; a successful first contact suddenly becomes a diplomatic disaster; and the sins of President Zife prove difficult to lay to rest...as one celebrated Starfleet officer's career reaches a turning point.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Nanietta_Bacco

the "canon-ish" novels introduce like five of them altogether and I think four of them are assassinated/attempted, which is roughly the same percentage as the ones who appear in the show/films :lol

I can't believe that you also follow IMAGINARY politics to this level of detail.

I would argue that given the reality of most star-trek fans, this is less imaginary than most of his politics.   
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 05:22:24 PM
I like every episode of DS9 except maybe two or three. A lot of people complain it takes a while to get going or whatever but idk it just clicked with me on every level. I’m even fond of season 7. I don’t think there’s a single bad season of DS9 and I know that’s controversial to say. I even love Ferengi episodes which everyone else seems to hate.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 05:57:12 PM
That’s fair assessment. :obama

Especially on the MM vs OoT thing.

I love both but prefer MM for the stories it manages to tell. I guess I’m the same way with DS9.

I feel like season 2 of DS9 is one of the best seasons in Trek. It saddens me others find it material for the cutting floor. Compare DS9 seasons 1 and 2 any other Trek season 1 and 2 and I think it comes out very, very well. On top of season 2 being pretty darn great as it is.

I think TNG overall has more bad than DS9. The bloody holodeck eps, Luwaxana, Q...DS9 has Luwaxana and uses her better. Same for Alexander and holodecks. I feel like anything I dislike about TNG hat DS9 manages to improve.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 15, 2018, 06:00:45 PM
I like Q because Picard is straight up :trigger when he shows up.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
When he shows up in DS9 and gets his shit slapped it was basically saying this isn't your daddies Star Trek.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 06:05:21 PM
It really depends on the Q episode for me. Taking Jean Luc to court? Good episode. Giving Riker god like powers? Blah.

My main grievance are holodeck eps and the lack of defined character arcs. TNG will bring interesting elements into the story (Picard becoming Borg for instance) only to forget about them. It feels like only Worf and arguably Data have any sort of development. Troi and Doctor Crusher are also kind of pointless.

Despite my problems with it it’s still one of my favorite shows. Which is weird to say. :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2018, 06:12:03 PM
I guess you could say:

TNG gives me the fuzzies. It gives me hope for a better tomorrow. But I don’t like its method of storytelling.

I love DS9’s storytelling but it puts be back on Earth, showing us that even paradise has flaws.

I can appreciate both. FWIW, I think DS9 is the better show but I’m much less likely to pop on a random ep of it and just bask in feel good fuzzies for an hour.

So I don’t begrudge anyone for preferring TNG.
 
In the end though, both work as perfect complimentary shows. And then there’s Voyager. The red haired step child.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 02:54:53 AM
Rewatched Star Trek First Contact. First time seeing it since release and really enjoyed it. I’ve avoided the TNG movies for too long. It’ll be a nice final goodbye to the crew. Have Generations on rent from amazon as well.

I think I saw that one in theaters with my dad too and I hated it. Man, I hated anything overly sci fi as a kid. I couldn’t stand Star Wars and thought it was boring. Something about sci fi clicked when I was 10 though. Thank goodness for the special editions of Star Wars trilogy I guess?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 02:25:12 PM
Realized that there's a silver lining to the new Picard series: it will be the first Trek to be post-Voyager.

Get hype. It could help bridge a gap to a post-Voyager tv show or movie. We might finally get answers to what happened in the universe. I'm really getting excited thinking about it.

Oh, and I'll be starting Voyager tonight. lmao RIP
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 03:35:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eqUNL5AdL8

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 18, 2018, 03:52:45 PM
That video is 13:37 long. :thinking

Also, the title is a complete lie. There was nothing I didn't know except for the stuff that was wrong. And I'm merely a casual Trek fan. For example, I may have read nearly all the comics, but I've never read more than like five or six of the non-relaunch-"canon" novels.

EDIT: SWAPPED THE VIDEOS ON ME, CINDI, YOU ARE NOW MY EDDINGTON :bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 03:55:52 PM
I pasted the wrong video. It doesn't have anything new I didn't already know! :brazilcry

https://youtu.be/4OJNBlZ-6UU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 05:55:45 PM
:rejoice Dukat :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 07:09:51 PM
because of the rich, diverse cast of characters Vic's easy to forget even if he's a good character.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 18, 2018, 07:26:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLl17YXrAZY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 18, 2018, 07:30:51 PM
Quote
mariokarter13
1 week ago
A real headline from a real news outlet:
New 'Star Trek' reboot starring Patrick Stewart is CBS' latest All Access offering. But who's the audience? The show is a dream come true for many Next Generation fans, but something of a retreat from the progressivism of Star Trek: Discovery
And the media wonder why they're called out of touch.
Quote
Rich Mond
1 day ago
It's very sad that today, films and TV shows aren't made for entertainment, only profit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 07:42:40 PM

Quote
Rich Mond
1 day ago
It's very sad that today, films and TV shows aren't made for entertainment, only profit.

:lol

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2018, 08:35:28 PM
Voyager’s first episode was surprisingly fantastic. :obama
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2018, 01:34:51 AM
Benji plz read and give us your thoughts

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/05/the-dismal-frontier
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2018, 02:26:01 AM
Voyager ep 3, Time and Again

I said,"WHAT?!?!" at least 4 times during this episode. Janeway and Paris hit some time fracture? Idk. And are sent back in time on some planet that is going to blow up. They do whatever and just try to blend in rather than sitting still and end up in some crazy adventure where anti-energy extremists are planning a terrorist attack that could have caused the destruction of the planet. Janeway and Paris have x amount of time to be found before they're caught in the explosion. The crew sets up a device to try to find as they use Kes to scout on the planet for clues. Turns out, they doomed the planet before even coming in the past, which is eerily similar and far more boring than the previous episode where they were stuck in a loop. The episode has bizarre characterization for Janeway: revealing themselves to be Starfleet without moments notice, having a gun locked on three of the terrorists with a clear view and just wasting time, caring about the prime directive 70 years away from home during an emergency situation only to throw away the PD within moments haste because she feels like it. But more than that, there's a bunch of awful technobabble this episode that makes it tedious to get through. The premise of the episode makes no sense and the way the crew tries to get Paris and Janeway out makes even less sense. It's a massive suspension of belief episode and just fails in a lot of ways for me. The ending was okay, but how everything managed to reset to the beginning of the episode is the definition of cumbersome.

Rating: C-
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 20, 2018, 02:45:37 AM
Benji plz read and give us your thoughts

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/05/the-dismal-frontier
I'm not sure about some of that gibberish or socialism jibber jabber, but it's Kurtzman. I think I pointed out here way back before Discovery even started that Kurtzman wanted to build up to a Klingon War in the films but JJ leaving and him breaking up with Orci derailed that thankfully, but then Kurtzman somehow got back into the franchise and then took over it. The article says it's not sure what Fuller wanted, but he was pretty clear on an anthology where it changed every season and could take place anywhere in Trek's timeline. Kurtzman wants KLINGON WAR.

The author also seems to quite downplay that DS9 was almost entirely taken over (aside from brief stops for baseball or heist hijinks in the holosuite) with a war plotline for its final two seasons and that the Federation also was revealed to be doing horrible things during it up to and including genocide. Now, where DS9 was distinct from DIS is that the Dominion War was used like much of DS9 to subvert traditional Trek. They couldn't warp away, so they had to deal with it. The show had established all the pieces, politics, threats and most importantly the characters for five seasons before finally pulling the trigger on the war. Then continued to make it extremely personal for those characters. Even doing things like taking a side almost background character in Damar and giving him a new purpose in life after Dukat went off the reservation. Promoting Garak to basically a full fledged crew member, one whose exile is ending in the worst way but is still willing to die with his friends. Establishing personal consequences for not only The Founders, but even Weyoun! Trek had never spent time with non-homebase characters like this, let alone "villains" of the show and... er "humanized" them. Enterprise would be the only other time it has done this.

Also, I'm surprised that in the year of our lord 2018 people are still quoting Gene on what "Trek really is about." Gene didn't agree with Gene ffs.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2018, 02:53:36 AM
People always forget DS9. TNG is like the one utopian vision of Trek. DS9 could be said to be dismal but in the end has races that HATED each other band together and fight for the future and the common good. We see entire races evolve before our eyes because of the conflict. Conflict in Trek isn't bad! An utopia shouldn't and won't be easy. DS9 shows this. But the socialism thing is crazy. Star trek isn't socialist. It's post-scarcity.

I mean, take this quote:

Quote
This last part—Trek’s utopianism—is likely the key to its continuing prominence. Modern media fandom really began with Star Trek: in the 60s and 70s, Trekkies, mostly female Trekkies, created fanzines and the first real pop culture conventions. People liked the Star Trek universe created by Gene Roddenberry so much that they wanted to live in it, or barring that, talk about it constantly with people who understood why the camaraderie of multicultural nerds in space meant so much to them. The fans fought to keep the original series from being cancelled (and failed); and yet the show remained popular in syndication, and has since spawned thirteen movies and five more TV shows: The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise—and now, in 2017-2018, Discovery, a show so odd, so off-putting, so vicious and violent and militaristic that it seems like an invader from another universe entirely.

 :confused

I haven't seen Enterprise yet but DS9 isn't utopian and shows a dark side to utopias. Voyager is about a crew 70 years from Earth. Hardly utopian.

A big problem I've got with TNG and its die hards is that they define TNG to be the only legitimate interpretation of Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 20, 2018, 03:25:49 AM
lol look at this cac dingus: http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=39357.msg2296436#msg2296436

anyway, it had what i was looking for in terms of Kurtzman already told us what this was going to be about, to quote the author of that Current Affairs piece, "lurching from one hideous crisis to another. A sinister new captain! War! Misery! Despair!":
Quote
"The defining factor of Roddenberry's vision is the optimistic view of the future ... Once you lose that, you lose the essence of what Star Trek is. That being said…we live in very different times. Every day we look at the news and it is hard. It is hard to see what we see. I think now more than ever Trek is needed as a reminder of what we can be and the best of who we can be. Star Trek has always been a mirror to the time it reflected and [the topical question now] is how do you preserve and protect what Starfleet is in the weight of a challenge like war and the things that have to be done in war. [That] is a very interesting and dramatic problem."
—Executive producer Alex Kurtzman on the balance between classic Star Trek and new elements in Discovery
Quote
felt that the aftereffects of the first season would be felt moving forward: "The results of the war are going to allow for a lot of new storytelling that will be the result of everything that happens and the people that are left behind; the casualties, the things that have grown in Starfleet as a result of the war. That's what we'll inherit in the second season."

oh aha, here's the care post about Kurtzman I was thinking of more where I questioned the entire premise of being able to base a show around war while staying "optimistic" at the core and whether Kurtzman could pull it off: http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=39357.msg2297099#msg2297099
Quote from: some doofus
But it seems like it belies a fundamental misunderstanding of not only Trek as a franchise (or really any series), but the history of the real world and also producing successful dramatic story. Even more than that his own notions of what Trek is supposed to be literally two seconds earlier.

I only have Kurtzman's Trek to go off of, but he comes off with desiring a fetishistic glamorization of war for its bad parts. "The things that have to be done in war." And in the other quote how the second season will bring with it from the war "the things that are left behind; the casualties, the things that have grown in Starfleet as a result of the war"
...
"The things that have to be done in war." DS9 dealt with this, and in the only way possible, an endless tragedy for everyone. Everyone's morals and morale is broken, an entire species has nearly been wiped out and the show makes us feel for them despite them being the bad guys from day one (and despite their two representative characters for the end story arc being the most blatantly grey or worse characters on it), another race was targeted for deliberate genocide (let alone what the Federation was going to let happen in the Gamma Quadrant as a result from the Dominion collapsing), pretty much all the main characters relationships have been shattered during and by the war and personal sacrifices are made to the very end. The Romulans aren't friends now because of the war and don't stick around to celebrate. The Klingons are putting on a brave face, but as the show multiple times indicates they are finished as a power, maybe for generations, because of the war and their ways. (Their entire government was overthrown just recently in a conference room by their new Federation ambassador.)

There's no optimism and "a reminder of what we can be and the best of who we can be" in weighing the challenge of war and "the things that have to be done." There can't be. War is inherently a failure, a disaster. Especially an intergalactic one.

You have literally the universe given to you and you want to explore war? You'll never explore it even on the level of something like Homeland has done. You can't deal with the consequences like you claim other than to revel in the suffering of certain characters. Real war tears apart societies on a level you can never do on a show where you want to keep the main cast and keep the main premise well past it.

And again DS9 already did all this and pushed it to the brink of where it could go before we tumble over an event horizon of no return. The Federation was literally prepared to commit genocide and bring about the collapse of an entire civilization that had the potential to kill untold trillions because it could not fight the war indefinitely. (And they didn't even know what havoc Janeway was unleashing in the Delta Quadrant at the time.) An idea which, by the way, you'll recall was already less successfully attempted by two "bad" powers. And for all the wartime ethics "In A Pale Moonlight" toys around with which Garak rightly points out has been a line they've crossed many times in the past and Sisko knew he would be crossing from the start, in the end, Sisko risks literally everything, trillions upon trillions of lives, on Bashir successfully getting the cure from Sloane's mind AND Odo being able to convince the Founders to end the war in exchange. DS9 had to end because they couldn't cover the aftermath of what they DID do, especially on Cardassia, let alone wrestle with what they nearly did.

If your Trek is premised on exploring "the things that have to be done in a war" because we "live in very different times ... the news ... is hard" and your previous Trek films featured a faction of the Federation determined to be prepared for the next war (after untold billions died to a Romulan ship from a future alternate timeline) that is utterly ruthless and prepared to slaughter anyone to pursue this goal pre-emptively then I'm not sure how your Trek is going to ever be optimistic or about exploration or about really anything but just brutal terrible suffering for everyone in just crudely and clumsily handled ways.


more release period "talking about what the show will be" from producers/writers/etc.
Quote
Noting that the Klingons historically represented the Soviet Union, becoming friendlier with the protagonists of Star Trek as the Cold War ended, Harberts stated that in Discovery they and Starfleet would represent different factions within the modern United States, explaining that "what we really wanted to do too is understand two differing points of view and really explore it ... I frankly love what they represent. Not in terms necessarily of all the messaging, but in terms of learning about them and learning why they are who they are and making sure they aren't just the enemy. And then finding a way to come together. How do we bring everyone back together? What do we do? What does it take? It is a big challenge for us, but that is what season one is all about."
Quote
Berg elaborated that "one of the themes we are exploring is universal and is a lesson I feel like as human beings we have to learn over and over again—is you think you know ‘the other,' but you really don't. You have to sort of cognitively re-frame or break or deviate from your own point of view to really understand. You have to forget what you knew before. One of the big steps in that journey is how to understand yourself. You have to understand yourself before you can better see others. The show is called Discovery and it is called Discovery for a reason, because our characters are on a journey."
Quote
"One of the driving forces of this war was to not vilify either side. The show is often told from both points of view ... there are significant sections of the narrative that are purely from the Klingon point of view and in Klingon. That allows the audience to participate in the debate of who is right and who is wrong."
—Executive producer Akiva Goldsman on approaching the Federation-Klingon war from both sides
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2018, 11:38:41 AM
Benji it's not DIS it's STD.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2018, 12:27:11 PM
Benji it's not DIS it's STD.

No, that's Kurtzman.

Sorry, only registered users can see this content. Please Login or Register.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2018, 12:39:40 PM
Nah, he's basically herpes. You can learn to love her again but it's unlikely.

:thinking Well said.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 20, 2018, 06:38:35 PM
TOS -> TNG -> DS9 -> VOY -> ENT -> STD?!?

ST -> STT -> STD -> STV -> STE -> DIS?!?

I'm keeping DIS :bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2018, 07:51:12 PM
Watching the show is still a self-diss as a Trek fan so I guess DIS still sorta works. It's not as catchy as STD tho.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 21, 2018, 01:02:44 AM
How could you take the wonderful premise of Voyager and make it about TOS like Twilight Zone encounters every week? Why do they ignore the fact they’re a lone starship lightyears from home without a starbase to fix the ship? How are they able to run around doing these dumb space errands without constantly refueling? Why aren’t they playing the Maquis vs Federation aspect of the cast? You’ve got the great pilot and then an alright episode and then ...:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 21, 2018, 08:01:09 AM
Ya thats the most frustrating thing about voyager.  They take this cool premise that they are alone in the wild wests of space and then use that for like a whole 6 episodes. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 21, 2018, 11:44:09 PM
Started watching DS9 again. The one where Quark meets his old Cardassian girlfriend (Bing Crosby's daughter, who was basically the semi-naughty brunette in every '80s drama ever), and then the one where Garak's pain-reducer-implant stops working and he gets nursed back to health.

This is some top-tier Trek, right here.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 28, 2018, 05:55:23 PM
I'm watching the first episode of TNG and I'm pleasantly surprised at how they captured the stilted feel, bombast and adorable cheapness of the original. Does it stay that way or did the series slowly drift closer to the style you'd expect for a show made in the nineties (darker, edgier, blander and shot on videoer) ?

Did they also redo the FX shots for TNG or are those vintage ? It was jarring in TOS even if the glimpse we get of the original composites (in that one episode that wasn't remastered for some reason) is very rough.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 28, 2018, 06:59:33 PM
TNG was remastered for blu ray. Season 1 and some of 2 have TOSness with sets. Season 3 onward are shot on location and the cinematography gets really good. Star Trek doesn’t have “gritty” aesthetic until Abrams. There’s a darker Trek show after TNG called Deep Space Nine but it’s hardly more bland in terms of special effects.

TNG looking like a 60’s show in season 1 also isn’t considered a positive so you’re a minority in that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 28, 2018, 07:07:45 PM
To test it yourself watch the intros (before the intro sequence starts) to Who Watches the Watchers (s3 ep4) and Darmok (season 5, ep 2) to see how the series aesthetic changes. Sure as shit isn’t TOS cheese. Season 1 looks like crap. Season 3 - 7 look fantastic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 28, 2018, 07:08:46 PM
Yeah I'm familiar with DS9 premise. The sixtyness faded quite a bit in the second part of the pilot (space jellyfishes notwithstanding), I guess they wanted to ease fans. That DeForest Kelley cameo was  :oreilly
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 28, 2018, 07:21:37 PM
Early TNG has a lot of terrible sets, and they didn't do location shooting as much because they wanted the planets to look "more alien", and everyone recognized Vasquez Rocks' reuse in TOS, but it just looks like garbage where somebody forgot to composite in the backgrounds or build the other half of sets. "Hide and Q" is hilarious awful, I don't think even the remaster helps it much, though they took out the stoundstage echoes and shadows on the "sky" and such. The remasters try to clean up a lot of that in TNG to where they straight up replace backgrounds with new footage and mattes, which they didn't do as often on the TOS remasters except in extreme cases like the infamous tinfoil mountains in "Arena."

Much of the remasters goals were simply to make things look cleaner in HD but keep the overall look, but early TNG they did a bunch more reworking because it was bad and everyone agreed it was bad and it looks so out of place with seasons 3-7.

Here's a comparison for "Farpoint": http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint.htm

Probably my favorite example because in the original it's just a static unmoving picture around Riker, but in the remaster, it's animated footage with wind/moving stream/etc. Plus just the colors and detail on Riker/behind him on the ship are great:
(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint.jpg)(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/observations/encounteratfarpoint/30b-encounteratfarpoint-r.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 29, 2018, 11:36:17 AM
Android fucking by episode 2 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on August 29, 2018, 11:46:59 AM
Is it more shameful to fuck an android or a hologram  :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 29, 2018, 06:22:51 PM
TNG

Episode 3 : Oups that's a bit racist ? :trumps "I should forcibly take Yar as my wife !"
Episode 4 : Ferengis are fucking obnoxious :quark "Yar should be nude !"
Episode 5 : Yar flashbacks to her CDPR wet dream of a rape planet. Is there any episode they won't bring her sordid sex life on ? :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: team filler on August 29, 2018, 10:42:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFX6l8FOQXQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 30, 2018, 04:23:59 PM
TNG

Episode 3 : Oups that's a bit racist ? :trumps "I should forcibly take Yar as my wife !"
Episode 4 : Ferengis are fucking obnoxious :quark "Yar should be nude !"
Episode 5 : Yar flashbacks to her CDPR wet dream of a rape planet. Is there any episode they won't bring her sordid sex life on ? :lol

Don't forget the space Irish episode.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I like how they went to Yar's home planet and they were like rape gangs???

Her younger sister was in that episode and she was  :whew.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 30, 2018, 04:29:09 PM
Leaving Trek because of season 1 was a massive career fail. Like, it’s the first season and you leave mid-season for a massive hyped show like TNG? What kind of manager did she have that allowed her to do that?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 30, 2018, 04:54:10 PM
TNG S1E7

Welcome to the FUCK PLANET populated by Swedish porn stars in terrible thongs. Man, did Roddenberry have a weird sex fixation when they wrote S1 ? At least it's not just the women who are horny this time round.

Edit : Oh it's also a jogging planet :lol I can certainly believe some scripts were old mediocre ones repurposed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 30, 2018, 05:07:28 PM
And yeah I'm severe with the TOS FX reworks. The space shots are too clean but the ship establishing shots are OK, not too showy and not too jarring. There's some nasty bits like the ethereal lifeforms flashing out (on that seemingly pacifist medieval planet the Klingon try to occupy) though.

The specific example you gave for TNG did continue to stand out, I can't imagine how poor they were originally.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 30, 2018, 05:17:15 PM
I still liked early TNG despite recognizing it was sort of bad. Season 2 is much better. Love that season. Dramatic improvement.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 30, 2018, 06:46:39 PM
TNG S1E9 Hide and Q

Oh god you weren't joking about the set in that one. :neogaf "Were we supposed to composite something into all that background green ?"  :picard
Yar making a pass at Picard. Jesus Gene go wank yourself, all that pent up libido cannot be good.
 :jeanluc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 30, 2018, 07:12:25 PM
Man, did Roddenberry have a weird sex fixation when they wrote S1 ?
He had a weird sex fixation at all times, difference on TNG season one was that he didn't have as many censors/editors as he had in the past. The novelizations he wrote often added weird sex stuff to them that was never shown or even in the scripts.

I'm pretty sure his ideal vision of everything off camera on the Enterprise-D was the other thousand people constantly boning in gender fluid ways. (Except Picard.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 30, 2018, 07:15:14 PM
TNG S1E9 Hide and Q

Oh god you weren't joking about the set in that one. :neogaf "Were we supposed to composite something into all that background green ?"  :picard
The remaster even doubled up the number of foreground rocks and rock formations. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 30, 2018, 07:55:33 PM
Man, did Roddenberry have a weird sex fixation when they wrote S1 ?
He had a weird sex fixation at all times, difference on TNG season one was that he didn't have as many censors/editors as he had in the past. The novelizations he wrote often added weird sex stuff to them that was never shown or even in the scripts.

I'm pretty sure his ideal vision of everything off camera on the Enterprise-D was the other thousand people constantly boning in gender fluid ways. (Except Picard.)

And Geordi.

You’re slipping buddy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 30, 2018, 07:59:42 PM
Man, did Roddenberry have a weird sex fixation when they wrote S1 ?
He had a weird sex fixation at all times, difference on TNG season one was that he didn't have as many censors/editors as he had in the past. The novelizations he wrote often added weird sex stuff to them that was never shown or even in the scripts.

I'm pretty sure his ideal vision of everything off camera on the Enterprise-D was the other thousand people constantly boning in gender fluid ways. (Except Picard.)

And Geordi.

You’re slipping buddy.

Geordi fucked that hologram lady until the real her came on the ship and found the hologram sex doll version of herself. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 30, 2018, 08:08:48 PM
Man, did Roddenberry have a weird sex fixation when they wrote S1 ?
He had a weird sex fixation at all times, difference on TNG season one was that he didn't have as many censors/editors as he had in the past. The novelizations he wrote often added weird sex stuff to them that was never shown or even in the scripts.

I'm pretty sure his ideal vision of everything off camera on the Enterprise-D was the other thousand people constantly boning in gender fluid ways. (Except Picard.)

And Geordi.

You’re slipping buddy.

Geordi fucked that hologram lady until the real her came on the ship and found the hologram sex doll version of herself. :lol

Yes but Geordi was missing out that action until well into like season 4? 3?

“Another Coco no no?”
“Geordi, I think-“
“Yeah”
“I think we should be -“
“Friends, yeah.”

*jacks off to hologram when she leaves but can’t see so has to jack off to her voice*

:(
 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 31, 2018, 02:57:17 PM
So yeah that S1 of TNG is kinda meh so far. I don't mind the stiff sixties look but the stories are not very good on average. I never felt much for the characters / actors for the little I was familiar with : Picard is great, Q too, Data is better than I thought (still a less good Spock so far). Worf has potential but ia basically doing nothing for the moment. Troi and the Crushers are bad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 31, 2018, 02:58:40 PM
Troi and the Crushers never really improve. The rest are rock solid.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 31, 2018, 04:14:49 PM
On second thought the stories themselves might not be the problem. I thought Justice (the planet of fucking and jogging) had interesting themes, but it's absolutely dragged down by the terrible design for the aliens. Same for the infected dying race popping up on the Betazoid planet to scoop Troi fiancé (the writing was corny too).

Yar had potential (with some interesting frailty and motivations) if she wasn't reduced to a sex symbol ( ??? No slight to Crosby but you'd think Troi would be the one...) / RAPE GANGS every other episode but I take it they never fulfilled it. She feels like the TOS Yeoman in modern times, with most of the original sexism still in there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on August 31, 2018, 05:33:49 PM
TNG S1E12 Datalore

BROTHER  :hulk

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://youtu.be/zI7cNhTIOEI
[close]

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 31, 2018, 05:57:00 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/98ussh/watching_tos_for_the_first_time_wow_i_am/

:bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 01, 2018, 06:50:39 PM
TNG S1E14 Angel One

TV show was warned for downplaying sexism, history of history of bothsidism, indecent hairy Frakes exposure.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 01, 2018, 07:06:23 PM
How dare you minimize the men on that planets lived experiences. :trigger
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 04, 2018, 06:18:17 AM
https://nerdist.com/star-trek-netflix-most-rewatched/

:picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 04, 2018, 10:19:03 AM
Fuck Voyager
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 04, 2018, 10:25:33 AM
From reddit

Quote
[–]
Borg
Borg
Borg
Borg
Borg
I heard Voyager only gets good when Seven shows up
Borg
Borg
I liked TNG, maybe I'll like Voyager too
Clues

:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 04, 2018, 10:40:59 AM
On the other hand, I loved the Borg eps when I was a teen. I also have fond memories of Voyager as I watched it with my dad almost every week as a teen. So I have nostalgia for it. I want to push through so I can get to the Seven of Nine parts so I can relive my "first Trek" and see if I still like it but season 1 is so bad it drives me crazy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 04, 2018, 06:44:30 PM
http://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1036475963796676609/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 04, 2018, 08:07:43 PM
Frakes is in the alley outside.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on September 04, 2018, 11:32:00 PM
Voyager is okay. It's the show where you turn your brain off for more than half of the episodes. You know, like your Uncle Frankie that got in that car accident where that metal rod in the back of his truck speared through his head and the doctors had to remove half his skull? That Uncle Frankie.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 05, 2018, 12:12:38 AM
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on September 05, 2018, 08:24:39 AM
I liked how Tom Paris was supposed to be this bad boy rebel pilot of Starfleet who didn't play by any rules but then they gave him all these grandpa hobbies like working on old cars and playing old-timey black and white holodeck programs. I was expecting him to be a Han Solo archetype when I first started the series but instead he was in serious competition with Harry Kim for most weenie crewmember of Voyager. They never really did much with his piloting skills, and they didn't seem to know what to do with him. I'm in the final season and it seems like his duties solely consist of being the Doctor's medical assistant and being a sensitive and caring husband to his irrational half-Klingon wife.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 05, 2018, 09:47:37 AM
Voyager is okay. It's the show where you turn your brain off for more than half of the episodes. You know, like your Uncle Frankie that got in that car accident where that metal rod in the back of his truck speared through his head and the doctors had to remove half his skull? That Uncle Frankie.

Christ. I actually have that uncle, except his name is "Bud."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus on September 05, 2018, 02:05:27 PM
Pilots having any sort of meaningful input on a ship that size was always dumb to me. Hell, even shuttles probably have supercomputers on them that can do the job better.

The height of stupidity was Ryker taking manual control with a fucking joystick in Insurrection.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 06, 2018, 03:10:20 AM
my favorite part about the Tom Paris and Harry Kim relationship on the job is that Harry stays an ensign for seven years...Tom gets a field commission like the Maquis members of lieutenant, Janeway knocks him down to ensign in that one episode as punishment, and then later she PROMOTES him back up to lieutenant

this combined with the fact that in another episode Janeway PROMOTES Tuvok to lieutenant commander totally implies she keeps Harry as an ensign just to spite him or something
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 06, 2018, 03:12:13 AM
maybe it's because he's a Harry Kim from another universe :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 06, 2018, 08:33:19 AM
Guys.

GUYS.

I AM WRITING IN CAPS BECAUSE I AM REALLY, REALLY EXITED FOR THE PICARD TREK.

Have you seen all the shit going on? There’s apparently this Pulitzer writer, Michael Chabon, who is a great writer attached as executive producer. They have drawn a map of the galaxy post Voyager and showed it off on instagram. WE (might) BE GETTING POST VOYAGER TREK!!!! Aughhhh!!!

And apparently Chabon is the real thing. Rick Berman hasn’t said shit about new Trek but when he found out about the new producer, he said nothing short of positive praise.

I’m really, REALLY excited for the Picard show guys!!

https://trekmovie.com/2018/09/04/rick-berman-endorses-michael-chabon-joining-star-trek-family-for-picard-series/

Look at the map!!

https://trekmovie.com/2018/09/01/picard-show-executive-producer-michael-chabon-reveals-his-star-trek-galactic-map-briefing/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 06, 2018, 10:46:49 AM
I want to believe. :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 06, 2018, 01:05:51 PM
After the look of the bridge on the TNG movies I doubt it :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 06, 2018, 01:16:05 PM
Top 3 Star Trek Bridges

3. 1701 Bridge

(https://i.imgur.com/2B8tYwl.jpg)

2. NX Bridge

(https://i.imgur.com/N7645Ra.jpg)

1. Defiant Bridge

(https://i.imgur.com/NEE25Zn.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 06, 2018, 04:55:57 PM
Low-key the actual best are the Klingon Bird-of-Prey bridges that always looked they were in a dingy tool shed or a set from Saw IV.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on September 06, 2018, 08:00:55 PM
I hope Janeway is leader of the Federation in the new Picard show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 07, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
I hope Wesley is.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM
Considering the Federation is usually corrupt and evil under their idealistic blanket, I agree.

Thanks for weighing in, Cindy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 07, 2018, 08:27:56 PM
Ehhhhhhhhhhhh?!

I did not say this about the federation?!?!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 11, 2018, 01:51:38 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTfAb9Yrz_c

didnt know this was a thing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 12, 2018, 02:52:34 AM
https://youtu.be/xe1hKZjCVyM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 12, 2018, 06:02:47 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2370159969666049&set=gm.1935088666795457&type=3&theater&ifg=1

:dead :dead :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 16, 2018, 03:25:31 PM
https://youtu.be/dAVFOVgwBrY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 16, 2018, 05:39:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvfZ9DZyE0Y
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 17, 2018, 02:43:42 PM
Heh TNG does get better in season 2. I know she's only there for this season but Pulaski, despite obviously brought in to ape the McCoy/Spock dynamic, is way better than Crusher. I don't hate Beverley but the whole romantic dynamic with Picard really feels out of place and interfered in her motivations as an actual doctor (and by contrast she was a bit of a doormat). I don't think the Original Show was all that deep with the character arcs and that works better in that formula.

Overall it feels they have a much better grip on the cast chemistry and pacing. I didn't mind the stories in S1 but the episodes was pretty flat and the conclusions felt too barebones or simple because of it (the evolving killing drones on the arms dealing planet, the black goo, the frozen XX century people "MUH TESLA STOCKS !" for instance).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 17, 2018, 04:15:24 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XJ7dhofvhY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 17, 2018, 05:24:32 PM
TNG Up the long ladder Obnoxious Irish stereotypes !
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2018, 06:30:16 PM
Pulaski is way better and should have stayed on. Dr Crusher is zzz. She might be a worse character than Troi. At least Troi had an occasional good ep (like the one where her bf has to kill himself for a ritual or something idk). Crusher doesn’t even have that. I expressed this to TNG fans when I first watched it and duringu rewatch and TNG fans just went ape shit as if she’s a good character like Picard or Data or Worf (she’s not). I think too much of TNG is based on nostalgia rather than having a critical eye towards it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2018, 06:31:05 PM
On the other hand she’s hot and she’s like the comfort food equivalent of a Trek Doctor. I don’t like her as a character but it just feels right with her there so :yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2018, 06:46:04 PM
I don’t hate Doc Crusher. I just see...wasted opportunity with all of the female characters on TNG. Which sucks. I love Vash and Ensign Ro tho. Especially Ro.

I don’t hate Alexander either. The ep where they go to the Wild West is the only good holodeck focused ep in tng imo. So cute.

I hate Winn, Mama Troi, and Wesley. That’s about it. Oh and Neelix.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2018, 06:53:21 PM
I technically love to hate Kai Winn rather than “get off of my screen” hate.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 17, 2018, 06:58:26 PM
Her interaction with Kira is something I always love for :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on September 18, 2018, 04:47:20 AM
TNG Up the long ladder Obnoxious Irish stereotypes !
What's the matter - don't you like girls?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 18, 2018, 05:35:04 AM
Mirror Kira :phil

First Contact/Insurrection Beverly and Troi :phil

spoiler (click to show/hide)
MIRROR HOSHI :mouf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUt46weEzpk
[close]
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 18, 2018, 05:42:13 AM
User was warned: DOWNPLAYING RAPE GANGS

RAPE GANGS :phil

spoiler (click to show/hide)
RAPE GANGS
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 18, 2018, 05:56:56 AM
TNG Up the long ladder Obnoxious Irish stereotypes !
What's the matter - don't you like girls?

The Irish wool bra is really something.

My favourite moment so far is Riva's chorus getting zapped Mars Attacks ! style.
The head explosion at the end of the first season was also fun.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 18, 2018, 03:36:14 PM
User was warned: DOWNPLAYING RAPE GANGS

RAPE GANGS :phil

spoiler (click to show/hide)
RAPE GANGS
[close]
(https://i.imgur.com/bdhttig.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 18, 2018, 04:26:07 PM
TNG Shades of Gray : A clip show by season 2 already ?  :beli
Edit : Writers strike year apparently.
Edit : Oh yes reuse the clip of the stunt double of geriatric Admiral Puppet Mastered doing that magnificent Savate kick on Riker in Conspiracy :lol

And yeah the Holodeck is often meh as an episode core.

The Klingon / Human ambassador Worf is boning was  :whoo tho.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 18, 2018, 07:36:39 PM
The actress was also the Vulcan medic in that episode with the horny cybernetics guy that took over Data.

TNG The Survivors : "We're not qualified to judge galactic genocide perpetuated in spite" :what You are, you cannot realistically bring it to justice but that's not the same thing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on September 18, 2018, 07:55:29 PM
Started watching some TNG again for the first time in a while, decided to start with season 3 since I just wanted to get right to the good stuff.

First episode is a "Wesley does something stupid and nearly gets everyone killed" episode. :beli
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 18, 2018, 08:14:46 PM
Started watching some TNG again for the first time in a while, decided to start with season 3 since I just wanted to get right to the good stuff.

First episode is a "Wesley does something stupid and nearly gets everyone killed" episode. :beli

Well it's ok because he admitted to it. And created a new lifeform. It's half the battle.

(https://i.gifer.com/Lpcb.gif)
The PICARD ! The PICARD !
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 19, 2018, 06:05:39 AM
I forgot to mention the ULTIMATE EVOLUTION OF MARTIAL ARTS : AIBO JITSU !
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 19, 2018, 10:43:57 AM
Picard : The Prime Directive is one of the tenets of Starfleet with string philosophical and historic justification and every officer knows he might have to die to protect this solemn...
Data : Captain, I've been having clandestine radio contacts with an unknown entity allegedly from a non-spacefaring civilization, can we save them okthxbye ?
Picard : But the Prime Di...
Data : But she sounds so cute !
Picard :  :uguu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 19, 2018, 10:57:01 AM
Yep, I was all "I don't get how trekkies keep wanting to bang aliens" till she showed up.

Suzie Plakson played the half-Klingon in TNG, a half-vulcan earlier than that, I think. Later, she was an Orion in Enterprise.

Super hot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 19, 2018, 03:17:32 PM
TNG The Price Guy just get creepy from the get go :kobeyuck
Personal space much ?

Edit : That's not proper Champagne glasses :rage

Edit : The infamous Crusher Troi fitness scene. Oh no. Oh noooo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 20, 2018, 12:54:37 AM
Yep, I was all "I don't get how trekkies keep wanting to bang aliens" till she showed up.

Suzie Plakson played the half-Klingon in TNG, a half-vulcan earlier than that, I think. Later, she was an Orion in Enterprise.

Super hot.
She also finally got to keep her own face on Voyager, she's the Female Q.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 20, 2018, 10:34:03 PM
You will offend your animal guide
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 21, 2018, 03:57:17 PM
I’m warming up to Voyager :obama

Only real bad thing is Neelix and the repetition but when the crew talks and and has those Trek dialogue moments, it’s in its element.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 05:48:48 AM
Prime Directive doesn't stop Riker from fucking alien nurses  :whatsthedeal
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 08:55:32 AM
Geordie is bad at that stalking thing. He got off super easy too. Then so did Barkley.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on September 22, 2018, 09:42:54 AM
Future people see stalking as the cute harmless crime it is. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 22, 2018, 10:57:53 AM
Fun Fact

Spoiler-ton

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Geordi got with that lady he was jacking it too in the holo-suite.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 11:56:04 AM
Nothing is impossible if you're persistent enough !
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 22, 2018, 12:15:20 PM
To be fair, she calls him out and it seems innocent enough. People just assume he fucks the hologram but he doesn’t seem to use it for that purpose.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 12:54:11 PM
I've seen it discussed a bit in the past but I like that TNG is basically an upgrade of the original series, including the self contained nature of episodes and the characters being locked down to their archetypes. I'm sure I'll like DS9 too when I'll get to it but the original premise works better with that formula. I think TOS in the end suffered a bit of relying entirely on just Kirk, McCoy and Spock; with the Vulcan getting plot convenient abilities every too often to the point of straining suspension of disbelief (I mean I'd crew Federation ships mostly with Vulcans considering just how superior they are). Making Data unique certainly alleviated that issue and having a broader base of characters (even if of varying quality) prevents it from getting too stale.

One thing I'll agree with an old message by Esch though : the Romulans could have been better (I'm mid season 4). They're still as tacky and paper thin as in TOS (minus the space centurions costumes) despite the enjoyable performances of Andreas Katsula. The Klingons are arguably not more original than in TOS but have a much stronger and distinctive visual identity than just "Yellow Peril". I liked what they did with Data's Day...

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Playing with the similarity of Vulcans and Romulans
[close]

...but it was a subplot they wasted somewhat.

Otherwise even Troi and the Crushers get more palatable : weakest parts still but not as cringe inducing as the textbook masterpiece on how not to write a teenage character that was Season 1 (the most heinous bit being either Wesley anointed as a Jesus Ludwig van Einstein of propulsion or that sweater). I'll agree with Cindi it's a shame how poorly written the two lead females are. Beverley especially has no room besides being a MOM and PLATONIC LOVE INTEREST.

And fuck that 24th century France :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: seagrams hotsauce on September 22, 2018, 01:00:55 PM
Started watching some TNG again for the first time in a while, decided to start with season 3 since I just wanted to get right to the good stuff.

First episode is a "Wesley does something stupid and nearly gets everyone killed" episode. :beli

Well it's ok because he admitted to it. And created a new lifeform. It's half the battle.

(https://i.gifer.com/Lpcb.gif)
The PICARD ! The PICARD !

i gotta get more sleep. at first glance i thought this was a gif of Jordan Peterson transforming into an old Adam Driver
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 03:05:24 PM
To be fair, she calls him out and it seems innocent enough. People just assume he fucks the hologram but he doesn’t seem to use it for that purpose.

I mean, yeah, but it's still a little weird that he's flipping the table on her (calling her judgemental). Obviously he's more clumsy than creepy but still...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 05:36:30 PM
Ryker boning Crusher under the pretense of being a host for a symbiote.

 :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 22, 2018, 07:18:14 PM
Shocked I’m about to write this shit.

I am fucking loving Voyager. I put away all expectations about the premise and it’s just good ol Trek. And I love me some Trek.

I made a video of one of my favorite scenes so far. Not on YouTube because it got hit with a copyright alert.

https://vimeo.com/291309956

This scene just hits me in my right Trekkie spots.

Things I love:

- Janeway. She cares so fiercely for her crew. When anyone in injured she briskly walks to the sick bay. She cares about the crews lives and stuff and it’s refreshing after Kirk (he could care less about their lives because his men and women die like flies out in the frontier) or Picard (who is cold and doesn’t ask about how his crew is doing or anything). This is compounded with the fact that she’s a hellion in battle. I am really liking her.

- The crew. It gleans into the crews lives. These feel like actual people unlike the TNG crew. Like they’ll talk about their lives and circumstances during down time which is completely absent in TNG. For instance Torres and Harry talking about home and how for Torres, she never really had a relationship with her family so the Macquis aboardnthe ship function as that for her, so she’s not really homesick. Which is different than Harry who called his parents regularly even during academy. They’ll have scenes having small talk going over their love lives and it feels natural in terms of chemistry compared to TNG’s bad chemistry between the characters.

- classic Trek adventures. Self explanatory. It has an adventure feel of the TOS and I like it.

- The Doctor is as fantastic as I remember.

Only negatives so far are the lack of engaging their premise in a real, serialized manner and Neelix.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 22, 2018, 07:58:20 PM
Ah yes, Romulan Denise Crosby. Even out of the show, the character can't seem to escape RAPE.  ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 23, 2018, 02:55:08 AM
- Janeway. She cares so fiercely for her crew. ...

It gleans into the crews lives. These feel like actual people unlike the TNG crew. ... They’ll have scenes having small talk going over their love lives and it feels natural in terms of chemistry compared to TNG’s bad chemistry between the characters. ...

- classic Trek adventures. Self explanatory. It has an adventure feel of the TOS and I like it.
oh dear
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 23, 2018, 02:58:09 AM
Ah yes, Romulan Denise Crosby. Even out of the show, the character can't seem to escape RAPE.  ::)
I think they acknowledged this at the time because later the re-explanation is more consensual in its telling. :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
When she shows up in the "semi-canon/post-DS9" novels that Paramount was overseeing, they retell it again as more consensual yet. And that she lived far longer than Sela has implied, she's really just lying to psyche out Picard.

Though they never get around that whole she's a prisoner thing.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 23, 2018, 03:25:48 PM
WTF is this Picard jacket in S5 ? :lol
Is the captain having a mid life crisis ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 23, 2018, 03:39:35 PM
The jacket owns and how tf are you going through this so fast? Wtf. 5 seasons in a damn week.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 23, 2018, 03:54:56 PM
The jacket owns and how tf are you going through this so fast? Wtf. 5 seasons in a damn week.

I have some downtime for the week and my binge watching can get pretty wild.

I checked and I started watching at the very end of August. Still poor impulse control, I'll admit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 23, 2018, 05:23:29 PM
Did we need to see Frakes O-face ? And Sirtis speaking dirty about chocolate ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 23, 2018, 05:33:40 PM
That ep is amazing :lol

What’d you think of Darmok? Imo the best Trek ep I’ve seen
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 23, 2018, 05:49:14 PM
Sorry, only registered users can see this content. Please Login or Register.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 23, 2018, 06:20:33 PM
That ep is amazing :lol

What’d you think of Darmok? Imo the best Trek ep I’ve seen

Darmok is a bit goofy, in a good way. Not a lot of vocabulary to that language (but I understand you need to do it for the audience benefit). Picard and the Federation come off a bit dense, you'd think they would attempt some more basic level stuff. I like the theme, it's well intentioned and decently written (the Gilgamesh part is good) except for the usual weaknesses of the show (it often feels things get wrapped up or brushed aside a bit quick in the ending bits).

I didn't mind Worf (apart from the running gag of the super warrior getting tossed around in almost every fight) but I think they did well in making him a quixotic Klingon and writing in the epiphany he was honorable because of who he was instead of his race. Not a great dad tho. Apparently he's much less of a pushover prop in DS9 (to the demand of the actor).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 23, 2018, 07:55:27 PM
It's actually starting to annoy me that Mike's Galaxy pitch is likely going to be the complete opposite of what we'll actually get. :/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 23, 2018, 08:16:45 PM
So is Discovery good or what? Thinking about signing up for CBS All Access if it’s worth watching. :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 23, 2018, 09:11:03 PM
First two eps are blah, after that it finds its footing. Episode three should have been the pilot. After that it’s interesting, if flawed. I like its messages but it stumbles along the way. So I wouldn’t call it good yet but it’s certainly among the best first seasons in Star Trek, which doesn’t count for much but gives hope that it’s only up from there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 23, 2018, 10:28:21 PM
Also, the people who said they drop the Macquis vs Federation plotline lied. They’ve built up for multiple episodes Seska and willingness to be a rebel and her loyalty to the Macquis and it comes to a riveting end in State of Flux. VOY isn’t serialized but it’s a complete misrepresentation to say it drops storylines. Its crew and stories don’t exist in a vacuum like TNG’s and this is just the first season. ...

Voyager has done better with its side characters
really gonna need ya to slow ya roll here sis
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 23, 2018, 10:31:29 PM
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/0aedc34ceb7dd35cc5aa6fd6f550bd5c/tumblr_o4wwwxRNfo1r95t24o1_1280.png)

When fanservice is used for good :american
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 23, 2018, 10:38:40 PM
So is Discovery good or what? Thinking about signing up for CBS All Access if it’s worth watching. :thinking

It's pretty great. I enjoyed it a heap.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 23, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
WTF is this Picard jacket in S5 ? :lol
Is the captain having a mid life crisis ?

That jacket rules. I'd buy one, as a balding crew leader, I'm entitled to one. But the only good replica is US$500.
:picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 24, 2018, 12:14:56 AM
Voyagers first holodeck episode is better than every TNG holodeck episode.

Def shaping up to be “TNG but better.”
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on September 24, 2018, 09:07:41 AM
Voyagers first holodeck episode is better than every TNG holodeck episode.

Def shaping up to be “TNG but better.”

Originally I was going to Like this for your enthusiasm, but then I worry about the Cindi going full-on into any new thing, and I want to encourage you to practice moderation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 24, 2018, 09:55:08 AM
voyager is a series with good moments that veered a bit too much "action trek" for me. janeway and the crew are all good though, and that helps me like it a lot more.

year of hell is one of the best episodes of any trek imo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 24, 2018, 11:27:27 AM
Have someone compiled just how many ladies Ryker fucked across TNG ?

It seems to get worse and worse as his role in the series gets smaller.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on September 24, 2018, 02:56:58 PM
Voyagers first holodeck episode is better than every TNG holodeck episode.

Def shaping up to be “TNG but better.”

Wait until you get to the Fairhaven holodeck episodes
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 24, 2018, 10:15:22 PM
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/581e2790a510996ef7c4ff9cdf958d9b/tumblr_pe4y93Msv71vdg1n7o1_500.gif)

(https://78.media.tumblr.com/f67b2f61ffe75394f7740a03a57fb31a/tumblr_pe4y93Msv71vdg1n7o2_500.gif)

(https://78.media.tumblr.com/3d5f3788fb1f4a83d0aa00447514db91/tumblr_pe4y93Msv71vdg1n7o3_500.gif)

(https://78.media.tumblr.com/12d7e4dd399f9e7812d198be7226a148/tumblr_pe4y93Msv71vdg1n7o4_500.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 25, 2018, 09:13:59 AM
"Nimoy don't accept our proposals."
"Shit. Let's just do an episode with his dad then."

One month later

"Nimoy called, he's ok to shoot."
"Oh well."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 26, 2018, 12:08:46 PM
Also it's really weird that families are traveling along on starships starting with TNG, even if the ship is to be sent fighting a Borg cube (!) (As per DS9 pilot intro). I'm sure there's some reason it might make sense in-universe : The dubious "we're not a military ship despite having over two hundred torpedoes" thing and keeping up morale in the strenuous long term postings imposed by space exploration... But it's not even like it is ever used for plots anyway save for a couple of small bits and drama, at least in TNG so far.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 26, 2018, 12:28:23 PM
Also it's really weird that families are traveling along on starships starting with TNG, even if the ship is to be sent fighting a Borg cube (!) (As per DS9 pilot intro). I'm sure there's some reason it might make sense in-universe : The dubious "we're not a military ship despite having over two hundred torpedoes" thing and keeping up morale in the strenuous long term postings imposed by space exploration... But it's not even like it is ever used for plots anyway save for a couple of small bits and drama, at least in TNG so far.

It's not weird. It's actually one of TNG's flaws.

It's completely underused. You never see what the rest of the Enterprise is even like. It's assumed to just be Federation ship. But if it has lots of people living on it, even civilians, this presumes that it should also have shops and things. It's amazing that for a show that touts a large scale galaxy that its world feels so limited and small. Despite its size, you would think the Enterprise-D is nothing but the bridge, a few turbolifts, a few rooms, engineering, sickbay, holodeck, Ten Forward, and the transporter room. Quite a little for small for a ship of that size, eh? Now compare to DS9. It's just a small space station yet has a rich, deep world where federation interacts with civilian.

TNG essentially comes up with a premise of handling civilians in it, but can you name a single permanent civilian character besides Guinan? No you can't. You will notice as you continue watching and talking that TNG gets a ridiculous number of free passes by its more hardcore fans that they criticize other series for that TNG does in leaps and bounds. For instance, they criticize Voyager for not living up to its premise when TNG does the same. Not having regular civilian cast members despite being a ship large enough to have civilians on it is but one example. You must use your imagination. TNG commits a cardinal sin of telling but not showing.

You also forget that Enterprise in TNG also while being touted as an exploration vessel doesn't really explore much of unknown space. Not like the original TOS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 26, 2018, 12:31:33 PM
Separating the saucer section to keep the families away from danger. :lawd

Only doing it in the pilot and then never doing it again unless the writers wanted some really crazy shit to go down. :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 26, 2018, 12:33:11 PM
I think they do that only twice. Once in the pilot and another time...I'm not sure.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 26, 2018, 01:02:48 PM
Quote
Despite its size, you would think the Enterprise-D is nothing but the bridge, a few turbolifts, a few rooms, engineering, sickbay, holodeck, Ten Forward, and the transporter room. Quite a little for small for a ship of that size, eh?

It's almost like broadcast TV of the early/mid-90s has limitations.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 26, 2018, 01:04:16 PM
I think they do that only twice. Once in the pilot and another time...I'm not sure.

Three. You forgot when they rammed the D into a planet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on September 26, 2018, 01:05:07 PM
Quote
You will notice as you continue watching and talking that TNG gets a ridiculous number of free passes by its more hardcore fans that they criticize other series for that TNG does in leaps and bounds. For instance, they criticize Voyager for not living up to its premise when TNG does the same. Not having regular civilian cast members despite being a ship large enough to have civilians on it is but one example.

Who are these rabid TNG hardliners you're constantly hanging out with? :confused

Cause it's nothing like the Trek fandom I know.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 26, 2018, 01:06:45 PM
Only times I can remember is Best of Both Worlds and Generations.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 26, 2018, 02:13:36 PM
Quote
You will notice as you continue watching and talking that TNG gets a ridiculous number of free passes by its more hardcore fans that they criticize other series for that TNG does in leaps and bounds. For instance, they criticize Voyager for not living up to its premise when TNG does the same. Not having regular civilian cast members despite being a ship large enough to have civilians on it is but one example.

Who are these rabid TNG hardliners you're constantly hanging out with? :confused

Cause it's nothing like the Trek fandom I know.

It's regarded as the best Star Trek and many of its fans critique other Trek shows on problems TNG itself has. They'll regularly talk about the weakness of characters in other Trek's (TOS, Voyager) while touting that a show that has Troi, Dr. Crusher, Geordi, and Wesley in it is the best Trek and completely immune.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 26, 2018, 02:37:32 PM
As I understand it they backpedaled on that on other series.
I guess it's just an avenue that they put in place in pre-production but died on the vine quickly and they couldn't just back off (or some Roddenberry demand). It doesn't really impact the show one way or another and yeah you barely see any civilian in Ten Forward, it just doesn't mesh well with the ship so frequently dispatched on military missions. But as you pointed they never built on that either.

DS9 on Netflix is super rough : It's SD masters with nasty color or interlacing artefacts (and in the pilot even flaws on first images of shots, macro locking maybe ? Didn't pause to check). Retroactively makes you appreciate TOS and TNG being made HD compliant / remastered.

It was kinda cool to have Sisko put Picard off balance for once in the pilot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 27, 2018, 04:02:39 AM
On the continued subject of spirit and practice colliding the Enterprise is a Frankenstein monster of the Queen Elizabeth 2 and the Bismarck. Engineering team must have been at each other throats in the shipyard. Basically everyone not serving on the ship comments on how ridiculously lavish quarters are (and AFAIK everyone gets an individual room) and I'm not sure if it's self awareness or a comment on the superiority of the Federation on backwards warrior races. (I think they did it in TOS a couple of times but the gap was less evident).

DS9 is rough in production values but then I guess TNG was too in the beginning. Garak is straight out of a Le Carré Book, is it ? I was a big fan of B5 so I'm sure I'll be there for the duration.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2018, 04:13:37 AM
In the federation ensigns share rooms. Past that you get your own room I believe.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 27, 2018, 05:42:15 AM
In the federation ensigns share rooms. Past that you get your own room I believe.

It's never really mentioned or shown in TNG (at least as far as I am) but then again we never see any ensign quarters ? Maybe that guy whose daughter had an imaginary friend (don't remember rank) and who obviously liver with her. Ro is sorta implied to have quarters (or not) and Wesley lives with his mom.

Then again they stopped doing that really in ulterior series, if I understand correctly.

Some amusing nerdery on the matter :

https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/6fize8/could_civilians_on_the_enterprised_be_viewed_as/

Quote
We know for a fact that ensigns do not get their own quarters (it's mentioned in "Lower Decks")

Guess it's canon.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on September 27, 2018, 08:35:40 AM
Harry Kim had his own room on Voyager though, didn't he? I feel like I remember him playing clarinet in there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2018, 09:10:32 AM
He did. It’s canon but not treated as serious depending on the show and the importance of the ensign. Harry is a main character so they probably found it best to give him his own room.

Tilly and Michael share a room in DSC though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2018, 09:13:41 AM
Also Wesley isn’t an ensign for most of the series. He’s either wunderkind bridge “officer” or a star fleet cadet. I don’t think we get an episode with him as an actual ensign but I’ve decided to scrub every episode of Wesley from memory besides the Red Squad episode and the one where he’s on the long trip with Picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 27, 2018, 03:41:16 PM
Short Treks #1 trailer.

https://youtu.be/juJEA6Hz9Nw

More Star Trek! :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 28, 2018, 03:11:40 AM
Am I the only one confused by all the distances announcements made on the bridge in TNG and TOS ? Like sometimes tens of thousands kilometers is implied to be "close distance" ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on September 28, 2018, 06:15:35 AM
When you're on a ship that can go a few thousand kilometres a second without faster than light drive, that's pretty close.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on September 28, 2018, 06:32:07 AM
He did. It’s canon but not treated as serious depending on the show and the importance of the ensign. Harry is a main character so they probably found it best to give him his own room.

Tilly and Michael share a room in DSC though.
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression Voyager was running a skeleton crew for its first mission, and even after the Maquis crew got folded in, there still wasn't a lot of people on the ship. So in that sense, everyone getting their own room was something I assumed. I don't remember if the show mentioned anyone bunking up. Even during that Lower Decks wannabe episode with Tom Morello.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 28, 2018, 06:44:45 AM
When you're on a ship that can go a few thousand kilometres a second without faster than light drive, that's pretty close.

I wasn't precise, I meant coupled with the fact that every combat happens in close proximity and ships facing nose to nose. I understand the shortcuts taken for visual and dramatic reasons but it's really extreme on Trek (you're cutting from the announcement of tens of thousands of Kms to a shot where the two ships are in visual range). Never got the impression it's consistent and the scale relative to the ship is lost on me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 28, 2018, 07:30:18 AM
https://www.cbr.com/star-trek-james-mcavoy-young-picard/ (https://www.cbr.com/star-trek-james-mcavoy-young-picard/)


The keep pulling me back in  :mjcry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 30, 2018, 12:27:50 PM
https://comicbook.com/startrek/2018/09/29/star-trek-discovery-jonathan-frakes-wrap-photo/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 30, 2018, 12:28:39 PM
He did. It’s canon but not treated as serious depending on the show and the importance of the ensign. Harry is a main character so they probably found it best to give him his own room.

Tilly and Michael share a room in DSC though.
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression Voyager was running a skeleton crew for its first mission, and even after the Maquis crew got folded in, there still wasn't a lot of people on the ship. So in that sense, everyone getting their own room was something I assumed. I don't remember if the show mentioned anyone bunking up. Even during that Lower Decks wannabe episode with Tom Morello.

You could be correct.

On the episode the 37’s Janeway says they have about 150 crewmen I believe?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 30, 2018, 01:48:58 PM
Jesus, Geordi, tell them you went through their files before creeping on them.
 :picard

You could have just have an affair with that mutant reptilian commander who obviously had something for you.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Obviously the shapeshifter was the dog.  ::) Good job Scooby-Doo team.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 30, 2018, 01:51:47 PM
What ep is this
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on September 30, 2018, 02:33:28 PM
What ep is this

Aquiel, the murder mystery on the radio relay station.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 01, 2018, 04:10:38 PM
I'm ready.

(https://media.comicbook.com/2018/10/star-trek-discovery-season-2-poster-1136659.jpeg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 01, 2018, 06:45:53 PM
Star Trek TNG : Starship Mine
"Let's have a Die Hard episode weeee !"
"Isn't it weird to have Picard casually let people die, even ambush some of them ?"
"What do you mean ?"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 01, 2018, 07:16:50 PM
I started watching TNG but started at season 3

good idea or bad? I already know I dislike Wesley Crusher.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 01, 2018, 07:26:23 PM
I mean, I won’t endose starting on season 3 because there’s plenty of good episodes before it. Season 2 is better than people say, for instance. But if you like it I’d say go backwards eventually. If you didn’t see all of best of both worlds (part 1 is the season 2 finale) that’d be a shame. If you’re to skip, start on season 2 andnot 3.

TBH, Trekkies tend to suggest skipping seasons too much and they’re often full of shit. The great thing about trek is going through it as an adventure. And just because someone says ____ sucks and to skip doesn’t mean you’ll agree. I for instance thought season 2 of tng, season 1 and 2 of DS9, and season 1 of Voyager to be pretty good seasons. But that wouldn’t fly with others.

But if you want to see if trek is for you and just want to get to the good parts immediately, it seems fine. But if you DO find yourself loving Trek, I think you owe it to yourself and Trek to watch all of it. That’s what I’m doing. I put off watching Voyager because fanbase says it sucks and here I am loving it despite its flaws. Enterprise and Animated Series after that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 01, 2018, 07:35:20 PM
Well I already love Voyager and DS9..seen all of it already and rewatched DS9 a bunch..too much.

I've never dived into TNG because it always seemed to old..too static. But a few of the S3 episodes I've watched I certainly enjoyed it.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 01, 2018, 07:37:40 PM
You’ll like it then. Watching the Blu-ray?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 01, 2018, 07:38:32 PM
No I'm watching it on Netflix.. not sure if that's the best way to watch it though? I thought the bluray had a good upgrade? At least that's what I read on GAF one time I think.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 01, 2018, 07:40:25 PM
Yeah the blu rays look great. Haven’t seen them though and I’m not sure if the one Netflix is the blu release.

Speaking of Blu, going to start going physical for Trek. Starting with this for Christmas.

https://www.amazon.com/Star-Anniversary-Movie-Collection-Blu-ray/dp/B01GRW4A64/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1538437101&sr=8-5&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=star+trek+collection+blu-ray&dpPl=1&dpID=51bKDcRPEwL&ref=plSrch
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 03, 2018, 12:52:59 AM
STD is some bullshit, but i wont lie this looks interesting from the trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVRstMA7KJs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 03, 2018, 10:47:21 AM
I started watching TNG but started at season 3

good idea or bad? I already know I dislike Wesley Crusher.

I started watching TNG with s1e1 during its initial broadcast. I abandoned it; it seemed super cheesy.

I went back to it during s3 and really enjoyed it.

"Oh, it must've really improved," I thought, and went back to watch s2. Turns out, it was a VERY gradual improvement.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 03, 2018, 01:42:39 PM
I like the episodes I've seen from S1 so far, the only thing I really dislike is the dramatic music at times. It's really overdone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on October 03, 2018, 03:20:44 PM
:rejoice Dr Pulaski :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff on October 03, 2018, 08:15:33 PM
I'm ready.

(https://media.comicbook.com/2018/10/star-trek-discovery-season-2-poster-1136659.jpeg)

yes
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 05, 2018, 03:17:04 PM
13 episodes in, almost every episode features sex in some way lol

Rape gangs?

Data talking about sex

Riker trying to get it on with various women

The episode where everybody gets drunk and wants to fuck

This is a crazy ass star trek lemme tell you, its nothing like DS9 or VOY  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 05, 2018, 05:51:57 PM
It fades away through S2 (except some parts where Riker get alien STD every two episodes up to S5 or S6) but yeah the first season is all innuendo all the time.

"- So you're the Resistance ?
Well, actually, we prefer the Maquis :snob "
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on October 05, 2018, 09:46:59 PM
13 episodes in, almost every episode features sex in some way lol

Rape gangs?

Data talking about sex

Riker trying to get it on with various women

The episode where everybody gets drunk and wants to fuck

This is a crazy ass star trek lemme tell you, its nothing like DS9 or VOY  :lol
Gene Roddenberry was a horndog.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 06, 2018, 10:21:42 AM
People love to hate the Trois and the Crushers but the worst recurring character in TNG by far is Lore. None of his episodes are good (the one where Data lockdown the ship has an ok first act but once we get to the meat of the episodes it's downright terrible.) It's not even good for Spiner hamming it up, he already does have quite some opportunities to do that as Data.

Speaking of there's this weird constant throughout the series : everyone seems in mild denial that Data already, for all intents and purposes, have feelings (or at the very least instincts). It's very common but to name a couple examples : his trust in Tasha's sister (or his attachment to Tasha), his compulsion to save the little girl in the doomed world where volcanoes are going crazy, trying to kill the mad smuggler / collectionneur, etc... It's probably just an effect of the status quo being sacred in episodic storytelling but it gets bizarre after a while, like if all the crew deluded themselves in not seeing it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 10:52:36 AM
Data is overrated and is a worse Spock. Odo is better, as are Seven of Nine and the Doctor. Brent Spiner is awesome though.

I also love Troi once she gets an actual starfleet uniform as seen in my avvy. She starts getting GOOD EPISODES all of a sudden and Marina shows off her chops and not just her assets. Shame she only has two seasons to do so.

People love to hate the Trois and the Crushers but the worst recurring character in TNG by far is Lore. None of his episodes are good (the one where Data lockdown the ship has an ok first act but once we get to the meat of the episodes it's downright terrible.) It's not even good for Spiner hamming it up, he already does have quite some opportunities to do that as Data.

Speaking of there's this weird constant throughout the series : everyone seems in mild denial that Data already, for all intents and purposes, have feelings (or at the very least instincts). It's very common but to name a couple examples : his trust in Tasha's sister (or his attachment to Tasha), his compulsion to save the little girl in the doomed world where volcanoes are going crazy, trying to kill the mad smuggler / collectionneur, etc... It's probably just an effect of the status quo being sacred in episodic storytelling but it gets bizarre after a while, like if all the crew deluded themselves in not seeing it.

You forgot the biggest one: his friendship with Geordi.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 11:41:18 AM
It really isn’t
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 06, 2018, 12:03:37 PM
(or his attachment to Tasha)

Well they did fuck  :ufup
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 06, 2018, 02:31:36 PM
Troi does get better. That Romulan episode with her is pretty great though it wraps up too hastily (as TNG often does), I expected more closure with her and the Romulan commander. She's still an abuse chew toy one too many for the writers tho. I never did mind much Lwaxana : her episodes are a mixed bag (the Soylent Green one was very good) but I find her scenes with Picard mostly hilarious.

Wesley is just dreadful in S1 but much less grating thereafter (and then is phased almost completely) though I understand the writers just went bonkers as fuck and circled back to the worst possible stuff they foreshadowed in S1.

Beverley is just... There.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 02:43:44 PM
Troi’s Romulan episode is great
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 02:48:23 PM
Spicy take:

The gray uniform of TNG films and late DS9 are trash. The black top, colored bottom is the best Starfleet uniform.

NO

(https://i.imgur.com/6ANiue5.jpg)
 
YES

(https://i.imgur.com/66spWP4.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 06, 2018, 05:05:08 PM
On Data, I would add the insistence he's one of a kind... Even long after it's clear to all he's not.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 05:59:14 PM
https://youtu.be/x6eoD9rQHL4

Giddy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on October 06, 2018, 07:52:41 PM
On Data, I would add the insistence he's one of a kind... Even long after it's clear to all he's not.

that's the point init
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on October 06, 2018, 10:21:32 PM
So that mini-episode wasn't too bad. Tilly being Tilly. Po was okay. It was basically a 'oh we can learn and grow from each other' episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2018, 10:38:49 PM
I like the late TNG film/DS9 uniform similar to the ENT ones and the TOS films. The idea that there's a standard uniform that the crew personalizes in a minor way makes more sense and looks cleaner than the TNG/DS9/VOY single piece jumpsuits with a massive swath of bold department color.

The fact that Sisko is wearing Riker's uniform early on and that's why his combadge is halfway down his chest should have no bearing on this.

The most unrealistic thing about the Trek uniforms is their lack of flair.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2018, 10:40:30 PM
Like this is more how I imagine the captains and admirals would wear their various medals versus how clean all the Trek ones are:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Dmitri_Ustinov.jpg_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2018, 10:42:20 PM
Brezhnev awarding himself the Order of Victory is the kind of thing I totally imagine an Admiral Janeway would do.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 06, 2018, 11:00:27 PM
Picard is the sole recipient of the "Winner of the Wolf 359 battle" medal.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 11:03:55 PM
That also makes it look military which might prove detrimental towards peace keeping
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 11:06:43 PM
What about these uniforms Benji?

Solid black with a little color on the shoulders and gray collar.

I prefer it to the gray top one.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ae/77/d9/ae77d9e5a4b4b77ebc7cd76f7fedb21b.jpg)

Ideally I’d only like captains and admirals to have a gray top uniform.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2018, 11:15:23 PM
In The Motion Picture, Kirk does initially have a special Admiral uniform that he changes out of to wear a crew uniform.

Actually, in the TOS time they at least wear medals and ribbons still. During "Court Martial" and then during the briefing scene where all the flag officers meet in VI the various captains, commodores, admirals, etc are wearing their awards. Spock, McCoy and others also wear them with the early dress uniforms on TOS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 06, 2018, 11:15:40 PM
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/4/4d/James_Kirk%2C_dress_uniform.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/502?cb=20090514111535&path-prefix=en)
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/e/e5/Cartwright%2C_2293.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/430?cb=20120316190334&path-prefix=en)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 06, 2018, 11:30:43 PM
I forgot about that. I always loved that look in the TOS films. That uniform is up there when it comes to Trek uniforms.

Do we agree that VI is the best Trek film?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on October 07, 2018, 01:20:57 AM
Those red film uniforms could still work today. Really great example of good design.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 07, 2018, 01:45:16 AM
https://youtu.be/x6eoD9rQHL4

Giddy

That link didn't work for me, so I found another:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zKf7pyxa1w
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 07, 2018, 03:36:14 AM
https://youtu.be/x6eoD9rQHL4

Giddy

That link didn't work for me, so I found another:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zKf7pyxa1w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB6mt2ptFmM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 07, 2018, 01:52:26 PM
What about these uniforms Benji?

Solid black with a little color on the shoulders and gray collar.

I prefer it to the gray top one.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ae/77/d9/ae77d9e5a4b4b77ebc7cd76f7fedb21b.jpg)

Ideally I’d only like captains and admirals to have a gray top uniform.

Jadzia Dax, Second Line Left Winger for the San Jose Sharks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 07, 2018, 04:36:29 PM
Troi - Worf couple heh  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on October 07, 2018, 09:06:27 PM
https://twitter.com/Decervelage/status/1049101789818228736
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 08, 2018, 01:08:37 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3Xb7htgRXs0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 11, 2018, 07:15:09 PM
DS9 is cool but boy the stinker episodes (some of the SF one offs and alternative realities) are not just half pretending to be bad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 12:20:22 AM
I liked every episode in the series in some way besides Move Along Home even if I can admit some weren’t the best.

I watched the first episode of Enterprise and wow. Really impressed with everything here. I’m already hooked but want to finish Voyager first.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 12:23:45 AM
The Trek crew honed their craft nearly twenty years and the production/direction really shows in Enterprise’s pilot.

Chronic and Stoney might be right about ENT!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 12, 2018, 07:08:19 AM
I see Move Along Home mentioned quite a bit among the worst DS9 episodes but I honestly didn't think much of it apart it's mediocrity. Miles better than the one where Jadzia falls for a guy on a planet shifting back and forth from the material plane. Anything with aging makeup (true for all Treks or any piece of film really) is bad too. The mirror universe DS9 is just corny (Avery Brooks as a sedated psychopath :lol).

Worst performance so far : The Starfleet guy / Benjamin's friend doing liaison for the federation citizens on the other side of the Cardassian border. I cringed at how wooden he was.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 08:19:54 AM
To be fair anything relating to the Mirror Universe is wack to me. Which is why Disco fell flat for me once it entered the picture. When it comes to Mirror Universe episodes of any Trek I just sigh and try to be positive the next hour.

And as bad as those episodes are they never get as bad as Data/Lore episodes or TNG holodeck episodes. I can stomach Mirror Universe in gulps. I can’t stomach fetishization of 21st century culture three centuries into the future. I don’t watch Trek for fucking Sherlock Holmes or Casablanca ripoffs.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 08:32:36 AM
That said the original Mirror Universe TOS episode is fantastic because TOS works as Twilight Zone-esque sci-fi storytelling and that ep has those particular finger prints all over it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 12, 2018, 08:36:02 AM
That said the original Mirror Universe TOS episode is fantastic because TOS works as Twilight Zone-esque sci-fi storytelling and that ep has those particular finger prints all over it.

The TOS one is fun for the novelty and because Evil Spock still being Spock works well.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 12, 2018, 12:07:00 PM
https://youtu.be/PJHoRx7mZLk :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 12, 2018, 12:20:22 PM
The Trek crew honed their craft nearly twenty years and the production/direction really shows in Enterprise’s pilot.

Chronic and Stoney might be right about ENT!

:heartbeat

Just as a heads-up, I'm "Chrono" never "Chronic" - that's a separate affliction.

And the final season of ENT is FUCKING AMAZEBALLS. Just skip the last episode. Seriously. Like, the same way you can skip the last two episodes of EVANGELION.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 12:24:46 PM
Huh? I typed Chrono. Blame autocorrect. Sorry.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 12, 2018, 12:27:48 PM
Huh? I typed Chrono. Blame autocorrect. Sorry.
(https://i.imgur.com/zHj3Xwq.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 12, 2018, 12:34:48 PM
:maf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: kingv on October 12, 2018, 01:23:54 PM
Chrono... triggered.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 12, 2018, 01:42:19 PM
think you mean Chronic triggered. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on October 12, 2018, 02:54:26 PM
I had the brew, she had the Chrono. The Lakers beat the Super Sono.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: kingv on October 12, 2018, 04:45:36 PM
Chronic Vore, resident Borean in Japan, has a whole other, better connotation and I think chrono should stick with it.

 :expert :bowsette
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 12, 2018, 05:03:19 PM
Finished TNG season 1, now on to season 2 :)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 12, 2018, 09:24:57 PM
Chrono... triggered.

 :ohyou
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on October 12, 2018, 10:17:03 PM
That said the original Mirror Universe TOS episode is fantastic because TOS works as Twilight Zone-esque sci-fi storytelling and that ep has those particular finger prints all over it.

Himu, have I ever told you that I love you?

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go put a little bit of chronic in my mouth and suck til I drop.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 13, 2018, 09:36:07 AM
I dunno guys I really liked the mirror universe episodes in DS9
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 13, 2018, 10:08:33 AM
I dunno guys I really liked the mirror universe episodes in DS9

Back when they cared about set continuity.

How I miss those days...

Edit- It's so early I confused this with Trials and Tribble-ations. Maybe I should go to go back to sleep. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 13, 2018, 10:12:21 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTOP1BezOB8

There's never going to be a moment like this in Star Trek ever again. :fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 13, 2018, 10:32:56 AM
Trials & Tribbleations is a god tier episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 13, 2018, 10:52:47 AM
So is the baseball ep.

“Klingons decided all tribbles must be killed.”

Worf really shines then.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 15, 2018, 04:12:58 PM
Trials & Tribbleations is a god tier episode

I'm not sure I love it but there's a lot of hilarious parts. Probably worth it just for the "Those are Klingons !? :confused" scene.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 15, 2018, 06:11:13 PM
Did what I’ve never done before and that’s watch Space Seed and Wrath of Khan back to back. Incredible experience.

Wrath of Khan is so great.

Khan, Voyage Home, Undiscovered Country. I think I like them all equally. So hard to pick!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: tiesto on October 16, 2018, 10:26:03 AM
Game Sack did an episode on Star Trek videogames. While I dislike Star Wars, SW games are mostly much better than the junk they show here. Best Star Trek game is Star Ocean 2.

https://youtu.be/Vh28YtsLVcg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 16, 2018, 05:46:49 PM
The O'Briens must be running obscene costs in shrinks :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Miles : Possessed, replaced by an android, replaced by his future self after witnessing himself dies a couple of times, PTSD.
Keiko : Possessed.
I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 16, 2018, 06:59:48 PM
The O'Briens must be running obscene costs in shrinks :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Miles : Possessed, replaced by an android, replaced by his future self after witnessing himself dies a couple of times, PTSD.
Keiko : Possessed.
I'm sure I'm forgetting a couple.
[close]

Yeah, a couple:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Keiko: Shrill, judgmental, projects self-worth problems onto anyone around her.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 16, 2018, 07:12:41 PM
Man there is a brutal ep later on involving Molly that makes me cry so hard.

O’brien gets some of the best episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 17, 2018, 10:28:47 AM
DS9 best Trek by virtue of Jeffrey Combs.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 17, 2018, 10:51:27 AM
He has a couple Voyager and Enterprise eps too :shh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 17, 2018, 07:41:12 PM
https://trekmovie.com/2018/10/16/exclusive-planned-star-trek-tv-shows-will-differ-in-style-with-breaks-in-between-to-avoid-burnout/

Hmnnnnnnng
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TVC15 on October 17, 2018, 07:45:46 PM
DS9 best Trek by virtue of Jeffrey Combs.

I basically give the nod to TOS because of Shatner alone, but I respect this reasoning.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 17, 2018, 08:02:17 PM
Game Sack did an episode on Star Trek videogames. While I dislike Star Wars, SW games are mostly much better than the junk they show here. Best Star Trek game is Star Ocean 2.

https://youtu.be/Vh28YtsLVcg

My dream Star Trek game would be like wind waker but in space and with more islands (planets). No map like Mass Effect. That wouldn’t be trek. It needs full space exploration, space battles, going into dangerous nebulas.

I think I could make a great Star Trek rpg.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 18, 2018, 04:13:43 AM
It's called EGA Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 04:17:19 AM
ME AFTER STAR TREK VOYAGER SEASON 2
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 04:18:31 AM
ME AFTER STAR TREK VOYAGER SEASON 2

It me!

(https://i.imgur.com/8XuIT47.gif)

I’ve cracked!....like an egg!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 03:17:33 PM
Tuvix is the worst Star Trek episode of all time and fuck Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 18, 2018, 03:36:07 PM
Hahaha Tuvix hahaha
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 03:40:48 PM
Hahaha Tuvix hahaha

What
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on October 18, 2018, 03:43:02 PM
No I agree it sucked
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 03:44:02 PM
I’ve never had outright hate for a starfleet crew before but I did in that episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 03:48:07 PM
All that from people who said they made voyager to “respect gene’s vision” as they green lit an episode where starfleet walks a sentient life form begging for his life down to sick bay under armed guard so he can be murdered as no one raises an objection after he spent weeks socializing and working with them. Fuck Voyager. Fuck Janeway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 18, 2018, 11:11:02 PM
Watching voyager has made me realize that most of my complaints with tng were nitpicks. I can’t stand the voyager crew after Tuvix. I find them completely unethical and have gone back to watching some TNG. I skipped most of season 7 so I’m going back to that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on October 19, 2018, 01:25:00 AM
Watching voyager has made me realize that most of my complaints with tng were nitpicks. I can’t stand the voyager crew after Tuvix. I find them completely unethical and have gone back to watching some TNG. I skipped most of season 7 so I’m going back to that.

Good luck with Sub Rosa (if you haven’t already watched it).  That single episode would turn away almost anyone from ever watching more Star Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 19, 2018, 02:55:17 PM
Janeway is trash. She started out fine and then they fucked it up
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 19, 2018, 03:42:59 PM
Janeway is trash. She started out fine and then they fucked it up

Apparently there were two competing (if not opposing) ways to write her depending on who was in charge much to the frustration of Mulgrew. She ended up joking that she played Janeway as a bipolar person.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 19, 2018, 04:14:47 PM
Janeway is trash. She started out fine and then they fucked it up

Apparently there were two competing (if not opposing) ways to write her depending on who was in charge much to the frustration of Mulgrew. She ended up joking that she played Janeway as a bipolar person.

Link
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 19, 2018, 04:25:24 PM
Janeway is trash. She started out fine and then they fucked it up

Apparently there were two competing (if not opposing) ways to write her depending on who was in charge much to the frustration of Mulgrew. She ended up joking that she played Janeway as a bipolar person.

Link

I've read it quite a bit on Reddit but a specific Google query brings up discussion about how no one got the actual source of that statement so maybe just an urban legend.

Everyone seem to agree that the character is written inconsistently.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 19, 2018, 04:55:15 PM
The only people I really see defending Janeway are fangirls. They’re almost always women. They often use bad logic for liking Janeway. For instance they’ll say something like,”Janeway is a female captain that is not defined by her gender and that’s why she’s such a great captain” which makes no sense because that statement is basically saying that Janeway is a good captain because she’s a woman, which naturally defines her by her gender. Nevermind that it isn’t evidence that she’s good.

When you put her up against female characters like Saavik, Ro, Dax, or especially Kira, it gets even more chuckle worthy. And that’s just within the Star Trek franchise. What about characters like Laura Roslin in BSG? Or the female characters in Macross? I just don’t find Janeway particularly special. And since she’s not even well done her being captain is irrelevant to me. Since she’s not even good it feels like the only reason people like her character despite the bad writing is that she’s a captain and that she’s a woman.

Like read this.

https://www.tor.com/2012/08/27/janeway-doesnt-deserve-this-shit/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 20, 2018, 04:36:34 PM
Dukat creeping on Kira :letsfukk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 20, 2018, 04:44:49 PM
:maf

He’s such a creep
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 21, 2018, 12:16:16 PM
Mirror Vedek Bareil, really ?
 :cmonson

That DS9 S6 opening arc was pretty good. Weyoun - Dukat - Kira is all gold.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 22, 2018, 03:06:41 AM
I can't pull out a link right now, but regarding this:
Apparently there were two competing (if not opposing) ways to write her depending on who was in charge much to the frustration of Mulgrew. She ended up joking that she played Janeway as a bipolar person.
Mulgrew uses this almost as a standard joke line at conventions, really all the Voyager people have become increasingly savage to the show's writing as the years have gone on. Originally they were slightly more defensive about it outside of Robert Beltran, who bashed the show while it was on, and Garret Wang started up right after it ended. But they've all since gotten pretty savage on it, Tim Russ and Jeri Ryan have done some brutal stories about it because of how both their characters were being written as "emotionless" but what they thought was actually more stupid or ignorant. (Ryan, for example, has said she tried to point out multiple times that Seven shouldn't "regress to a child" doing basic things while also having all the Borg knowledge to save the ship every episode still in her brain. And that they never dealt appropriately with what should have been her serious "loss" emotionally and mentally being cut off from the Collective. Instead they just make her like a vulcan.)

One of the Janeway shifts is because Michael Piller and Jeri Taylor had quite clear visions of what Janeway should be initially, but Taylor after writing the background novel for Janeway (Mosiac), started to become "expert" on the character and wrote her and tried to fend off others into the second, third and fourth seasons as to anything against her vision. That's why she got pushed out of the show. Piller originally didn't want Janeway to not be non-different as "progressive" equality of the future, he wanted her to be different as a fee-male* and somewhat of a "mother hen" to her dysfunctional crew and maybe even question her career over family choices like Picard has done, Taylor apparently changed her mind and decided against this, Piller left to do Insurrection and Taylor started to shift things around to make her more BADASS FEE-MALE CAPTAIN TAKES NO SHIT DOES ANYTHING "FOR HER CREW" (AKA HERSELF) that leads to her character eventually turning into that version that we all like to call the villain of the show. Berman and Braga preferred this version by far, but couldn't handle Taylor as the showrunner/EP anymore apparently.

*Part of this was they realized that they had goofed with Sisko being black. Not that it was a problem, but that in the 24th Century they couldn't exactly use him as a character who has faced discrimination and so on. So they totally lost that potential hook of the advantage of having a black captain. Instead they gave him the wife grief story and the single father, then realized it was crap too lol, so he's the Prophet. Janeway differed as being the highest ranking Starfleet fee-male on any of the shows, a position previously held by Beverly Crusher, and someone in the position of authority unlike Kira. They had more justification as to how she would approach things versus a man, and Chakotay, especially being Maquis, would have been an ideal person to be the complete opposite but he almost immediately turns into a toady.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 22, 2018, 03:15:25 AM
T'Pol goes through more exploration of dealing with personal traumas in four seasons of ENT than Seven did in four seasons of VOY.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 22, 2018, 03:27:59 AM
Holy shit the episode resolutions was so boring I fell asleep. Season 1 of VOY is better. Season 2 sucks.

Also fuck I’m a badass female characters that like male badasses but with tits. That’s what Janeway is slowly becoming. Kira and Dax not her out the park. I even prefer Troi and Doc Crusher. Janeway is by far and away my least favorite Trek captain.

Also I’m on season 2 finale of Voyager and nothing has happened plot wise. AT ALL.  By this point in DS9 we met the dominion and the beginnings of the dominion war we’re starting to develop. Season 2 of voyager is SO BAD.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 22, 2018, 03:30:17 AM
You mean you don't like the Kazon? And all their multiple warring tribes that yet somehow always manage to be right where Voyager is despite two years of high warp travel?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 22, 2018, 03:32:06 AM
You mean you don't like the Kazon? And all their multiple warring tribes that yet somehow always manage to be right where Voyager is despite two years of high warp travel?

I really like the Vidiians. Menacing villains that should have been the main bad guys.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on October 22, 2018, 09:38:14 AM
Also I’m on season 2 finale of Voyager and nothing has happened plot wise. AT ALL.  By this point in DS9 we met the dominion and the beginnings of the dominion war we’re starting to develop. Season 2 of voyager is SO BAD.
I was waiting for this shoe to drop.

Yeah, so Season 3+ Voyager is Diet TNG mixed with 'oh look the Borg, watch as they do Borg stuff but lose to Janeway and Company' and Seven of Nine's tits.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 22, 2018, 06:15:11 PM
Dukat creeping on Kira :letsfukk

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Creeping on his almost step daughter.  :lucas
[close]
Cruz smiley was accurate.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 23, 2018, 01:31:14 AM
Sorry, only registered users can see this content. Please Login or Register.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: FatRiker on October 23, 2018, 07:12:09 AM
The Thaw is great. Janeway outpsychoes a psycho clown.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 23, 2018, 08:41:16 AM
That’s why it’s shit and why Janeway is also shit. Wow look at me scare this clown like a psychopath, wow Janeway is sooooo badass ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 23, 2018, 11:10:52 PM
I like The Thaw because it's so stupid. And it's the first time they realize the potential of The Doctor as a crew member I think.

I don't mind Janeway's counter dramatic play to The Clown, she's mostly pointing out that they had figured out his game and a way to punish him.

I also like Death Wish. For going inside the Q Continuum in such a perfectly absurd way, "oh, we've all been the scarecrow!", for Q knowing exactly how to play all sides to setup the ending all while protesting.

But you mentioning the episodes for the first time made me realize that all three "we never talk about this again" episodes are from that season. Tuvix, Threshold and Deadlock. Killing a crew member cuz, Janeway and Paris mating and leaving behind a bunch of salamanders, and the fact that HARRY KIM IS HARRY KIM FROM ANOTHER UNIVERSE FOR THE REST OF THE SERIES. All of which it's like the entire crew agreed to never mention in public/ "on camera"again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 23, 2018, 11:19:32 PM
Voyager gets better, maybe blander on average, and does come to have some actually really great individual episodes, but that season you can easily see was the start of the Janeway madness, which the crew never really questions her on after that point. I think Chakotay tries once (over The Borg iirc) but after that it's only The Doctor and Seven who ever protest anything she does really. And compared to what she more or less does to The Doctor for questioning her increasing madness, Tuvix arguably got off easy.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I also liked how Berman and Braga didn't understand how the whole Equinox plot fell flat to viewers and that even some people saw the Captain as correct in his debate with Janeway. Because compared to Janeway they hadn't torn a path of destruction through an entire quadrant of the galaxy all on their own unhinged personal moral code. They'd crossed the line once, knowing they had but to save themselves, and had actually been suffering for it since.

edit: lol, looked it up because i couldn't remember his name, Captain Ransom, even the name is totally on the nose
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 24, 2018, 04:18:40 AM
Voyager fans tell me “she’s the captain”. BRO. SIS. Kirk, Picard, and Sisko all had crew members rebuke and question them regularly. They had discussions. The captain would check what his officers thought and made an action because Odo is security chief and is an expert in security, and Bones is a doctor and has the most human considerations  down pat, and because Geordi is chief engineer and knows wtf he’s talking about. They’re experts. Star Trek is ABOUT communication. Between races, between ideals, between differences. The captain is the captain and has the final say but they ALWAYS consult and the times they don’t are exceptions, and even in the case of In the Pale Moonlight Sisko STILL consults Garak and when he asks Bashir for what he needs he’s instantly checked and rebuked. All Janeway does is give orders and make decisions based on her whims.

IT’S AWFUL. I hate her for it. It’s obvious they are overcompensating having a female captain by not making her “weak” and by “weak”  I mean consulting others and forming dialogue, you know, some of the most important principles of the Federation? Far too much of it instead is about making their female captain look badass so she doesn’t appear female. Yet she doesn’t have one ounce of the depth and badassery of Jadzia Dax and Kira fucking Nerys da Gawdess. Janeway WISHES she were Kira.

I hate Janeway. She was great in season 1 but after that? Forget about it.

Fuck Janeway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 24, 2018, 04:21:44 AM
Benji I have NO IDEA why Harry Kim wasn’t immediately promoted after coming to the other voyager with the baby in Deadlock.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 24, 2018, 04:23:34 AM
Because my limit with Janeway runs thin I’ve been watching the occasional tng s7 ep on the side and GOD it feels so good. I now realize after season 2 of voyager that my problems with TNG were nitpicks. Picard please hold me and save me from the bad woman.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 24, 2018, 05:00:16 AM
Season Three will be a little rough to start, though there are a couple of decent pieces early on, but it picks up in the last five or six episodes, there's some good Trek stuff there. Even if one is a lame copout from what should have been a major plotline on the series.

Season Four is kinda similarly setup, including I think the first Bryan Fuller written episode, but "Year of Hell" is absolutely peak Voyager and obviously what the show should have been. (It also had been pitched as an entire season but was made into a two-parter.) Then they have a decent little run again that's up and down on the Hirogen, before again having a pretty good last five or six episodes including another one of the great ones. Season Five is all over the place really; Season Six has some of the worst but also some of the better episodes in that second tier; Season Seven is kinda meh, but there's a few I like, "Workforce" is probably really the most interesting of their two-parters after "Year of Hell" aside from maybe "Equinox" even if it kinda dances around some details you wonder about.

Voyager doesn't really ever get truly better to move it above any of the other series, but like I said it gets a little better and then blander and evens out so it's never as bad as season two. Especially once you accept the Janeway madness.

Plus arguably even if someone was skipping through the episodes, they'd have to watch the Borg stuff just to see how hilariously the Borg are turned into patsy's who are easily fooled and conquered by Janeway constantly, after their devastating "Q-Who?" introduction, "Best of Both Worlds" triumph and First Contact brutal savagery. Even Hugh and Lore couldn't make them as lame as Voyager does after "Scorpion" and Seven.

And then there's Species 8472... :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 24, 2018, 12:33:24 PM
People are saying that maybe I’m sexist for hating Janeway and have some internal misogyny I didn’t know about because apparently a lot of captains do the same things Janeway does. I don’t know about it but maybe they’re right. But when I watch TNG i agree pretty much always with Picard’s methods. Is Picard my ideal captain or something because he was my first or what? Idk.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 24, 2018, 05:44:42 PM
Picard is EVERYONE's dear captain.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 24, 2018, 09:31:21 PM
People are saying that maybe I’m sexist for hating Janeway and have some internal misogyny
Oh jeez, it's not because she's a woman, it's because of the writing. Yeah, all the captains make decisions based on their own ethics and violate Starfleet rules/Prime Directive/etc., but Janeway does things far beyond any captain, and does them when she doesn't have to while never truly considering the ramifications of her actions, but none of it has do with her being a woman.

Sisko and Archer both cross the line (during wartime or equivalent arguably), but they're almost always shown as ultimately not being okay that they did it, and the crew doesn't blindly follow them. Even Ransom is shown as unsure about his choices. Janeway never reconsiders hers, on anything she does.

And part of that is because the show simply never allows it, instead they warp off to next week. So sure, it's technically not Janeway's fault, but nobody is talking about her and the other captains without making the qualifier of "if this were real and these people were making their own choices instead of following a script" because they know it's not. (Yet.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 28, 2018, 12:06:00 AM
Wow. The Passion of the Janeway. S3e7.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 28, 2018, 12:52:56 AM
Future’s End is good.

Season 3 is solid Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 28, 2018, 01:22:51 AM
Sarah Silverman's best role?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 28, 2018, 01:40:06 AM
“What is that thing in your pants?”

:sabu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 28, 2018, 02:41:02 AM
Why the fuck is B’ellena the most incompetent Klingon ever? You mean to tell me they tied a Klingon with tape and she couldn’t break it? What’s the point of having Klingon blood if you’re that much of a wimp? Holy shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 28, 2018, 02:43:03 AM
That's why you need pure blood, not one of these half-breeds. :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 28, 2018, 02:43:51 AM
But Worf’s mate is half human half Klingon and she’s rad af
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on October 28, 2018, 03:13:51 AM
Don't all the Klingons spend both those episodes trashing on her for being one?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on October 30, 2018, 05:45:33 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/9sqlf1/discovery_has_learned_the_lessons_of_contemporary/

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 07, 2018, 04:20:28 AM
http://twitter.com/TNG_S8/status/1055497452369850370
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on November 07, 2018, 08:29:26 PM
Started rewatching DS9. 


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IMBUa7w9K4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 09, 2018, 08:58:20 AM
https://www.instagram.com/p/BX-7hoxltZd/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

:lawd

Her Star Wars Rey cosplays are so spot-on, I think she could replace Ridley if she wanted.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on November 11, 2018, 12:02:17 AM
wait, are ferengi giant penis heads?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 11, 2018, 02:57:06 AM
No, more like dolphins.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 12, 2018, 02:55:51 AM
https://deadline.com/2018/11/michelle-yeoh-star-trek-spinoff-talks-cbs-crazy-rich-asians-1202498617/
Quote
Crazy Rich Asians star Michelle Yeoh is in talks to reprise her Star Trek Discovery role of Captain Emperor Georgiou for a stand-alone CBS All Access series, I’ve learned.

...

Still in the early planning stages, the spinoff looks likely to focus on a continuation of her Discovery Season 2 adventures in Starfleet’s Section 31 division.
Quote
the series is one of several ideas being pursued by Discovery EP Kurtzman’s Secret Hideout and David Stapf’s CBS TV Studios for the multi-project, multi-year Trekverse expansion, sources say. “My goal is that there should be a Star Trek something on all the time on All Access,” Stapf told Deadline in August.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 12, 2018, 03:08:39 AM
Anyone see Calypso yet
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on November 13, 2018, 02:10:08 PM
Saw Yesterday's Enterprise for the first time yesterday, wow that was an awesome episode!!

Is this about the best it gets? It was better than anything that came before it I think. Although I am a sucker for mixed timelines and shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on November 13, 2018, 03:34:12 PM
Saw Yesterday's Enterprise for the first time yesterday, wow that was an awesome episode!!

Is this about the best it gets?

Yesterday's Enterprise is a Top 10 episode for sure, but there are still a lot of good ones. Inner Light, Best of Both Worlds, All Good Things... :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 13, 2018, 08:44:27 PM
Saw Yesterday's Enterprise for the first time yesterday, wow that was an awesome episode!!

Is this about the best it gets? It was better than anything that came before it I think. Although I am a sucker for mixed timelines and shit.

It's my favorite episode, alongside Lower Decks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on November 13, 2018, 11:25:25 PM
Tapestry.

 :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on November 21, 2018, 02:41:58 PM
https://boingboing.net/2018/11/20/cosplay-adjacent-2.html
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on November 21, 2018, 03:36:46 PM
Rewatched 'Duet'.  So damn good. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on November 21, 2018, 04:42:00 PM
Rewatching "Emergence." Pretty good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on November 22, 2018, 06:39:46 PM
https://boingboing.net/2018/11/20/cosplay-adjacent-2.html

I want one, but (a) I'm not that nerdy, (b) US$315 is a lot of money, and (c) I'd need one with Captain Kirk's built-in girdle.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 01, 2018, 11:37:06 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/DawsonMulgrewLien1995.jpg)

Quote
A 1995 promotional image, featuring Jennifer Lien (right) with her Star Trek: Voyager co-stars Kate Mulgrew (center) and Roxann Dawson (left)

For a sitcom or what?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 01, 2018, 11:41:19 PM
Holy crap, she's still getting arrested:
Quote
Lien has had run-ins with the law from 2012 to 2018 which resulted in her being charged with a number of offences including domestic violence,[17] indecent exposure[18][19] and vehicle related offences,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26] and led to her undergoing mental health treatment.[21]
Quote
Stedman, Alex (15 September 2015). "'Star Trek: Voyager' Actress Jennifer Lien Arrested for Indecent Exposure". Variety. Retrieved September 15, 2015.
 Staff writer (15 September 2015). "Star Trek: Voyager's 'Kes' charged with exposing herself to children in Harriman". WATE.com. Retrieved September 15, 2015.
 Lawrence, Damon (23 April 2015). "Police: Woman rams cruiser". Roane Country News. Retrieved August 4, 2015.
 Lawrence, Damon (1 March 2016). "'Star Trek: Voyager' star ordered to pay, continue treatment". Roane Country News. Retrieved 2016-05-08.
 Lawrence, Damon (3 May 2016). "'Star Trek' star on check". Roane Country News. Retrieved May 8, 2016.
 "Area arrests 3-7". The Daily Citizen. 5 March 2016. Retrieved January 24, 2018.
 Lawrence, Damon (29 November 2016). "Star Trek actress' charges dismissed". Roane Country News. Retrieved February 12, 2017.
 "Deputy: Voyager star spat on him". Roane Country News. 11 January 2018. Retrieved January 13, 2018.
 Staff writer (13 March 2018). "Former Star Trek: Voyager actress arrested in Kingston". WATE.com. Retrieved March 17, 2018.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 02, 2018, 10:29:54 AM
why is lien so troubled

what happened
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 02, 2018, 11:09:04 AM
Sounds like Brittany Murphy. :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 08, 2018, 09:24:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHxnVAlSMxs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 12, 2018, 01:03:02 PM
I'm on season 5 episode 9 now  :D

Very good show
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 02, 2019, 10:33:35 PM
Patrick Stewart in 1976 :ohhh

(https://i.imgur.com/qZVTfcB.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 02, 2019, 10:41:36 PM
Here's one for benji:

(https://i.imgur.com/mw5dlee.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 02, 2019, 11:01:22 PM
it's crazy how both him and Shatner refuse to significantly age

Shatner is seemingly going to look like a fatter version of himself from Star Trek V at his funeral
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 02, 2019, 11:56:55 PM
Shatner could almost pass for being in 50s, despite being 87!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 03, 2019, 09:28:58 AM
So I finished TNG for the first time, what an awesome ride.

Only skipped one or two episodes with Diana and her mother, I cant stand her mother ( just like anyone else on the Enterprise haha )
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 04, 2019, 01:42:27 PM
How did you like that episode where Beverly fucks a ghost? :noah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 04, 2019, 01:47:26 PM
Well I actually skipped that only episode of s7 because I find Beverly to be a bit of a boring character..

but if she's fucking with a ghost I might actually watch that episode?  :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 04, 2019, 02:59:24 PM
Watch TOS movies now and then the TNG movies so you can watch First Contact. Then watch DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 04, 2019, 03:15:08 PM
 :umad I've already seen the Plinkett reviews

Already seen First Contact too.. And DS9 and Voyager..

I'm doing a new rewatch of DS9 maybe
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 04, 2019, 03:18:13 PM
Plinkett reviews aren’t a good substitute for actually watching the classic TOS films.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 04, 2019, 03:20:26 PM
Well I haven't watched the classic TOS..they were always too cheesy for my taste. Like I thought TNG S1 was kinda rough, how am I gonna watch something from 1960's something?

The movies might be worth it though, I havent seen the old TOS movies and I have heard decent things about them.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 04, 2019, 03:25:06 PM
TNG s1 is not on the same footing as TOS. TNG s1 feels dated. TOS doesn’t. You are only making the assumption that you wouldn’t like TOS but you haven’t actually seen it. Watch The Menagerie or The Man Trap and see how you like it so you can have an informed opinion. :)

But I’m talking about the films. TOS films > TNG.

Star Trek VI is the best Trek movie imo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 07, 2019, 11:36:18 AM
TOS is pretty cornball as a whole but the famous/standout episodes are a step above anything else of the time

6 and 2 are such amazing movies. i also love first contact but it's not on that level
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 07, 2019, 11:52:05 AM
TOS also has some great character dynamics and if you can enjoy The Twilight Zone I see zero reason you shouldn’t be able to enjoy TOS. Same shit except in space.

II, IV, and VI are :hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 07, 2019, 12:22:31 PM
The TOS movies are peak Trek, imo. :delicious

I'll even watch 5, don't @ me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 07, 2019, 01:27:08 PM
I used to be a TNG hardliner but I've come to appreciate TOS a lot over the years, mostly thanks to my dad since it's what he grew up with...

We both agree s3 is pretty doodoo tho. I haven't seen TAS yet but he's a big fan, considering he's not much for cartoons either.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 09, 2019, 05:04:43 PM
Quote
Speaking with THR, Alex Kurtzman confirmed that the series will actually be set after the events of the 2009 Star Trek film (in the Prime Timeline, of course, rather than the Kelvin alt-reality), which revealed that the Romulan Empire had been torn apart by the destruction of Romulus, consumed by a star going supernova.

According to Kurtzman, the event will have a huge impact on Picard’s life and state of mind:

Picard’s life was radically altered by the dissolution of the Romulan Empire.

A prequel comic to the 2009 movie confirmed Picard was currently ambassador to Vulcan at the time and had long been a part of attempts to unify the Vulcan and Romulan peoples alongside Spock


Despite Kurtzman's name being a perpetual boner-killer related to anything Trek, this is actually the first bit of Star Trek news in 10 years to make me a tiny, tiny bit excited.

The Prime timeline is moving forward!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on January 09, 2019, 05:08:40 PM
I used to be a TNG hardliner but I've come to appreciate TOS a lot over the years, mostly thanks to my dad since it's what he grew up with...

We both agree s3 is pretty doodoo tho. I haven't seen TAS yet but he's a big fan, considering he's not much for cartoons either.

TAS is fun, I grew up watching it on Nickelodeon. It was able to do a lot of things they'd never be able to afford on a live action budget back then.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 11, 2019, 08:19:04 AM
https://twitter.com/anasabdin/status/1031936012942028801?lang=en (https://twitter.com/anasabdin/status/1031936012942028801?lang=en)

 :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 12, 2019, 07:53:20 AM
 :point
spoiler (click to show/hide)
:quark
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 15, 2019, 09:00:42 AM
Only 9 episodes for the new season lol

So much for a little world/character building

Fuck this show
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 15, 2019, 09:57:48 AM
9 episodes? Lol wtf.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 15, 2019, 11:24:36 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4197h-lJxBk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bLAPvNESBA&list=PL5h4ur_aSq8N5yx46vUjnNbsaQ74kcBLV
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on January 15, 2019, 01:52:05 PM
Going to see this this weekend on my birthday:

https://funhouselounge.com/uss-improvise-the-next-generation-the-musical/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Borealis on January 16, 2019, 03:31:26 AM
Only 9 episodes for the new season lol

So much for a little world/character building

Fuck this show

This Discovery S2? It's 14 eps, with Frakes directing the 2nd and 9th.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 16, 2019, 08:58:54 AM
My bad I saw a air schedule and it only listed 9 episodes, but yes it's 14.

Still not a lot but ok.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 16, 2019, 09:12:12 AM
Good to see Star Trek and Star Wars competing for who can have the most pointless spinoff from a essentially a brand-new show (Georgiou vs. Cassian Andor.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 16, 2019, 09:15:47 AM
Making a section 31 spinoff is bullshit. The coolest thing about Section 31 was the mystery behind it all. Now to take that away with a spin off?

We all know most of the shit section 31 does is very anti-trek, anti-prime directive. So it will be another show with a lot of explosions and backstabbing.

 :mike
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 17, 2019, 09:25:58 PM
I don't think Section 31 is anti-Trek, but it's definitely a difficult toy to play with. The Section 31 books also worked only for a similar reason, it was about the agents meeting regular Trek people plus the mission, as soon as they started to explain how it operates or anything like that it would get stupid. Stories set within the Obsidian Order and Tal Shiar work way better for that reason. Both are open secrets, but their exact level of power and how much of the governments they control waxes and wanes and remains hard to tell. DS9 even tried to imply that neither government knew or at least wanted to admit knowing about the Order/Shiar plan to wipe out the Founders despite it being a huge ass fleet.

The episode where Dianna has to play a Tal Shiar agent is such a good one because of how it also has a fearless Romulan commander, who even she has to cower in the face of the Tal Shiar and Dianna's presence instantly creates divisions among the crew. Section 31 can't do this because Starfleet crews are going to back their captain and their ship for the most part against someone spinning such a tale that goes against everything they've been taught. In Romulan and Cardassian society one of the first things you learn is fear of the Tal Shiar and the Obsidian Order.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 17, 2019, 09:26:55 PM
Discovery premieres tomorrow and I couldn't give two fucks.

My hopes are in the Picard series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 17, 2019, 11:04:02 PM
*suspiciously notes the page number*
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 17, 2019, 11:06:21 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KbH736n.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 18, 2019, 01:50:46 PM
Well its on Netflix, I'll watch it tonight after the orvlle
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 19, 2019, 04:13:55 PM
I saw it

quite forgettable

is Tilly supposed to be the comic relief?

I'll go back to Quark  :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 21, 2019, 01:48:12 AM
I'm a child and I cant parse Tilly without hearing Tiddy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 21, 2019, 10:56:15 AM
Jennifer Tiddy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2019, 01:02:00 PM
Alex Kurtzman you fucking wanker

Quote
'Star Trek' Head Wants Franchise to Appeal to Kids Like 'Star Wars'

Quote
Star Trek exec Alex Kurtzman recently confirmed that he hopes to deliver more kid-friendly stories within the franchise that will appeal to younger audiences in the ways Star Wars has similarly done.

"I go back to my childhood and Luke Skywalker, the farm boy who looks out at the twin suns of Tatooine and imagines his future. Trek never gave me that. Trek was always fully formed adults, already in Starfleet and people who have decided who they are. And it never was aspirational that way," Kurtzman shared with The Hollywood Reporter. "It's important to me to find a way to go back and reach younger kids in a way that Trek should and never really has."

:donot :mike
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 22, 2019, 01:30:28 PM
*facepalms*

Appeal to kids with a show that has f-bombs, rape, and extremely visual torture.

Also, Nog exists you pissant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Uncle on January 22, 2019, 01:53:27 PM
kids love f-bombs though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 22, 2019, 01:54:57 PM
That said, I would like a Trek story about a character that dreams of starfleet, and we watch them go through the academy, and finally get assigned. That's untapped potential.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
That said, I would like a Trek story about a character that dreams of starfleet, and we watch them go through the academy, and finally get assigned. That's untapped potential.

That's fucking gold Cindi. Let's make it happen?!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 22, 2019, 02:42:20 PM
That said, I would like a Trek story about a character that dreams of starfleet, and we watch them go through the academy, and finally get assigned. That's untapped potential.

That's fucking gold Cindi. Let's make it happen?!

That should have been the new Star Trek show. :yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 22, 2019, 03:05:06 PM
They're already fully-formed adults, living on the Upper West Side, who have already decided who they are. How can we better make this Seinfeld reboot appeal to kids?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Uncle on January 22, 2019, 03:38:23 PM
They're already fully-formed adults, living on the Upper West Side, who have already decided who they are. How can we better make this Seinfeld reboot appeal to kids?

Now I just want to see Seinfeld Trek

People living a boring life on earth in the 23rd century

Jerry waiting in the coffee shop and George beams into the seat and gestures with a flourish

Jerry: "Well, look at you!"

George: "Whaddya think, Jerry?  Dating a transporter technician has its perks, eh?"

All of George's possessions left at her apartment suddenly beam onto the table too

George's face falls

Jerry: "Well that's a shame."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2019, 03:43:15 PM
They're already fully-formed adults, living on the Upper West Side, who have already decided who they are. How can we better make this Seinfeld reboot appeal to kids?

Now I just want to see Seinfeld Trek

People living a boring life on earth in the 23rd century

Jerry waiting in the coffee shop and George beams into the seat and gestures with a flourish

Jerry: "Well, look at you!"

George: "Whaddya think, Jerry?  Dating a transporter technician has its perks, eh?"

All of George's possessions left at her apartment suddenly beam onto the table too

George's face falls

Jerry: "Well that's a shame."

https://youtu.be/ticP43gQeLw
https://youtu.be/JcQsXGXAv9s
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 23, 2019, 03:44:18 AM
But...like Trek often already appeals to kids. There are tons of kids who have grown up on Trek. Hell, many of the people associated with the franchise say it. I feel like probably even Kurtzman has said it. And then they come back around to it when older and see the plots and characters and stuff underneath the sci-fi and action and space fights.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 23, 2019, 03:48:05 AM
That said, I would like a Trek story about a character that dreams of starfleet, and we watch them go through the academy, and finally get assigned. That's untapped potential.

That's fucking gold Cindi. Let's make it happen?!
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/1/1e/Worf1stadventure.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20060317231155)(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/3/39/Lineoffirecover.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20060813182413)(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/6/61/Survival.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20060919095002)(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/0/0a/Capture_the_Flag.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20070214232724)(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/5/56/Atlantis_Station.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20180309234717)

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/d/d5/SA1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20071005204308)

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/9/97/Best_and_Brightest.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/306?cb=20180212085708)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2019, 04:01:57 AM
But...like Trek often already appeals to kids. There are tons of kids who have grown up on Trek. Hell, many of the people associated with the franchise say it. I feel like probably even Kurtzman has said it. And then they come back around to it when older and see the plots and characters and stuff underneath the sci-fi and action and space fights.

Kids who liked Trek were often either weirdos, kids who were smarter than the rest of us, or who watched because their parents did. Trek is fucking boring to most kids. So appeal to kids? Trek? Mmmm...no. Once you’re talking about teens you’ve made a case. But kids? Trek? Lol.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 23, 2019, 04:05:08 AM
my parents didn't watch trek
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2019, 04:23:03 AM
I feel like just because you liked trek as a kid doesn’t mean it was specifically designed to appeal to kids.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 23, 2019, 04:28:04 AM
I never said Trek was specifically designed to appeal to kids.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 25, 2019, 04:39:57 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvYu1Yu6p6Q

 :lol how did Paramount not bury the creators of this with legal threats
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2019, 04:44:18 AM
They're already fully-formed adults, living on the Upper West Side, who have already decided who they are. How can we better make this Seinfeld reboot appeal to kids?

Now I just want to see Seinfeld Trek

People living a boring life on earth in the 23rd century

Jerry waiting in the coffee shop and George beams into the seat and gestures with a flourish

Jerry: "Well, look at you!"

George: "Whaddya think, Jerry?  Dating a transporter technician has its perks, eh?"

All of George's possessions left at her apartment suddenly beam onto the table too

George's face falls

Jerry: "Well that's a shame."

https://www.pntgrm.com
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 26, 2019, 04:54:30 AM
supposedly the new episode is really good? Ill have to check it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 01, 2019, 06:52:14 PM
The season premiere is on youtube officially for free.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
My rating is gobshite/10.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 01, 2019, 07:24:45 PM
I can't watch more than ten minutes because of how much they want to shove TOS references down my throat and I was the biggest Disco defender here last season. I really respected how much it stood on its own feet last season only for it to reach back into the nerd bag of cheap gimmicks to try to remain relevant. No thanks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 03, 2019, 12:07:09 PM
https://youtu.be/su6bmqQKgAs
 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: naff on March 11, 2019, 03:02:30 AM
Theory that I haven't seen on the red angel and/or future threat threat to sentient life: its the krenim from Voyager. They had time ships and man, they/it looked pretty similar to the ones in spocks premonition

Voyager time ship
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/d48882523a9ae889e56ebdbe6da48658/tumblr_ooukk0Bctn1v7ibmio2_400.gif)

(on phone, can't take a screen of the discovery ships rn)




Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 14, 2019, 02:51:47 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxz1uCDvX0Q
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 14, 2019, 04:14:31 AM
are any of you still bothering with discovery?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 21, 2019, 11:14:36 PM
are any of you still bothering with discovery?

Yeah.

I like it. I'm about 4 eps from the end of season. It's been a bit action-y for my tastes, but I'm enjoying the character interaction. I even like the sibling stuff between Michael and Spock.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 21, 2019, 11:20:06 PM
the season is over so i'll binge it now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 22, 2019, 12:43:25 AM
i've also been waiting on it

to the point to where i forgot when it came back :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on April 22, 2019, 02:11:41 AM
I've been watching it with a friend who's a huge Trekkie. First Star Trek I've watched outside the original series.

We've both enjoyed it a lot. He's really having fun with all the links to the other shows etc.

Gonna watch the season finale when I'm back from Sydney next week.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 22, 2019, 09:40:04 AM
The fan service has put me off entirely. Low hanging fruit like that doesn’t appeal to me. Making Pike and Spock prominent characters is a very Poochie like course correction to me. Unfortunately most Trek fans like that stupid shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 22, 2019, 11:16:35 AM
I'm probably going to be on-board with s3+ Discovery considering [spoilers], but that makes me even more nerd-annoyed they didn't stick to canon aesthetic. :lol :maf :expert
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 22, 2019, 11:44:35 AM
What spoilers.

Lemme guess.

More cheap fanservice.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 22, 2019, 12:39:19 PM
What spoilers.

Lemme guess.

More cheap fanservice.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Season finale ends with Discovery jumping through a wormhole 950 years into the Kelvin timeline future.

AKA what the show should have fucking been in the first place.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 22, 2019, 12:46:19 PM
Interesting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 22, 2019, 02:48:31 PM
I'm probably going to be on-board with s3+ Discovery considering [spoilers], but that makes me even more nerd-annoyed they didn't stick to canon aesthetic. :lol :maf :expert
they literally can't use that aesthetic, star trek has two separate licences, one for the classic verse (tos - enterprise) and one for the new shit, this is licensed under the new licence so they actively have to make things look at least 25% different legally
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 22, 2019, 02:49:28 PM
Fyi the new Picard series that's seemingly in production trouble now is new licence.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 22, 2019, 04:59:40 PM
I'm probably going to be on-board with s3+ Discovery considering [spoilers], but that makes me even more nerd-annoyed they didn't stick to canon aesthetic. :lol :maf :expert
they literally can't use that aesthetic, star trek has two separate licences, one for the classic verse (tos - enterprise) and one for the new shit, this is licensed under the new licence so they actively have to make things look at least 25% different legally

Ugh fuck capitalism
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 22, 2019, 05:00:22 PM
Also links and sources are good
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 22, 2019, 05:07:43 PM
Also I was wrong on that spoiler

spoiler (click to show/hide)
it's still original timeline not Kelvin.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on April 22, 2019, 05:14:37 PM
That makes it even better. Fuck Kelvin.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 23, 2019, 10:44:22 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/afo7ve/why_is_star_trek_online_exempt_from_the_25/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/afo7ve/why_is_star_trek_online_exempt_from_the_25/)

Apparently im wrong, unsourced comment. Still two different licences though


EDIT: There's a link in the top rated comment that says Scott Sneider said it was a legal requirement, so fucked if i know what the real deal is.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 27, 2019, 01:21:43 AM
I don't think there's a rule, I think there was a confusion during the separation of Viacom that led to this rumor, but it's never been said because I think they never intended to separate the franchise. Reading that reddit thread seems to suggest that it was confusion by the producers talking to management and the producers erred on the side of caution although it was what they wanted anyway so didn't pursue it further.

I know they originally separated the license between the individual parts of the franchise, that's why the games were split between TOS and TNG+DS9+VOY, for example. Activision had first right of refusal on series that came after TNG and since they were all of the same time period it was easy enough to manage. But they unified that license after Nemesis and they intended the Kelvin timeline to become the main one, while the original timeline remained under their publishing licenses not TV licenses. IDW published comics in both timelines for example without any kind of scheduling hitch, they simply added Kelvin books. (The reimaginings of classic TOS episodes actually were some of the best Kelvin stuff I thought.) Pocket Books was going to similarly add Kelvin but it got "cancelled" before they got around to it so they canned or reworked in regular TOS the two books that were scheduled.

When Brian Fuller came back he had zero problem with his anthology series that would cover the entire breadth of the franchise.

Star Trek Online has been a unique case for some time, that I don't know that looking at for answers will get you any. They originally were going to stay separate from Kelvin, but then gradually added some stuff and reworked their own timeline to fit it in. Pocket Books timeline was entirely separate and also as "canon" as Online until they decided to junk Kelvin.

This isn't a case like Sony/Marvel and Fox/Marvel where it was literally two different companies with one holding the original licenses and one holding the film rights, this was one company split into multiple parts. National Amusements, the vehicle for Summer Redstone's estate, still owns a majority of both the new Viacom and the new CBS. I'm pretty sure they, acting as the chair of the board and majority, could at any time simply sign off on anything if they needed an official legal paper trail.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 27, 2019, 01:24:18 AM
It's worth noting that last year CBS attempted to force Viacom back into it and then at the same time essentially sued itself to prevent the merger. If they merged back together this whole "problem" would cease to exist. (This is what Shari Redstone apparently wants. Leslie Moonves was so against this that his settlement to get him the fuck out of their company prevents it until almost 2021.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 27, 2019, 02:56:37 AM
Increasingly unsure how I feel about DISCOVERY. I'm just not sure where they're going with it, oddly not a feeling I had during season 1. Despite a consistently presented arc through the season, and references to Starfleet, Section 31, the Klingon empire, etc. I feel oddly disconnected from the larger picture. I can't visualize the worlds that they're claiming are at risk, because I feel like we've almost never seen them, nor even had them described except to say they're imperiled.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: BlueTsunami on April 27, 2019, 03:03:06 AM
Watched the last episodes of TNG and man, Pre-emptive strike is so damn good. Felt like the shades of grey TV would finally gravitate towards in a show that was pretty optimistic. The scene whwre Jean-Luc and Ro are head to head had a sense of intimacy that was quite astounding.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 02, 2019, 10:30:57 AM
https://youtu.be/D4LPDX6uqSM

In theatres this month. Bought tickets.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 03, 2019, 12:58:19 AM
Increasingly unsure how I feel about DISCOVERY. I'm just not sure where they're going with it, oddly not a feeling I had during season 1. Despite a consistently presented arc through the season, and references to Starfleet, Section 31, the Klingon empire, etc. I feel oddly disconnected from the larger picture. I can't visualize the worlds that they're claiming are at risk, because I feel like we've almost never seen them, nor even had them described except to say they're imperiled.
I'm just glad that they've moved ahead of conventional canon, hopefully they dont do too much 'oh that happened with that character in the past' crap. I can pretty much safely ignore this show now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 03, 2019, 05:02:40 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/star-treks-ira-steven-behr-looks-back-on-the-complex-le-1834401786
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 03, 2019, 06:15:54 PM
https://youtu.be/D4LPDX6uqSM

In theatres this month. Bought tickets.

How did I not know this was a thing until now???
 :stahp
I need tickets for this!
:cornette
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 03, 2019, 10:41:22 PM
Discovery fans might have the worst fanbase in Trek. Defending a mediocre show and accusing those who don’t like it of being incapable of accepting change.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 04, 2019, 07:11:28 AM
Discovery fans might have the worst fanbase in Trek. Defending a mediocre show and accusing those who don’t like it of being incapable of accepting change.
You’re gonna wanna be careful with rocks, in that glass house you got there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 04, 2019, 08:52:26 AM
Discovery fans might have the worst fanbase in Trek. Defending a mediocre show and accusing those who don’t like it of being incapable of accepting change.
You’re gonna wanna be careful with rocks, in that glass house you got there.

I mean, I defended it during season 1. It was the first season. I felt people were being too harsh towards a show in its first damn season. Then season 2 kind of shits the bed in many ways and they have no idea what they want to do with no long term plan other than,”let’s backtrack this.”

In the DS9 article I posted last page they couldn’t help comparing DS9 to Discovery. Because DS9 was different it was maligned when it came out for being different to TNG. But let’s be real, just because people don’t like Discovery doesn’t mean it’s just because it’s “different”. It’s also because it’s not really quality. Yet Discovery fans keep assuming that I’d you have problems with Discovery you just can’t accept change, which is batshit. Also the first two seasons of DS9 are far better than Disco’s first two. Compared to the Orville which has improved leaps and bounds going from season 1 to 2, the amount Disco fans are willing to go to defend it from criticism is ridiculous.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 04, 2019, 12:52:02 PM
I dont think any fanbase will every come close to the Sonic fanbase ito being things you want to scrape off the face of the planet
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 04, 2019, 12:55:18 PM
I’m talking specifically Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 04, 2019, 12:58:35 PM
Discovery is gobshite.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 04, 2019, 01:28:11 PM
I stumbled upon a Wiki entry recently that was talking about Will Ryker having a twin, created from a teleporting mishap.

:ryker :ryker

The twin was more inexperienced and had been marooned on an abandoned base for years and the TNG episode was kinda fun to watch, since he got to act like a different character and argue with himself.  Then he popped up in an episode of DS9 as a bad guy, of sorts, acting like a terrorist against the federation.  And that was it.

Are there any other episodes similar to this or any good mirror universe episodes to watch if I'm not that big into ST and don't know all the backstory?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 04, 2019, 02:16:21 PM
If anyone suggests star trek nemisis I will for a fact know you are the devil.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 04, 2019, 03:44:22 PM
Not Mirror Universe but "Trials and Tribble-ations" is a fun sort of time travel/alt-past episode where the DS9 crew go back to the Tribble episode of TOS and are cut into the footage of the old episode and such. A fun little one off episode that doesn't require a lot of lore/show knowlege.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 04, 2019, 04:08:44 PM
I stumbled upon a Wiki entry recently that was talking about Will Ryker having a twin, created from a teleporting mishap.

:ryker :ryker

The twin was more inexperienced and had been marooned on an abandoned base for years and the TNG episode was kinda fun to watch, since he got to act like a different character and argue with himself.  Then he popped up in an episode of DS9 as a bad guy, of sorts, acting like a terrorist against the federation.  And that was it.

Are there any other episodes similar to this or any good mirror universe episodes to watch if I'm not that big into ST and don't know all the backstory?

Not alternate universe but also a DS9 episode. It's a heist episode.

Badda-Bing Badda-Bang.

(https://i.imgur.com/JTNE2eU.gif)

S7E15.

It's a fun one off.

For the most part, mirror universe eps suck. But there's plenty of fuckery episodes to choose from.

There's even an episode where the crew of DS9 plays baseball.

(https://i.imgur.com/wn51fPU.jpg)

Or the VOY ep where Janeway becomes Ripley and the show turns into Alien and she's the only one alive.

(https://i.imgur.com/dojM3WS.png)

Then there's the TOS ep that probably inspired the two Riker's idea which is also very good called The Enemy Within.

(https://i.imgur.com/knK2Ez0.jpg?1)

TOS is full of episodes like the ones you've described. Season 1 and 2 are classics.

Also "have to know the backstory". Star Trek, aside from DS9 and now Discovery, is not one of those franchises. Most shows are episodic and stand alone. DS9 is the one where knowing the backstory is crucial. TOS, TNG, VOY, you can watch most episodes out of order.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 05, 2019, 01:41:40 AM
I mean, until Discovery came along, DS9's the only series that really goes into the mirror universe at all.

I stumbled upon a Wiki entry recently that was talking about Will Ryker having a twin, created from a teleporting mishap.

:ryker :ryker

The twin was more inexperienced and had been marooned on an abandoned base for years and the TNG episode was kinda fun to watch, since he got to act like a different character and argue with himself.  Then he popped up in an episode of DS9 as a bad guy, of sorts, acting like a terrorist against the federation.  And that was it.

Are there any other episodes similar to this or any good mirror universe episodes to watch if I'm not that big into ST and don't know all the backstory?
It was not it. YOU BETTER READ THE BOOKS AND COMICS BUDDY. :bolo

https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Thomas_Riker

The only mirror universe episodes I think I might suggest without watching any of the show to get to know the characters and thus why the mirrors are well done, is the two part Enterprise mirror universe episodes "In A Mirror Darkly"

Unlike the others it's totally standalone in that it doesn't interact with the normal universe, set entirely in the mirror universe.

Voyager's "Living Witness" is NOT a mirror universe episode but is an episode in which a far future historian is retelling when Voyager came to its planet. Some of his details are... inaccurate. Easily one of the best Voyager episodes of any category.

not really big Enterprise episode spoilers, but sorta if you're anal about spoilers, mixed with a new garbage thread meme
Like ugh just step on me Empress Sato. Just step on me and grind me into the ground beneath your boots. Oh my god. I need a cold shower.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 09, 2019, 01:43:58 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/RWTfYL5.png)

lmao calm down
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on May 09, 2019, 01:56:32 AM
I mean, I defended it during season 1. It was the first season. I felt people were being too harsh towards a show in its first damn season.

Season 1 was amazing until the time dilation in the last X episodes. That twist with Lorca. :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 09, 2019, 10:00:43 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/RWTfYL5.png)

lmao calm down
It might be the fever I’m nursing at the moment, but this reads like stream-of-consciousness ramblings from someone whose the type to have just had a third protection order placed against them.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 09, 2019, 10:05:07 AM

In theatres this month. Bought tickets.
Just wanted to say thanks for posting this Cindi, I was able to grab tickets.  It’s rare that I see documentaries in the theater on subjects I am passionate about (I think the last one for me was I Am Not Your Negro), so it’s always a treat when I get the chance.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 09, 2019, 03:03:22 PM
I mean, I defended it during season 1. It was the first season. I felt people were being too harsh towards a show in its first damn season.

Season 1 was amazing

(https://media0.giphy.com/media/kvmGn8OlwBccaeoK8R/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 10, 2019, 01:33:15 AM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/deep-space-nines-new-documentary-is-an-earnest-love-let-1834614447
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 10, 2019, 01:39:04 AM
I mean, I defended it during season 1. It was the first season. I felt people were being too harsh towards a show in its first damn season.

Season 1 was amazing
(https://i.imgur.com/9uDWq4R.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TEEEPO on May 10, 2019, 05:21:44 AM
am i the only person here who loved season 2? whatevs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on May 11, 2019, 03:43:18 AM
I'm a little late with this but Jesus Christ at XCom2 War of the Chosen having half a dozen TNG actors in the voice cast.  :awesome

I suppose there's a value package available by their artistic agent or something.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on May 13, 2019, 04:30:38 AM
am i the only person here who loved season 2? whatevs
I enjoyed it even though the quality was a little inconsistent.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 14, 2019, 10:44:15 AM
https://youtu.be/ddGDn40GNmU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 14, 2019, 10:55:05 AM
DS9 movie was good
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 14, 2019, 07:55:38 PM
DS9 movie was good
I left the theater desperately wanting the season 8 they theorycrafted in the doc.

I’m hoping the home release has a shitload of extra material that was cut.  There’s just so much rich material to mine for examination.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 15, 2019, 12:47:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHmgC4Hq3zE

tl;dr

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hey, gang! Today we're gonna have a great time talking about the recent announcement that the new Star Trek Picard Series will be exclusively available on Amazon Prime and NOT on Netflix for the global fans.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2019, 12:56:07 PM
Putting different Trek shows on completely different platforms is a bonkers business decision. Fucking CBS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 15, 2019, 01:05:40 PM
LOL beaten to the punch by a few posts up.  :sabu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2019, 10:03:03 PM
Is that just int'l or also domestic
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 15, 2019, 10:14:16 PM
Is that just int'l or also domestic

CBS streaming platform in the US, Amazon Prime outside the US.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2019, 10:15:01 PM
OK so nothing's changed, cool.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 16, 2019, 01:34:49 AM
omfg the tng/ds9/voy style uniforms!!! In a new Trek show!!

Eek1!!

http://www.twitter.com/KateAurthur/status/1128757437081821185

Description of the image:

http://www.twitter.com/RobOwenTV/status/1128757637430951936
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 16, 2019, 02:04:49 PM
I have zero faith in any of these new trek shows.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 16, 2019, 04:19:02 PM
i'm seeing Voyager-style uniforms that resemble the cadet ones with the collar attached back there

if i ever get control of Star Trek, i'm writing a ten minute scene explaining why in the late 24th Century they changed the uniforms so drastically, so many times

spoiler (click to show/hide)
let's just say that the Founders first took over the uniform supply vendors as part of their plan to destabilize the Alpha Quadrant
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 16, 2019, 04:21:15 PM
voy uniforms > those silly grey uniforms
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 22, 2019, 06:21:02 PM
 :rejoice

https://youtu.be/DLxboxey_OU

 :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 23, 2019, 10:26:51 AM
Finished watching season 2 of Discovery. I quite enjoyed it. Way better than the Abrams movies.
I really wonder what they'll do in season 3, considering the season finale worked as a series finale, too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 23, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Oh, too bad. I just learned that
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Anson Mount (Captain Christopher Pike) only had a contract for season 2, so he won't be back for season 3.
[close]
That means season 3 will be about
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Michael Burnham and Discovery 950 years in the future.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 23, 2019, 02:41:57 PM
https://youtu.be/eA-GJNebJj0

 :hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2019, 02:58:58 PM
I'm calling it it's going to be STD 2.0.  :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on May 23, 2019, 03:03:58 PM
No one's ever really gone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2019, 03:04:47 PM
No one's ever really gone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNTLC_uiGFA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 23, 2019, 03:46:27 PM
Yeah right, as if this is going to be any good, or as good as TNG. Gonna be crap
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 23, 2019, 03:48:33 PM
https://youtu.be/LXm9q53Xcbw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 23, 2019, 04:13:52 PM
Yeah right, as if this is going to be any good, or as good as TNG. Gonna be crap

Shits on Picard which was has award winning sci-fi writer attached to it, shills Game of Thrones season 8.

Checks out.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 23, 2019, 04:32:28 PM
Yeah right, as if this is going to be any good, or as good as TNG. Gonna be crap

Shits on Picard which was has award winning sci-fi writer attached to it, shills Game of Thrones season 8.

Checks out.

 :larry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2019, 06:49:10 PM
Motherfuckers got me...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 24, 2019, 08:00:06 AM
I'm cautious, I'm optimistic. I'm much more the latter than the former given the names involved.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 24, 2019, 11:49:51 AM
voiceover sounds like Gina Torres to me
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on May 24, 2019, 11:55:33 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4fW0EInqw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 25, 2019, 12:23:59 AM
What kind of blackmail does Mike have on Jay :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on May 25, 2019, 01:00:04 AM
am i the only person here who loved season 2? whatevs

It reminded me a lot of Enterprise in that too much of the content was navel gazing references to past shows, and by references I don't mean someone shouting, "Khan!" I mean a sequel to the pilot episode of The Original Series. Shut up, nerds.

That said it was just offensive in the sense that it ran back to its mommy (the fans who couldn't economically support this IP in the first place) and not because the episodes themselves were repellant (well except for the penultimate episode that was straight out of a Mass Effect game). Some of the storylines had emotionally resonant arcs and conclusions, even.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 25, 2019, 01:33:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4fW0EInqw

I don't get this. As I said in the other thread, almost nothing regarding Star Trek's science ever made any sense whatsoever.
Did it really take them 50 years to notice? It's always been deus ex machina whenever needed.

And the science isn't the only part of Star Trek that makes zero sense. Society, all those humanoid alien species, none of it does. So what, its degree of realism is not what makes Star Trek enjoyable.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 25, 2019, 03:58:54 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4fW0EInqw

I don't get this. As I said in the other thread, almost nothing regarding Star Trek's science ever made any sense whatsoever.
Did it really take them 50 years to notice? It's always been deus ex machina whenever needed.

And the science isn't the only part of Star Trek that makes zero sense. Society, all those humanoid alien species, none of it does. So what, its degree of realism is not what makes Star Trek enjoyable.

It’s the fact that everything is convenient that’s the issue and science worship which Trek never did. This ain’t about realisim.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 25, 2019, 04:13:22 PM
Hmm, the only thing that seemed a little too easy was how quickly and effortlessly the crystal-charging device (and the suit) were built. The core issue was the time travel story, and there was only one way it could end: with everything falling into place.

Edit: So Star Trek never did science worship? Come on. A good portion of all episodes revolve around finding a scientific solution to a problem. There is also Wesley Crusher.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 25, 2019, 05:30:47 PM
A scientific answer is not the same as proudly exclaiming “I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!”

Just one example.

https://youtu.be/Z2A2wDXYhEE

Oh, I definitely remember in previous Star Trek’s when they declared ho much of a nerd they were for science. Science fuck yeah!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 25, 2019, 06:08:41 PM
Eh, if that's the worst criticism...

Maybe it was an allusion to The Martian. I actually think there are way too few people declaring their love for science in the world of today. Especially in America.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 25, 2019, 06:11:31 PM
Ill just leave this here.

https://youtu.be/Qv3SuIxU4W4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 25, 2019, 07:11:16 PM
Eh, if that's the worst criticism...

Maybe it was an allusion to The Martian. I actually think there are way too few people declaring their love for science in the world of today. Especially in America.


That’s hardly the only criticism. Notice the shitty camera work? Also making fun of discovery. The arguments is that Discovery has an overly inflated sense of self, no real direction, poor writing, navel gazing, and extremely poor production while presenting nothing in the way of a traditional Trek experience. Reusing characters and entire stories/plots from previous Trek shows is another criticism but it is not present in that video. After all, it’s called In A Nutshell.

I say all of this despite being a defender of Disco during s1.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 26, 2019, 10:57:36 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVjeYW6S8Mo

Great sample of how Trek handles scientific questions here. Philosophical, measured. Does Discovery do this?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on May 27, 2019, 02:00:50 AM
So, after really enjoying watching Discovery with my Trekkie mate, I am hyped for Picard, but feel the need to get familiar with the source material.

How much 90s sci fi tomfoolery am I in for if I attempt to watch TNG from start to finish?

I just started S1 and the cringe factor is pretty high.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 27, 2019, 07:39:53 AM
A former, more purist version of myself believed that if you don't like TNG s3-s7, you don't like Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 27, 2019, 09:07:55 AM
So, after really enjoying watching Discovery with my Trekkie mate, I am hyped for Picard, but feel the need to get familiar with the source material.

How much 90s sci fi tomfoolery am I in for if I attempt to watch TNG from start to finish?

I just started S1 and the cringe factor is pretty high.

S1 sucks straight up. You just gotta power through and stick with it.

Things pick up during s2.

The show gets good during s3. The best seasons are 3-6. 7 is the final season and the quality is lower and while not on par with 1 it’s just full of lazy stories.

The good thing about TNG is there’s no problem with watching a random episode. I won’t tell you to skip whole seasons like other Trekkies but I will suggest to maybe watch some pivotal episodes in the future to know what you think. If you like them they will increase your affinity towards the cast and you will have greater drive to continue on.

These are episodes are:

A Matter of Honor (s2)
Who Watches the Watchers (s3)
The Wounded (s4)
The Offspring (s3)

These aren’t even episodes considered the top of TNG. They’re just random, good episodes. Watch them and let us know what you think and see if you want to continue on because TNG is a show that requires investment due to its size.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 27, 2019, 09:11:09 AM
It’s also helpful if you can find appreciation in TNG even during the cringey s1. I swear to you it improved leaps and bounds in s2, which I am actually a fan of despite fans lumping it with s1.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 27, 2019, 10:00:54 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tIWYtcwp2I

 :aah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 27, 2019, 11:17:15 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tIWYtcwp2I

 :aah

Must have watched this over 1000 times and it's never gotten old.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 12, 2019, 05:51:42 AM
https://twitter.com/BrentSpiner/status/1138144170898366465
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on June 12, 2019, 09:47:49 AM
LttP but season 1 of The Next Generation has some amazing instances of terminal nerd horniness to laugh at and it's full of away missions that look like they were shot on sets that were left over from The Original Series. Can't miss TV.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on June 14, 2019, 12:17:45 PM
https://youtu.be/E4Fp9WeN7G4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 15, 2019, 05:03:21 PM
Star Trek Enterprise is the horniest of the treks :noah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 16, 2019, 12:19:54 AM
Star Trek Enterprise is the horniest of the treks :noah

But Enterprise is like CW horny. TNG is PBS horny.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 18, 2019, 12:48:23 PM
https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/17/18682802/jj-abrams-bad-robot-warnermedia-att-apple-netflix-streaming-wars

Great news star trek fans!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on June 18, 2019, 12:54:43 PM
I doubt anybody's paying half a billion for anything to do with Trek, especially Film Trek

From that article I learned that Netflix apparently paid $100 million for the streaming rights to Friends...for one year. :mindblown
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 18, 2019, 01:12:00 PM
I doubt anybody's paying half a billion for anything to do with Trek, especially Film Trek

From that article I learned that Netflix apparently paid $100 million for the streaming rights to Friends...for one year. :mindblown

What a dummy, I only paid $12.99 a month to have the streaming rights to Friends.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 18, 2019, 01:24:30 PM
 :smug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on June 18, 2019, 01:26:13 PM
https://youtu.be/E4Fp9WeN7G4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sleIsIkKEaI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 18, 2019, 05:09:32 PM
https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/17/18682802/jj-abrams-bad-robot-warnermedia-att-apple-netflix-streaming-wars

Great news star trek fans!

How is this great news?

Trek being two different entities will never be good for the franchise

Did you forget the /s?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 18, 2019, 05:24:31 PM
If it leads to actual original universe trek with at least a basic understanding of writing and respect for canon i'm game.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 18, 2019, 06:02:14 PM
https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/17/18682802/jj-abrams-bad-robot-warnermedia-att-apple-netflix-streaming-wars

Great news star trek fans!

How is this great news?

Trek being two different entities will never be good for the franchise

Did you forget the /s?
it's quite the opposite, bad robot won't be making star trek for paramount anymore and hopefully then cbs/paramount/shitty star trek friends can go forward and licence this shit sensibly going forward. Either make it themselves (kek) or give it to someone like Amazon who still has something to prove, some good talent signed up and money to spend.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 18, 2019, 06:14:06 PM
Worst case scenario, the deal between CBS and paramount stays as is and they find even bigger hacks to continue this weird tvshow/classic/movie licencing electric boogaloo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 19, 2019, 02:05:28 AM
http://trekcore.com/blog/2019/06/new-alex-kurtzman-star-trek-updates-picard-discovery-lower-decks-more/

rip
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on June 19, 2019, 02:16:10 AM
http://trekcore.com/blog/2019/06/new-alex-kurtzman-star-trek-updates-picard-discovery-lower-decks-more/

rip

This guy has no fucking clue what makes Star Trek great. Fucker still thinks its some kid show for 6 year olds. Jesus christ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on June 19, 2019, 05:17:04 AM
http://trekcore.com/blog/2019/06/new-alex-kurtzman-star-trek-updates-picard-discovery-lower-decks-more/

rip

This guy has no fucking clue what makes Star Trek great. Fucker still thinks its some kid show for 6 year olds. Jesus christ

Just to play Devil's ZattMurdock Esquire LLC for a minute, franchises (or long running IPs) have to be accessible and optimally keep bringing new blood into the audience if they want to continue to exist as franchises. It doesn't have to inherently be synonymous with "dumb" but it's harder to sell or pull off.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 19, 2019, 05:34:19 AM
Pokemon has used the same story for 200000000 episodes and it still gets omega viewers  :snob
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 19, 2019, 07:21:44 AM
Yes. When has Star Trek ever tried to appeal to little kids and help build the brand?

(https://i.imgur.com/TeFzCuk.gif)

Oh.

Stop being so hyperbolic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on June 25, 2019, 11:07:11 AM
https://twitter.com/LeeBinding/status/1143463240812453888
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 25, 2019, 11:12:53 AM
https://twitter.com/LeeBinding/status/1143463240812453888

Reading up on what was in those documents, it's so incredibly tame and both of them even admit nothing even happened... Hard to believe that's all it used to take to end someone's political career.

Now every politician is a fucking zombie that won't fucking fuck off.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 25, 2019, 11:19:54 AM
https://twitter.com/LeeBinding/status/1143463240812453888

what am i missing here? Domino effect? Jack Ryan? The Tom Clancy character?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 25, 2019, 11:20:51 AM
Click through and expand to see the full image.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 25, 2019, 11:22:41 AM
oh ok

neat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on June 25, 2019, 11:29:11 AM
Then Obama roasted Donald Trump at that White House dinner, and here we are. Thanks, Rick Berman.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on June 25, 2019, 11:42:30 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eJpWOY3r18

lul

https://youtu.be/wC1NGWM8gP8

lul
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 27, 2019, 02:56:33 PM
https://twitter.com/startrekcbs/status/1144282763433930752
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 27, 2019, 02:59:44 PM
Show just keeps getting more and more hype
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 28, 2019, 11:49:44 AM
https://youtu.be/5SHhySoXDcA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 28, 2019, 12:18:01 PM
Math, fuck yeah!!!!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 28, 2019, 12:25:29 PM
Gotta admit, Picard wearing an Enterprise-turned-Gundam mech suit and punching Borg cubes in space still sounds better than Kurtzman's plans for Amazing Spider-Man and the Dark Universe.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on June 28, 2019, 12:35:07 PM
Jay’s “this is due to the power of math” is just so hilarious even months later 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on June 28, 2019, 01:06:36 PM
21 producers :o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 28, 2019, 01:26:02 PM
I hope they produce themselves to the unemployment line.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on June 28, 2019, 03:36:55 PM
They're obviously playing it up but man the writing sounds like total garbage through and through.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on June 28, 2019, 07:19:52 PM
https://youtu.be/KEVcuDOO2nA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on June 30, 2019, 05:59:35 AM
https://youtu.be/5SHhySoXDcA

Just got around to watching this and it's all true.
I like the characters of Discovery, I like the designs, the look, the production values are movie-quality, but the writing is bad. They really needed to not make this up as they went along, which is the worst sin a show with a season-long arch can commit, which is obviously what happened.
As I wrote before, I quite enjoyed the second season of Discovery (which to my defense I watched while I was in bed with a flu) but after letting it sink in and having a closer look at all the contrivances and unresolved plot elements there is no denying that it was a mess. Why do the studios continue to employ hacks instead of actual science fiction authors? Alex Kurtzman is a trash tier writer. The thing is, Discovery season two could have been great with a few small changes; all they needed to do is plan everything in advance.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 04, 2019, 05:21:28 AM
"Find the person that seems farthest from you, and reach for them... Reach for them :brazilcry"

WTF does that even mean? :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on July 04, 2019, 05:30:59 AM
"Find the person that seems farthest from you, and reach for them... Reach for them :brazilcry"

WTF does that even mean? :lol

Set yourself high end goals and reach over the divide to every one.
Seems pretty self explanatory. Sounds a bit trite.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 04, 2019, 05:44:57 AM
It's not trite, it's clunky. There are a multitude of better ways to write that intention.

"Yeah but you're an internet armchair writer nerd."

True, but I'm also not getting paid millions of dollars not to botch the finale of one of the most influential franchises of all time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on July 04, 2019, 06:30:13 AM
On the whole, Captain, I believe I am quite fit. Fascinating. A remarkable example of a retrograde civilisation. At the peak, advanced beyond any of our capabilities and now operating at this primitive level which you saw. And it all began thousands of years ago when a glacial age reoccurred. This underground complex was developed for the women. The men remained above, and a male-female schism took place.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 04, 2019, 08:18:13 AM
"Find the person that seems farthest from you, and reach for them... Reach for them :brazilcry "

WTF does that even mean? :lol

Set yourself high end goals and reach over the divide to every one.
Seems pretty self explanatory. Sounds a bit trite.
could also mean grow longer arms by stretching  :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 04, 2019, 10:05:45 AM
Kurtzman is tying in Fan4stic to the Star Trek universe :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 04, 2019, 10:31:32 AM
Monkey D Spock!!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 08, 2019, 03:21:54 AM
from a con six years ago: https://birthmoviesdeath.com/2013/08/11/the-star-trek-movies-as-ranked-by-star-trek-con-goers
Quote
7. Galaxy Quest

You may have noticed this list began at 13 and that there are, to date, only 12 Star Trek films. That's because Galaxy Quest made the cut. Not only did Galaxy Quest make the cut, it was listed at NUMBER TWO early in the proceedings. And what's more, Mike and Denise Okuda - the graphic designers who created the GUI on all TNG era ships - lobbied for it to be considered the best film in the franchise. These are people who started working on Trek with The Voyage Home! The film's inclusion was met with largely happy replies, although one guy seemed offended it was listed at all. Eventually the film dropped from the second spot to nestle right here, dividing the halves of the list, coming right between the movies people like and the rest of them.
8)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 08, 2019, 03:23:27 AM
Quote
saintaugust • 6 years ago
If GALAXY QUEST can make the list, I think MASTER & COMMANDER should at least be considered. It's the best STAR TREK story that happens to not be in a STAR TREK movie.
:ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 10, 2019, 03:30:39 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4S0R7YN7W4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 10, 2019, 03:38:34 PM
The dog being named Number One :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on July 10, 2019, 05:10:47 PM
 Not gonna click that video, nerds with allahu-akbar-beards who shout at me on youtube are starting to repulse me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 11, 2019, 04:59:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/yiE7ltY.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 11, 2019, 08:57:40 PM
https://youtu.be/OJkLS9nabsY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 12, 2019, 01:03:37 AM
i really, really, really hope they dont make Picard into a sad man that regrets his time in Starfleet. I'm cool with sorta a plot with a threat only he can really deal with given his experience with the Borg (laughs in Janeway), but please do not sour Picard's history :maf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 12, 2019, 01:11:26 AM
Out of what has been hinted at I think that is what they are going for.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on July 12, 2019, 03:36:08 AM
I think the proper way to deal with this is to pretend that All Good Things is the end of Next Generation's canon.
Just like Star Wars only is the Original Trilogy to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 12, 2019, 03:43:14 AM
Apparently Picard did very badly at a test show. More JJ Trek than TNG according to rumors.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 12, 2019, 06:59:21 AM
Apparently Picard did very badly at a test show. More JJ Trek than TNG according to rumors.

Rich Evans: *laughs*
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 13, 2019, 12:32:18 PM
As long as they have Picard punching Borg cubes with his space ship arms then I'm in. :rejoice

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The power of math/science :rejoice
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on July 13, 2019, 04:32:40 PM
I like the JJ Trek, but  :stahp :goldberg :donot
Action-Picard was the worst version of Picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 13, 2019, 05:26:30 PM
https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/06/13/rumor-alex-kurtzman-fired-by-cbs-test-shows-for-star-trek-picard-are-horrible/

Quote
The rumor comes from Gary Buechler aka Nerdrotic. Buechler notes a Star Trek insider contacted him and told him, “Kurtzman has been fired. He is refusing to give up the title but there are 3 producers who have taken over as showrunners.”

The source adds, “He has been replaced. He is refusing to lose the title but there are three other producer who are exercising his functions. He is not even allowed on set. He has been Orci’ed.” (Ed. note: :lol)

...

However, Buechler’s insider notes the show is not screening well. His insider tells him the show has “75 to 80% negativity. The 20% who tested positive were people who labeled themselves Abrams fans like it.”

Cause that's what this situation needs, more producers in the kitchen. :juicy

Get Brian Fuller back. Or moneyhat Stephen S. DeKnight or Drew Goddard or anybody with a great drama under their belt.  :wow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 13, 2019, 06:12:23 PM
Just get Star Trek alumni like Moore and Behr involved. Fuck.

They’re cleaning up shop on The Orville. Surely they can bring more stories to actual Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 15, 2019, 01:37:34 AM
Been rewatching a lot of Trek lately (full disclosure: to arm myself against Disco season 1 haters) and I sort of can't believe that "The Offspring" was first aired in 1990.

Maybe I'm reading it too much through the lens of 2019 than I should, I don't know. It does veer into "machines have no rights" eventually and that's very well-worn science fiction territory.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 15, 2019, 02:23:02 AM
Why against Disco s1 haters? Btw that means nothing. I liked s1 of Disco and think s2 was rabid feces.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 15, 2019, 02:31:26 AM
Because they fucking suck. >:( :punch
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 15, 2019, 02:44:50 AM
Lemme guess: they’re all racist MRA’s, right?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 15, 2019, 02:46:59 AM
Because they fucking suck. >:( :punch
No u.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 15, 2019, 02:52:48 AM
Lemme guess: they’re all racist MRA’s, right?

Just people who haven't watched Enterprise anytime recently.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 15, 2019, 09:12:39 AM
Why against Disco s1 haters? Btw that means nothing. I liked s1 of Disco and think s2 was rabid feces.

Why did you like s1 and not s2?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 15, 2019, 07:58:22 PM
Why against Disco s1 haters? Btw that means nothing. I liked s1 of Disco and think s2 was rabid feces.

Why did you like s1 and not s2?

Season 1 for Trek is always the worst season, sans TOS and VOY. Sans TOS because it's one of the best seasons of Trek ever. Sans VOY because VOY s2 is actually considerably worse than s1, much like Disco.

Season 1 of Disco has some ideas. They have the pieces set, and while it's flawed, I thought it had some good episodes. I thought the first season of Disco was probably among the best first seasons of Star Trek in its history despite its glaring holes. Only TOS tops it and I think it's even steven with DS9's (which I am an unashamed slut for). I saw lots of potential. And then in S2 they screwed the pooch by making it an insipid nostalgia fest. The first episode is full of franchise navel gazing and they even introduce actual tie-ins of prior TOS episodes like the Menagarie. At least in DS9 when they introduced TOS it was a filler joke of an episode just for laughs. I do not care about Pike. I do not care about tying in to TOS. I hate shit like that. Prequels are fucking stupid. Stand on your own merits (Better Call Saul), continue an already told story (post-VOY) or get the fuck off my tv.

I couldn't stand the endless,"do you remember SpcOcK? What about PiEEEk?" The first episode of Disco s2 was almost unwatachable for me in how they kept building up "where's Spock??!" and built an entire fucking half season around that very question. I'm watching a Star Trek prequel involving a character I'm well informed about and don't give a fuck to know more about. At least in s1, for better or for worse, you guys did your own thing. That I can respect.

It was so creatively bankrupt and rested on its laurels serving fan service blow jobs while on an official "apology tour" for season 1 when no apology was needed. Unfortunately, it decided jacking off its own teet was necessary with horribly self aggrandizing crap like "the power of math" and "i liek science  :-["

It was then I realized Disco staff have no fucking idea what they're doing, what the show is about, whether it has a vision or anything.

I defended s1 in this thread without mercy and then it turned into a cynical corporate cash grab of a farce beat Trekkie's dicks so they see another Spock or another Pike.

Thank fuck Disco s3 is way in the future so they have a clean slate to do something interesting. Unfortunately it might also be the last Disco season as well. Fucking RIP you hack frauds.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 16, 2019, 01:22:17 PM
Just people who haven't watched Enterprise anytime recently.

Enterprise had Porthos, already better than Discovery :hmph
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 16, 2019, 01:34:04 PM
Enterprise had Shran. :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 16, 2019, 01:45:18 PM
Jeffrey Combs, god of Trek :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 16, 2019, 02:03:24 PM
Enterprise had Shran. :rejoice

That honor duel. :whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 16, 2019, 02:05:32 PM
https://www.startrek.com/news/every-star-trek-character-played-jeffrey-combs-ranked

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Uncle on July 16, 2019, 02:15:38 PM
https://www.startrek.com/news/every-star-trek-character-played-jeffrey-combs-ranked

(https://i.imgur.com/xKDCPcj.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 16, 2019, 02:18:01 PM
Jeffery Combs being overshadowed on that VOY ep because The Rock Peoples Elbowed someone lol.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 17, 2019, 12:03:15 AM
https://www.startrek.com/news/every-star-trek-character-played-jeffrey-combs-ranked
article makes a good point, GOG needs to save the Elite Force and Armada games from the memory hole
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 20, 2019, 07:30:08 AM
https://trekmovie.com/2019/07/19/cbs-viacom-merger-announcement-expected-soon-star-trek-re-unification-cited-as-factor/

Our long national Star Trek nightmare may finally be coming to an end.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on July 20, 2019, 04:31:41 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbXy0f0aCN0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 20, 2019, 04:43:16 PM
I'm mixed.

Looks too action-focused.

On the other hand, post-Voyager.

I'm hyped but very cautious.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 20, 2019, 05:30:04 PM
Looks like shite.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 20, 2019, 05:42:20 PM
I know I'm new to this trekkie thing but nothing about that looks like what I'd want, unsurprisingly.

When 7 of 9 showed up I couldn't help but get extreme cringe bumps.

Yeah aside from cameos.

This show could two ways:

1. It's JJ Trek action-fest and what we see is what we get.

or

2. They're marketing it as JJ Trek action-fest but it's actually a laid back Trek adventure, kind of like how Orville advertises itself as primarily Star Trek with fart jokes but ended up having the best sci-fi show this year by miles and had the most Trekkian TNG vibe of any show since TNG.

I really, really hope it's a fake out and it's number 2.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on July 20, 2019, 08:23:40 PM
https://youtu.be/YhBBXHwEsIo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on July 20, 2019, 08:27:36 PM
I see you guys posted it and discussed it already but yeah

 :lol :lol :lol

It looks well made, and better than garbage Discovery, but this old man needs to be the captain why exactly?

Why can't they just make a fucking star trek about exploring the galaxy? Why does the galaxy need to be saved every time now?

BOOOORING

Quote
HighlandPhoenix
3 hours ago
Where's the 'Tea. Earl grey. Hot.'?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on July 20, 2019, 08:35:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbXy0f0aCN0

Brent Spiner's makeup is working extra hard in the clip.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on July 20, 2019, 10:10:25 PM
On the one hand: looks so action-focused  :nope

On the other hand: they’re bringing back Hugh into the story  :ohyeah

I haven’t finished Voyager so I don’t know if Seven’s story makes Hugh redundant, but all the same I’m glad to see the character return, especially since his and Picard’s relationship is particularly unique
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on July 21, 2019, 01:11:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbXy0f0aCN0

Brent Spiner's makeup is working extra hard in the clip.

It looks weird. Maybe it's computer-rejuvenation. Otherwise, Spiner's makeup is the MVP.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 21, 2019, 04:00:36 AM
but this old man needs to be the captain why exactly?
Well let me tell you something. Don't! Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 21, 2019, 04:03:29 AM
season budget: $50 million
-de-aging Brent Spiner for five minutes: $48.6 million
-items on Patrick Stewart's rider: $1.15 million
-everything else: $250,000
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 21, 2019, 08:09:58 AM
Worth every penny.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 22, 2019, 01:29:27 AM
Interesting theory.

https://old.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/cg85zf/regarding_the_the_new_star_trek_picard_trailer_i/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 22, 2019, 01:33:14 AM
 :nope

That's not Borg cube punching.  :ohyeah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on July 22, 2019, 02:04:15 AM
I'm like  :nope :larry :jeanluc :rage :whatsthedeal :batman :ltg :rogan :cornette :era :nugenix :hmm :juicy :crazy :betty  on that trailer
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on July 23, 2019, 04:42:42 PM
I rewatched some of the Q episodes and saw the one with Vash, and was like oh yeah that was a thing.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://s-media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/b1/fa/d2/b1fad2178e3d08d7f38b729528839797.jpg)  :whew
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 23, 2019, 10:59:08 PM
found this on a totally hot twitter account and it probably was already in this thread but needs to be posted again anyway: http://www.memory-prime.de/barbecue/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on July 23, 2019, 11:18:48 PM
found this on a totally hot twitter account and it probably was already in this thread but needs to be posted again anyway: http://www.memory-prime.de/barbecue/

Then William Shatner made that the plot of Star Trek V.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 23, 2019, 11:22:46 PM
Interesting theory.

https://old.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/cg85zf/regarding_the_the_new_star_trek_picard_trailer_i/

This is a cool track to take if so.

However I don't like the whole "protect the chosen girl" trope, it feels overplayed and out of character for Star Trek.

I'm reserving the vast bulk of my judgment until I finish the first season, though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on July 26, 2019, 03:19:12 AM
"Family" . . . What an episode. :whew

spoiler (click to show/hide)
lol @ Susan Ivanova's rabbi being Worf's adoptive father. So many Babylon 5 actors across the years of Trek.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on July 31, 2019, 12:51:22 PM
https://trekmovie.com/2019/07/30/brent-spiner-says-data-is-a-story-point-for-star-trek-picard/

Quote
Brent Spiner Says Data Is A “Story Point” For ‘Star Trek: Picard’

Quote
Data is back, but not every episode
Speaking to the Las Vegas Review Journal promoting his upcoming appearance (and concert) at Star Trek Las Vegas this week, Brent Spiner also talked a bit about his appearance in Star Trek: Picard:

Data makes appearances in the show, I can say that. And Data is a story point in this season as well. But I’m not in every episode. I’m not a major character on the show.

According to the article, Spiner has read all the scripts for the first season of the show, describing them as “excellent.” The actor also offered this assessment of Picard:

I think people will be really, really excited about it, because it’s a great story.

Quote
Spiner’s comments to the LVRJ also confirm Spiner is appearing as Data, and not another Soong-type android, like B-4, who Spiner has suggested appears in the trailer as the non-functional android seen in a Starfleet lab. Spiner has also made clear that Data died in Star Trek Nemesis. This has led to speculation that Data’s appearances in Picard will be different than other returning characters like Seven (Jeri Ryan) and Hugh (Jonathan Del Arco).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on July 31, 2019, 01:00:15 PM
the Kelvin canon version was that they they saved Data's brain (brain? brain?!? WHAT IS BRAIN!) and imported it into B-4's body

nobody cared about the ramifications of erasing B-4 because lol fuck that android we want our bro back
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 01:04:43 PM
Shoulda just erased Lore. He was a bitch anyway

Oh wait he got exploded I think?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 01:36:43 PM
They know how to make multiple Datas now. The tech exists. Why are star ships not filled with hundreds of them?

Though I guess at that point cut out the middle man and just make the entire ship one big AI, which it basically is anyways...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on July 31, 2019, 02:18:09 PM
What do you mean they know how to make data's?

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 31, 2019, 02:20:55 PM
They know how to make multiple Datas now. The tech exists. Why are star ships not filled with hundreds of them?

Though I guess at that point cut out the middle man and just make the entire ship one big AI, which it basically is anyways...

I don’t like this because now Data isn’t Data. He’s just one of many Data’s. Making more than one Data goes against his personhood.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:23:02 PM
What do you mean they know how to make data's?
Due to Data's work creating Lal, Starfleet has the knowledge and ability to make Soong-type androids.

It sounds like the Data in Picard will not be actual Data in their present time but seen in flashbacks/Picard's thoughts.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on July 31, 2019, 02:29:57 PM
I always assumed Data transferred his consciousness to B4 prior to his destruction, analogous to what Spock did in Star Trek II.
I bet this is what they would have gone with in Star Trek XI if X hadn't been the flop it so very much deserved to be.
By the way, of all Star Trek (TV episodes and movies) ever made, Nemesis was what pissed me off most.
They should just have retconned it out of existence and pretend it never happened.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on July 31, 2019, 02:30:41 PM
What if all the Datas become the Borg Collective and Picard has to blast them back in time to get rid of them? :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:32:36 PM
They know how to make multiple Datas now. The tech exists. Why are star ships not filled with hundreds of them?

Though I guess at that point cut out the middle man and just make the entire ship one big AI, which it basically is anyways...

I don’t like this because now Data isn’t Data. He’s just one of many Data’s. Making more than one Data goes against his personhood.

I don't like it either.

I do like that they're trying to get out in front of it and say "Data DEFINITELY died in Nemesis still, you guys."

But whether they're straight up lying or being somehow misleading, either way it diminishes Data's sacrifice and takes some winds out of Nemsis' sails (not that anyone is really going back and revisiting it as some classic gem...) I will say making it a "plot point" or whatever for Picard is, to me, a good sign for the show overall. RLM is right when they said Picard in TNG was really only interesting in an ensemble because of how collected he always was. However, I don't think it's totally useless to examine a character like that, and doing a "character study" Star Trek show is fresh and I honestly wouldn't have anyone else but Picard in the spotlight.

Unfortunately they initially promoted Discovery as a character centered show about Burnham. By s2 I think they pretty strongly pivoted from that, but I haven't seen all of Discovery yet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:33:35 PM
It sounds like the Data in Picard will not be actual Data in their present time but seen in flashbacks/Picard's thoughts.

Hmm not bad. That could work. And then have B4 or Lore 2 running around so Spiner can still have some fun without taking away Data's sacrifice.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on July 31, 2019, 02:35:16 PM
Or Star Trek Nemesis was just a bad dream.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:36:59 PM
It seems like this whole thing is basically Picard blaming himself for Data's death, becoming disillusioned with Starfleet and/or losing confidence in his ability to command (he sees himself as a totally different man that wasn't worthy of Captain Picard Day or whatever), and then whatever is going on with this girl is important enough that he wants to help her and atone for his past sins ("Completing this mission is what Data would have expected from Captain Picard" or some shit is bound to be said).

Kinda generic but if it leads to good character moments then it'll be okay.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:37:57 PM
Or Star Trek Nemesis was just a bad dream.

Nemesis wasn't a bad dream, Romulus' destruction wasn't a bad dream. I actually think it's mildly commendable they're continuing things instead of trying to reboot every fucking aspect all over again.

The only bad dream of dubious canonical status is Star Trek V.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:39:18 PM
Just thought of the dumbest Kurtzman-esque plot twist.

Data comes back as a Borg in the season finale. YOU GUYS LIKED THAT LOCUTUS RIGHT?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:40:04 PM
It seems like this whole thing is basically Picard blaming himself for Data's death, becoming disillusioned with Starfleet and/or losing confidence in his ability to command (he sees himself as a totally different man that wasn't worthy of Captain Picard Day or whatever), and then whatever is going on with this girl is important enough that he wants to help her and atone for his past sins ("Completing this mission is what Data would have expected from Captain Picard" or some shit is bound to be said).

Kinda generic but if it leads to good character moments then it'll be okay.

Quoting myself but just realized this would mean Picard didn't give a shit about Tasha Yar cause he didn't skip a beat after that ho died :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:40:07 PM
Not just a Borg, the first ever BORG KING
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:41:08 PM
It seems like this whole thing is basically Picard blaming himself for Data's death, becoming disillusioned with Starfleet and/or losing confidence in his ability to command (he sees himself as a totally different man that wasn't worthy of Captain Picard Day or whatever), and then whatever is going on with this girl is important enough that he wants to help her and atone for his past sins ("Completing this mission is what Data would have expected from Captain Picard" or some shit is bound to be said).

Kinda generic but if it leads to good character moments then it'll be okay.

Quoting myself but just realized this means Picard didn't give a shit about Tasha Yar cause he didn't skip a beat after that ho died :lol

Of course, did she even play a single card game with him?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:41:31 PM
The only bad dream of dubious canonical status is Star Trek V.
Worth it alone just for

"What does God need with a starship?" :hmm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:42:19 PM
Of course, did she even play a single card game with him?

Picard didn't play a card game with any of those fuccbois until the last episode, what an aloof dick.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:44:32 PM
Of course, did she even play a single card game with him?

Picard didn't play a card game with any of those fuccbois until the last episode, what an aloof dick.

That's why he was stoic throughout TNG until he want all Action Picard in the movies. The poker game let out a flood of emotions!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY7kzdnpgJ4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on July 31, 2019, 02:45:33 PM
The only bad dream of dubious canonical status is Star Trek V.
Worth it alone just for

"What does God need with a starship?" :hmm

What about 57-year old Uhura's fan dance?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on July 31, 2019, 02:48:14 PM
i forgot about that :rofl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on July 31, 2019, 04:15:43 PM
It seems like this whole thing is basically Picard blaming himself for Data's death, becoming disillusioned with Starfleet and/or losing confidence in his ability to command (he sees himself as a totally different man that wasn't worthy of Captain Picard Day or whatever), and then whatever is going on with this girl is important enough that he wants to help her and atone for his past sins ("Completing this mission is what Data would have expected from Captain Picard" or some shit is bound to be said).

Kinda generic but if it leads to good character moments then it'll be okay.

I hope it’s hopeful trek that gives me hope for the future that makes me want to pop in a random ep of TNG when I want to kill my misanthropy. Picard being disillusioned in starfleet doesn’t bode well and isn’t what I want at all but I’ll give it a chance.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 01, 2019, 04:31:41 AM
My fear is they will turn him into total bitch tits like Luke in the Disney Star Wars abominations.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 07, 2019, 01:26:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suaA23LrFZg

 :nope

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 07, 2019, 11:18:10 PM
Not just a Borg, the first ever BORG KING
But he's already an android, so cyborging that shit makes him even more than Borg -- THE BORGER KING.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 07, 2019, 11:33:39 PM
Have it your way... OR ELSE. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 08, 2019, 01:15:56 AM
They cant keep getting away with it :goldberg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 08, 2019, 11:18:07 AM
They cant keep getting away with it :goldberg

They will. :goty2
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on August 08, 2019, 12:26:16 PM
 :lol

Fuck these producers, no clue what Star Trek should be about
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 08, 2019, 12:29:11 PM
It's such a frustrating thing.   Like it might be hard to write a good star trek story, but it's not hard to point out all the things that make star trek great and make a setting that allows them to tell those stories.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 08, 2019, 12:41:25 PM
:lol

Fuck these producers, no clue what Star Trek should be about

It's pretty clear to me we're heading straight into another Star Trek "crash" and we'll probably go ten years without anything except comics and videogames in the (Prime) series, just like after Enterprise was cancelled. Calling it now. Trek is like Ghostbusters in that there really isn't a ton of profit incentive there, so the big boys are going to ignore it, and an effects-heavy show is always going to need some kind of budget these days.

Further predictions: Discovery won't make it past season 3, the Section 31 show will bomb, Picard will do OK but I see it as more a limited series than an ongoing show? Stewart isn't going to want to do it forever.

CBS's non-ST shows will be ignored and die, CBS All Access will shutter, and CBS will go back to schlepping their wares on Netflix and Hulu or whatever package seems popular when this goes down.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 08, 2019, 12:59:02 PM
:lol

Fuck these producers, no clue what Star Trek should be about

It's pretty clear to me we're heading straight into another Star Trek "crash" and we'll probably go ten years without anything except comics and videogames in the (Prime) series, just like after Enterprise was cancelled. Calling it now. Trek is like Ghostbusters in that there really isn't a ton of profit incentive there, so the big boys are going to ignore it, and an effects-heavy show is always going to need some kind of budget these days.

Further predictions: Discovery won't make it past season 3, the Section 31 show will bomb, Picard will do OK but I see it as more a limited series than an ongoing show? Stewart isn't going to want to do it forever.

CBS's non-ST shows will be ignored and die, CBS All Access will shutter, and CBS will go back to schlepping their wares on Netflix and Hulu or whatever package seems popular when this goes down.

This is why I've been against the massive "dump all the Treks!!!" by announcing constant Trek shit. I remember when Voyager and Enterprise were on air and TV Guide would talk about trying to make Enterprise appeal to younger demographics. There was also talk of people just oversaturated with Trek in general. My dad, a lifelong Trek fan, barely watched Enterprise as much as he watched TNG/DS9/VOY. By the time Enterprise was on air people were just sick of Trek. At one point we had two Trek shows on at the same time at the franchises height combined with TNG movies in theaters. All of this helped create Trek fatigue and a dwindling interest in the franchise due to 7 season long series'. And now they're dumping Lower Decks, Discovery, Picard, Section 31, teasing some goddamn Pike show all in our faces. The Trek whores are happy though because it means they finally get their Trek but there's very legitimate concerns this will all have a short shelf life. Currently Discovery is already too expensive too keep up.

Basically, a big contributor to Star Trek going dark for a full decade on television was due to the sheer amount of Star Trek available to the public, where it started to get more convoluted and harder to get into for the average tv watcher. Too much Star Trek in such little time helped create franchise decay. The low quality work (Nemesis, Insurrection, much of Voyager) ruined the franchises image even further and they're doing the same fucking thing again but instead of this being a decade and a half long process they're speeding it up to amount to maybe 5 years.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 08, 2019, 01:55:52 PM
That and Les Moonves hated Scifi and one of the first things he did is shit can ENT. If all we are going to get is Star Drek, STD and it's ilk from now on it's OK to let it die.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The merchandising and licensing of old
Trek was lucrative dummies.  :steiner
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 08, 2019, 02:42:20 PM
Agreed. Just let Star Trek die.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on August 08, 2019, 03:15:37 PM
NEVER!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 08, 2019, 04:58:23 PM
I’d rather watch Star Trek V than most Nu-Trek tbh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 08, 2019, 08:54:53 PM
I’d rather watch Star Trek V than most Nu-Trek tbh

I was reading the Wiki article for the movie today and realized this too. :lol

Honestly Shatner probably took too much blame for V's problems. The core idea isn't very Trek-y and that was definitely all him (originally it ended with them literally meeting Satan :lol), but most other aspects of production were hamstrung by external events like the writer's strike and Paramount charging into production to meet a deadline.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Dickie Dee on August 09, 2019, 05:12:06 AM
The opening with Spock/Bones/Kirk fucking around in Yosemite  :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 09, 2019, 05:59:16 AM
Agreed. Just let Star Trek die.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Koxkg7C216c
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 09, 2019, 03:26:59 PM
https://axanar.com/

https://youtu.be/1W1_8IV8uhA

https://youtu.be/hrlNSGbgrlQ

 :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 10, 2019, 03:41:33 PM
I’d rather watch Star Trek V than most Nu-Trek tbh

That’s because Star Trek V is great!  It’s got what is maybe peak-ornery Bones! It’s got Nichelle Nichols hot dance moves making me feel like Scotty!  A planet of Mad Max extras!  David Warner!  Marsh-mellons!  What does God need with a starship!

(https://awriteradolescentmuse.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/favorite-capt-kirk-quote.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 11:14:06 AM
https://trekmovie.com/2019/08/03/cbs-viacom-merger-update-parties-agree-on-leadership-team/

Preeeeeeeetty close to this whole stupid movie/TV split being a thing of the past.

Also apparently Lionsgate might be next on nu-Viacom's list.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 11:29:33 AM
does MGM still have stargate?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 11:35:39 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbLWDbC1grE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 11:42:33 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbLWDbC1grE

:confused
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 11:47:03 AM
tl;dr CBS could have made actual in universe (canon) Star Trek but didn't.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 11:57:29 AM
another goddamn 30 minute youtube video
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:01:45 PM
tl;dr CBS could have made actual trek but didn't.

So...? :dunno
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 12:06:48 PM
tl;dr CBS could have made actual trek but didn't.

So...? :dunno

 ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:16:09 PM
"Real Trek" to me is a Star Trek TV show in the model of TOS/TNG/ENT/DS9.

We already know CBS could have been making that all along. Where is the controversy?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 12:27:33 PM
"Real Trek" to me is a Star Trek TV show in the model of TOS/TNG/ENT/DS9.

We already know CBS could have been making that all along. Where is the controversy?

That's what I mean by real trek, the controversy is that they were supposedly hampered by their sister company into having to change ship and uniform design aka the kelvin timeline shit which was not the case....
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:34:43 PM
If you think about things for a few moments it kinda becomes obvious, with the costumes especially... Why would a CBS Trek show not be able to use things from another CBS Trek show? :thinking Why would TOS designs be locked up in movie rights? :thinking

The obnoxious "updating" of TOS designs has more to do with Kurtzman as an executive producer 1. not respecting the original iconography as previous Star Trek producers had in the past, and 2. wanting to put his mark on the franchise as "the guy who took it from old and boring to fresh and relevant." He probably saw Star Trek Discovery in some ways as "his" Next Generation -- an entry in the franchise that is so fresh and well-produced that it defines the next decade+ of Trek media. And Next Gen had updated designs too!! (Kurtzman neglecting to realize that was because it was set 100 years later than TOS, and TOS designs remained canon...)

Only it didn't work out that way...





Anyways, finally but most importantly: none of the designs *really* matter in making Trek "Real Trek." CBS still could have been making "Real Trek" TV shows, just with different designs. But they made STD instead. So the video is doubly useless IMO...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 12:38:52 PM
"Real Trek" to me is a Star Trek TV show in the model of TOS/TNG/ENT/DS9.

We already know CBS could have been making that all along. Where is the controversy?

I love how you don't mention VOY :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:39:48 PM
:lol I legit forgot about it. I looked at the list and was like "There's only four of them, right? ...eh."

And I've seen more of VOY than ENT too. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:46:00 PM
Also this reminds me of another critical failing of making Trek prequels: you squander any kind of spinoff or expanded universe capability.

When I was a kid it seemed like Trek really could go on forever. They had the perfect formula: each new "generation" has its own "look" and political situation, and within that generation, since space is so fucking big, you could literally have a dozen Trek shows taking place simultaneously in-canon and have none of them crossover, and it would still not break the suspension of disbelief nearly as bad as "Why doesn't Ant-Man just call in the Avengers?"

But then when you *want* them to crossover, they're literally a warp away from each other.

And then when a generation gets a bit tired, you jump forward 100+ years and start again.

The one-two-three prequel punch of Enterprise-Star Trek '09-Discovery really killed a lot of enthusiasm I had for the franchise, and now I think I've been able to articulate partly why... Trek is about looking forward, not back.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 12:52:10 PM
It's the Suikoden problem. Happened around the same time too.

You're now 3-4 or more stories deep into an established continuity and universe. So you make a prequel to "appeal to people who haven't been caught up in the story" to make it have more casual appeal. Then you end up making nothing but prequels. Then you make nothing but spin offs that have nothing to do with the original story or timeline because "the original timeline is too confusing". Suikoden died after that point because old fans have no use for a new continuity and they weren't bringing in new fans despite the attempts to do so. Trek is lucky to still have an audience. It's still stuck in prequel mode because it made another prequel. Basically, prequels are all shit and there's only a handful of good/necessary ones. They ruin franchises that want to suddenly start to appeal to people who don't know what's going on and single handedly ALWAYS alienate core fans.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 12:59:27 PM
Didn't this happen to Metroid too? :lol

Fusion hit and literally anyone who touched Metroid after that was like "Yeeeaaaahhh it would be neat to explore Samus, her new status, and how things have changed in this universe... but that seems like a lot of work. Hey look everyone, Ridley and Mother Brain!!" [crowd applauds]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:01:40 PM
Being light on story (except for... that one) definitely helps Metroid here, though. Most people probably have no idea the Prime games are interquels.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:03:21 PM
Didn't this happen to Metroid too? :lol

Fusion hit and literally anyone who touched Metroid after that was like "Yeeeaaaahhh it would be neat to explore Samus, her new status, and how things have changed in this universe... but that seems like a lot of work. Hey look everyone, Ridley and Mother Brain!!" [crowd applauds]

Well, Zero Mission was just a remake. Idk what happened after that. Metroid isn't very story focused either. So I can't talk about this subject.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:10:21 PM
I believe the timeline is:

Metroid/Zero Mission -> Prime 1, 2, and 3 -> Metroid II* -> Super Metroid -> Other M -> Fusion

*3DS version is the canon one, and in fact unites the normal and Prime canons (in a very direct way.)

So yeah, two Prime sequels they were gonna make anyways, and Other M... not nearly as bad as that Suikoden situation lol. What a mess.









That all said... now that Prime is unambiguously canon, and free from the shackles of the concept of a "trilogy"... it would be very exciting to see if Prime 4 takes place after Fusion.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:11:44 PM
In a way, same thing happened to Star Wars.

Star Wars prequels happen. Then you've got these Star Wars prequel cartoons for a full decade. It's like, once you go prequel, there's no coming back. Ever. Star Wars having a sequel after a decade of prequels is almost unprecedented. I can't think of any other property that bounced back after the prequel curse. But even now we're still getting prequels (Solo, Rogue One).

Happened to LOTR too. Once Jackson made The Hobbit there's been no attempt to do live action Scouring of the Shire, which could make a damn good tv series or a single film. Instead we get an Amazon series that's sort of a prequel.

Once you prequel you never come back. Its why Star Trek has been in prequel mode since Enterprise. Ent, JJ Trek, Disco, all prequels. Picard existing and being in the main Trek timeline and a sequel to the last TNG film is nothing short of a damn miracle.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:13:24 PM
The lesson: never prequel.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 01:20:18 PM
I have very little faith in Picard being good.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:21:44 PM
Most of us would agree. At least on this site.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:28:36 PM
It could have been. And it could be.

But the trailer does not look good, outside of the general feeling of hope that comes from a non-prequel Trek show. Unless they fuck Picard's character over in some way a la his fucking nephew getting fridged in Generations, the show will be worth it just to move the timeline forward and show that it is possible to avoid making a prequel.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 01:34:28 PM
More fuckery with the star trek license is the toy rights, Hasbro owns the pre-existing stuff currently and when CBS wanted to have them make Discovery toys they said fuck right off this shit wont sell, McFarlane picked up the licences going forward - discovery new movies etc and it's believed (no evidence) Hasbro didnt like the idea of having competing toys so told them to make theirs different, hence the different looks. Hasbro was right, new shit doesnt sell at all :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 01:35:16 PM
Did anyone watch the DS9 documentary? I haven't as of yet but they pitched a S8 for DS9 and it sounded interesting as fuck.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
What could have been. :'(
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 01:36:16 PM
I didnt watch that 30 min video but im going to assume the jist of it is that Parmount licences their rights from CBS and CBS still owns everything
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:38:41 PM
More fuckery with the star trek license is the toy rights, Hasbro owns the pre-existing stuff currently and when CBS wanted to have them make Discovery toys they said fuck right off this shit wont sell, McFarlane picked up the licences going forward - discovery new movies etc and it's believed (no evidence) Hasbro didnt like the idea of having competing toys so told them to make theirs different, hence the different looks. Hasbro was right, new shit doesnt sell at all :lol

Still waiting for Star Trek Legos.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:39:48 PM
Did anyone watch the DS9 documentary? I haven't as of yet but they pitched a S8 for DS9 and it sounded interesting as fuck.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
What could have been. :'(
[close]

Yes, I saw it in theaters.

It was good to okay-ish. The problem with documentaries like that is that I never have an urge to see them ever again after the fact.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 01:40:11 PM
More fuckery with the star trek license is the toy rights, Hasbro owns the pre-existing stuff currently and when CBS wanted to have them make Discovery toys they said fuck right off this shit wont sell, McFarlane picked up the licences going forward - discovery new movies etc and it's believed (no evidence) Hasbro didnt like the idea of having competing toys so told them to make theirs different, hence the different looks. Hasbro was right, new shit doesnt sell at all :lol

Still waiting for Star Trek Legos.
Let's wait till disney buys CBS :goldberg :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 13, 2019, 01:41:40 PM
Yeah we don't need another company to body ST CBS is doing just fine in that regard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:42:38 PM
More fuckery with the star trek license is the toy rights, Hasbro owns the pre-existing stuff currently and when CBS wanted to have them make Discovery toys they said fuck right off this shit wont sell, McFarlane picked up the licences going forward - discovery new movies etc and it's believed (no evidence) Hasbro didnt like the idea of having competing toys so told them to make theirs different, hence the different looks. Hasbro was right, new shit doesnt sell at all :lol

Still waiting for Star Trek Legos.
Let's wait till disney buys CBS :goldberg :yuck

If anything it would need to be Warner Bros...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 01:43:26 PM
Arent Warner Bros selling DC comics or some shit? I recall a casual conversation with someone to the effect.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:48:02 PM
More fuckery with the star trek license is the toy rights, Hasbro owns the pre-existing stuff currently and when CBS wanted to have them make Discovery toys they said fuck right off this shit wont sell, McFarlane picked up the licences going forward - discovery new movies etc and it's believed (no evidence) Hasbro didnt like the idea of having competing toys so told them to make theirs different, hence the different looks. Hasbro was right, new shit doesnt sell at all :lol

Still waiting for Star Trek Legos.
Let's wait till disney buys CBS :goldberg :yuck

If anything it would need to be Warner Bros...

And have Star Trek fucked with CW shipping storylines? Over my dead body.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:50:24 PM
Arent Warner Bros selling DC comics or some shit? I recall a casual conversation with someone to the effect.

They're also really buddy-buddy with Lego, as evidenced by the 800 Lego/DC movies coming out every year.

(https://i.imgur.com/bDZJi4v.jpg)

In addition to that one that was nominated for an Oscar and made half a billion dollars.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:51:37 PM
I would kill for Lego Star Trek games. :tocry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 01:52:52 PM
I would kill for Lego Star Trek games. :tocry

The games are usually published by WB Interactive too, for the record.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 13, 2019, 01:56:09 PM
I would kill for a good Star Trek game period. :tocry A nice comfy single player game where you explore the stars :rejoice Whoever is running Star Trek's game division is a moron for not capitalizing on Mass Effect - it itself heavily inspired by Star Trek. A single player Star Trek rpg where you're an XO and then get promoted to captain, exploring the stars would be GODLIKE. Yeah, there's an MMO but fuck that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 13, 2019, 01:58:40 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwJN4wf9VqM

only one i ever liked
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 13, 2019, 02:26:22 PM
Isn't that VR Trek game where you basically just control the Command Deck supposedly pretty awesome?

Cause it sounds pretty awesome.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Dickie Dee on August 13, 2019, 02:54:51 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b0/Star_Trek_TNG_A_Final_Unity.jpg/220px-Star_Trek_TNG_A_Final_Unity.jpg)

 :aah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 13, 2019, 09:13:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbLWDbC1grE

:confused
another goddamn 30 minute youtube video
:nerds

Dude needs to be leashed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on August 14, 2019, 04:32:57 AM
Remember when Youtube videos were capped at 10 minutes and people didn't spend several minutes asking for money?
Short clips, straight to the point, no youtube personalities.
Ah yes, the glory days before youtube content was monetized.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 14, 2019, 04:40:22 AM
idk man, I'd rather have 1 hour movie reviews and character analysis videos by Aleczandxr than go back to 10 minute pewdiepie meme videos.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 14, 2019, 04:48:38 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LGK7i8XCis

thanks guys, now this dumbfuck is my recommends
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 14, 2019, 07:57:12 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LGK7i8XCis

thanks guys, now this dumbfuck is my recommends

Just delete bad items from your History. Same as keeping your pubes trimmed. We're not barbarians.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 14, 2019, 10:55:03 AM
idk man, I'd rather have 1 hour movie reviews and character analysis videos by Aleczandxr than go back to 10 minute pewdiepie meme videos.

17-part Mr. Plinkett Star Wars takedowns tho  :jeb
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 11:06:57 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LGK7i8XCis

thanks guys, now this dumbfuck is my recommends

 :expert

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub51H8yKi_I

The only long winded Star Trek video you need.  :ohyeah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 14, 2019, 11:21:52 AM
https://deadline.com/2019/08/star-trek-universe-cbs-viacom-merger-franchise-united-1202667413/

(https://i.imgur.com/sdtJ7rx.png)

:picard

Quote
As CBS All Access heads towards launching the much hyped Star Trek: Picard next year, the Trekverse may now be poised for an intensified expansion. Already in the pipeline are multiple animated series, more short films, and a Michelle Yeoh-led Discovery spinoff, and at Comic-Con International the Trek braintrust :brain was openly hinting about the possibilities of a Mr Spock series starring Ethan Peck (grandson of Gregory Peck).

:jeanluc

MOAR PREQUOLS!! :science

Some good news though:

Quote
The challenge will be creating a wider pantheon of recognizable characters that goes beyond the familiar core of Picard, Spock, Kirk, Dr. McCoy, Lt. Uhura, Lt. Commander Data, Lt. Commander Worf, and about a dozen others.

At least they acknowledge it...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 11:33:53 AM
Spock wouldn't work as a main character.  :maf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Especially not Discovery Spock Spork.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 14, 2019, 12:12:44 PM
Star Treks problem is the same problem cape movies had pre-MCU (and the problem all based on the vidya films and shows currently have); the people calling the shots know its popular, but don't really know why and think the whole thing is silly so they pick people who have the same outlook to come in and 'fix' the 'silly' and end up with something people not into the franchise don't like, because its still inherently pretty fucking silly, and people who bought in in the first place don't much like because the first thing 'fixed' is a major part of the charm.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 12:19:13 PM
Saw a video about Lower Decks animated Star Trek series centered around cadets/enlisted on a non important ship, was kind of excited until I found out it is basically done by Rick & Morty people.  :brain

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 14, 2019, 12:24:46 PM
Saw a video about Lower Decks animated Star Trek series centered around cadets/enlisted on a non important ship, was kind excited until I found out it is basically done by Rick & Morty people.  :brain



Can't wait for nerdlingers to lose their shit over Sha Ka Ri nugget sauce! :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on August 14, 2019, 12:29:30 PM
Saw a video about Lower Decks animated Star Trek series centered around cadets/enlisted on a non important ship, was kind excited until I found out it is basically done by Rick & Morty people.  :brain

Rick & morty is good shit tho
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 12:30:20 PM
 :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 14, 2019, 01:11:41 PM
Klingon Blood nugget sauce :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 01:14:35 PM
Yamok BBQ Sauce  :aah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2019, 01:20:46 PM
I SWEAR TO GOD.

I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT A PIKE SHOW.

I DO NOT GIVE AF UCK ABOUT A SPOCK SHOW.

I AM FUCKING SICK OF PREQUELS. I LOVE TOS BUT I. DO. NOT. CARE.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SPOCK AND HE IS DEAD. FUCK OFF.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 14, 2019, 01:24:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4fW0EInqw

Never forget!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2019, 01:31:32 PM
Watched the DS9 documentary, and am I alone in thinking it kinda sucked? I loved the whole S8 first episode pitch, and liked some of the ideas they had like reading bad reactions to DS9 and all that. But it felt a little to wanking themselves off to me, more so than most "we made this special thing" documentaries.

Completely agreed.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 14, 2019, 01:32:03 PM
What if instead of a lot of shitty Trek, they made one good Trek? :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2019, 01:35:00 PM
No let's milk it all to the bone.

Anyways, it's a good thing Trek is at one place again. That's the GOOD news.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 14, 2019, 01:56:55 PM
https://youtu.be/xeqTMTOxid8
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 14, 2019, 02:07:51 PM
What if instead of a lot of shitty Trek, they made one good Trek? :thinking

CBS exec reading this post: (https://i.imgur.com/rUmQLJf.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2019, 01:13:07 AM
I know I've been critical of TNG in the past,, but I really want to emphasize that although it's not imo the best Trek, it's actually probably my favorite. The past few months (the past year actually I watch random TNG episodes, like one a day. Life has been extraordinarily dark and TNG just gives a little light. It's the definition of television comfort food. Picard is pretty much my favorite captain at this point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 15, 2019, 01:15:02 AM
Its comfy af. I am changing my favorite Captain to Kirk though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2019, 01:15:52 AM
Its comfy af. I am changing my favorite Captain to Kirk though.

Is it because you wish you were a 60's go go dancer aboard his ship?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 15, 2019, 01:23:35 AM
Sorry Im on my phone lazy posting I meant TNG is comfy af. Kirk is my new favorite Captain now.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I do want to wear one of those skirts.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 15, 2019, 01:42:16 PM
Cardassians in DS9. :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2019, 06:48:40 PM
Cardassians in DS9. :rejoice

Cardassians in general :rejoice

There wasn’t a single bad Cardassians episode in TNG. If it wasn’t good it was at least decent. Between Chain of Command, Ensign Ro, The Wounded they were master class episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on August 15, 2019, 09:47:24 PM
There was that one obnoxious Cardassian on Voyager though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 15, 2019, 09:59:24 PM
Cardassians in DS9. :rejoice

Cardassians in general :rejoice

There wasn’t a single bad Cardassians episode in TNG. If it wasn’t good it was at least decent. Between Chain of Command, Ensign Ro, The Wounded they were master class episodes.

THERE
ARE
FOUR
LIGHTS
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on August 15, 2019, 10:00:55 PM
Damar best Cardassian bro :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 15, 2019, 10:15:19 PM
There was that one obnoxious Cardassian on Voyager though

Voyager ruins everything.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 16, 2019, 12:09:37 PM
I remembered them having hokey designs at first but...

(https://i2.wp.com/www.tor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/thewounded2.jpg?resize=475%2C363&type=vertical)

(http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f331/planetshannon/Sourced%20Elsewhere/STTNG412TheWounded33.jpg)

 :rofl




Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on August 16, 2019, 12:45:22 PM
I think Gul Dukat played a different cardassian on TNG right?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 16, 2019, 01:12:17 PM
I think Gul Dukat played a different cardassian on TNG right?

First Cardassian, Gul Macet in season 4.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 16, 2019, 03:18:17 PM
Rewatched All Good Things. Third or maybe fourth time ever seeing it. It didn't click in past viewings but I really liked it this time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 17, 2019, 01:46:54 PM
Rewatched Galileo Seven. Jesus Christ, I can't stand this episode. So many officers questioning Spock. Placing their petty human reasoning above all else and treating human values as the best and most important. You're stranded on a planet, you need to fix a shuttle or you all die and you demand to take manpower, resources, and time away for a fucking funeral? Red shirts die all the time on TOS. Why in the fuck would anyone unprofessionally endanger the mission and question the commanding officer (Spock) for a funeral in a life or death situation? The constant questioning of Spock's orders, the condescending racism of treating Spock's Vulcan values as lesser than, the emotional outbursts, wanting to kill sentient life forms on an unknown planet (even the senior medical officer) and having a problem when Spock chooses non-violence instead. Then there's the premise of the episode in general. Why the fuck would Kirk send out a shuttle in that bag of shit anyways? What the fuck. The episode sucks regurgitated Saurian ale. This episode is beneath Star Trek is and is utter drek. I've watched it before and I do not plan on watching it ever again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 18, 2019, 10:19:50 PM
This is why Cindi isn't Captain, despite years in the service of the Federation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 18, 2019, 11:27:09 PM
what does that mean??
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 12:03:35 AM
Watched Star Trek Insurrection. Haven't seen it since it came out.

I really liked it. Felt like another TNG episode. Helps a lot that some of my favorite episodes are first contact episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 04:30:13 AM
I really like this movie and think it’s better than First Contact.

https://www.tor.com/2013/04/16/star-trek-insurrection/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 06:32:35 AM
Insurrections pretty bad though  :-\

Also, if you can stomach a wesley episode, rewatch Journey's End which has basically the same plot, except Picard has literally the opposite stance on it, although insureection was made however many years into voyager and captain-hypocrisy so they'd stopped caring by then I guess about consistency
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 06:43:47 AM
Also I just finished up The Orville season 2, and as star trek knock-offy as it is, its still more enjoyable than Discovery :stahp

Its just rubbing salt in the wound to have episodes directed by Riker, and cameos by EMH, Troi, Tuvok and Dr Phlox
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 19, 2019, 09:06:21 AM
The only good Wesley episode is The First Duty.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 19, 2019, 09:13:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vjrIj5fEX0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 19, 2019, 09:21:00 AM
Title + thumbnail and I'm already rolling
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 19, 2019, 09:21:22 AM
:ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 19, 2019, 10:44:12 AM
Watched The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock on Amazon Prime this weekend. Both movies are flawed, but kinda cool in their own way. Also TSFP is the only time a middle-aged William Shatner beating up Doc Brown could ever count as an action scene.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 02:17:28 PM
Insurrections pretty bad though  :-\


Insurrection isn't bad at all and I've already seen that episode. I also happen to like that episode. Like I said, I love off world episodes. Especially ones with philosophical and ethical quandaries. That just happens to be the kind of Trek I like. Who Watches the Watchers is a top 5 Trek episode for me. Darmok imo is the best Trek episode of all time. So...

Not sure how a Star Trek fan can say Insurrection is bad. It has awkward pacing but it's full on Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 02:23:49 PM
Section 31 is kind of stretching how assholish earthgov the federation can get while still being the federation, teaming up with mustache twirling pantomime villain F. Muray Abraham to steal a planets immortality potion is borderline an Asterix plot

:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 02:24:59 PM
Section 31 is kind of stretching how assholish earthgov the federation can get while still being the federation, teaming up with mustache twirling pantomime villain F. Muray Abraham to steal a planets immortality potion is borderline an Asterix plot

Is this even a sentence or is it a fragment?

And while theft, they're also right in that it could help with medical tech. They're not even going to kill them. They're just going to relocate. Federation just has a greater good argument. I see no difference between the predicament in Insurrection and the ones in other TNG off world episodes ranging from Ensign Ro, Who Watches the Watchers, Darmok, Pre-Emptive Attack, or The Ensign of Command. Its flaw is that it's a TNG episode stretched to 2 hours which results in flawed pacing. But the overall story beats are good.

It's much better than First Contact imo, which is just a generic action/revenge movie for the most part.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 02:35:18 PM
Watched The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock on Amazon Prime this weekend. Both movies are flawed, but kinda cool in their own way. Also TSFP is the only time a middle-aged William Shatner beating up Doc Brown could ever count as an action scene.

I really like The Search for Spock.

Also I need order the Directors Edition of Motion Picture on dvd. I hear it's much better than regular TMP.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 02:38:37 PM
Star Fleet are somewhat unique in scifi as being idealistic and utopian; even where they're doing shady shit (eg Section 31) theres plausible deniability, and the implication is that most federation citizens would lose their shit if they ever found out about it as a complete betrayal of everything they stand for.

F Murray Abraham - apart from being fucking great in general - is a proper cartoon super villain in Insurrection. Like, you could take that character and have him ranting at Captain Planet, or working for Cobra Commander without skipping a beat. It's not subtle because it's not meant to be subtle. He's A Bad Guy. It's pretty clear to the audience right up front.

So hinging the entire plot on the federations willingness to team up with A Bad Guy to displace a settlement and steal their resources, isn't exactly a moral dilemma, like many of the episodes dealing with the nuance of things like the Prime Directive in theory versus testing those ideal in practice do. They're working with the Bad Guy. They're complicit in what the Bad Guy does.

e: I mean, I don't much like First Contact either :trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 19, 2019, 02:39:06 PM
Director's Cut is the only way to go on TMP.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 19, 2019, 02:45:47 PM
Watched The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock on Amazon Prime this weekend. Both movies are flawed, but kinda cool in their own way. Also TSFP is the only time a middle-aged William Shatner beating up Doc Brown could ever count as an action scene.

I really like The Search for Spock.

Also I need order the Directors Edition of Motion Picture on dvd. I hear it's much better than regular TMP.

The DC touched up some of the special effects and shortened some of the effects scenes that were needlessly long, really helps the movie flow better.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 02:45:50 PM
Star Fleet are somewhat unique in scifi as being idealistic and utopian; even where they're doing shady shit (eg Section 31) theres plausible deniability, and the implication is that most federation citizens would lose their shit if they ever found out about it as a complete betrayal of everything they stand for.

F Murray Abraham - apart from being fucking great in general - is a proper cartoon super villain in Insurrection. Like, you could take that character and have him ranting at Captain Planet, or working for Cobra Commander without skipping a beat. It's not subtle because it's not meant to be subtle. He's A Bad Guy. It's pretty clear to the audience right up front.

So hinging the entire plot on the federations willingness to team up with A Bad Guy to displace a settlement and steal their resources, isn't exactly a moral dilemma, like many of the episodes dealing with the nuance of things like the Prime Directive in theory versus testing those ideal in practice do. They're working with the Bad Guy. They're complicit in what the Bad Guy does.

e: I mean, I don't much like First Contact either :trumps

I don't really care if the bad guy isn't terribly good. That's not the point to me. The point imo is standing up for Federation ideals. Federation regularly makes bad calls such as the entire thing with the Macquis. And Picard is on Starfleet's side there. Whether you disagree with that or not (I happen to disagree) I still personally find it riveting storytelling. And yes, it's an ethical question. Whether the bad guys are wrong doesn't change that it's an ethical question.

https://youtu.be/_cXBy1SbPgk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 19, 2019, 02:51:32 PM
Yeah, I wish TMP Director's Cut was on Blu-Ray, but apparently they only prepared the updated SFX for 480p and Paramount hasn't wanted to cough up the dough to create a 4K remaster yet. It was mentioned at Comic-Con that they've been toying with the idea for the 40th Anniversary (this year), but so far they haven't started on it.

https://trekmovie.com/2019/07/19/paramount-considering-4k-star-trek-the-motion-picture-directors-edition/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 02:52:20 PM
The only good Wesley episode is The First Duty.

Journey's End is good. Not because of the Wesley stuff but how you get to see Picard maneuver and handle something akin to a proto-Macquis. Picard's interactions with Macquis in Pre-Emptive Strike is fascinating.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 02:56:12 PM
I mean, that clip in a nutshell is the big flaw, and why its not really an ethical dilemma: starfleet man just goes "oh, yeah, well it would conflict with the prime directive, but that doesn't count because they weren't born there".

The Prime Directive is about not fucking about with another culture. Definitely not because they have assets you fancy grabbing and want to rationalise it. Definitely definitely definitely not pre-warp cultures.
Their plan is a straight up violation, in both 'spirit' and 'letter' of the law, and Picard is 100% in the right to call it out as such.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 03:01:08 PM
I mean, that clip in a nutshell is the big flaw, and why its not really an ethical dilemma: starfleet man just goes "oh, yeah, well it would conflict with the prime directive, but that doesn't count because they weren't born there".

The Prime Directive is about not fucking about with another culture. Definitely not because they have assets you fancy grabbing and want to rationalise it. Definitely definitely definitely not pre-warp cultures.
Their plan is a straight up violation, in both 'spirit' and 'letter' of the law, and Picard is 100% in the right to call it out as such.

Have you seen Insurrection?

They make it a point that the people aren't pre-warp. They're warp capable and have chosen to strip their culture of technology. They're basically Space Amish people.

The reasoning is two fold:

1. They are not pre-warp.
2. They weren't even born there. They settled that land.

It's not a Prime Directive question then, and the Federation is correct in that.

Why are you bringing up pre-warp societies in this? It's not related to this species.

And so what if it's a violation? If there weren't tension there'd be no story. And let's be real, Starfleet have done this numerous times. I personally don't object to stories that place Starfleet in the ethical wrong. Nor do I see why or how that makes a story bad or else I'd also have to hate In The Pale Moonlight. Your argument is very flimsy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 03:19:29 PM
yeah, I've seen it, but when it came out, and I thought them being space amish was like a mid-film reveal, not something everyone knew from the start - and even then "oh, but its fine they weren't born there" is some rationalising fuckery for stealing their shit.

Like I say, Section 31 is about where I draw the line for subverting the expectations of the Federation as being Lawful Good - In the Pale Moonlight is a great episode, but again, its contained to a few people acting mostly independently, who know its wrong, and are under duress in a time of war.

If the plot for insurrection was like... they're space amish and its their religion to not use teleports or spaceships, but the whole planets about to explode and they'll all die... that's an ethical conundrum about respecting the wishes of another culture versus the death of a species, including members of which are too young to make that decision for themselves. Do you just watch people die knowing you can help, or do you overrule their beliefs to save their lives?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 03:26:04 PM

e: I mean, I don't much like First Contact either :trumps

I like First Contact a lot. I just like Insurrection more. It's more Trek-like.

I don't see the problem tbh. We see Geordi's optic nerve heal itself and him witness his first sunrise. Even with their 24th century tech they couldn't heal Geordi's eye condition. That's why it's an ethical quandary. They legitimately have tech that is beyond even the Federation's that could serve to help advance medical tech. You can see how tempting that is and the Federation is right in that it'd be useful. Even Picard says he can see the allure. But Picard is right in that it's wrong to relocate an entire people, no matter the number.

That's why it's an ethical battle. They both have good points.

"In the Pale Moonlight is a great episode, but again, its contained to a few people acting mostly independently, who know its wrong, and are under duress in a time of war."

Insurrection also happens during the Dominion War. We're talking about the same Federation that used Odo to send a disease to the shapeshifters. :yeshrug

Remember in DS9 when a few admirals were complicit in trying to start a coup or something? I really don't see the problem here. Federation gets their hands dirty when they can. :idont

I have no idea how you can critique Insurrection for this and even be able to stomach watching DS9 which paints the Federation in a bad light on more than one occasion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VhSm6G7cVk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5J_qn93Nkc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 03:44:50 PM
We're talking about the same Federation that used Odo to send a disease to the shapeshifters. :yeshrug

Yeah, but that's Section 31, and when people find out about it they're fucking appalled by it - its why... Sloane, is it? gives his big speech to Bashir that he knows he's a monster doing terrible things, but he does it in secret so the rest of the Federation can live up to their own ideals.
I can buy into that as a realpolitik extension of federation ideals of 'playing fair' when most of the rest of the universe don't, and you've got things like romulan fuckery going all the way back to TOS.
It's just a step too far to me to have actual Federation going "Oh, hey, this planet has space oil, and we're teaming up with space-Halliburton to relocate them all when they're asleep. It's fine, we ran it through the lawyers and theres a loophole, because they weren't actually born there. We still cool though, right jean-luc?".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 03:44:50 PM
I mean...

GALLATIN: They're following the kelbonite deposits. Using the interference to block our transporters.

RU'AFO: Recommendations?

DOUGHERTY: Take me down. Let me talk to Picard.

RU'AFO: Talk! We should send down an assault team and take them by force.

DOUGHERTY: That is not an acceptable option. If people get hurt, all the support we have in the Federation...

RU'AFO: Federation support, Federation procedures, Federation rules. ...Look in the mirror, Admiral. The Federation is old. In the past twenty-four months, they've been challenged by every major power in the Quadrant. The Borg, the Cardassians, the Dominion. They all smell the scent of death on the Federation. That's why you've embraced our offer, because it will give your dear Federation new life. Well, how badly do you want it, Admiral? Because there are hard choices to be made. Now! If the Enterprise gets through with news about their brave Captain's valiant struggle on behalf of the defenceless Ba'ku, your Federation politicians will waver, your Federation opinion polls will open a public debate, your Federation allies will want their say. ...Need I go on?

(https://i.imgur.com/x8O70e4.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 03:45:25 PM
We're talking about the same Federation that used Odo to send a disease to the shapeshifters. :yeshrug

Yeah, but that's Section 31, and when people find out about it they're fucking appalled by it - its why... Sloane, is it? gives his big speech to Bashir that he knows he's a monster doing terrible things, but he does it in secret so the rest of the Federation can live up to their own ideals.
I can buy into that as a realpolitik extension of federation ideals of 'playing fair' when most of the rest of the universe don't, and you've got things like romulan fuckery going all the way back to TOS.
It's just a step too far to me to have actual Federation going "Oh, hey, this planet has space oil, and we're teaming up with space-Halliburton to relocate them all when they're asleep. It's fine, we ran it through the lawyers and theres a loophole, because they weren't actually born there. We still cool though, right jean-luc?".

"But that's Section 31" :lol

Which the FEDERATION allows to exist.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 19, 2019, 03:46:57 PM
yeah, thats like, 10 seconds away from a "We're not so different, you and I..." monologue.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on August 19, 2019, 05:48:35 PM
First Contact is awful, because it ruins the Borg by giving them a queen, which is idiotic.
The borg are a collective organism with collective intelligence. It makes no sense for them to have a leader.
"Moviegoers are dumb, they need a bad guy (or gal)."
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 19, 2019, 07:58:44 PM
Having a local leader/coordinator (there are multiple Borg Queens) for a hive makes sense and is rooted in nature.

It may be a disagreeable narrative decision, but I wouldn't say it completely clashes with the Borg concept as we knew it pre-First Contact.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 08:20:12 PM
How does a hive mind/collective having a leader go against a collective? Have you ever heard of bees or ants? The Borg we often see even act just like worker ants/bees
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 19, 2019, 10:02:42 PM
half of First Contact's greatness is the stuff that happens on the planet at the same time, it's fucking brilliant movie making
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 19, 2019, 10:08:29 PM
Rewatched Galileo Seven.
Watched Star Trek Insurrection. Haven't seen it since it came out.

I really liked it. Felt like another TNG episode. Helps a lot that some of my favorite episodes are first contact episodes.
Some things you might want to check out:
1. IDW comics Star Trek - Volume 1 (issues #3-4) - A re-imagining of "The Galileo Seven" in the AbramsTrek universe that I thought was decently good, actually many of the reimaginings of TOS episodes they did for this comic I enjoyed. Same TPB has "Where No Man Has Gone Before" which I really quite liked.

2. Fade In: The Making of Star Trek Insurrection by Michael Piller (never published book, after he died his wife made it available in PDF online, if you can't find it I can post it for The Bire), the film started as something quite different and much more explicitly a Star Trek Apocalypse Now before the studio essentially rewrote it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 11:07:39 PM
half of First Contact's greatness is the stuff that happens on the planet at the same time, it's fucking brilliant movie making

I love all that stuff.

Troi really shines in that bar.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 19, 2019, 11:18:39 PM
Alsooooo are the IDW trek comics good?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 19, 2019, 11:24:29 PM
I've read quite a lot of them and I'd say that the TNG stuff is kinda lame, the stuff tied in with the Abrams films in terms of actual plot (Countdown, Nero, Khan, Countdown to Darkness, etc.) is some quality "oh god how do I possibly tie this into continuity" from the writers handed a pile of shit but otherwise lame, and the ongoing series that had sixty some issues and just takes the AbramsTrek crew and does adventures with it is actually enjoyable and pretty good like Beyond is. Because really it's just more TOS adventures similar to when DC used to do a series, like then they do a lot of three-four issue arcs.

Nothing amazing but if you want to just read some Trek comics it does pretty well. Though later on they do get a bit nutty like have Q show up.

One guy wrote pretty much the entire run except for a couple issues so the characterization and stuff stays consistent.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 20, 2019, 01:46:37 AM
Having a local leader/coordinator (there are multiple Borg Queens) for a hive makes sense and is rooted in nature.

It may be a disagreeable narrative decision, but I wouldn't say it completely clashes with the Borg concept as we knew it pre-First Contact.

I respectfully disagree. The Borg felt relentless and unknowable, the intelligence behind it beyond an individual, like arguing with an ocean. This is sophomoric connect-the-dots bullshit of some pleb in the writer's room saying, "Waitaminnit, 'hive' mind? Like a bee? They have a queen!" Putting out a Borg girlfriend for Picard is lame.

If they wanted a retcon for having singular voices, tie it into the Locutus-of-Borg storyline, and explain that these are additional evolutionary attempts to integrate a species elements into The Collective. But instead they just took the cheaper route.

I adore Alice Krige as an actor, and I loved the character design, it's just not what I wanted from a Borg story.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on August 20, 2019, 05:11:21 AM
Someone gets it. :)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2019, 08:46:20 AM
I don’t know about unknowable. Relentless, yes. Unknowable, no. Hugh taught them a lot about the Borg for instance. And it makes sense you’d learn more about the Borg in time. Just like how Klingon culture slowly evolved as Star Trek continued. What, are they are they going to defeat a faceless enemy? Where’s the chase? Where’s the thrill? Did you think the Federation would never be able to defeat the Borg? That they’d be outclassed forever? Where’s a Borg storyline going to go? The Borg don’t even talk in TNG beyond “resistance is futile”. How can you craft an actual storyline of Federation vs Borg and make it compelling if they don’t have a face? Make them like zombies?

Borg Queen is a reasonable compromise of making them still a relentless collective but with a leader in each individual ship.

Borg not making sense and being daunting/unknowable at first is compelling in the start. But how can you keep that up? Even the Zentraudi in Macross have a face, culture, and organization. And they’re just as ruthless. Cylons in BSG also have a face, views, ideals. The Borg without a Queen is just a cube of collective drones. Pretty boring after a while. Also very predictable, which Borg had become by the time TNG even ended.

Respectfully disagree.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2019, 09:07:30 AM
One of my favorite all time sci-fi reveals is the Zentradi in Macross. Get your shit rekt by a fleet of ships and mechs. Your entire world is destroyed. You’re the last ship alive out there fighting to survive. You manage to take down a ship and you see the corpse inside it. Turns out you’re fighting a giant human race.

Master class shit.

God I need to rewatch SDF.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on August 20, 2019, 10:44:16 AM
I don't agree with this at all. The Borg are completely unlike insect drones. They have a collective mind that can use its individual biological components like drones, but each individual part adds to the collective consciousness.

Having an imperfect, narrow minded and flawed individual with personal ambitions acting as queen is idiotic and makes no sense. A collective striving for perfection would get rid of this flaw instantly.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2019, 10:53:27 AM
I don't agree with this at all. The Borg are completely unlike insect drones. They have a collective mind that can use its individual biological components like drones, but each individual part adds to the collective consciousness.

Having an imperfect, narrow minded and flawed individual with personal ambition acting as queen is idiotic and makes no sense. A collective striving for perfection would get rid of this flaw instantly.

Okay. How do you expand Borg stories post-TNG then? Borg were already kind of played out by the time Lore were dealing with them. How does a collective, who have no real face,  no voice, who only chase enemies in a giant cube going to continue lend to good stories? Like I said, that type of enemy has a limited nature. It works for a while but how can they keep things going? The whole "we're outgunned and being chased by an unknown foe" works only a few times before eventually gets boring.

I don't see how it ruins the Borg. Janewaye nerfing them certainly did though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2019, 11:00:14 AM
A collective striving for perfection wouldn't necessarily go around the galaxy in giant cubes or assimilating anyone, either. What "perfect" is and how to attain it is up to interpretation. Maybe there's a technological reason a billion Borg can't network together without a queen or separate intelligence -- space DDOS, basically.

In the end it's all fiction. The rules are by definition made up.

Is it a good narrative decision? That can be the debate.

Quote
is idiotic and makes no sense

Because the Borg never acted idiotically or did things that appeared to make no sense?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 20, 2019, 11:05:28 AM
Alien Vs Predator Vs Borg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2019, 11:06:42 AM
Also fun fact until about ~5 years ago I was 100% convinced the Borg Queen was played in all appearances by Tilda Swinton.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 20, 2019, 01:04:10 PM
Janeway is such an awful captain.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 20, 2019, 03:42:27 PM
I used to hate Archer as much if not more than Janeway, but I came around on him. Janeway? Nevah.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on August 20, 2019, 03:50:01 PM
Captain Janeway :nope

Admiral Janeway :jeb

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF74RbqXr-U
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2019, 04:12:29 PM
Archer is just a good ol' Texan who is actually a New Yorker <3
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 20, 2019, 04:13:48 PM
Janeway is such an awful captain.

I WILL NEVER FORGET TUVIX

justice 4 tuvix NOW

Alien Vs Predator Vs Borg

I...would see this. How can we make this happen? :obama

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 20, 2019, 04:38:53 PM
https://m.bradfordexchange.com/products/917892_star-trek-character-sculpture-collection.html

 :uguu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 20, 2019, 04:56:49 PM
Admiral Janeway :jeb

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Ensign Harry Kim
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 20, 2019, 05:21:54 PM
Alien Vs Predator Vs Borg

I...would see this. How can we make this happen? :obama

Lobby Netherealm to start including Star Trek guest characters :jeb
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 20, 2019, 08:03:01 PM
I never watched Voyager from the start, only caught a few episodes here and there, so I’ve been doing a full watch-through of it and am midway through season 4.  I’d already seen Threshold prior to this and figured that was the nadir of the show, but there have been so many bad moments beyond that already.

Janeway is the anti-Picard.  She’s so awful at promoting the core values of Starfleet that of course they would make her an admiral.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 20, 2019, 11:25:48 PM
obligatory: Janeway 👏 is 👏 the 👏 villain 👏
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 21, 2019, 06:36:44 PM
Okay, just watched the one where a hirogen and species super-8 are on the ship, and to save the ship Seven disobeys Janeways orders, and then takes a massive verbal-shit on Janeway about it.  I wasn’t too keen about Seven at first, but she’s starting to grow on me.

Now I can’t wait for the show to later nonsensically turn things around and make it out as Janeway somehow being in the right there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on August 21, 2019, 10:02:07 PM
Okay, just watched the one where a hirogen and species super-8 are on the ship, and to save the ship Seven disobeys Janeways orders, and then takes a massive verbal-shit on Janeway about it.  I wasn’t too keen about Seven at first, but she’s starting to grow on me.

Now I can’t wait for the show to later nonsensically turn things around and make it out as Janeway somehow being in the right there.

Don't you DARE make me interested in Voyager! It's the one Trek series I've nearly entirely evaded.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on August 21, 2019, 11:20:35 PM
SEVEN :jeb

Mulgrew HATED Jeri Ryan because she took over her show and got into tight outfits.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 22, 2019, 04:32:42 PM
they made up at a convention, Mulgrew admitted she "was a bitch about some stuff" :lol

Star Trek Family :heart
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 23, 2019, 12:13:19 AM
I don’t want my moms to fight.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 23, 2019, 03:27:22 AM
The thing that annoys me is Mulgrew is a really good actor, I feel like she would portray an excellent starfleet captain probably the equal of Kirk/Picard/Sisko, if only the writing of the character was there.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on August 23, 2019, 04:07:59 AM
https://youtu.be/S-S4JpRkvUE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 23, 2019, 04:16:00 AM
Oh shit!  Captain Geordi!

(https://i.redd.it/pwkxr1kfovl11.jpg)

Levar Burton is so much better than this show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on August 23, 2019, 06:36:56 AM
Voyager did pretty much go off the rails with 7 though, where basically every plot was about 7, and she was the cause of or solution to the Problem Of The Week
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 23, 2019, 09:19:36 AM
The thing that annoys me is Mulgrew is a really good actor
She's amazing in NTSF:SD:SUV.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh5e5jCducM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbCWYm7B_B4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpdzwl0a2ds
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on August 23, 2019, 09:30:31 AM
She was absolutely, 100% perfect as Red in OITNB.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on August 23, 2019, 09:42:07 AM
Yeah, but how great was she in UDSFK:JLK-SDJT?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on August 27, 2019, 04:19:27 AM
https://twitter.com/WilliamShatner/status/1165806163872624646

 :whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 27, 2019, 06:34:27 PM
Ah, I was wondering if Jeffrey Combs would show up in Voyager, or if even he smelled it’s taint all the way back in Deep Space Nine and refused.

Edit: And now The Rock shows up, this is wild.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 27, 2019, 10:10:07 PM
the promo for that episode is one of the best considering what actually happens in it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzFCBZCv85E
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 27, 2019, 10:10:40 PM
VOYAGER'S BATTLESTAR BABE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on August 29, 2019, 07:25:16 PM
Damn, I just realized the Borg Queen is being played by the same actor that plays Moira Queen in Arrow.  Even with all that necrotic flesh and metal embedded in her skin, she’s still fine as hell.  She can assimilate me anytime.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on August 31, 2019, 11:49:45 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/7EYvN7r.jpg)

 :brazilcry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on September 01, 2019, 12:21:54 AM
Then it turned into a threeway. :jared
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on September 13, 2019, 03:56:56 AM
Finished Voyager.  Been stupid busy lately and am still collecting my thoughts on the show overall, but for now I’ll just say that I have some opinions about this show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on September 13, 2019, 06:47:51 AM
Finished Voyager.  Been stupid busy lately and am still collecting my thoughts on the show overall, but for now I’ll just say that I have some opinions about this show.
if they are positive keep them to yourself!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on September 22, 2019, 02:40:07 AM
Aron Eisenberg, who played Nog in Deep Space Nine, passed away. :tocry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on September 22, 2019, 02:58:15 AM
oh no, that's awful. rip :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on September 22, 2019, 03:05:03 AM
He only ever had one kidney, it failed a few years back, and I assume it did again but it was too much this time.

Considering his role on the show it's kinda surprising when you realize he was 50!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on September 22, 2019, 03:31:35 AM
Aron Eisenberg, who played Nog in Deep Space Nine, passed away. :tocry

That's a really unfortunate character name.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on September 22, 2019, 04:49:20 AM
rip nog :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on September 22, 2019, 10:40:22 AM
all that yamok sauce
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on September 29, 2019, 02:19:25 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KhCSD6s.jpg)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/pXkj5Vn.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on October 02, 2019, 03:43:11 PM
shaka, when the walls fell
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on October 03, 2019, 02:06:08 AM
penis, when the seven appeared
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on October 03, 2019, 03:22:57 PM
voyager, when ensign kim never got promoted
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 04, 2019, 02:12:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KhCSD6s.jpg)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/pXkj5Vn.jpg)
[close]
Hahahahaah holy fuck
darmok and tamal live at tanegra

 :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Also I hated that episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 04, 2019, 02:13:28 PM
Chakotay, when the eagle flew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on October 05, 2019, 03:25:18 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FySrgrKJguE

spoiler (click to show/hide)
CW presents not Star Trek. :neogaf
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on October 05, 2019, 03:27:27 PM
video not available :lol  what year is this
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on October 05, 2019, 03:28:17 PM
Must be a leaf thing works in freedomland.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on October 05, 2019, 04:46:53 PM
Doesn't look awful, but I can't help being reminded of this:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6VEnT11mTnI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on October 05, 2019, 05:15:37 PM
The Scotty gag is a big childhood favorite of mine. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 06, 2019, 06:42:54 AM
Its fucking garbage reminds me more of star wars than trek

no surprise there
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 06, 2019, 12:11:46 PM
the promo for that episode is one of the best considering what actually happens in it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzFCBZCv85E

This video contains content from CBS CID, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.

 :lol

All Star Trek shows are on Netflix here CBS..
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on October 06, 2019, 01:31:23 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/7EYvN7r.jpg)

 :brazilcry
Goddamn I just now realized what that picture was showing.  Lol that’s fucking dark, that could almost fall under bad vibes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on October 22, 2019, 10:15:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on October 22, 2019, 10:27:26 AM
breh picard is rolling in his grave
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on October 22, 2019, 12:32:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rfqAkUXKT5Y/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on October 22, 2019, 01:26:14 PM
Man, STD really is trash.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on October 22, 2019, 10:32:49 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rfqAkUXKT5Y/maxresdefault.jpg)

I don't get it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on October 23, 2019, 02:34:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0

is this one of the STD short that people outside of murica don't get to watch until the next season and CBS remembers them and dumps them all on netflix undeer the trailers category?

Why is Archer slumming it?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on November 12, 2019, 11:48:47 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjckbAqUwT0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on November 12, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
...but steels heavier than feathers?

(https://i.imgur.com/kGKYLWK.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 12, 2019, 12:26:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rfqAkUXKT5Y/maxresdefault.jpg)

I don't get it.
he's fucking white
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Sideshow Raheem on November 12, 2019, 01:01:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnlxugk3Qb0

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rfqAkUXKT5Y/maxresdefault.jpg)

I don't get it.

It seems like a bad comedy routine. The guy in it is the guy from Bob's Burgers, an animated show that's endearing without being funny.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on November 13, 2019, 12:05:10 PM
...but steels heavier than feathers?

(https://i.imgur.com/kGKYLWK.png)

we need some limmy emotes please
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on November 26, 2019, 03:42:52 AM
https://deadline.com/2019/11/star-trek-noah-hawley-directing-writing-sequel-jj-abrams-chris-pine-paramount-1202785280/
Quote
Paramount Pictures is in final talks with Noah Hawley to write and direct a Star Trek film. Through his 26 Keys production banner he will produce along with JJ Abrams and his Bad Robot banner. I don’t have too much more to report on the film, but my understanding is Hawley will helm the fourth film in this iteration of the venerable franchise, with the Enterprise crew led by Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg and Karl Urban.

In addition to his groundbreaking series Legion, Hawley serves as executive producer, writer, director and showrunner on FX’s Emmy-winning limited series Fargo.
Quote
The studio separately is working on a Star Trek spinoff that Quentin Tarantino is eyeing to direct and has been working on with Abrams. This one would likely carry an R rating, with a screenplay by The Revenant scribe Mark L. Smith.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on November 26, 2019, 09:39:54 AM
DCEU levels of mismanagement, splintering, rushed productions and franchise overexposure incoming.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Damn I'm bitter and jaded. :goty
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on November 26, 2019, 03:00:51 PM
I'd actually really like a noah hawley star trek tbh. Legion and Fargo are both way more cerebral than they ever needed to be.
It'd be more likely to have, you know, character driven drama and reflections on why they're doing what they're doing.

And less, you know, gun fu with phasers while beastie boys sabotage plays in the background.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on November 26, 2019, 04:25:07 PM
It's from a webisode, not the main TV series.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 26, 2019, 05:46:49 PM
Trek - the milk frontier
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on November 26, 2019, 05:47:42 PM
It's from a webisode, not the main TV series.

Doesn't matter
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on November 28, 2019, 05:53:57 PM
It's from a webisode, not the main TV series.

Its canon now  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on November 28, 2019, 11:49:53 PM
 :picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 01, 2019, 06:56:29 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMIVezLiUyk

Quote
On November 19th, Variety confirmed that Star Trek 4 is back in development, under the helm of writer/director Noah Hawley. However, this is but the most recent of several different iterations of Star Trek 4, a movie which was first announced more than three years ago. Could it actually move forward and happen this time, or are there still hurdles to overcome?

As you are about to find out, there are.

In this video, we will first look back at the earlier iterations of the proposed 4th Kelvin Star Trek movie, and why none of them made it to the big screen. Then we’ll see how Noah Hawley’s Star Trek 4 has to overcome the very same hurdles that sunk those, and how the imminent re-merger between Viacom and CBS plays into all of this.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 03, 2019, 08:59:09 PM
https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/12/03/star-trek-writer-d-c-fontana-passes-away-at-80/

:fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on December 08, 2019, 08:44:04 PM
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1203809715232346114
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1203818292214931456

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Env5DPtZylo

 :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 08, 2019, 08:49:53 PM
oh no :( rip
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on December 08, 2019, 08:50:13 PM
Sad, he was great.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 08, 2019, 09:10:43 PM
Nooo :stahp

Rip

One of the GOAT Trek characters and actors
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 08, 2019, 10:15:04 PM
https://www.twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/1203809287958671366
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 09, 2019, 01:16:33 AM
Holy shit. Marina Sirtis' husband died in his sleep.

Death all around Trek right now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 09, 2019, 04:02:16 AM
Rip Constable
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 09, 2019, 08:10:25 AM
 :fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 09, 2019, 09:33:49 AM
Damn
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 10, 2019, 09:05:19 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/e053u3/you_pointy_eared_devil/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/e053u3/you_pointy_eared_devil/)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on December 10, 2019, 10:30:12 AM
From reddit:
https://ve.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_puxhiaJG6B1t051e2.mp4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 10, 2019, 03:59:42 PM
Oh boy, Voyager is so terribly flaccid.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on December 10, 2019, 04:06:35 PM
Voyager's only interesting character is the doctor.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 10, 2019, 04:23:06 PM
cause the doctor is the only one to get any real, logical development. neelix got a few random tidbits, seven had stop/start things and a random and pointless relationship, but most of the others were relatively static.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 10, 2019, 05:12:48 PM
Tom and Blanda episodes

zzzzzz

Actually I like the one where Tom trades for that ship and wants to turn it into another Runabout and gets brainwashwd by the AI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 10, 2019, 05:37:29 PM
Voyager's only interesting character is the doctor.

No lie, he's even somehow making that terrible Beowulf holodreck episode enjoyable.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 10, 2019, 05:59:14 PM
the doctors always end up being interested though. bones, pulaski, bashir, emh, and phlox were all great.

crusher :nope
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 10, 2019, 06:30:29 PM
Maybe TNG’s “Sub Rosa” was the price we all had to pay for a future of great doctors in trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 11, 2019, 03:48:30 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/dq74y8/select_all_five_lights/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/dq74y8/select_all_five_lights/)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2019, 05:51:45 AM
Belianna the worst Klingon ever made.

Vok from Disco is better.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 11, 2019, 08:54:27 AM
the only klingon thing about her is that she's vaguely pissed about something all the time :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 11, 2019, 09:08:11 AM
the only klingon thing about her is that she's vaguely pissed about something all the time :lol

Whats the difference with a human woman then?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on December 11, 2019, 09:46:28 AM
Vaguely being something accurately sums up most of Voyager's characters, which apart from their total lack of character-development is why they are all so fondly remembered. B'ellana is vaguely Klingon, Chakotay is vaguely native American, Tom Paris is vaguely delinquent, Neelix is vaguely annoying, Harry Kim is vaguely boring. If I had to sum up Voyager in a single word, it would be "bland".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 11, 2019, 11:05:35 AM
Tuvok is EXTREMELY Vulcan. Not vague at all. Guy is among the shows best characters and one of my favorite Vulcans.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on December 11, 2019, 01:04:34 PM
You are right, Tuvok doesn't belong on that list, I'll edit my post.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 11, 2019, 01:50:35 PM
One thing you can’t deny about Voyager, though, is that it brought out one of the most villainous characters in Trek history.

Gul Dukat looked at Janeway’s actions and was all, “Damn.”   :jeanluc

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I legitimately loved Brad Dourifs character, we don’t get to see that aspect of broken humanity often in the Trek universe.  Shame it was on Voyager and not DS9, where they probably could’ve made his story flourish even more.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 11, 2019, 02:09:16 PM
Tuvok is a good guy I like him
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on December 11, 2019, 02:32:12 PM
eh has pon farr and doesn't afraid of anything
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 11, 2019, 02:36:58 PM
remember when paris had to make vr porn of tuvok's wife so he could bang out in the holodeck? :lol

iirc that's also the episode where the doctor tries to lez out in seven's body
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 11, 2019, 02:43:53 PM
Should’ve commissioned Barclay for some next-level holo-erotica.  That holodeck would’ve been greased over in Vulcan nut.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 12, 2019, 05:38:40 PM
Star Trek Voyager "The 37ers"

- "We built CITIES, striving CITIES !"
- "You must come SEE our CITIES !"
- "We"d like you to be our guest in our CITIES, such wonderful SIGHTS !"

*cross-fade to Janeway in her office*

- "Wow those cities sure were something !"

 :mike

Such a mind fuck, I kept expecting some reveal that the cities and human descendants were fake (hence the insistence that they were almost too Earth like and too good) but it was really just outrageous cost saving.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 12, 2019, 06:18:50 PM
The actor playing Chakotay got a rough deal with all the Native American pot pourri.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 13, 2019, 08:25:10 PM
https://youtu.be/81UqzgyGEiw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 13, 2019, 08:32:06 PM
(https://media.tenor.com/images/1a8aa26e2d2fe73e0cff6cf9e82fe0b7/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on December 14, 2019, 09:26:57 AM
I guess losing the showrunner would be bad news if I was sat here thinking what they'd shown of picard looked really good?
:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 15, 2019, 07:29:29 PM
 :nsfw

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/crt9wb/wow/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/crt9wb/wow/)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 15, 2019, 07:37:20 PM
Where no man has shilled before.  :ryker

https://youtu.be/IzUX_1jaO_I
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 17, 2019, 11:33:02 AM
DS9  :quark

stays great
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 18, 2019, 02:34:38 AM
Where no man has shilled before.  :ryker
Man they really don't care about the Prime Directive do they.

edit: of course this is in the comments and there's a big argument over it :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 18, 2019, 02:36:50 AM
ViscountStratton
5 years ago
I'm a bit annoyed at how many fans seem outraged at this. I'm a hardcore Trek fan and I think it's awsome they used this for a commercial. And a tech company at that, how very fitting. And to all you people saying Star Trek "sold out", get over yourselves. Considering Star Trek was a TV show which sought to get ratings, the whole "selling out" argument makes no sense. It may be hard for some fanboys to believe, but Paramount doesn't receieve funding from the United Federation of Planets to make the series. It's kinda fictional, to say the least.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 18, 2019, 02:39:21 AM
http://blog.trekcore.com/2013/10/exclusive-inside-boole-babbages-trek-vision/
Quote
After a bit of searching, we were able to track down Pat Letsos – a senior marketing director at Boole & Babbage during the time this video was produced – and she took the time to speak with us about how this commercial came to be, how Jonathan Frakes got nabbed for the role, and the big question everybody asks: how much did this thing cost!?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 18, 2019, 05:20:29 AM
https://reddit.app.link/Cv9SepM5v2
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 18, 2019, 05:27:04 AM
that subreddit :dead :dead :dead :dead

(https://i.redd.it/wa9cznkzme441.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/olcsj6440j441.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/5i1xuqy8t8541.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 18, 2019, 08:55:35 AM
https://twitter.com/realGulDukat/status/1206658763278749696
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 19, 2019, 04:32:42 PM
Is Keiko the worst ? A scientific, quantitative argument.

https://www.womenatwarp.com/is-keiko-obrien-the-worst-a-discourse-analysis/ (https://www.womenatwarp.com/is-keiko-obrien-the-worst-a-discourse-analysis/)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 19, 2019, 04:44:26 PM
keiko is fine in ds9
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 19, 2019, 05:04:33 PM
https://reddit.app.link/7YkLbmYyy2

:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 19, 2019, 05:19:22 PM
Not sure if your laugh is ironic or not because that one is an old classic. So old it has grey hair.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 20, 2019, 01:30:16 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/in-a-new-look-at-star-trek-picard-jean-lucs-a-man-on-1840555153

Long-haired vulcan with a samurai sword, Seven o' Ninetails full-on Halo 2 dual wielding PEW PEW, and chosen one girl who is almost certainly half-Borg or something doing Black Widow flips and shit...

No "spaceship hands" yet but a lot of Dominion-level space battle clusterfuckery, that's what I'm reminded of when I hear the name "Picard."

Trek is just as dead as Wars.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 20, 2019, 01:36:44 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiSn2JuDQSc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 20, 2019, 01:44:26 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/in-a-new-look-at-star-trek-picard-jean-lucs-a-man-on-1840555153

Long-haired vulcan with a samurai sword, Seven o' Ninetails full-on Halo 2 dual wielding PEW PEW, and chosen one girl who is almost certainly half-Borg or something doing Black Widow flips and shit...

No "spaceship hands" yet but a lot of Dominion-level space battle clusterfuckery, that's what I'm reminded of when I hear the name "Picard."

Trek is just as dead as Wars.

Be careful on becoming too cynical. It makes hearts black.

My hope is that it's done to feel in casual viewers. It has a lot of "please watch the show :tocry" going on. Not only are all sequences action oriented but it ends with Picard chatting with Number One Will Riker. It's a way to present the show as pleasing as possible. At least, that's the hope.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 20, 2019, 02:17:48 PM
People aren't watching new shit (Orville)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on December 20, 2019, 02:24:36 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/in-a-new-look-at-star-trek-picard-jean-lucs-a-man-on-1840555153

Long-haired vulcan with a samurai sword, Seven o' Ninetails full-on Halo 2 dual wielding PEW PEW, and chosen one girl who is almost certainly half-Borg or something doing Black Widow flips and shit...

No "spaceship hands" yet but a lot of Dominion-level space battle clusterfuckery, that's what I'm reminded of when I hear the name "Picard."

Trek is just as dead as Wars.

(https://i.imgur.com/t6B9AV9.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 20, 2019, 02:40:36 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/in-a-new-look-at-star-trek-picard-jean-lucs-a-man-on-1840555153

Long-haired vulcan with a samurai sword, Seven o' Ninetails full-on Halo 2 dual wielding PEW PEW, and chosen one girl who is almost certainly half-Borg or something doing Black Widow flips and shit...

No "spaceship hands" yet but a lot of Dominion-level space battle clusterfuckery, that's what I'm reminded of when I hear the name "Picard."

Trek is just as dead as Wars.

 :quark :heh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 20, 2019, 05:45:01 PM
Profit & Lace : So bad :quark

But even with such terrible episodes, DS9 is more engaging on virtue of its characters than Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 20, 2019, 06:00:05 PM
Profit & Lace : So bad :quark

But even with such terrible episodes, DS9 is more engaging on virtue of its characters than Voyager.

A 2015 binge-watching guide for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine by W.I.R.E.D. recommended skipping this episode.[2]

In 2016, SyFy included this episode in a group of Star Trek franchise episodes they felt were commonly disliked but "deserved a second chance".[3]

In 2017, this episode was rated the 9th worst episode of the Star Trek franchise up to that time, by ScreenRant, which related the episode to the film Tootsie.[4]

WhatCulture ranked this episode the 4th worst episode of the Star Trek franchise.[5]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 20, 2019, 06:24:50 PM
DS9 S6E25 : The vegan system !?  :rethread
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 20, 2019, 07:03:01 PM
All the ferengi eps in DS9 especially the one where Quark crossdresses and shows his gender fluidity

Fight me
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 20, 2019, 07:07:19 PM
I mean, some of the comedy was OK (Quark, Rom and Nog making the inquiry calls) so there's that, I'd say there's been worse DS9 episodes.

Christopher Pike medal of honor ? :confused
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 20, 2019, 07:28:49 PM
It's named after Pike in Star Trek TOS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 20, 2019, 08:04:21 PM
It's named after Pike in Star Trek TOS.

I know, but I'm not sure I saw what he did on Talos IV merited an award to his name.

And wow they managed to tie in the Prophets with Sisko's Créole restaurant.
:lol

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 20, 2019, 10:33:30 PM
:rejoice THE SISKO :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 20, 2019, 11:20:42 PM
I know, but I'm not sure I saw what he did on Talos IV merited an award to his name.
wow you just gonna ignore the rest of his storied and decorated career just for the one time he got a whole planet declared off limits
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 21, 2019, 06:38:30 AM
The Sisko is linear
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 21, 2019, 12:38:05 PM
I know, but I'm not sure I saw what he did on Talos IV merited an award to his name.
wow you just gonna ignore the rest of his storied and decorated career just for the one time he got a whole planet declared off limits

I mean that's what he was known for onscreen (that and being a Dalek) up until that point though I'm sure you had all the lore already. I just found the drop to be sort of awkward and a mouthful.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 21, 2019, 06:49:19 PM
I don't know how I feel about the whole Pah Wraith thing but it's pretty hilarious and on point to have Dukat just stumble from delusion to delusion at an accelerated pace, claiming he has changed from episode to episode. And becoming a kooky Bajoran Satanist is so on brand for him :lol Snake Saviour Complex much ?

Edit : Oh man, that birth on Empok Nor moment :neogaf
Gul, you magnificent con man. :nothing  :playa
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 22, 2019, 04:19:52 PM
Star Trek : Vic Fontaine also some intergalactic war.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 22, 2019, 04:40:45 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/XiDLmaG.jpg)

Gul Dukat, choking ? Another Starfleet lie !
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 22, 2019, 05:37:49 PM
Gul Dukat :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 22, 2019, 06:07:07 PM
DS9 is so damn good, I even enjoyed it’s supposedly “shit” episodes like Profit and Lace.  Ferengi  :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 22, 2019, 06:09:24 PM
Opportunity and profit :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 24, 2019, 12:12:07 PM
Gul Dukat / Weyoun (more funny than scary but ok), Kai Winn

All impressive bad guys, with interesting characters and great actors behind them. I HATED Kai Winn, which says a lot about the actress and script.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 24, 2019, 12:26:22 PM
Weyoun is a water carrier so he's not scary in that way though he certainly has a way to offer the most horrible threats in the most polite of coating (and there's a couple plot turns where he's acting out of his own volition).

I'm really lukewarm on where the series went with regards to the whole Emissary thing and being full Bajor mystic but I'm not through completely yet. I guess I'll have some random thoughts about DS9 when I wrapped it up.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 24, 2019, 12:29:15 PM
Where are you at right now?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 24, 2019, 12:47:19 PM
Where are you at right now?

Episode 22 of the final season IIRC.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 24, 2019, 01:23:15 PM
Cardassians are so great in that show. Almost all of them are such great characters and really show off the nuance in the "enemy" side

Dukat :lawd

Garak :preach

Damar :rejoice

Ziyal :larry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 24, 2019, 01:52:12 PM
Nah Ziyal sucks she couldnt even see her fathers greatness cmon

I guess she likes Garaks greatness instead  :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 24, 2019, 02:06:23 PM
I personally love the Bajor-Cardassian conflict. It's my favorite storyline in Trek.

Cardassians and Bajorans have easily the most interesting interspecies dynamics besides humans and ferengi. All of the Bajoran and Cardassian characters are excellent.

My favorite Trek character is Kira. Not sure how far in the DS9 finale Vom is now but
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kira training and helping Cardassians fight for freedom - the same species that enslaved her planet, led by the same man that murdered her friend - is true strength of will. The part where Damar mentions that the Dominion killed innocent women and children and opined how anyone could do such a thing, with that death stare from Kira, and his resolved, introspective silence after is among the strongest scenes in Trek.

https://youtu.be/Nm4QWRG7Iwg

Also can I please geek out about Kira in a STARFLEET UNIFORM??

I love her so much. Clearly the baddest bitch in Trek.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 24, 2019, 05:52:48 PM
Kira was so good, I remember having a huge crush on Nana Visitor at the time.  I used to always see in trek stuff Jadzia played up as the sexy one, but for me it was that Nerys Fire I’d have wanted to warm beside.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Usually it’s the churchiest of girls that end up being freaks in the sack.  Makes it easier to convert.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 26, 2019, 05:37:07 AM
Oh man somehow, despite being familiar with Andrew Robinson as an actor it only just hit me that he was Scorpio. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 26, 2019, 02:20:31 PM
Oh man somehow, despite being familiar with Andrew Robinson as an actor it only just hit me that he was Scorpio. :lol
:ohhh
Thats news to me too!  Not many actors that can say they were gunned down by Dirty Harry.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 27, 2019, 06:18:53 AM
I personally love the Bajor-Cardassian conflict. It's my favorite storyline in Trek.

Oh that part is fine, great even, though it gets put on the backburner a bit by the end, what I didn't like is how overt Sisko's status gets by the end. The writing goes way too far IMHO in lifting any ambiguity there is to his religious role. I actually think it makes him embracing it a lot weaker. I didn't mind Dukat writing in that last stretch, which is a common pet peeve among fans, but the epilogue for him and Sisko was really underwhelming and have the air of being an afterthought to the main thread of the Dominion war conclusion. That Vic Fontaine tunnel in the third quarter of the final season is really bizarre and it's a bit baffling they didn't use some of that time for something else. I didn't mind Ezri too much. I think there's some good bits with regards to the comments it introduce w/r/t relationships. That murder investigation episode centered on her was pretty bland though.

Overall I liked the series a lot though it has that distinct pre-prestige TV show era problem of being severely under budgeted for what it has the ambition to portray. It gets a lot more noticeable as the war gets more and more epic but basically they can't scale up over a dozen extras per scene to depict the Cardassian resistance, military HQ or dramatic political changes in the Klingon Empire.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 27, 2019, 08:43:13 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/d4zryr/maybe_i_should_stop_getting_worfd_every_night/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/greatestgen/comments/d4zryr/maybe_i_should_stop_getting_worfd_every_night/)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 27, 2019, 11:40:13 AM
I'm also fine with SISKO and the religion stuff :yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 27, 2019, 12:17:13 PM
i didn't either. it's a bit hamfisted but that's fine. was a good way to complete the arc of "dude who doesnt even want this assignment, just get bajor into the federation and peace out" to really caring about bajor and it's people and their customs and being fully integrated into their society while also coping with unresolved issues he has with the loss of his wife and mother.

in hindsight with all the shit sisko dealt with, i dunno if anyone other than full scenery chewing avery brooks could have pulled that character off :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 27, 2019, 12:35:05 PM
While I do roll my eyes at a good deal of what I call “bajoran bullshit” with regards to the whole
Prophets stuff, I do think it ultimately helped in building compelling reasons for the whole deal of Bajoran-Cardassian conflict, as well as informs upon why the Federation would ultimately refuse including Bajor as a part of the Federation.

Even if he had been terrible captain in every other episode (which was of course not the case), Avery Brooks is probably the only actor who could’ve have given such a transformative performance in “Far Beyond the Stars”.  Was pitch perfect and breathtaking.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 05:21:22 AM
The part I take exception with is really

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Sisko's mother being a wormhole alien and him being a demi-god.
[close]

I think it cheapens a lot of Sisko's path and the whole Pah-Wraith thing felt very peripheral even as a factor in Bajor's politics.

But oh well. :yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 01:32:18 PM
Is Neelix secretly a great cook, just misunderstood by hu-mans ?
I mean, he does seem to have a broad knowledge of Delta food.

I don't know why Voyager is so bad. Everything from most of the characters to the storylines is so bleh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 28, 2019, 01:37:48 PM
Because DS9 up ended a lot of Trek tradition so they wanted to play it safe by doubling down on the TNG formula while not making it as good. Voy was the safe show on and had lots of executive meddling.

Consider it a direct response to DS9.

DS9 - serial storylines
VOY - non serial storylines, red button reset stories

DS9 - takes place on a space station with little travel
VOY - all about the space adventure like in TOS and TNG

VOY gets much better during s3 but nowhere near TNG or DS9. Still enjoyable and gets good when Seven joins.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 02:24:47 PM
I don't think the safety is the issue except it suffers from the vagueness of the ship's supply shortage which could have been a real plotline running through a season. Jettisoning most of the established familiarity of Klingons, Romulans, etc... was somewhat bold too and so far I can't say they did a good job filling the rogues gallery. It definitely is hurting from the weak characters. Star Trek often gets stridently caricatural & formulaic with its characters but it also help channelling the stories. It's not a mystery why the Doctor is the only thing working properly because he follow the established mold. I'm in the first third of S2. Kes and Tuvok are shaping up better now.

It's hard to believe that the writers suddenly got shit and unable to write some decent SF hooks, but without the characters to anchor them it just doesn't work.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on December 28, 2019, 02:37:48 PM
Continuous reset buttons for Voyager is the primary safety.  That’s one of its biggest weaknesses (writing generally being another).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 28, 2019, 02:39:39 PM
No, you don't get it. The safety IS the issue. Ron Moore, after finishing his run on DS9, came to VOY team and wanted it much, much darker. People wanted them to run out of ammunition and supplies, and test to see how they could keep their Federation values while stranded in another quadrant with dwindling supply. This pitch was negged by higher ups, who wanted a safer show. Ron Moore went on to showrun BSG 04 which took that exact concept.

Voyager is a case of executive meddling more so than the writers being entirely at fault. Voyager was the flagship show for a newly launched UPN network. They wanted it safe, comfy, and non offensive. It worked at the time (Voyager ratings are very high and it's actually very popular despite online protest of Trekkies) but has tainted its overall legacy.

Voyager is the victim of execs wanting Trek to be a very specific way. The writers on the team really tried but producers and execs wouldn't play ball.

At the time, many didn't care. It was the Trek I grew up with and watched weekly with my dad. It's also my dad's favorite Star Trek. The reaction to pre-s3 DS9 was that bad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 02:51:38 PM
It's different forms of defining "safety", I guess. I don't doubt what you mention about the production and yes obviously going for something as episodic is indeed a form of an easier, safer show. But TOS was mostly like that too and it never prevented it from having great episodes. I think they could have pulled it off with better characters.

Edit : Oh god Chakotay is so, so insulting and they keep writing in those phony Native American clichés.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 28, 2019, 03:15:07 PM
With Chakotay they hired a fake Native American advisor and culture consultant that fed them a bunch of bullshit. :dead

https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/archive/fool-s-gold-the-story-of-jamake-highwater-the-fake-indian-who-won-t-die-TWNcn2mC8EKDindk8TYh6g
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 03:31:36 PM
Oh wow they literally went Chariot of the Gods with First Nations people.
:brain  :rethread
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 28, 2019, 03:34:02 PM
Oh wow they literally went Chariot of the Gods with First Nations people.
:brain  :rethread

The 90's were very socially progressive despite what people say.  :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 28, 2019, 03:55:43 PM
Oh wow they literally went Chariot of the Gods with First Nations people.
:brain  :rethread

The 90's were very socially progressive despite what people say.  :doge

I'd guess it's more some misplaced good intent and condescension but considering some infamous TNG episodes and the lack of background checks on the consultant...
:trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 29, 2019, 02:09:16 PM
That's a total fridge thought but considering DS9 does touch on colonialism I wondered if it factored in the casting of Siddig El Fadil as Bashir. The character sort of has that vibe of the perfect Anglo-Indian (or "Anglo-Egyptian" I guess would be more appropriate here) subject and the writing in the initial bouts of the series sorta plays on that, as well as the later big character reveal of his parents being quite pushy for him to overachieve academically speaking.

Maybe just an happy accident of a diverse cast.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 29, 2019, 03:57:43 PM
Man I hope we get Star Trek : Picardo next.

"I pledge to do no harm... NOT."

*smashes Borg cubes with spaceship arms... And legs.*
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tripon on December 29, 2019, 10:23:49 PM
The next Star Trek film is in some sort of development hell. It'll be pretty funny if they did another reboot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 29, 2019, 11:37:18 PM
Do a reboot but only in the cast sense.

Trek films have this weird mentality where they have to use TV actors and characters.

Fuck all that! Show us a brand new movie-only crew and ship and time period and conflict. Star Trek is flexible, people.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 12:02:22 AM
The next Star Trek film is in some sort of development hell. It'll be pretty funny if they did another reboot.
It's because they continue to believe Star Trek can be a blockbuster tentpole tier franchise instead of something they need to cut the budgets on down to at most $100 million and expectations on it to simply target a decent quarter billion box office. Star Trek II, the most important event in the franchise, one of the most beloved and best profitable films, Nicholas Meyer WAS ABLE TO BUILD IN A CAVE... with a box of scraps.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 12:57:47 AM
Rolling my fucking eyes so hard because Danti is so goddamn on the money FUCK
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 01:06:02 AM
That's a total fridge thought but considering DS9 does touch on colonialism I wondered if it factored in the casting of Siddig El Fadil as Bashir. The character sort of has that vibe of the perfect Anglo-Indian (or "Anglo-Egyptian" I guess would be more appropriate here) subject and the writing in the initial bouts of the series sorta plays on that, as well as the later big character reveal of his parents being quite pushy for him to overachieve academically speaking.

Maybe just an happy accident of a diverse cast.
Bashir was supposed to be hispanic, but Siddig auditioned for Sisko and they liked him and asked him to be Bashir. Trek has a long history of someone auditioning for another part and getting a different one and going onto success with it. Andrew Robinson auditioned for Odo. Tim Russ auditioned for a ton of roles, including Geordi, before finally getting Tuvok. Those are just the ones I remember. I think on one of the shows the females auditioned for the others part and got switched. Might have been TNG?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 01:13:42 AM
This is his dad's brother, the former PM of Sudan, look at that fucking beard :lawd
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/SadiqAlMahdi_Hermannsburg_RomanDeckert12062015.jpg/800px-SadiqAlMahdi_Hermannsburg_RomanDeckert12062015.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 01:26:31 AM
From searching it has apparently spread in recent years to India, Bangladesh, etc., it's now in lots of Muslim areas in general. Apparently they say Muhammad did it, PBUH.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 02:40:01 AM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dreamworks-screwed-up-why-galaxy-quest-wasnt-a-bigger-hit-1264866
Quote
To delve into what really happened on the set of Galaxy Quest and beyond, The Hollywood Reporter spoke with director Dean Parisot, producer Mark Johnson and stars Tim Allen, Sigourney Weaver, Sam Rockwell, Tony Shalhoub, Justin Long, Daryl “Chill” Mitchell, Enrico Colantoni and Missi Pyle, who reflect on the film’s legacy and future.
:american
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 30, 2019, 04:07:51 AM
My bet is they jump to their own version of TNG. There seems to be more enthusiasm for TNG than the OT nowadays so from a business standpoint that's the thing they'll choose to reboot.

A 2h version of "Rascals". :preach
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on December 30, 2019, 09:10:03 AM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dreamworks-screwed-up-why-galaxy-quest-wasnt-a-bigger-hit-1264866
Quote
To delve into what really happened on the set of Galaxy Quest and beyond, The Hollywood Reporter spoke with director Dean Parisot, producer Mark Johnson and stars Tim Allen, Sigourney Weaver, Sam Rockwell, Tony Shalhoub, Justin Long, Daryl “Chill” Mitchell, Enrico Colantoni and Missi Pyle, who reflect on the film’s legacy and future.
:american

It's an absolute shame that Galaxy Quest wasn't a bigger hit, but on the other hand I dunno if they could have made sequels work nearly as well as the original did.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 30, 2019, 09:31:23 AM
I am 100% happy with the success Galaxy Quest achieved. That movie is a done-in-one perfect send-up of Trek and I don't think a sequel's cast, writing, or plot would have had nearly the same lightning-in-a-bottle the original had.

That said, maybe it could have still been decent, like Ghostbusters II. But it's also OK to let a series end.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 30, 2019, 09:31:44 AM
Galaxy Quest also had extremely underrated music and effects, for the record. Every part of that movie fired on all cylinders.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 11:26:14 AM
I see that Benji uses firefox and had that recommended in his Pocket as well.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 30, 2019, 05:16:37 PM
I'm on the tail end of Voyager S2 and it's getting... Better ? At least better bottle episodes.
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

The Thaw is straight up TOS style garbage. I don't know if I like it or not.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 30, 2019, 05:24:08 PM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on December 30, 2019, 05:28:48 PM
Who doesnt like Lizard people  ???
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on December 30, 2019, 05:38:10 PM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

beverley crusher fucking a scotch ghost is the worst star trek
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on December 30, 2019, 05:54:15 PM
I'm on the tail end of Voyager S2 and it's getting... Better ? At least better bottle episodes.
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

The Thaw is straight up TOS style garbage. I don't know if I like it or not.

If you weren't a fan of Vic Fontaine, just wait until the Voyager crew decide to turn the holodeck into some fucking Oirish pub begorrah begorrah for reasons
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 06:15:34 PM
I found s1 VOY better than 2.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 06:21:47 PM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

JANEWAY MURDERED TUVIX
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 30, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
https://chiefobrienatwork.com/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 06:56:31 PM
Now that I'm at a computer:

season 1 Voyager was much better. I prefer Janeway as a mother-esque Captain more than the hardened, emotionless Captain she became in s2. s1 had more adventure than 2, which was full of episodes preoccupied with aliens that have hair made of marijuana. I found s2 a massive step back from 1 and didn't find it shocking to see that the earlier, better episodes of the season were left over from s1 production. S3 is pretty good and has a really fun two parter co-starring Sarah Silverman.

I like Voyager once it finds its footing. It gets good, but never truly great like TNG and DS9. But it serves as solid comfort food Trek if you're into that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on December 30, 2019, 11:09:05 PM
Why doesn't anyone talk about ENTERPRISE though? I mean, seriously, out of nowhere, the final season of that is some of the best Trek to have ever Trekked.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 30, 2019, 11:17:53 PM
I like a lot of Enterprise, for most of the series the ship feels far more in danger and in the unknown than Voyager ever did despite the huge amount of HEY REMEMBER THESE GUYS episodes and hanging around in Vulcan space or whatever. Third season is close to what some people on Voyager wanted to do with Year of Hell, actually do it for a whole season. Archer and T'Pol are good characters. I love Bakula always though.

ALSO YAS QWEEN:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUt46weEzpk
 :jeb
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 30, 2019, 11:23:44 PM
Why doesn't anyone talk about ENTERPRISE though? I mean, seriously, out of nowhere, the final season of that is some of the best Trek to have ever Trekked.

Haven't seen it since it was on air. Should give it a go. I want it on bluray first.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 31, 2019, 12:32:46 AM
Why doesn't anyone talk about ENTERPRISE though? I mean, seriously, out of nowhere, the final season of that is some of the best Trek to have ever Trekked.

And then the series finale took a big ol' dump on all of it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 10:29:13 AM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

JANEWAY MURDERED TUVIX

Sadly we never had such a transporter fuck up in TOS that would have resulted in Captain Kock.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 31, 2019, 10:43:26 AM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

JANEWAY MURDERED TUVIX

Sadly we never had such a transporter fuck up in TOS that would have resulted in Captain Kock.

(https://i.imgur.com/wFiQmR4.gif)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Captain Kick on the other hand sounds like a really lame superhero.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 11:15:53 AM
Tuvix is a pretty good episode, simple premise but hard dilemma. I'm a bit dumbfounded people are reacting so strongly to it though. It's not the first time a Captain make a questionable decision, Sisko ethnic cleansed a whole planet to settle a score and Picard could get a bit flip floppy on Prime Directive even. The episode is clear of how cold and morally dubious the decision is though it's true the writers ducked out of having Tuvok and Neelix commenting on the situation. I guess some of the audience being disgusted with the plot resolution is proof the writing was efficient. That bridge scene at the end is a bit of a gut punch.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 11:31:28 AM
Janeway and Chakotay living like Starfleet pilgrims, taking baths and making Play-Doh art.
 :donot

Vulcan night dresses are pretty ballin' tho.

Janeway to monkey : What is it ? What's happened to the sky ?
:foodcourt
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 12:48:26 PM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

JANEWAY MURDERED TUVIX

Sadly we never had such a transporter fuck up in TOS that would have resulted in Captain Kock.

(https://i.imgur.com/wFiQmR4.gif)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Captain Kick on the other hand sounds like a really lame superhero.
[close]

Captain Spick  :yikes
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:05:10 PM
Tuvix is a pretty good episode, simple premise but hard dilemma. I'm a bit dumbfounded people are reacting so strongly to it though. It's not the first time a Captain make a questionable decision, Sisko ethnic cleansed a whole planet to settle a score and Picard could get a bit flip floppy on Prime Directive even. The episode is clear of how cold and morally dubious the decision is though it's true the writers ducked out of having Tuvok and Neelix commenting on the situation. I guess some of the audience being disgusted with the plot resolution is proof the writing was efficient. That bridge scene at the end is a bit of a gut punch.

JANEWAY TOOK TUVIX WITH ARMED GUARD AND KILLED HIM AS HE BEGGED FOR LIFE IN FRONT OF EVERYONE

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 31, 2019, 01:11:15 PM
and sisko murdered vreenak after faking evidence to try and change him to their side

in space, people die every day b
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on December 31, 2019, 01:12:33 PM
Quote
Except that episode where Janeway and Paris evolve into lizards.

Not sure if this is better or worse than Tuvix. Tuvix makes me madder but this one is literally the worst idea for a Trek episode of all time, including the racist ones.

JANEWAY MURDERED TUVIX

Sadly we never had such a transporter fuck up in TOS that would have resulted in Captain Kock.

(https://i.imgur.com/wFiQmR4.gif)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Captain Kick on the other hand sounds like a really lame superhero.
[close]

Captain Spick  :yikes

Captain... Spock :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:22:07 PM
Except the episode shows that Sisko challenged himself doing which showed why he felt it was so bad and why he also justfied it.

Tuvix does no such thing.

It goes from the crew liking Tuvix, Tuvix preferring their existence, to Janeway suddenly forcing a precedure. It doesn't show Janeway wracked with dealing with the ethical dilemmas nor show any hint of introspection. Tuvix says they have a right to live and then Janeway is just like,"NO YOU DONT".

Then, at the climax, Janeway applied the precedure on Tuvix under armed guard against their own will which the doctor himself refused to do for ethical reasons all while looking like a emotionless robot while doing so.

This is compounded with the fact that much of S2 has Janeway regularly saying that they won't sacrifice Federation ideals. Then the episode hits a nice, big reset button.

Comparing this

https://youtu.be/TNCw_avF_Qg

With Tuvix is illogical.

One has self awareness and acknowledges going against ones values. The other the captain just does whatever because she wants her friend back.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tripon on December 31, 2019, 01:26:50 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dux2NCUpZ3o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:29:21 PM
I cant find a clip but I hate the way Janeway applied the precedure. Not one word despite someone crying that they don't want to die. Just a mean face. No comfort. Just force.

Truly the worst captain. God I hate her.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on December 31, 2019, 01:33:14 PM
yeah it was handled poorly in the show but it was still the right choice imo. tuvix may have preferred to stay as is but tuvok and neelix as separate consciousnesses had no choice in the matter.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:36:16 PM
I agree it was the right decision but hate how it was done. Without one shred of mercy or empathy. Janeway has no inner conflict. She just does it.

Thank God Seven took over her ship

:rejoice

Fuck Janeway
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 01:39:46 PM
Tuvix is a pretty good episode, simple premise but hard dilemma. I'm a bit dumbfounded people are reacting so strongly to it though. It's not the first time a Captain make a questionable decision, Sisko ethnic cleansed a whole planet to settle a score and Picard could get a bit flip floppy on Prime Directive even. The episode is clear of how cold and morally dubious the decision is though it's true the writers ducked out of having Tuvok and Neelix commenting on the situation. I guess some of the audience being disgusted with the plot resolution is proof the writing was efficient. That bridge scene at the end is a bit of a gut punch.

JANEWAY TOOK TUVIX WITH ARMED GUARD AND KILLED HIM AS HE BEGGED FOR LIFE IN FRONT OF EVERYONE

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

I cant find a clip but I hate the way Janeway applied the precedure. Not one word despite someone crying that they don't want to die. Just a mean face. No comfort. Just force.

Truly the worst captain. God I hate her.

I felt it was portrayed for what it is. It's cold, there's no compassion and the whole crew is rolling with it though everyone know it's a bit of shitting the bed too. The Doctor making it clear it violated his oath is a big indictment. It does lack an epilogue (from Tuvok, probably) maybe.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:48:07 PM
The crew going from loving Tuvix to being quiet while under armed guard MADE NO SENSE

There is not one single shred of natural escalation.

Episode is AWFUL.

Tuvix is a pretty good episode, simple premise but hard dilemma. I'm a bit dumbfounded people are reacting so strongly to it though. It's not the first time a Captain make a questionable decision, Sisko ethnic cleansed a whole planet to settle a score and Picard could get a bit flip floppy on Prime Directive even. The episode is clear of how cold and morally dubious the decision is though it's true the writers ducked out of having Tuvok and Neelix commenting on the situation. I guess some of the audience being disgusted with the plot resolution is proof the writing was efficient. That bridge scene at the end is a bit of a gut punch.

JANEWAY TOOK TUVIX WITH ARMED GUARD AND KILLED HIM AS HE BEGGED FOR LIFE IN FRONT OF EVERYONE

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

I cant find a clip but I hate the way Janeway applied the precedure. Not one word despite someone crying that they don't want to die. Just a mean face. No comfort. Just force.

Truly the worst captain. God I hate her.

I felt it was portrayed for what it is. It's cold, there's no compassion and the whole crew is rolling with it though everyone know it's a bit of shitting the bed too. The Doctor making it clear it violated his oath is a big indictment. It does lack an epilogue (from Tuvok, probably) maybe.

My thought on it:

it could more narration AND an epilogue. It should have raised questions of how Janeway felt about it and the conflict within her.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 01:53:07 PM
And it's not to compare it 1:1 with other Trek series but it's not exactly the first time a high ranking Starfleet officer or captain is taking some questionable decisions with the best of intents.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 01:55:46 PM
No it's not the first time, but usually it's done with far more gravitas.

You will find that Voyager regularly has Janeway do cold, harsh things as if to make her a "badass" and when combined it just makes her look like a psychopath.

No Star Trek captain has as much problematic baggage as Janeway. It's the Tuvix thing combined with 999 other examples of what the fuck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 02:07:21 PM
The crew going from loving Tuvix to being quiet while under armed guard MADE NO SENSE

There is not one single shred of natural escalation.

Episode is AWFUL.

Someone on Reddit mentioned that Kes was mostly the onscreen surrogate for that. I never got the impression the crew loved him. They warm up to him in the absence of an alternative and they like him, but it's not hard to imagine that most people would rather have Tuvok and Neelix, that they have known for quite some time. Tuvix and Janeway ("When did it stop being a Teleport accident and began being a person") gives all of the expected toolset in dialogue for the audience to grok at it.

To be honest, a "compassionate" procedure might have been softpedaling the decision and a bit hypocritical. The cruel ending does underline the diddiculty of the decision, I think.
:yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 02:10:08 PM
Vom this episode is over 20 years old and people still debate it.

Welcome to Trekdom. :jawalrus

On Reddit there's a Tuvix post at least once a week.

A sample:

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/9mcp8q/just_saw_voyagers_tuvix_and_i_cant_see_how_this/?st=k4u8u680&sh=d458f293
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 02:11:20 PM
The crew going from loving Tuvix to being quiet while under armed guard MADE NO SENSE

There is not one single shred of natural escalation.

Episode is AWFUL.

Someone on Reddit mentioned that Kes was mostly the onscreen surrogate for that. I never got the impression the crew loved him. They warm up to him in the absence of an alternative and they like him, but it's not hard to imagine that most people would rather have Tuvok and Neelix, that they have known for quite some time. Tuvix and Janeway ("When did it stop being a Teleport accident and began being a person") gives all of the expected toolset in dialogue for the audience to grok at it.

To be honest, a "compassionate" procedure might have been softpedaling the decision and a bit hypocritical. The cruel ending does underline the diddiculty of the decision, I think.
:yeshrug

Chakotay considers him a friend like ten minutes before Janeway murders him and stands by and does nothing when he is escorted to his death under armed guard dude
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 02:14:24 PM
Dat Vulcan Jenga tho.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 02:18:35 PM
:lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 02:55:36 PM
Oh no, did Ensign Kim get captured by a RAPE GANG ?
 :existential
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 02:57:56 PM
RAPE GANGS!!!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on December 31, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
The Kobayashi Maru solution to tuvix was to replicate the transporter riker dupe to double him, then fix one of the doubles, then you have all 3 as crew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 31, 2019, 04:50:38 PM
Enterprise has a medical ethics debate episode that's handled with a bit more care between Archer and Phlox, but they still run into the problem that they sorta have to forget it and move on due to the nature of the show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on December 31, 2019, 04:51:11 PM
Oh no, did Ensign Kim get captured by a RAPE GANG ?
 :existential
Just you wait until you see what kind of trouble Ensign Kim gets himself into with ladies in the Delta Quadrant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 05:15:37 PM
JANEWAY SENT BACK HOME TWO MAROONED FERENGIX
:salute
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 05:31:43 PM
Oh no, did Ensign Kim get captured by a RAPE GANG ?
 :existential
Just you wait until you see what kind of trouble Ensign Kim gets himself into with ladies in the Delta Quadrant.

Well, all Riker-wannabes have to start somewhere.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on December 31, 2019, 06:51:56 PM
Wow that Los Angeles 1996 set might be the less realistic thing in Star Trek.
 :wiseau

And happy 2020 to you all.

Edit : I know Trek has always been "put some loaf on that forehead and voila ! An alien" but Voyager is pretty extreme with having just some nose ridge stuff and call it a day.

Edit 02 : Oh wow Starfleet Vs 90's Militia Hillbillies. Great ideas guys. Sarah Silverman's smile carry a lot of water for those episodes goddamn.

That VFX of the semitruck exploding.
  :itagaki :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on December 31, 2019, 09:16:19 PM
Those eps are good!!! :maf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 01, 2020, 02:50:10 AM
Sisko and Janeway could hardly be more different.
.
Janeway is a sociopathic tyrant.

Also: Sarah Silverman is a real cutie in that two-parter.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 04:53:21 AM
Those eps are good!!! :maf

It subverted my expectations of Khan's Eugenics Wars to be sure.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 08:32:59 AM
Didn't expect Q to be into JordanN brand of racial science. :brain

And a macho. Less surprising though.

Edit : Janeway going Ripley  ::)

Voyager is sort of the elevator music of Star Trek but that's a really trashy string of episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 01, 2020, 09:38:58 AM
:lol the alien ripoff episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 12:19:24 PM
Ensign Kim made into a giant dad... by a Vulcan !?  :bedroomeyes  :gladbron
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 01, 2020, 12:36:35 PM
I've always imagined Vulcans having huge cocks. It's the logical thing to have.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 02:52:20 PM
The Doctor pimping holo-Vulcan real dolls  :ryker
They're really getting every cent back on that beach resort setting.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on January 01, 2020, 03:24:42 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/RfmH9y8.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 04:01:47 PM
Kes finally dumped Neelix ! :preach
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 01, 2020, 05:54:49 PM
Oh no, did Ensign Kim get captured by a [feminazi] RAPE GANG ?
 :existential

Edit : Ensign Kim son-in-law of Tom Paris  :pika
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 02, 2020, 05:59:12 PM
I was shit talking the film so wouldn't claim I was super engaged anyway but man, Into Darkness is really bad. I thought the first film was OK and pretty charming but this one doesn't work at all. Even the actors are pretty stiff and the spell to evoke the original characters is off the target. Photography and grading is pretty tiring.

Plus all the common criticisms that have been made towards the film, how it picks and stitches from the greatest hits but only to deliver a soulless, incoherent patchwork of a story.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 02, 2020, 06:12:07 PM
Even as someone 100% on board with JJ Trek after the first movie... even I couldn't stomach Into Darkness. And I may have walked out of the theater thinking it was passable if they didn't pull that stupid fucking Kirk death fakeout and introduce Khan's Magic Super Blood to immediately undo it. (Super Blood that is never mentioned again, ever, even though it apparently cures 100% of the extremely aggressive cancer caused by being inside a warp core.)

Then they're just like "Hey, tribbles!" and I'm just like "Hey, fuck off!"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 02, 2020, 06:13:49 PM
Into Darkness does have one of my favorite scenes though, although it actually works best outside the movie with no context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8BYyBLsCUk

I was kinda shitting a brick at this point cause the movie still hadn't lost me and this was unprecedented in Trek (to my knowledge; at the very least the JJ direction made it hype as fuck.)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 02, 2020, 06:15:34 PM
Watching that clip again makes me mad how shitty they treat the Enterprise in these movies, it gets completely eviscerated almost every action scene... Then in Beyond they just blew it up right out of the gate. :social2

Really takes a lot of the tension out and devalues the act of destroying the Federation flagship.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 02, 2020, 06:22:54 PM
every movie after first contact had them trying their hardest to blow up or wreck the enterprise
meanwhile i'm over here demanding more separations of the saucer section :maf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 02, 2020, 06:29:36 PM
Isn't the way warp works in the trekverse is that the nacelles hold the warp cores, and the warp cores create a bubble that lets anything inside it go to / stay at warp?

Because thats why you cant have a fire fight in warp. Because anything outside of the warp field isn't capable of warp speeds. So you're just spaffing phasers and shit into yourself the second they leave the warp bubble.
Like using a water pistol into a strong wind.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 02, 2020, 06:33:10 PM
Isn't the way warp works in the trekverse is that the nacelles hold the warp cores, and the warp cores create a bubble that lets anything inside it go to / stay at warp?

Because thats why you cant have a fire fight in warp. Because anything outside of the warp field isn't capable of warp speeds. So you're just spaffing phasers and shit into yourself the second they leave the warp bubble.
Like using a water pistol into a strong wind.

Yeah this was my problem with the scene on a tech level, even while watching. There's no way you can shoot something "forward/in front of the ship" when you're going warp, unless you attach a warp drive to a photon torpedo or something.

Originally I thought the big ship was just going to "ram" the Enterprise (it gets pretty fuckin' close in that clip) out of warp, which would make much more sense.

But in the moment it worked, like a lot of JJ stuff. And like I said, without context I like it. :trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 03, 2020, 01:01:57 AM
Why doesn't anyone talk about ENTERPRISE though? I mean, seriously, out of nowhere, the final season of that is some of the best Trek to have ever Trekked.

And then the series finale took a big ol' dump on all of it
Yup. The s4 showrunners were allowed free reign, and it kicked ass. And then Berman and his lackeys came back and said, "You know what would make a great ENT finale? A half-assed TNG episode!"
 :ryker


Even as someone 100% on board with JJ Trek after the first movie... even I couldn't stomach Into Darkness. And I may have walked out of the theater thinking it was passable if they didn't pull that stupid fucking Kirk death fakeout and introduce Khan's Magic Super Blood to immediately undo it. (Super Blood that is never mentioned again, ever, even though it apparently cures 100% of the extremely aggressive cancer caused by being inside a warp core.)

Then they're just like "Hey, tribbles!" and I'm just like "Hey, fuck off!"
Yeah, that's one of the things I meant when I talked about JJ Abrams not really thinking things through about what he's breaking, and making the whole fiction more thin and less believable by his flippancy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 06:36:35 AM
I'm hesitating on starting ENT before finishing Voyager (not that I'm very invested... It's borderline background noise for me.).

I would really like to get to the movies, especially The Motion Picture, but it would require buying discs or something...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 03, 2020, 07:51:22 AM
Or downloading a torrent and it taken one hour to get all motion pictures

Then buy them if they are worth it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 03, 2020, 05:56:11 PM
Into Darkness does have one of my favorite scenes though, although it actually works best outside the movie with no context.
Even though I knew it was coming, Robocop's ship coming up in warp with a Deeper Bass Evil Warp™ made me laugh again. Also the fact that they had her run all the way to the bridge but cut out the trip anyway so she still gets there within ten seconds.

I think Beyond's destruction of the Enterprise is a bit of an injoke. Remember Simon Pegg wrote it, and it happens in the third movie, and the trailer spoils it. Plus, it's a good way to trap them on the planet for the movie. (Also rumor was they wanted to do a new model Enterprise if the films continued.)

Since it's all but declared dead, Abramsverse (no, I'm not calling it Kelvin) content ranked:
1. Star Trek Beyond (although it's not like there's other choices)
2. Star Trek comics (the only place other than Pine/Urban that this semi-not-really-reboot has actually ever worked as a recreation of TOS)
3. Star Trek: The Video Game (storywise and dialogue and so on, it's actually pretty good... the worst thing about it is actually that it's not as buggy or broken as it was portrayed to be even by myself)
4. Star Trek (no one actually thinks this movie is good, it's a lie they tell themselves and others as part of a sinister plot to keep Alex Kurtzman employed and continuing to destroy the franchise)
5. Star Trek Into Darkness (clear proof that a film cannot survive a great cast, actually fine paced action, known fan references, a hidden twist that everyone guessed from the start that falls hilariously flat in its epic reveal moment making up for everything, and $500 million in total budgeting, if four guys can't write a coherent plot while stealing half of it from another movie and/or 9/11 conspiracy videos)

I'm hesitating on starting ENT before finishing Voyager (not that I'm very invested... It's borderline background noise for me.).
Don't, finish Voyager. You'll regret introducing Enterprise into the mix.

I'd tell you to go ahead and watch the films inbetween if you want to, but ideally we'd be here trying to prevent you from having how Enterprise ends as the last Trek taste in your mouth for almost five years.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 06:01:55 PM
Jeri Ryan, dat Borg ass.  :whew
Da... Vinci played by Rhys Davies :confused
Species whatever VFX  :girlaff

Quote
Deeper Bass Evil Warp™

 :playa
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 06:06:15 PM
Vulcan neck pinch, apparently more universal than medical knowledge among all species.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 03, 2020, 06:28:30 PM
Also regarding knocking the Enterprise out of warp in that clip, it wouldn't happen. It would simply stop the ship where it was and it would be the other ship that would continue on at near infinite velocity.

Although the Abramsverse already established earlier that the plot drives of the ships don't use warp but instead transport the ship near instantaneously, which also you can do individually thanks to Scotty's infinite transport formula, also despite this the best way to get over to another ship is to jump out of it in space suits and try to fly yourself over to it.

Really, the way the "warp" works in both films shows why everyone thought he'd be ideal for Star Wars, it operates as hyperspace does. The weapons/shields operates as they do in Star Wars. Even JJ can't grapple with transporting and whether or not the momentum stays even though it never really has. To the point where Spock KNEELS DOWN so that when he comes out of transport to chase Khan to punch him in the face a hundred times he doesn't fall immediately. (Something he didn't do when beaming down onto a planet that was imploding mind you. So much for the tolerant le- Vulcan logic.)

Beyond actually goes out of its way to mention how the transporters Jaylah provides for the crew don't operate as normal and are more dangerous. Even though Kirk and Jaylah keeping their momentum and spatial location, thus falling, is how the normal transporters have operated to date. (Pegg must have forgot!) :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 06:46:52 PM
The Doctor designed 7 of 9 catsuit ?  :lol
Writing room being a bit shameful heh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 07:03:27 PM
Tom Paris is such a dickhead, god. :neogaf
I mean Torres is pretty bad too but damn he's juvenile.
And already putting moves on Borg. :foodcourt
"Wow I'm really sorry about that alien reacting badly because your species genocided his family and entire homeworld, wanna date wink wink ?"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 07:54:44 PM
Vietnam guerilla ? In my Star Trek ?  ???
Why not but the production really didn't bother by renting a bunch of AK bullpups.

Edit : What a weird episode. Leaves a lot of questions hanging. DS9 had some decent war movie style episodes but this one felt really cheap.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 03, 2020, 08:21:08 PM
which one was it? Nemesis with Chakotay? I remember that one as seemingly good until it's revealed and then the plot goes completely into the tank
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 03, 2020, 08:52:25 PM
which one was it? Nemesis with Chakotay? I remember that one as seemingly good until it's revealed and then the plot goes completely into the tank

Yeah. The way they try to turn the twist in this one is a bit of a clusterfuck. In itself it's ok but there's no story meat to the bone of that moral tale.

Oh no Ensign Kim was nearly RAPE GANGED by Seven.
:existential
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 03, 2020, 09:18:38 PM
every movie after first contact had them trying their hardest to blow up or wreck the enterprise
meanwhile i'm over here demanding more separations of the saucer section :maf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd7aIjqexOk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 03, 2020, 09:26:35 PM
Beyond separated the saucer :bolo

then smashed it into a planet too :teehee

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiFM30eUUnU
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haHdgdAFqw4
spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4ub_TPlQp4
[close]
[close]
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 03, 2020, 09:33:43 PM
Quote
Gene Roddenberry would have preferred if, in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, the Enterprise's saucer section had been blown up, rather than (as happens in the film) the entire ship. "If the saucer had been blown up, at the end of the picture," speculated Roddenberry, "we [could have] had a new saucer come down and reunite the two. Symbolic of the end of the story. They preferred to do it the other way." (The Making of the Trek Films, 3rd ed., p. 47)
Quote
Saucer separation was planned as a regular feature during the early days of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Several story lines, including a B-plot for "When The Bough Breaks", were to use saucer separation. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion) However, budget limitations at the time did not allow for extensive footage of the separated components to be shot, and it was also felt that separation slowed the progress of the story. (Star Trek Encyclopedia) Unfortunately, this meant that the Enterprise was sent into a number of dangerous situations with saucer separation never being mentioned as an option.

The Enterprise-D saucer landing sequence was conceived in 1991 for the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual. Writers Ronald D. Moore, Brannon Braga, and Jeri Taylor were inspired by that information and wanted to use a crash as a cliffhanger for the sixth season of TNG, but producer Michael Piller did not like the idea. Furthermore, it would have been too costly to film on a television budget with the VFX technology available at the time. Moore and Braga later wrote the scene into Generations. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion, The Art of Star Trek)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 04, 2020, 04:52:27 PM
Star Trek Voyager : One Holodeck Set For 3 Seasons Only.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 04, 2020, 05:18:03 PM
Year of Hell : "Only senior officers will stay."
*Ensign Kim still on board*
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 05, 2020, 08:00:49 AM
Vulcan neck pinch, apparently more universal than medical knowledge among all species.

It's speculated that Vulcans have an energy they focus for that, not a nerve location, per se. That's why McCoy can't make it work in The Search for Spock; he's using the correct move, but humans don't have the correct energy.

 :brain
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 05, 2020, 09:49:57 AM
Year of Hell was kinda good but mostly on the strength of the writing around the antagonist and his ship. It was cool they paid off the "premonition" from Kes in that earlier episode but a bit deflating they didn't play on it. As I understood it was perhaps supposed at one point to be a season arc... I think it works as a two parter though the ending is a wee bit shite. I see what everyone calls the "reset button".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on January 05, 2020, 09:53:52 AM
Vulcan neck pinch, apparently more universal than medical knowledge among all species.

It's speculated that Vulcans have an energy they focus for that, not a nerve location, per se. That's why McCoy can't make it work in The Search for Spock; he's using the correct move, but humans don't have the correct energy.

 :brain

Is that the same movie where Spock's soul gets transferred and reincarnated?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 05, 2020, 11:21:24 AM
I'd tell you to go ahead and watch the films inbetween if you want to, but ideally we'd be here trying to prevent you from having how Enterprise ends as the last Trek taste in your mouth for almost five years.

Hey, he has 2 seasons of discovery to enjoy
:mike
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 05, 2020, 01:21:30 PM
To be honest I don't find Neelix that terrible so far. He's not good but it's rare he's so omnipresent as to ruin episodes. But I'm already foggy on what happened in S1 when he was probably at peak presence.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 05, 2020, 01:36:03 PM
To be honest I don't find Neelix that terrible so far. He's not good but it's rare he's so omnipresent as to ruin episodes. But I'm already foggy on what happened in S1 when he was probably at peak presence.

Neelix really isn't that bad and often has some of the darker, better episodes. Better character than Kim and Chakotay anyway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 05, 2020, 03:53:36 PM
Leonardo Da Vinci... FULL SPREAD.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 05, 2020, 04:34:14 PM
Neehilix : Ve believes in nossing, Lebowski. Nossing. And tomorrow ve come back and ve cut off your chonson.

Edit : Oh Jesus "Resistance to intercourse is futile" + Vulcan dong on bridge  :lol ::)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 05, 2020, 07:39:57 PM
Vulcan neck pinch, apparently more universal than medical knowledge among all species.

It's speculated that Vulcans have an energy they focus for that, not a nerve location, per se. That's why McCoy can't make it work in The Search for Spock; he's using the correct move, but humans don't have the correct energy.

 :brain

Is that the same movie where Spock's soul gets transferred and reincarnated?

...Yes.

:picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 05, 2020, 10:18:30 PM
Vulcan neck pinch, apparently more universal than medical knowledge among all species.

It's speculated that Vulcans have an energy they focus for that, not a nerve location, per se. That's why McCoy can't make it work in The Search for Spock; he's using the correct move, but humans don't have the correct energy.

 :brain

Is that the same movie where Spock's soul gets transferred and reincarnated?

...Yes.

:picard

Yes.

:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 06, 2020, 03:24:29 PM
Star Trek Voyager "Retrospect" : Is this an episode about Cancel Culture ?

Edit : Oh wow it really is :lol It's weird the writing seem to rule so conclusively on the case (or have the characters so swayed to the other side) instead of leaving some ambiguity. I guess it ties up any loose ends and makes more sense for the final scene.

Also shout out to Tony Todd as a Hirogen.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 06, 2020, 05:59:37 PM
Star Trek Voyager "Vis à Vis"

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Tom Paris so bland it takes days for his closest friends to notice he's not himself.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 06, 2020, 07:02:36 PM
7 of 9 & Harry Kim... Will they or won't they ?  :ryker :jeanluc

spoiler (click to show/hide)
My guess : probably not  :dsp  :girlaff
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 07, 2020, 01:28:01 PM
Star Trek Voyager "Vis à Vis"

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Tom Paris so bland it takes days for his closest friends to notice he's not himself.
[close]

they kill off ensign kim and replace him with his phase double, and literally nobody gives a fuck or even remembers to ever bring it up ever again :idont

Meanwhile Paris gets busted down the ranks for outright dereliction of duty and insubordination, and still gets promoted back before anyone even gives old perma-ensign a second thought
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 07, 2020, 02:12:23 PM
I guess the thing with the phase double is that he's virtually identical and the "cloning" is very fresh and short lived. It's more the other person he brings with him that is going to possibly struggle mightily in the future with that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 07, 2020, 02:34:34 PM
still pretty weird I kinda forgot about that even happened
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus on January 07, 2020, 02:48:20 PM
Something similar happened with O'Brien on DS9.

Quote
O'Brien was killed later in 2371, after becoming infected with delta-series radioisotopes following an accident aboard the station. This, coupled with the presence of a cloaked Romulan Warbird nearby, had the effect of shifting him forward in time by several hours. His death occurred when he deliberately contaminated himself further in order to determine the exact cause of events he had witnessed. He was 'replaced' by his counterpart from the timeline he visited. Thus, events that occurred to O'Brien from this point on involved the future version, rather than the "original". (DS9: "Visionary")
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Miles_O%27Brien
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Visionary_(episode)

I had completely forgotten about it until Benji mentioned the thing with Kim a while back.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 07, 2020, 03:04:48 PM
O'Briens the same O'Brien, just from a different point on his own timeline (Like Admiral Janeway is still Janeway).

Kims an alternate universe type dealio
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Rufus on January 07, 2020, 03:50:21 PM
Hence "similar" 👀

Though the timelines being identical safe for that one thing feels like a cop-out. The timecops should have come around to investigate.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 07, 2020, 06:33:21 PM
Mirror universe episodes  :social2
But those black gloves on Janeway are pretty cool.

Edit : OK it's not Mirror, it's better than that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 07, 2020, 08:42:07 PM
The writing and ideas are kinda better now but the conclusions and buttons often give me the impression of being rushed... Or maybe it's the episodes only get too late to whatever the main point of the week is ? The core issues often don't get any room to breath.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2020, 02:14:05 AM
How is it possible to go through 4 seasons of Voyager in a week?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 08, 2020, 03:48:10 AM
How is it possible to go through 4 seasons of Voyager in a week?

ez
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2020, 04:04:16 AM
Uh, no
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 08, 2020, 04:05:43 AM
Uh, no

Runs in the background in the free time after work. I already watched a part of S1 months ago.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 08, 2020, 04:46:22 AM
Uh, no

Sure it is
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 08, 2020, 05:02:39 AM
Also need to finish to update my dating profile. :expert :playa
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2020, 11:03:33 AM
https://variety.com/2020/tv/features/patrick-stewart-star-trek-picard-cbs-all-access-1203459573/ (https://variety.com/2020/tv/features/patrick-stewart-star-trek-picard-cbs-all-access-1203459573/)

And here we go


Quote
“The Next Generation” presented a humanist future in which issues like poverty, race and class have long been sorted out, and conflicts are more often resolved through negotiation and problem-solving than at the point of a phaser pistol.[/size]Stewart had no desire to go there again.
[/size]“I think what we’re trying to say is important,” he says. “The world of ‘Next Generation’ doesn’t exist anymore. It’s different. Nothing is really safe. Nothing is really secure.”
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2020, 11:10:32 AM
“Picard” finds its hero living in near-isolation on a very un-cosmic French vineyard. He is retired and estranged from Starfleet, the interstellar navy to which he devoted most of his life. He’s haunted by a pair of catastrophes, one personal, the other societal — the death of his android colleague Lt. Cmdr. Data (as seen in “Nemesis”) and a refugee crisis spawned by the destruction of the planet Romulus (as seen in Abrams’ “Star Trek”). When those two seemingly disparate strands of his life cross, Picard returns to action, this time without the backing of a Starfleet whose moral center has shifted.




How the fuck does this even work timeline wise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 08, 2020, 11:13:27 AM
“In a way, the world of ‘Next Generation’ had been too perfect and too protected,” he says. “It was the Enterprise. It was a safe world of respect and communication and care and, sometimes, fun.” In “Picard,” the Federation — a union of planets bonded by shared democratic values — has taken an isolationist turn. The new show, Stewart says, “was me responding to the world of Brexit and Trump and feeling, ‘Why hasn’t the Federation changed? Why hasn’t Starfleet changed?’ Maybe they’re not as reliable and trustworthy as we all thought.”


Holy fuck :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on January 08, 2020, 11:20:23 AM
I have no faith in this not being a bunch of dumb action garbage.

To be honest, going full on Fall of Starfleet ideological drama would be interesting. I have no faith that the writers are even interested in telling such a story, and we're just going to end up with a world where Starfleet is a net negative to the universe, pissing on the concept of star trek. But here we are, with the Picard Show, so it was already pretty fucked.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 08, 2020, 11:53:25 AM
Fuck this show
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2020, 12:28:40 PM
But I want positive trek. The world is dark. We need real trek NOW!!!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 08, 2020, 12:46:02 PM
Trexit
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 08, 2020, 12:57:16 PM
Obviously the contemporary real world is so much darker than it was in the TOS heyday that they have to grimdark away all optimism.

Wait, what?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 08, 2020, 01:36:03 PM
NOTHING HERE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 08, 2020, 01:38:24 PM
I just want TNG/Voy/DS9 era Trek, The Orville without the fart jokes.


spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well I still have The Orville but the rumor is the 3rd season might be the last. :fbm
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 08, 2020, 01:42:34 PM
I mean, it might be a "no, it was definitely mutual" type deal, but the claimed reason the Orvilles going streaming only is so that they can fuck about with episode lengths as needed.

either way we live in a world where both star trek discovery and the orville got greenlit for two more seasons than firefly was  :larry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 08, 2020, 01:45:07 PM
I just want TNG/Voy/DS9 era Trek, The Orville without the fart jokes.


spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well I still have The Orville but the rumor is the 3rd season might be the last. :fbm
[close]

I really want Trek that's Orville like.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 08, 2020, 02:18:58 PM
If Firefly was on now on streaming platforms it would run so much longer. Like 7 seasons
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on January 08, 2020, 02:40:22 PM
It's kind of funny that the American Noon Universe has taken the same trajectory as the actual one did.

Is there a mirror universe where they didn't copy JMS' homework? Wonder how that Trek turned out.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 09, 2020, 01:36:18 PM
JANEWAY MURDERED GARBAGE TRUCK DRIVER
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 09, 2020, 02:25:07 PM
“Picard” finds its hero living in near-isolation on a very un-cosmic French vineyard. He is retired and estranged from Starfleet, the interstellar navy to which he devoted most of his life. He’s haunted by a pair of catastrophes, one personal, the other societal — the death of his android colleague Lt. Cmdr. Data (as seen in “Nemesis”) and a refugee crisis spawned by the destruction of the planet Romulus (as seen in Abrams’ “Star Trek”). When those two seemingly disparate strands of his life cross, Picard returns to action, this time without the backing of a Starfleet whose moral center has shifted.




How the fuck does this even work timeline wise.

“In a way, the world of ‘Next Generation’ had been too perfect and too protected,” he says. “It was the Enterprise. It was a safe world of respect and communication and care and, sometimes, fun.” In “Picard,” the Federation — a union of planets bonded by shared democratic values — has taken an isolationist turn. The new show, Stewart says, “was me responding to the world of Brexit and Trump and feeling, ‘Why hasn’t the Federation changed? Why hasn’t Starfleet changed?’ Maybe they’re not as reliable and trustworthy as we all thought.”


Holy fuck :dead

(https://i.imgur.com/rtqrrGH.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 09, 2020, 02:26:43 PM
JANEWAY MURDERED GARBAGE TRUCK DRIVER

Explain this reference to me? Been a while
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 09, 2020, 02:54:38 PM
JANEWAY MURDERED GARBAGE TRUCK DRIVER

Explain this reference to me? Been a while

Voyager first episode of S5, Night (?).
Obviously some hyperbole but I was kinda shocked at the end.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Janeway fucks the garbage ship up and they kinda shrug shoulders about the whole recycling technology they wanted to give this civilization when they don't find them immediately.
Also wouldn't it be even worse for the radioactivity to blow the cargo that was the whole issue ?
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 10, 2020, 04:55:56 PM
Tom Paris has, like, the weirdest yet blank nerd hobbies : serials, oceans ?
:yeshrug

Edit : One hell of a ugly kid too. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 10, 2020, 06:52:09 PM
tom paris is lame as hell
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 10, 2020, 07:46:43 PM
Tom Paris is the most boring "renegade" character I've ever seen. What a total bore.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 11, 2020, 04:15:06 PM
They're laying it really thick with Janeway but I think it works better as it is now, with her getting very stiff very quickly to browbeat her crew into some hastily decided hard stances out of guilt.

Counterpoint was a legit good episode : The character dynamics were engaging, some make up work a lot stronger than the average and even a bit of stylistic flair.

The Cardassian Mengele one was ok too, even if very on the nose.

I don't mind Kes but 7 of 9 is a much better conduit to have some conflict going (though I would agree she gets away with it a little too much, as Mulgrew thought at the time).

Edit : Fuck "the janitor is the one making or breaking Starfleet Academy". It's whimsical in TNG but they went 150% too hard in Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 11, 2020, 06:00:44 PM
tom paris is lame as hell
Tom Paris is the most boring "renegade" character I've ever seen. What a total bore.

captain proton episodes :holeup
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 12, 2020, 04:17:36 PM
Oh TVTropes :mike

Quote
Quote
Quote
In Star Trek, almost everything that happens revolves around military officers. Military officers doubling as explorers, but military officers all the same. An unintended consequence of this is creating the (almost certainly unintentional) impression that the supposedly utopian Federation is a military society. For example, in the Deep Space Nine episode "Paradise Lost," there is an attempted military coup, which has no trouble with civilian resistance, but instead is only opposed by the good military officers. Why don't more people inside the Trek-verse notice this?
Massive glorification of the military is a common theme in communist regimes. And the Federation is, by any definition, a communist regime.
"By any definition"? An odd statement, considering there are several definitions by which it doesn't fit.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Headscratchers/StarTrek (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Headscratchers/StarTrek)

I'm not deep in the lore, and I get the society is "post scarcity" and "moneyless" but as far as I can tell the mainline series have always been a bit fuzzy about the details of how Earth function as a society or on an economical level.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 12, 2020, 04:56:29 PM
tom paris is lame as hell
Tom Paris is the most boring "renegade" character I've ever seen. What a total bore.

captain proton episodes :holeup

instant skips
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 12, 2020, 07:33:58 PM
There's lengthy regulations about fucking aliens and you need clearance from the CO and the medical staff ?

Nobody told Will :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 12, 2020, 09:21:40 PM
Ouch :lol

https://youtu.be/pxznaXsk6Hg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 13, 2020, 08:43:19 AM
Federation government/socity never made much sense. Theres a president with a cabinet, a council, and a supreme court but I have no idea what they would actually do. Money and various forms of scarcity don't exist but it seems its possible to own private property, so it's not socialist.

Also some Federation worlds still do have money and money would be needed to deal with non-Federation groups so who knows.  Probably best not to think too hard on it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 14, 2020, 04:44:18 PM
Chakotay has a boxing vision quest. Also WTF is that haircut ? :hhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 14, 2020, 06:20:57 PM
JANEWAY MURDERED COSTANZIX.

Edit : Man, Roxann Dawson is pretty fit.  :whew
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 15, 2020, 05:31:02 PM
Janeway great great (etc) grandma flashbacks.  :snore

Edit : JASON !? JASON !  :doge

Edit : Time travel  :whatsthedeal
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 16, 2020, 06:00:13 PM
Wait a minute : Tom Paris is a discount, stale, William Riker... And the Equinox second in command is a discount, stale (no offence meant to Titus Welliver), Tom Paris ?

:mindblown

I was a bit let down by Equinox, which is part of many lists of the best Voyager episodes. It's a good premise but the conclusion is really dealt in a hurry, I didn't like the moral escape hatch for the antagonist (and most of the ethical issues really). Janeway is so blatantly hypocritical it's hard to take it seriously... And the script glazes over that also anyway.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 17, 2020, 12:06:48 PM
I was a bit let down by Equinox, which is part of many lists of the best Voyager episodes. It's a good premise but the conclusion is really dealt in a hurry, I didn't like the moral escape hatch for the antagonist (and most of the ethical issues really). Janeway is so blatantly hypocritical it's hard to take it seriously... And the script glazes over that also anyway.

Which ultimately is an indictment of voyager as a whole that its clearly one of the stronger episodes and actually memorable
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 17, 2020, 02:05:20 PM
I wouldn't be so harsh maybe but I'll say a lot of Voyager episodes rush and fumble their finishing acts. I often feel frustrated that the intricacies of a premise I find interesting get left in the side of the road.

Jeri Ryan and Robert Picardo are having a blast every episode. That Doctor recital of Rigoletto in the mess :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on January 17, 2020, 05:08:55 PM
Wait a minute : Tom Paris is a discount, stale, William Riker... And the Equinox second in command is a discount, stale (no offence meant to Titus Welliver), Tom Paris ?

:mindblown

I was a bit let down by Equinox, which is part of many lists of the best Voyager episodes. It's a good premise but the conclusion is really dealt in a hurry, I didn't like the moral escape hatch for the antagonist (and most of the ethical issues really). Janeway is so blatantly hypocritical it's hard to take it seriously... And the script glazes over that also anyway.

And the Equinox crew members who join Voyager at the end of the episode are never seen or mentioned again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 19, 2020, 05:53:37 PM
Star Trek really has a grudge with the Irish, hasn't it ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 19, 2020, 08:33:36 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/eq38pm/voyager_never_used_the_variable_nacelle/

:dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Kara on January 19, 2020, 11:26:01 PM
Star Trek really has a grudge with the Irish, hasn't it ?

In The Next Generation there's a throwaway line in an episode stating that Irish reunification took place in this decade thanks to the occasional efficacy of terrorism. That episode was censored on broadcasts in the UK until ~2008 because they're always having a normal one there and I don't think it's ever actually been aired by RTE.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 20, 2020, 03:22:18 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bOFCAYK.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on January 20, 2020, 05:08:49 PM
Star Trek really has a grudge with the Irish, hasn't it ?

In The Next Generation there's a throwaway line in an episode stating that Irish reunification took place in this decade thanks to the occasional efficacy of terrorism. That episode was censored on broadcasts in the UK until ~2008 because they're always having a normal one there and I don't think it's ever actually been aired by RTE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHsoPPynIIc
Hah, the part about Irish reunification in 2024 may actually come true thanks to Brexit.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 21, 2020, 06:04:09 PM
I'll say for Voyager that some of the VFX work get really good for what it is in the back half of the series. It's hit and miss but it wouldn't be Star Trek otherwise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 21, 2020, 07:35:54 PM
The Borg Queen concept is like the poster child of a terrible idea born out of narrative creep (never saw First Contact but AFAIK it's the same) but I'll admit Susanna Thompson squeezes a lot of good scenes out of that Unimatrix Zero plot. The episodes themselves are very Voyager : pretty pleasant background noise, very uneven, don't ever stop to think about the plot details and as a piece of world building it's a little bit jarring.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 21, 2020, 09:40:58 PM
The Borg Queen vaguely makes sense in First Contact as similar to the Locutus idea and representing the collective as a contact point for Picard/Data. (When they "kill" her the gas shit also kills all the rest of the Borg so it's not as egregious as it seems.)

By Voyager she's totally an individual in a group of individuals, but then so are like half the Borg on the show lol

The CGI and makeup advances are indeed quite real, Voyager winds up looking as good as First Contact, and First Contact had a limited number of Borg they could fully makeup at like three or something, by the end of Voyager they're all over the place.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2020, 03:08:36 AM
I heard people have seen the first 3 episodes amd it sucks ass
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 22, 2020, 04:54:02 AM
Those Voyager Barclay / Troi visits are :larry but Deanna is closer to doing actual "counseling" (per TV standard) than 95% of TNG.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Barclay end up not listening to her, break up in his place of employment, disobey direct orders but somehow it turns fine so OK ?
[close]

I feel (second half of) the series does a lot better with its "small scale" stories in general. The comedic episodes too generally land well. I got the impression Janeway was better nailed down but she's still written mightily rash and flip-floppy in those Epic™ two-parters, her indirect alien body count is out of control, especially with the whole endorsing of Borg-Shia. I prefer that over the excessive motherly attitude she tended to have at the beginning though.

Also have the feeling the holodreck episodes were kept to tolerable levels compared to TNG but I don't know if it's accurate if you do an actual episode count. And the recurring sets are really glaring (though the worst is that fucking beach resort).

On reflection that can't be right because I recall a LOT of them ("Oh yeah Janeway was stuck into a dollar store British novel..."). Maybe not paying my full attention to whenever the show is running helped me get through it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 22, 2020, 01:05:19 PM
If Voyager has one saving grace it is that
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Lwaxana Troi never shows up
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2020, 01:14:38 PM
Brent Spiner is taking a break from twitter just on the safe side

(https://i.ibb.co/bg6826S/bail.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 22, 2020, 01:21:02 PM
(http://imgur.com/VXVRlzA.gif)

That does not fill me with confidence.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 22, 2020, 01:22:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL8EJbBnbjY

tl;dr it's shite.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Star TP indeed.  :lol
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2020, 01:24:16 PM


confidence

You still had some?  ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL8EJbBnbjY

tl;dr it's shite.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Star TP indeed.  :lol
[close]

What an annoying persona.. dafuq.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 22, 2020, 01:26:40 PM
Shaddap faqqit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 22, 2020, 01:29:15 PM
Shaddap faqqit.

This guy is like a fake Jim Sterling but a million times worse. Does he just record himself making these gestures and then adding the sound later?

Also cmon going on 4chan rumors.. Look at his channel its all negative shit towards new shows/movies all with clickbaity thumbnails

This guy truly is the anal wart of the internet
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 22, 2020, 01:29:50 PM


confidence

You still had some?  ;)
not really, still sucks to think about

:goldberg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 22, 2020, 01:30:13 PM
Nah Doomcock is almost 100% right on his rumors/insider information. ::)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
A Jim Sterling he is not.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 22, 2020, 01:46:03 PM
But let's be fair, it probably will suck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 22, 2020, 04:07:15 PM
i'm still excited to watch it tho
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 22, 2020, 08:37:24 PM
Oh man Risa turned into a dump. :hhh

"- Last time you were singing with Data.
- It was LaForge birthday party !"
TNG pandering. :donot
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 07:45:04 AM
So the first ep is out for DL..

let me check it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 07:52:47 AM
Jesus christ wont even give picard more than 5 minutes in the intro, gotta have someone shooting and getting attacked

" SHES ACTIVITING " what shit dialogue
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 08:52:18 AM
it was pretty good?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2020, 09:48:58 AM
it was pretty good?

You can't shit on this for days, weeks, months and be like,"they won't give Picard time in his own intro!!" and then just say,"it was pretty good?"

DETAILS.

If we had negative reputation system I would NEG you!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 23, 2020, 09:58:55 AM
it was pretty good?

(https://media1.giphy.com/media/EouEzI5bBR8uk/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 10:07:42 AM
Allright well I'll just say that even though there were a few things I didn't like that much, its still better than Discovery. It feels like its own thing

I feel like I would have appreciated a little bit more slow approach, and after having met Picard have the action take place at the tail end of the pilot instead of the beginning, but the story might be interesting. Not a huge fan of dialogue sometimes, like the " SHES ACTIVATING " bullcrap.

Im interested to see where it all goes, sadly I think once he gets a ship and some crewmates it might devolve into funny jokes and a lot of action ala Discovery..but we'll see.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2020, 10:31:58 AM
I'm 7 minutes in and the production on this is incredible and I'm already fucking hooked.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2020, 11:08:57 AM
Holy fuck this was the most Trek thing in years. So much TALKING. When we can sit down, and have NICE LITTLE STAR TREK CHAT. The action is minimal and only serves the plot.

I'm all in.

I really liked it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 23, 2020, 01:12:19 PM
Why y’all giving me hope?  I was happy in my pessimism.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2020, 01:36:29 PM
The show doesn't rely on fan service at all in the first episode. That isn't to say it doesn't have it, but it's often in the background where it exists to seen and is part of the larger story. Kind of like how now and then you see Jean Luc's instrument from Inner Light on his desk. It doesn't force the attention of it. It's a very natural flow from TNG's style but more modernized. Even the way Data and the girl are handled is done elegantly.


Originally I thought Data would be shoehorned the way Discovery has shoehorned Spock. "Remember Spock?!" is how Discovery handles its fan service. It's tacky and forced. But Picard, at least so far, handles things in a far more elegant manner. Data is used only to further the plot and done in such a charming way. You think it's about a generic synthetic Girl of Destiny that we've seen so much before in sci-fi but she's so much more than that. The first episode has twists and turns and misdirection. It's wonderfully paced in a TNG way that considers, brings up issues, and is highly introspective. The first episode is the real deal and hours after seeing I can't wait to rewatch it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 23, 2020, 03:19:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JShPVYFajpM&feature=youtu.be&t=108
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 03:37:58 PM
@D3RANG3D

When you gonna watch it curious to know what u think of it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 23, 2020, 03:56:24 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't know what high seas route to take to get my yargh on.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 23, 2020, 03:58:01 PM
eztv used to be the go to waaaay back in the day, dunno if they do streaming stuff
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 04:52:22 PM
plenty of torrent sites out there cmon bro

rarbg or something

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 23, 2020, 05:48:15 PM
plenty of torrent sites out there cmon bro

rarbg or something

Will give not-Picard a pre-emptive review gobshite/10

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Will sign up for a free trial for cbs all access, to binge when the season is over not getting dmca'd for this shit.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 23, 2020, 07:01:09 PM
Voyager : Body & Soul is a delight. Jeri Ryan is having the time of her life (that's an awesome impression of the Doctor) and Picardo is pulling some insane faces in this.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on January 23, 2020, 07:03:20 PM
I thought Picard was really stupid. :lol you're telling me these people got in a gunfight on top of the starfleet archives and nobody noticed?

Didn't like the script. Couldnt take the action seriously. The final reveal made me laugh. I'm not going to watch any more.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 23, 2020, 07:22:03 PM
you're telling me these people got in a gunfight on top of the starfleet archives and nobody noticed?


Jean Luc woke up at home. Sorry Starfleet wasn't there within 10 seconds and they didn't show the transport?

Baffling complaint.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 23, 2020, 07:29:39 PM
Voyager : Body & Soul is a delight. Jeri Ryan is having the time of her life (that's an awesome impression of the Doctor) and Picardo is pulling some insane faces in this.

fun episode 2  best chars
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 23, 2020, 07:45:24 PM
aight got picard, will watch in a bit. you guys got me pretty curious now with this praise :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 23, 2020, 09:18:03 PM
Voyager : Flesh & Blood is a neverending conga of Janeway adding more kills to her body count, Holy Christ.
:trumps :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 23, 2020, 10:16:59 PM
wow. i wasn't really sure what i expected out of this show, but that really was an excellent start and feels like the old trek i loved. a troubled picard who feels betrayed by starfleet but is still ultimately hopeful is really on point, and he still can give excellent speeches. perfect little bit of action, some great callbacks with the mentions of B4, the end of nemesis, and maddox among other things (seeing the enterprise for just a moment was perfect). plus my expectations were subverted (:doge) a bit as well

hell of a cliffhanger at the end and that teaser really has me ready for more. really happy to have star trek back again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 24, 2020, 04:00:02 AM
Picard isnt working for me, but i've decided to give it 3 eps.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 24, 2020, 08:38:27 AM
maybe its just because i'm comparing it to dsc season 1 and the first two neo-trek movies, but picard really does feel like a huge step up. just the scene with the reporter that caught us up on current events while also showing that picard is still the thoughtful and caring starship captain we remember (even if starfleet has changed) was enough to sell me on the show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 24, 2020, 11:41:49 AM
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1220680809750892544
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 24, 2020, 06:34:08 PM
you're telling me these people got in a gunfight on top of the starfleet archives and nobody noticed?


Jean Luc woke up at home. Sorry Starfleet wasn't there within 10 seconds and they didn't show the transport?

Baffling complaint.

Spoilers much?

There are transporter methods that are not commonly scanned for, and can even work through shields. Or it may be temporal. Who knows?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 24, 2020, 07:08:55 PM
I wish they'd spent some of their budget deaging data for that opening sequence, or at least smeared vaseline all over the camera like they did for city on the edge of forever for joan collins in TOS to cover up the fact the actor is way fucking older than the character they're now portraying
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 24, 2020, 08:23:37 PM
you're telling me these people got in a gunfight on top of the starfleet archives and nobody noticed?


Jean Luc woke up at home. Sorry Starfleet wasn't there within 10 seconds and they didn't show the transport?

Baffling complaint.

Spoilers much?

There are transporter methods that are not commonly scanned for, and can even work through shields. Or it may be temporal. Who knows?

The original quote was a spoiler then, no? Sorry but that kind of comes with the territory. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 24, 2020, 08:35:18 PM
I imagine the production knew Season 7 was the last of Voyager, there's a commendable effort to wrap things up. There's also a very apparent theme about holographic people running through several of the episodes. Feel like a less interesting retread of the Data/Androids one they had in TNG but at least they're trying. Somehow feels like Voyager should have done that all along instead of stop-n-go a bunch of arcs they kept aborting because they didn't want to commit.

Episode "Repentance" is borderline :gamergate with how it treats disproportionate incarceration of minorities.
Tom Paris asserting dat privilege "well, maybe they commit more crimes ?"
:trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 24, 2020, 09:19:49 PM
I imagine the production knew Season 7 was the last of Voyager, there's a commendable effort to wrap things up. There's also a very apparent theme about holographic people running through several of the episodes. Feel like a less interesting retread of the Data/Androids one they had in TNG but at least they're trying. Somehow feels like Voyager should have done that all along instead of stop-n-go a bunch of arcs they kept aborting because they didn't want to commit.

the problem with going too far down the lines of holographic people are actually real people if you leave the holodeck on long enough - which as a one off aberration with the doctor works if you don't think about it too much - is you're then basically saying the entire fucking federation are raping and murdering potentially sentient lifeforms in their millions on a fucking daily basis literally for shits and giggles.

which kinda undercuts that whole utopian future ideals thing.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on January 25, 2020, 12:03:49 AM
I finally got around to finishing s2 of Discovery.

As much as I enjoyed the first season and the Terran Empire stuff, I really found it to be a chore trying to slog through the back half of s2 Discovery.

In contrast, I found myself picking Picard apart for logic errors, but otherwise enjoying it. Nice to see Scott Pilgrim's drummer doing some Trek, too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 01:18:24 PM
I imagine the production knew Season 7 was the last of Voyager, there's a commendable effort to wrap things up. There's also a very apparent theme about holographic people running through several of the episodes. Feel like a less interesting retread of the Data/Androids one they had in TNG but at least they're trying. Somehow feels like Voyager should have done that all along instead of stop-n-go a bunch of arcs they kept aborting because they didn't want to commit.

the problem with going too far down the lines of holographic people are actually real people if you leave the holodeck on long enough - which as a one off aberration with the doctor works if you don't think about it too much - is you're then basically saying the entire fucking federation are raping and murdering potentially sentient lifeforms in their millions on a fucking daily basis literally for shits and giggles.

which kinda undercuts that whole utopian future ideals thing.

I don't think it's an issue, "Starfleet as an utopia" has already lost a lot of shine through TNG to VOY. Holograms aren't that widespread yet apparently (the episode featuring the creator of holographic doctor says... 600 or so for the Mark 1 ? IIRC...) and it's only been 7 years. A legal and ethics gap is not inconceivable.

Though there's also the Moriarty precedent. But well the TNG crew wasn't particularly considerate despite acknowledging sentience.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 25, 2020, 01:27:28 PM
Basically it took Data to ether Picard to get him to stick up for him and his sentience.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The luster of Starfleet is kinda only there on the Enterprise or other MC ships it's always some other ships Captain/Officer/Admiralty/StrarFleet Command doing sketchy ass shit.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 25, 2020, 01:40:10 PM
fucking holodeck sluts  :aah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 25, 2020, 01:47:41 PM
I'd buy that for a slip of latinum.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 01:55:36 PM
I don't think the show actively undermines the Federation's image as a more progressive place, there's always plausible deniability for the most dubious stuff (the closest is perhaps Sisko's direct superior that is mostly painted as a decent guy admitting he's in cahoots with Section 31 when they gaslight the Romulan senate committee), though TNG and DS9 especially suggest there's a systemic problem with the Academy culture and the "elite" cadets. The modern shows all acknowledge that the Federation is political and faillible and that principles can't be inflexible especially when dealing with diplomacy, but it never deviates from the fact it wiped out poverty, work alienation, etc...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 25, 2020, 02:53:04 PM
I don't think it's an issue, "Starfleet as an utopia" has already lost a lot of shine through TNG to VOY. Holograms aren't that widespread yet apparently (the episode featuring the creator of holographic doctor says... 600 or so for the Mark 1 ? IIRC...) and it's only been 7 years. A legal and ethics gap is not inconceivable.

Though there's also the Moriarty precedent. But well the TNG crew wasn't particularly considerate despite acknowledging sentience.

there was also that jazz woman riker fell for, and you had vic fontaine straight up comming senior staff going "hey pally, come get your boy nog" by the end of DS9.

While TNG showed some holos gaining sentience as freak occurrences, voyager pretty much implied it was inevitable if you just didn't turn them off, which is something you'd assume would get caught in QA.
sloppy writing aside, if you have always-eventually-sentient beings whose role in life is always going to be to get fucked (one way or another) and star fleet just don't give a fuck... thats, uh.... yeah.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 03:18:58 PM
Vic Fontaine might actually be more recent than the HMU (though obviously the HMU is in the Delta Quadrant and word of him didn't reach Starfleet immediately), Voyager overlaps the second half of DS9 ?

But yeah the writing is a bit loose, it's back to the whole Data has-no-feelings-even-if-he-obviously-does and is-unique-but-not-really. It's somewhat implied the Doctor's situation is because he's on all the time and has vast amount of computer memory and power to continuously expand but he's pretty much sentient from the get go and so is the HMU Mk.II on that Voltron ship... Or the other HMU on the Equinox. By the end of S7 you have several photonic insurgencies and it seems it's just a matter of overriding a couple of safeties in the programming to create a person out of any sufficiently sophisticated hologram which start to strain the idea no one in the Alpha Quadrant encountered this outside of flagships despite heavy holo-use.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on January 25, 2020, 04:24:10 PM
Watched first ep of Picard with my trekkie mate. I enjoyed Discovery, but this is way more my style. Very keen for more episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 04:56:27 PM
Voyager gets trapped in another void ?

 :cmonson
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 25, 2020, 05:06:42 PM
Really like this review and enjoying the good press and reviews for the show. Most Trek fans seem to be on board. This is the first time I've seen Trekkies united on something since...*thinks*

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/star-trek-picard-review?fbclid=IwAR04BeasePpiCUknT5fb3jsldhbbgKZpUlylvNLkyssi_QRPMRcrjKxG5KU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 25, 2020, 06:11:01 PM
I like the Voyager episode where they get trapped inside this big space creature, where it slowly eats their crew alive by feeding on their energy or something, while showing them that they are actually on their way home

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 06:26:46 PM
Voyager : Workforce is kinda cool and a fresh premise.
I guess Naomi Wildman was put to work into the salt mines offscreen.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 07:05:24 PM
Jeri Ryan looks good in that Starfleet uniform (DUH). I'm not gonna relitigate the issue of fan service but it's been a while I found a little weird there's no actual blue shirt science officer among the main cast besides the Doctor. I know Janeway is supposed to have been one and Seven (& Kes) is basically fulfilling those duties, so I'm just hung up on the uniform and it's dumb.

Seven holofantasies with Chakotay :donot
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 25, 2020, 09:51:07 PM
I hadn't seen the Photons, Be Free episode yet when discussing holograms and was unaware they had the judicial ruling again. You'd imagine someone would have loved invoked the Data precedent  :brain
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 26, 2020, 09:52:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfQdf93e63I

:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 27, 2020, 02:01:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2XrkuexUaY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on January 27, 2020, 04:36:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfQdf93e63I

:rejoice

Lemme guess they don't like it and it's beep beep boop consume corporate product bad  :snore
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 27, 2020, 04:50:36 PM
Well I watched it.

















I liked it.

Yeah there’s some nu-Trek action in the mix, but the story they seem to be telling so far is one that would make sense for Picard to pursue, and it’s nice to see a new Trek show mirroring the “social consciousness” and dilemmas of current times.  (I haven’t watched Discovery so maybe that does it too?)

Based on this first episode, I’ll give the full season a watch.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 27, 2020, 04:51:38 PM
The RLM video is very cranky old men yelling at clouds though they play it up for comedic effect (I thought the bit with Jay was hilarious even if very partisan).

As said in the RLM thread I don't think their demonstration in support of their point about Picard not being especially close to Data is very convincing, the examples they use are extreme cherry picking. Picard being all duty all the time to a fault is his whole TNG schtick or character arc. It's true that Picard is not Data's best friend but from his pleading in Measure of a Man it's obvious he has some passion about the matter of Data's humanity.

That rooftop action scene looks :hhh and  :snore and the whole Fox interview of Picard seems painfully on the nose. It's a fine line separating being a witness and commentator of its time & just being tacky, stale and dated. But I would need to see the episode / series to really opine on that I guess.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 27, 2020, 06:44:08 PM
Voyager : Endgame is fucking lame. BOO. BOO.

That Enterprise intro :donot
Future rednecks with future Remington shotguns  :existential

Edit : Is Archer Country Music MAGA Captain ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 27, 2020, 06:55:34 PM
Voyager : Endgame is fucking lame. BOO. BOO.

Admiral Janeway: Fuck you Captain Kim, imma go back in time and keep you ensign forever
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 27, 2020, 08:28:33 PM
Calling ep 1 of Picard an action fest makes no sense to me.

It's like the guys are bitching to bitch. I really disagree with them
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on January 27, 2020, 09:09:12 PM
RedLetterMedia have been wrong quite a bit lately. For instance, they thought Overlord was great (it's trash), they thought The Mandalorian was good (it was boring), they thought Tron was a difficult movie to follow and nobody could possibly like it, and last but not least, they thought Terminator Dark Fate was the best sequel to the franchise since Terminator 2 (the Sarah Connor Chronicles TV show and Terminator Salvation were). They also went way too easy on Rise of Skywalker.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 27, 2020, 10:25:46 PM
Haven't watched the full video yet but have they acknowledged that so far at least they're in the minority and that many (most)  Trekkies that are critical of Disco and JJ Trek loved the first episode? The reception is almost universal praise and it's the first time in decades I've seen Trekkies united about something.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 28, 2020, 03:21:04 AM
Future rednecks with future Remington shotguns 
I actually disliked that they already had handheld "phase pistols" at the start. I know lots of people had a similar response at the time as you did to that, but to me it's like we have been using our basic projectile guns for 400 years ourselves. This is only 150 years in the future.

The phase cannons are clearly "new" and "untested" and blatantly not phasers. And have all kinds of issues. You'd think that it'd be harder to scale them down to handheld weapons rather than the other way.

I did like how the torpedoes are just like a space version of our torpedoes and don't have the magic explosions of the photon ones yet.  I actually think more of the weapons in Trek in general could be projectile based, even into the DS9 era one of the other races should use them in some way. Warp torpedoes seems like it should be a thing. Physically smash through your hull and then use a failed warp reaction to really fuck things up. Could be where you put the bad warpcores to increase yields.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 28, 2020, 04:05:19 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/DcbLhPt.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 28, 2020, 06:41:32 AM
https://youtu.be/jTwpoLLjpqg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 28, 2020, 06:42:10 AM
Haven't watched the full video yet but have they acknowledged that so far at least they're in the minority and that many (most)  Trekkies that are critical of Disco and JJ Trek loved the first episode? The reception is almost universal praise and it's the first time in decades I've seen Trekkies united about something.

Not really, and I think this is one of their worst reviews. Still had a good laugh though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on January 28, 2020, 06:44:02 AM
Haven't watched the full video yet but have they acknowledged that so far at least they're in the minority and that many (most)  Trekkies that are critical of Disco and JJ Trek loved the first episode? The reception is almost universal praise and it's the first time in decades I've seen Trekkies united about something.

I really don't care how universally praised a fucking Romulan built Borg Cube is.  :lol this shit is goofy on its face.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 28, 2020, 06:47:35 AM
https://youtu.be/jTwpoLLjpqg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da16Z33GyRw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 28, 2020, 06:54:10 AM
It's hard to top the "I ride off... on the grass" part but the "they've turned lesbian" "yeah because they've been in the camp for so long" exchange is great because it's like he's so clearly thought out the logic and lore of this world.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 28, 2020, 07:10:11 AM
https://youtu.be/jTwpoLLjpqg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da16Z33GyRw

Bbc has blocked that clip in my country, well fine you british cunts fuck off then
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 28, 2020, 07:26:23 AM
Future rednecks with future Remington shotguns 
I actually disliked that they already had handheld "phase pistols" at the start. I know lots of people had a similar response at the time as you did to that, but to me it's like we have been using our basic projectile guns for 400 years ourselves. This is only 150 years in the future.

I'm not gonna create a YouTube channel to upload 45mn long videos of my bitter and jaded re:views alongside my alcoholic / diabetic friend (I'm not sure which I'd rather be) about it, it's a very minor detail and the Enterprise intro is obviously trying to blindside the viewer. To be honest, future shotgun is no more visually silly than some of those phaser rifles design(s) they had, especially on Voyager. I agree that the series sorta shot its whole load early in paying off the obvious expectations (hey guys, remember TELEPORTATION, TORPEDOS and SET TO STUN ?), or it feels this way.

I'm a bit torn : I kinda like the more archaic, army submarine style but it's also so bloody grey and expected. I must say however than jumping from Voyager : Endgame to Enterprise was massively refreshing. Except for the opening music, made me want to barf.

I'm still reeling from how bad Voyager : Endgame was. Time Travel Ex Machina shit + not so great premise and story + old people make up + cramming so much extraneous details while the main plot is already suffocating from the lack of any scope... And not having even a decent payoff at the end (I dunno, show Earth from space as the credit rolls. ANYTHING) is the killing blow. I thought they made a decent job of wrapping things up and overall direction for the final season up to that point too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 28, 2020, 07:32:48 AM
Janeway deffo the sort of person to complain about the lack of difficulty options in Sekiro.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 28, 2020, 01:51:15 PM
So I watched the first episode of Picard...

Positive aspects

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The old timey music at the start of the show.
[close]

Negative aspects

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The opening sequence.  :yuck
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Data's makeup looked like shite in the first dream sequence, though looked much better in the second dream sequence Data painted Daj somehow was.  :doge
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I got excited because of Picard/Data wearing the TNG uniforms but was appalled by the collar redesign
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The overly human acting Romulans (Romulans have two modes a superiority complex and a calm yet seething anger).
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
While the show looks impressive from a technical standpoint, it looks ugly i don't know how else to put it.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The present day politics are going to age like stale ass and hot dog water.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The Borg cube fly by shit was totally Death Star/Tie Fighers lol the Romulan tech in this show looks like garbage.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The episode feels cobbled together.
[close]


spoiler (click to show/hide)
The neckbeard Romulan in the season preview totally :trigger me.
[close]



4/10



Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 28, 2020, 04:46:47 PM
One last thing about the end of Voyager

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Being vaguely familiar with some of the plot points ahead, I kept expecting an episode about Tuvok entering early Vulcan senility at some point in S7. Didn't realize it was a C-plot crammed into the last episode.
[close]

That ending note is really sour. Overall I'll probably remember Voyager as one long blur of mediocrity. Ultimately the show failed at conveying the feeling that they were really stranded and isolated. Minus the maintenance at star bases, it didn't look very different than Enterprise 5 year mission. I wasn't convinced at first but it's really a lesser version of TNG with a much lesser cast of characters.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 28, 2020, 05:58:13 PM
Edit : Is Archer Country Music MAGA Captain ?

Archer being a W.Bush expy seem to be a well worn point of Star Trek punditry.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 28, 2020, 06:10:18 PM
One last thing about the end of Voyager

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Being vaguely familiar with some of the plot points ahead, I kept expecting an episode about Tuvok entering early Vulcan senility at some point in S7. Didn't realize it was a C-plot crammed into the last episode.
[close]

That ending note is really sour. Overall I'll probably remember Voyager as one long blur of mediocrity. Ultimately the show failed at conveying the feeling that they were really stranded and isolated. Minus the maintenance at star bases, it didn't look very different than Enterprise 5 year mission. I wasn't convinced at first but it's really a lesser version of TNG with a much lesser cast of characters.
If you haven’t seen it, maybe give Stargate Universe a try.  Despite some really dumb first season drama, I feel like they managed to sell the “stranded and isolated in space” vibe a whole lot better, even with the power creep that had occurred in the series by then.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 28, 2020, 06:48:53 PM
One last thing about the end of Voyager

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Being vaguely familiar with some of the plot points ahead, I kept expecting an episode about Tuvok entering early Vulcan senility at some point in S7. Didn't realize it was a C-plot crammed into the last episode.
[close]

That ending note is really sour. Overall I'll probably remember Voyager as one long blur of mediocrity. Ultimately the show failed at conveying the feeling that they were really stranded and isolated. Minus the maintenance at star bases, it didn't look very different than Enterprise 5 year mission. I wasn't convinced at first but it's really a lesser version of TNG with a much lesser cast of characters.
If you haven’t seen it, maybe give Stargate Universe a try.  Despite some really dumb first season drama, I feel like they managed to sell the “stranded and isolated in space” vibe a whole lot better, even with the power creep that had occurred in the series by then.

I'll take a look if it is on Netflix over here, maybe take a look at it. I've seen my fair share of SG1 and it's always been a somewhat decent show.

Man, Enterprise Engineer-Man and Tactics-Man are really cracker overload. :lol They blend quite a bit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 28, 2020, 11:23:45 PM
Phlox :jeb
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 28, 2020, 11:38:50 PM
Shran :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 28, 2020, 11:40:37 PM
T'Pol is the hottest Star Trek actress next to Troi and I desperately want to eat her Vulcan pussy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 29, 2020, 01:57:55 PM
If you haven’t seen it, maybe give Stargate Universe a try.  Despite some really dumb first season drama, I feel like they managed to sell the “stranded and isolated in space” vibe a whole lot better, even with the power creep that had occurred in the series by then.

All I remember about SG:U was how, uh, "inspired" by the BSG reboot it was, right down to Captain Not-Adama having the same beef with Robert Carlyle as Adama had with Baltar in BSG, to the point he leaves him to fucking die on an uninhabited planet.
Except Baltar was responsible for the death of most of the human race in BSG, and robert Carlyle saved the earth and all their fucking lives, so didn't really have a strong justification for why he was suddenly treated by shit by everyone like he was the one who'd tried to kill them all
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 29, 2020, 02:38:16 PM
I’ve only just started watching BSG, so luckily I didn’t have that to color anything there.  I really like the actors playing Young and Rush, though, so I had that to help me through some of the dumb stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 29, 2020, 02:51:57 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da16Z33GyRw

Bbc has blocked that clip in my country, well fine you british cunts fuck off then

BREXIT NOW BREXIT NOW
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 29, 2020, 03:00:24 PM
I’ve only just started watching BSG, so luckily I didn’t have that to color anything there.  I really like the actors playing Young and Rush, though, so I had that to help me through some of the dumb stuff.

Robert Carlyle (Rush) is always watchable, even in utter shit like Once Upon A Time.
I seem to recall being pretty disapointed all in all with SG:U, and it suddenly making not-Jonah-hill the focus towards its tailspin into cancellation
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on January 30, 2020, 05:01:25 AM
Watched the second episode of Picard much better than the first, the neckbeard Romulan though. :trigger

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Mohawk Romulan :trigger :trigger :trigger
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I also had my suspicions validated when I thought to myself that his servants are glow in the darks. :lol
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Cussing  :hhh
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on January 30, 2020, 05:26:25 AM
T'Pol is the hottest Star Trek actress next to Troi and I desperately want to eat her Vulcan pussy.
only when she's brown, she's a weird looking white woman :fbm


(https://i.imgur.com/uoEwSv9.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 30, 2020, 07:42:54 AM
I kinda like Enterprise (not yet Star Trek colon) actually ? The simplicity of it is a huge palette cleanser. Technobabble never bothered me in the moment but the contrast from coming directly from Voyager really make me feel in retrospect how the stories abused it. I'm sure I'll get mad at the Temporal Cold War thing already though.

https://youtu.be/M64voQEIY9k
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 30, 2020, 08:08:57 AM
A lot of the Enterprise backlash was it being four years after Voyager stopping (so people were really wanting another Trek show), not continuing the timeline but going back to the start, and having Bakula on the show. Plus the theme song, which is pretty good in hindsight. I liked the show a lot more when I rewatched it a decade or so later without the baggage of expecting things from the show that it wasn't going to do.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Joe Molotov on January 30, 2020, 11:20:26 AM
The only episodes of Enterprise that I've watched is the arc where they brought back Brent Spiner as Dr. Soong.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on January 30, 2020, 11:49:40 AM
I only saw the first season or two of Enterprise and never went back to finish.  I remember distinctly having at the time a big “fuck this fucking shit, I’m out” reaction to the episode where the nazi space-vampires appeared.

Years later, I heard the finale was a massive pile of shit, and thus have never felt compelled to try and finish watching it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 30, 2020, 11:51:24 AM
The finale is a real slap in the face for sure.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 30, 2020, 12:31:52 PM
I kinda like Enterprise (not yet Star Trek colon) actually ? The simplicity of it is a huge palette cleanser. Technobabble never bothered me in the moment but the contrast from coming directly from Voyager really make me feel in retrospect how the stories abused it. I'm sure I'll get mad at the Temporal Cold War thing already though.

https://youtu.be/M64voQEIY9k

Enterprise premiered like immediately after Voyager ended. Immediately. If they waited a few years Star Trek probably would be on tv right now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 30, 2020, 12:49:01 PM
i thought it was a few years but i just looked it up and it really was only 4 months after voyager ended. damn my brain really didn't want to believe that :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on January 30, 2020, 01:42:02 PM
Watched the first episode of Picard.

Probably already been posted but you can watch it here in us for this week if you haven't seen it already.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PPm5l3o2zw&

For context I really like Discovery so that's where I stand on that.


I liked the premiere episode but I had my issues. I kinda wish it had been a two hour premier episode. I feel like this episode moves very fast to set up the world dominoes. I probably would have preferred a slightly slower pace to ground me in the world and characters. I like where it ends up at the end of the episode but I think I would have preferred a slower trip there.

I like that it's not just another show on a ship. I've always felt Star Trek on television could expand beyond just being that, not that I don't think it won't end up having its fair size tropes of trek on a ship moments.

The special effects are a little sketchy. It's easier to do sci-fi when you are confined to a ship and limited locales especially exteriors. Definitely trickier if you are trying to tell stories in cities where the special effects have to do the whole job of simulating an entire world. It's not a big issue with me, as I'm not a stickler when it comes to special effects in the first place, but its noticeable.

We'll see where it goes and how I feel after it starts to move the plot along.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 30, 2020, 04:12:11 PM
New Picard was pretty good
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 30, 2020, 04:33:20 PM
i thought it was a few years but i just looked it up and it really was only 4 months after voyager ended. damn my brain really didn't want to believe that :lol

TNG - DS9 - VOY - ENT & the movies were "18 years or so of continuous production" to quote what I read, fatigue was inevitable.

I don't know if launching Discovery then Picard in such short order (though I'd imagine it's maybe planned for a shorter overall duration than 7 years each) is really a great idea but I guess it's go for broke when it's time to milk that cow.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 30, 2020, 04:56:42 PM
That has been my argument against the trek milking. They beat Trek to death. In the 90's and early 00's and they're doing it all over again. We do not need three to four different trek shows on at once and of course Trekkies don't want to hear it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 30, 2020, 04:58:49 PM
fwiw the current crop of trek shows seem pretty different from each other compared to before
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 30, 2020, 05:05:23 PM
That has been my argument against the trek milking. They beat Trek to death. In the 90's and early 00's and they're doing it all over again. We do not need three to four different trek shows on at once and of course Trekkies don't want to hear it

I really do think they're desperate to make fetch cbs all access or whatever its called a thing and this is basically all they got to try and do that.
See also the mandalorian tbh.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 30, 2020, 05:57:00 PM
fwiw the current crop of trek shows seem pretty different from each other compared to before

True Voyager and ENT just rehashed TNG. They wore that formula thin.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 31, 2020, 08:49:12 AM
liked the second picard episode, dunno how we are handling spoilers here so i'll just say that the conversation he had with the admiral was sobering. definitely shows a different view on starfleet than we are used to from TNG era.

this part specifically
spoiler (click to show/hide)
CLANCY: The Romulans were our enemies, and we tried to help them for as long as we could. But even before the synthetics attacked Mars, fourteen species within the Federation said "cut the romulans loose" or we'll pull out. It was a choice between allowing the Federation to implode or letting the Romulans go.

PICARD: The Federation does not get to decide if a species lives or dies.

CLANCY: Yes we do.
[close]

when she said that my wife and i just looked at each other and both raised our eyebrows. things have really changed and considering the history of everything that happened in the show/movie canon it does make sense in a way.

saw a really good post on r/daystrominstitute (an excellent sub btw) that sums up my feelings really well on the show and its new perspective so far. it does have spoilers for the first two eps but it's worth a read
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/ew9fg8/the_other_side_of_jeanluc/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 31, 2020, 09:16:01 AM
It makes sense the federation would be more war hawkish and TOS like after the dominion war.

Also we've always had questionable admin behavior. The whole Maquis thing? Staff like Jelico? The rot of the issues raised at the academy and its students. It's almost like Picard and the Enterprise were operating on the ideal of the federation more than anyone else.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on January 31, 2020, 10:17:26 AM
always relevant clip about why that underlying idealism about what the future could be (that star trek is pretty unique in portraying) has kept its fanbase going for half a century now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hdiuRMK3UQ
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 31, 2020, 10:57:10 AM
This post on the Picard Daystrom thread is fantastic

- - - - - - -

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I think there are a lot of people watching the first two episodes with nostalgia glasses on and not looking at the Federation as analogous to The United States as an entity.

The US was an experiment and there's not really a historical comparison--a country built on democracy with self-governed states making up the whole. It's a big country with a lot of moving parts, maybe too big with too many at times. People from California are as different as people from New York as they are from Tennessee. And it was never perfect, like people like to think it once was. There have always been problems, enemies, corruptions, moral failures.

So looking at a Federation that is now in its 238th year of existence, made up of 150 member worlds over hundreds of light years with different species with different points of view and cultures and histories, why is anyone surprised that when we get our boots on the ground that Starfleet and the Federation may be different from what we have been exposed to? Four ships, a station, a handful of admirals and an idyllic group of explorers.

I think that the more time has passed since the inception of an idea the more convoluted it gets. I believe that Commodore Oh is actually Vulcan but part of that larger sect, but even though she technically is from a member world she is compromised. It's like a galaxy-spanning game of telephone. Unless everyone you meet is 100% into the Federation ideal the people that join up and rise the ranks are at risk of doing something antithetical to the whole concept.

As OP pointed out, even Picard is not immune to the wheels of time and to scrutiny.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 31, 2020, 11:02:21 AM
yeah its important to note that WE know the decisions and background info on stuff like locutus and wolf359 and all the other issues and incidents in the saga of the borg and dominion war and shinzon and all that, but the general public of the federation does not. so they could have a much different view of picard in that light. sisko and his view on picard in the first episode of DS9 is the perfect example of that.

also might want to spoiler that commodore bit? i dunno. anyway on her...

spoiler (click to show/hide)
i assumed she was romulan at first but then realized that's probably unlikely since they are officially "enemies" of the federation. the lieutenant who's name i forgot is in a disguise so it's possible the commodore is too.

a vulcan who was turned by the romulans would be something really interesting though, and i'm not opposed to the idea.
[close]

either way i really am looking forward to episode 3. really liking the "aw, that's it? i want more" feeling i get at the end of each episode so far.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 31, 2020, 11:07:08 AM
I seriously don't understand reading an in depth convo and complaining about spoilers but I'll oblige.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I like the idea of a Vulcan that's actually Romulan and being in Starfleet. It's likely to be true and it will put into question what Starfleet would do about such a case. We've established that federation won't take in romulan aid and refugeee. How will they react when a commander is revealed to be romulan? I also like the mystery surrounding these characters and their allegiances. Like we have no idea what the twin wants.
[close]

I am really liking this show. It's like a continuation of DS9 more than TNG's principles.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on January 31, 2020, 11:09:52 AM
its more for the benefit of those in other countries and/or with parental obligations that stop em from watching the show day one. personally i don't believe that spoilers out of context ruin anything but its such a mixed thread with old and new trek being discussed back and forth, that's all. :)

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on January 31, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
It's been a while so I rewatched the scene in Emissary between Sisko and Picard.

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

Picard (the show) is definitely evoking a similar feeling.

Like many of Jean Luc's best tales, it seems the show will basically come down to the ideal versus pragmatism.

Also:

Quote
I also think those who are viewing it with rose tinted glasses may have skipped some viewing.

We've already seen members of the Federation happy to see a major species die from a disaster, and a conspiracy between the Federation and Romulans - The Undiscovered Country.

A lot of the stuff I've seen on the Star Trek sub singled out often angrily as just impossible from Trek was established in a Kirk film that came out in the middle of TNG's run.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on January 31, 2020, 12:08:39 PM
slightly sped up Youtube videos

 :nope
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on January 31, 2020, 02:34:18 PM
Considering undiscovered country is a bunch of kirkwanking with a scooby doo villain that's a much better comparison than i initially thought
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on January 31, 2020, 05:22:21 PM
RE spoilers: I'm watching with my trekkie friend, but he's overseas for work for three weeks, so I'm on blackout from Picard.

My attitude is that it's up to me to avoid spoilers, but it's probably polite to wait at least a week before openly discussing stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on January 31, 2020, 06:07:24 PM
It wasn't a conspiracy between the Federation and the Romulans in The Undiscovered Country. The Undiscovered Country is a fall of the Soviet Union allegory.

It was a separatist group within the Federation AND the Klingons that wished to prevent peace to maintain the status quo. The Romulans are named at the end in the conspiracy simply because preventing the alliance is in their normal strategic goals. The Romulans make their actual move decades later at the other Khitomer Event.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on January 31, 2020, 06:27:04 PM
Wow, that's some bad drunken acting from Southern Cracker and British Cracker. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: thisismyusername on February 01, 2020, 12:15:27 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PPm5l3o2zw&

Very cool. I'll maybe check it out for Patrick Ste--

*CBS, a fucking megacorp broadcasting Network with Captions on TV can't fucking put them up on their Youtube videos*

Whisky. Tango. Foxtrot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 01, 2020, 03:50:31 PM
Enterprise has a lot of flaws but no holodreck :rejoice
I wondered in this very thread back when watching TOS why Starfleet wasn't running with Vulcans everywhere considering they live longer, more resistant to environment, stronger and smarter. It's always been clear they're often smug xenophobes but I like that Enterprise adresses that in more political detail, going so far as to suggest a certain amount of imperialism. I think it's new because while they were at odds with Romulans, there was never much made of militaries capabilities or even will to defend by force.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 01, 2020, 04:51:23 PM
Vulcans are totally the world universe police murica style in ENT.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 02, 2020, 10:00:13 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/ewp0jc/starfleet_admirals_and_the_philosopher_king/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/ewp0jc/starfleet_admirals_and_the_philosopher_king/)

:dead at the number of disgruntled academics in that thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 03, 2020, 02:16:57 PM
one of the promo shots for the new picard episode show a flashback to post-Nemesis and what the uniforms looked like

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/5CxeAMj.jpg)
[close]

 :obama
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 03, 2020, 02:18:41 PM
Penguins 2021 jersey is rad.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 03, 2020, 04:10:29 PM
Bakula's Quidditch champion of the Mujahideen.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 03, 2020, 04:17:06 PM
Those uniforms.  :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 03, 2020, 04:35:16 PM
one of the promo shots for the new picard episode show a flashback to post-Nemesis and what the uniforms looked like

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/5CxeAMj.jpg)
[close]

 :obama

Gross
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 03, 2020, 04:41:52 PM
To be fair, I don't think any of the uniforms since the service colors were relegated to secondary (so early TNG) looked all that hot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 03, 2020, 04:50:00 PM
buncha haters
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 03, 2020, 04:54:07 PM
Bring back the one-piece spandex jumpsuits, you cowards!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 03, 2020, 04:58:55 PM
Enterprise's "Dear Doctor" is apparently a close contender to "Tuvix" if you want to start an argument at a Trek convention and whether it ruins Phlox. I didn't get all hot & steamy but yeah it's built on what seem to be a fairly fishy way to interpret the Theory of Evolution. I guess in a way the lore wrote itself into a corner with the whole "one homogeneous species per planet".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 05, 2020, 07:30:33 PM
Enterprise's Dead Stop is legit one of the best and tightest Star Trek scripts in a long time.
 :leon

The retcons to the general Star Trek timeline are a bit :larry (no matter how improbable, the TOS evocation of the first war against the Romulans fought in antiquated rockets had more flair than them having technology much closer of the rest of the franchise) but I don't care a lot about continuity if you bend it for decent stories.

As expected, the time travel stuff is  :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 05, 2020, 07:44:16 PM
Like I mentioned, I think Enterprise does better than Voyager are making "unexplored" space seem risky, dangerous and mysterious. "Dead Stop" is one of those episodes I remember, along with most of "The Catwalk" coming up, at creating a threat for the crew that doesn't have to be some other species, it can be a legit thing. And it can be restrained instead of drowning everything in technobabble.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 06, 2020, 05:03:29 AM
Saw ep3 of Picard and it's poop.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 06, 2020, 07:31:29 AM
Saw ep3 of Picard and it's poop.

dang
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 06, 2020, 04:32:00 PM
Porthos triggering Archer's JANEWAY BLOODLUST :lol
I think Enterprise has a good episodic / continuity balance too.

"How long since your last sexual intercourse Captain ?"
I take it Archer didn't bone plastic surgery Dean Stockwell on Risa.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 07, 2020, 01:44:40 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/)

 :hmm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 07, 2020, 04:09:48 PM
British Cracker officially now British Angst.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 08, 2020, 02:05:51 AM
Like I mentioned, I think Enterprise does better than Voyager are making "unexplored" space seem risky, dangerous and mysterious. "Dead Stop" is one of those episodes I remember, along with most of "The Catwalk" coming up, at creating a threat for the crew that doesn't have to be some other species, it can be a legit thing. And it can be restrained instead of drowning everything in technobabble.
I just went and re-watched this episode, and was reminded how much I enjoyed it the first time. It does a good job on making the station feel strange and mysterious, and ultimately ends with very few of the raised questions answered. ENT got short shrift in general; it's a better series than VOY.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/)

 :hmm
I'll have to check that one out next.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 08, 2020, 11:26:20 AM
voyager might have my favorite theme though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 08, 2020, 05:19:08 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fMPiNTmXRs

:ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 08, 2020, 06:47:13 PM
voyager might have my favorite theme though

I think the Goldsmith theme for The Motion Picture that they reused for TNG is super good but the Voyager one is a lot better than the series deserve.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 08, 2020, 10:32:53 PM
IT'S BEEN A LONG ROAD

GETTING FROM THERE TO HERE

IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME

BUT MY TIME IS FINALLY NEAR

AND I WILL SEE MY DREAM COME ALIVE AT LAST

I WILL TOUCH THE SKY

AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA HOLD ME DOWN NO MORE

NO THEY'RE NOT GONNA CHANGE MY MIND

GONNA RISE UP KICK A LITTLE ASS ROCK FLAG AND EAGLE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 08, 2020, 10:37:42 PM
and looked it up and I nailed it somehow

the Enterprise version isn't the actual song version, it's like two of the verses and a bridge rearraigned into one verse so it sounds like it's about flight, then like DS9 they do a minor redo to the music in a later season but I forget which
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 09, 2020, 04:29:58 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyDaystrom/comments/evgqyi/in_tng_brothers_riker_and_the_senior_staff_are/)

 :hmm

Quote
Is Riker retired in STP because Troi hit Betazoid menopause, quadrupling her sex drive, so now he's basically nothing more than a sex slave?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 09, 2020, 05:57:42 PM
What if Roy Batty's speech but in a southern accent ? 
:jeanluc
Trip is like the most facile thing ever but he's kind of growing on me.
Phlox is good, I'm glad they finally worked out a a good doctor not of the jerkass type.

The Catwalk wasn't as good as Dead Stop but not bad, I liked how the last act was condensed at the very end. Made for a tense and explosive conclusion.

Wow that AIDS metaphor is really transparent. Kinda awkward how Archer goes "Oh yeah you were [sexually] assaulted  :cornette now I remember.". I guess it was for the benefit of infrequent viewers.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 11, 2020, 05:42:42 PM
"- They should put families on starships.
- They would have to put a psychologist too then !"


FUUUUCKKKK OFFFFFF
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 11, 2020, 05:52:09 PM
Leave Troi alone :stop
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 13, 2020, 12:04:04 PM
Star Trek Picard EPIV There and Back Again aka Romulan Rivendell.

 :neogaf
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 13, 2020, 02:07:17 PM
I thought it was ok although highly predictible also a bit boring
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 13, 2020, 02:20:04 PM
If you told me this and the recent Shannara share the same universe I wouldn't question it. :shaq
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 13, 2020, 02:26:58 PM
What is Shannararar
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 13, 2020, 04:54:34 PM
Amazon Prime Japan just recovered all the Star Trek films, and I'd been wanting to re-watch VI: The Undiscovered Country for a long while.

I'd forgotten how many actors appear in it. Christian Slater is an ensign on Sulu's ship, Michael Dorn plays Kirk-and-McCoy's Klingon lawyer, John Schuck plays an ambassador, and "Clarence Boddicker" plays the President of the Federation, who LOOKS like he is a Klingon, but for some reason is not.

The CG blood in this is stunningly dated.

Christopher Plummer is having a great time chewing the scenery.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 13, 2020, 04:58:32 PM
"Clarence Boddicker" plays the President of the Federation, who LOOKS like he is a Klingon, but for some reason is not.

Kurtwood Smith. Also played the Cardassian head of security in DS9 (in that Odo flashback episode) and the captain of the massive time-travel cannon ship on Voyager.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on February 13, 2020, 09:51:06 PM
Michael Dorn plays Kirk-and-McCoy's Klingon lawyer
Named Worf.

One of the later Worf's ancestors. A joke they made into canon. :lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bluemax on February 14, 2020, 03:18:40 AM
https://twitter.com/HollyConrad/status/1228217579551875072
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 14, 2020, 03:32:27 AM
Nah Normandy is still better
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 17, 2020, 06:52:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMKtKNZw4Bo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 17, 2020, 07:29:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkDmRy6SP28

:rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 18, 2020, 04:00:11 AM
mid season episode reviews yassss
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 18, 2020, 06:39:21 AM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/yr5n1fh.png)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 19, 2020, 07:25:15 AM
Was reading TVTropes (self inflicted injury, I know) for ST:Picard and saw this in the "Your Mileage May Vary" section :

Quote
"Endgame", the finale of Voyager, also ended with the strong implication that the entire Borg Collective had been wiped out once and for all

:confused It doesn't imply anything of the sort ?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 19, 2020, 12:42:16 PM
It's just their network of transwarp shit being blowed up right?

https://youtu.be/edflm7Hh3hs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 19, 2020, 04:44:01 PM
Yeah I remember it was made pretty clear that they destroyed a transwarp hub (out of 6 known to Seven of Nine or something). I guess you could infer that Borg efforts to reach the Alpha Quadrant would be set back from it.

I suppose the confusion is that Borg Queen get destroyed too. But didn't that happen in First Contact too ? And the whole body (at the very least neck down) is basically just expandable parts both in First Contact and Voyager ? And Voyager had the Borg Queen role go back and forth between two actresses, so it's actually fairly ambivalent that there's one Queen instead of a (or body avatars of) Queen out of several. Or that destroying her would wipe the Collective.

At any rate you'd expect a character to say out loud that the Borg Collective may have been wiped if that's what the writers are trying to say, considering how high profile and prominent they are to the franchise.

I thought that was a pretty outrageous thing to read on TVTropes (not that I think the standard is high or anything).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 20, 2020, 11:24:49 AM
Picard EP5 finally a halfway decent episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 20, 2020, 12:30:03 PM
Picard EP5 finally a halfway decent episode.

Oh shit now im legit excited
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 20, 2020, 12:57:45 PM
Nooooooooooooooooooooo

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Icheb :(
[close]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sIYe74sczE

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Oooooooh Quark get's a mention! He's still killing business I see
[close]

 :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 20, 2020, 11:07:32 PM
I just noticed that Maddox, looks like Jordan Peterson. :neogaf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Commodore Oh (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/thekaratekid/images/0/0c/3iLQU4WFaclBOEQxGmWZ6cARhtX.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20180119231646) (The head of Starfleet Security) 
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 21, 2020, 03:15:01 AM
Pretty lame they didnt use the original actor but whatevs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 21, 2020, 06:51:40 PM
I just noticed that Maddox, looks like Jordan Peterson. :neogaf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Commodore Oh (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/thekaratekid/images/0/0c/3iLQU4WFaclBOEQxGmWZ6cARhtX.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20180119231646) (The head of Starfleet Security) 
[close]

Yeah, Oh is Tamlyn Tomita -- big crush for me, early on. I was happy to see her in Picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 23, 2020, 06:19:59 AM
She was also Jun Kazama in Tekken

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on February 23, 2020, 07:44:56 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/0kesxvefjpi41.jpg?width=1024&auto=webp&s=8bd575ad7e76be5abe24b58be9a7111f78728a42)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 23, 2020, 09:01:30 PM
She was also Jun Kazama in Tekken
Voiceover or movie?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 24, 2020, 04:54:55 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/0kesxvefjpi41.jpg?width=1024&auto=webp&s=8bd575ad7e76be5abe24b58be9a7111f78728a42)

Fucking LOL

@Chronovore she was in the movie
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on February 24, 2020, 09:36:24 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/nrhxwcbglri41.jpg?width=814&auto=webp&s=96161dba42daa725e8773394b4f9ee1c1db855a5)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 24, 2020, 10:18:38 AM
I dun gettit :(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 24, 2020, 10:53:59 AM
I dun gettit :(

Loss meme.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 24, 2020, 10:56:04 AM
I know the loss meme but I still dont get it :(

Guess im just a dumb HU-MAN
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 24, 2020, 10:58:33 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/s6N6S8K.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 24, 2020, 11:06:40 AM
Now thats funny
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 24, 2020, 03:04:21 PM
I dun gettit :(

Loss meme.

That is what loss comes down to now?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on February 24, 2020, 03:06:28 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/s6N6S8K.png)

Dax being left libertarian. Sounds about right and that sounds like me too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on February 25, 2020, 04:11:34 PM
I dun gettit :(

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg/1024px-Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on February 25, 2020, 06:10:09 PM
Where are the pictures of Quark being a top and a bottom then?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on February 25, 2020, 06:34:21 PM
they decayed
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 27, 2020, 06:43:05 AM
Picard Episode 6 another halfway decent one, and better than the last one.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 27, 2020, 06:55:39 PM
https://youtu.be/Uv-wmixiiMA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 28, 2020, 11:26:03 AM
yeah and its pretty good. the best star trek anything in 15 years.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 28, 2020, 01:07:53 PM
its a little strange to be sure, but there's not too much of it and part of the motive seems to be them showing off that they are on a streaming service and can do whatever they want. also this show isn't really as bound by starfleet military stuff. so that's part of it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on February 28, 2020, 01:13:38 PM
thats a good question
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on February 28, 2020, 07:15:00 PM
At the Dabo table.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on February 28, 2020, 08:25:19 PM
Alien underboob :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on February 29, 2020, 07:08:00 AM
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/f/f4/Dabo_girls%2C_Insurrection.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20100820094207&path-prefix=en)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on February 29, 2020, 09:26:58 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/grmRryX.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 03:12:44 AM
Damn, RLM has gone full on bitch mode. It's like they just want to hate it to hate it rather than offer any salient objection.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 01, 2020, 05:21:26 AM
As much as I like Picard, they are right though. The show is fucking stupid compared to TNG
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 01, 2020, 09:23:29 AM
I dunno, I feel like I'm not being spoon-fed the entire story. I feel compelled to do a re-watch of eps. 1~3 just to see if I can figure out more of the post-TNG worldbuilding.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 09:31:11 AM
Nah it's a fucking mess, I'm still like ok I have a vague idea of where we are and how we got here I don't care how many shill channels try to sell me on how this is plausible outcome of Star Fleet/The Federation it's terrible.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Leadbelly on March 01, 2020, 03:56:41 PM
I feel like Patrick Stewart is too old for this shit. The way he delivers his lines seems clunky to me. Then again, I think the dialogue is clunky at times any way.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 07:09:22 PM
Fuck the haters. ST Picard is the most star trek thing in decades.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 07:52:17 PM
Lol no.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 07:55:50 PM
:obama

Yes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 07:59:56 PM
No.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 08:15:52 PM
Alright. What in Trek in the past few decades is better?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 10:32:06 PM
I seriously don't complaints about this show.

"The plot makes no sense!"

The back story makes no sense! The back story is explained episode by episode.

It really just sounds like people mad it's not the same kind of format as old Trek which is really just sour grapes.

"Why is Picard so different?"

In what way?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 10:58:47 PM
The plot is explained but its nonsense.

Picard picked a fight with that Romulan Senator forcing Romulond to kill him that is not Picard, Picard would have been devastated that he caused that shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 11:04:04 PM
The plot is explained but its nonsense.

Picard picked a fight with that Romulan Senator forcing Romulond to kill him that is not Picard, Picard would have been devastated that he caused that shit.

It's like you didn't even watch the show. He didn't pick the fight. In fact, he tried to defuse the situation. The senator is the one that forced him into a duel. The first thing he did was throw the sword to the ground in defiance and refusal to fight. The fight thing Picard literally does when they're on board the ship is lecture Elnor in anger that there was no reason to kill him.

:lol

What happened on the show is literally the exact opposite of what you just wrote and yet you demand the rest of us believe that the story is nonsense. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 11:06:40 PM
Oh please he knew it would escalate to that and thats why its not Picard and its bullshit at most he wagged his finger at him and went about his business.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 01, 2020, 11:06:43 PM
In every single combat scenario Picard has had his gun set to stun. He has chided two crew members (Seven and Elnor) about murder. This is a completely nonsensical criticism and Picard has very much been in line with prior Federation principles of past shows.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 01, 2020, 11:09:19 PM
Yet he gave Seven two phaser assault rifles with little to no hesitation.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 02, 2020, 01:16:27 AM
Anyways, let's actually discuss the show.

Episode 6 was fantastic.

The reunion with Hugh, the Borg reclamation project scenes were the most positive Trek in DECADES, the tension and build up to Soji's dream. I like all of the characters and how it's a show about the struggle to find good in a harsh universe. I love this show and I'm excited as FUCK for the next episode.

It also looked like Soji's father looked sort of like Bashir. I'll be giddy if that's the case.

"These aren't monsters, they're victims."

:bow

RLM complainers: WHEN IS IT GOING TO BE POSITIVE TREK AGAIN reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Also reusing the old Hugh actor :hyper

And this week we get to see Riker and Troi :hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 02, 2020, 01:17:50 AM
https://screenrant.com/star-trek-picard-tng-ds9-morality-idealism-better-explained

Quote
Picard Is About The Good In Flawed People In An Imperfect World

Quote
The Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good

As per the article.

They've truly taken what was great about DS9 and are just exploring more of it :bow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 02, 2020, 01:26:33 AM
Yeah this show is complete nonsense as a Trek show, but I'm going to finish it because I'm essentially a hostage to trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 02, 2020, 06:43:38 PM
https://screenrant.com/star-trek-picard-tng-ds9-morality-idealism-better-explained

Quote
Picard Is About The Good In Flawed People In An Imperfect World

Quote
The Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good

As per the article.

They've truly taken what was great about DS9 and are just exploring more of it :bow

No.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 02, 2020, 06:48:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eHO5Nz2o3E
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: TEEEPO on March 02, 2020, 06:51:14 PM
why do you guys care what other people think?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 02, 2020, 07:37:14 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/wsld8rf407k41.jpg?width=576&auto=webp&s=bcae26d1d270e39c7845c13b1533af82068d40fb)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 02, 2020, 07:38:38 PM
(https://i.redd.it/a5vjzdqjyqj41.png)

:dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 02, 2020, 07:42:10 PM
why do you guys care what other people think?

they encapsulate what I think I just dont want to type it out
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 02, 2020, 07:56:44 PM
why do you guys care what other people think?

So I can tell them they are wrong an their taste is shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Leadbelly on March 02, 2020, 10:16:04 PM
It's just their network of transwarp shit being blowed up right?

https://youtu.be/edflm7Hh3hs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngsqaRD2HI8
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 02, 2020, 10:32:37 PM
None of us should really care if someone dislikes/likes this stuff yet here we are. Can't get mad at people for liking it because I don't, I'm happy for you all.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Leadbelly on March 02, 2020, 10:42:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO8WiZab_PI
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 02, 2020, 10:46:43 PM
why do you guys care what other people think?
None of us should really care if someone dislikes/likes this stuff yet here we are. Can't get mad at people for liking it because I don't, I'm happy for you all.
FUUUUCCCCCKKKK OOOOOOOOoooofffOOOFFFFFF
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 02, 2020, 10:50:46 PM
FACT CHECK: I can't fuck ooooof without first being fucked ooooon
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 04, 2020, 04:30:53 PM
(https://i.redd.it/cgtc1j7u7nk41.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 05, 2020, 05:02:33 AM
What's the point in bringing back
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hugh
[close]
if you're just gonna have the character be totally pointless and then die a pointless death?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 05, 2020, 07:30:01 AM
I just started watching the new ep and what little I saw it looks like the rumor is true about tying it with the dumpster fire that is STD.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 05, 2020, 07:47:59 AM
Already watched the episode, how so?

And yes the episode is garbage again
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 05, 2020, 07:50:45 AM
Already watched the episode, how so?

And yes the episode is garbage again

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm pretty sure they are tying it to the whole "Control" AI thing from STD.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 05, 2020, 07:53:42 AM
Oh, I don't know anything about that. I didn't watch S2 of Discovery.

I would imagine they would steer this show as clear from Discovery as possible, the trainwreck that it is.

Not that this is much better tbh. The entire episode was boring as fuck.

Also why would Rios not suspect Agnes when she says "It's not Raffi"  and why would he even suspect Raffi in the first place?
Doesnt he already know her for a long time?

And why are Rios and Agnes hooking up again? I totally missed that really.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Potato on March 05, 2020, 08:43:52 AM
Just finished episode 5 of Picard. It's very slow moving, but I think I like it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 05, 2020, 10:23:19 AM
I liked the Riker and Picard interactions...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 05, 2020, 11:00:55 AM
Imo the only good parts of the episode. Good to see them together
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 06, 2020, 04:00:23 AM
I LOVED this episode. Troi!!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 06, 2020, 07:05:37 AM
https://twitter.com/redlettermedia/status/1235724538983391232

 :lol

(https://i.imgur.com/xeCGmA0.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 08, 2020, 03:39:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQDVFXHNwUU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 12, 2020, 08:36:30 AM
Picard EP 08 The first episode that I can even call good, felt almost like  a Star Trek episode if not for the cursing, and drunks/druggies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 12, 2020, 03:30:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVlKqh6IRdo

Might watch picard tonight
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 13, 2020, 07:06:09 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vaj_ypAbN_Q
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 13, 2020, 07:12:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVlKqh6IRdo
"Out of context?" No, I'm pretty sure I saw this episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 13, 2020, 07:14:09 PM
(https://i.redd.it/hdcgui46wfm41.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 14, 2020, 03:22:52 AM
This is beautiful.

https://youtu.be/nNNWWdsEYGg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 14, 2020, 04:45:36 AM
Steve Shives  :ufup :trash
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 14, 2020, 11:32:54 AM
That's like, your opinion, dude.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 14, 2020, 12:06:59 PM
He is watchmojo/whatculture tier.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 14, 2020, 03:53:27 PM
Ok
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 14, 2020, 03:55:28 PM
This is beautiful.

https://youtu.be/nNNWWdsEYGg

Keep American politics outta this thread please
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 15, 2020, 02:07:43 AM
Are people still using Red Letter Media as a barometer of what is good?

 :heh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 07:21:15 AM
No RLM is the barometer for what makes an entertaining youtube channel and nothing more.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
They are not wrong on STD/Picard though.  :ryker
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 15, 2020, 08:38:00 AM
Are people still using Red Letter Media as a barometer of what is good?

 :heh

No, but they are right in that this show is written by someone who hasnt watched much tng at all.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 15, 2020, 09:25:14 AM
Have only watched 3 episodes of Picard and liked what I saw so I won't comment but I know I disagree with RLM generally speaking as a source of authority (or people who can never seem to stop bringing them up) when it comes to this stuff so I doubt they have suddenly got better when it comes to what determines good from bad.

The idea that Picard also needs to be roughly the same show as TNG is also something I don't agree with at all. But I'll digress until I have time to watch the full season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 09:59:08 AM
Notice I said an entertaining channel and not whats good and right with the world. I don't agree with them on a lot of their opinions on film and TV shows but I whole heatedly agree with them on STD/Picard.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
See stuff like NuTrek (STD/Picard aka Star Drek) wouldn't be as lambasted if they had any likable characters and weren't written like dog shit.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 15, 2020, 10:01:12 AM
To each his own but I have no problem in general with "NuTrek". TNG was just as flawed as anything else once nostalgia goggles are removed. Which is not to say I don't generally speaking like TNG. I just don't put it on some pedestal as the only way to do Trek or even the best way to do Trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 10:05:40 AM
To each his own but I have no problem in general with "NuTrek". TNG was just as flawed as anything else once nostalgia goggles are removed. Which is not to say I don't generally speaking like TNG. I just don't put it on some pedestal as the only way to do Trek or even the best way to do Trek.


I don't think TNG is the best Trek, to me it's TOS then DS9.

Ah the it's not as good as you remember fallacy...

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH-wD-wMx54
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 15, 2020, 10:32:36 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/2uypqyooqqm41.jpg?width=650&auto=webp&s=db042330e84e254d7fa07dcea6ff5f59fca2c004)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 11:43:39 AM
To each his own but I have no problem in general with "NuTrek". TNG was just as flawed as anything else once nostalgia goggles are removed. Which is not to say I don't generally speaking like TNG. I just don't put it on some pedestal as the only way to do Trek or even the best way to do Trek.


I don't think TNG is the best Trek, to me it's TOS then DS9.

Ah the it's not as good as you remember fallacy...

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH-wD-wMx54

This video is terrible. It is drawn out, has no structure, and just seemingly meanders.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 11:46:38 AM
fake news.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 15, 2020, 11:55:12 AM
Have only watched 3 episodes of Picard and liked what I saw so I won't comment but I know I disagree with RLM generally speaking as a source of authority (or people who can never seem to stop bringing them up) when it comes to this stuff so I doubt they have suddenly got better when it comes to what determines good from bad.

The idea that Picard also needs to be roughly the same show as TNG is also something I don't agree with at all. But I'll digress until I have time to watch the full season.

It doesnt need to be the same as TNG. But the characters need to be not fucking stupid, ie Picard himself.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 15, 2020, 11:57:05 AM
To each his own but I have no problem in general with "NuTrek". TNG was just as flawed as anything else once nostalgia goggles are removed. Which is not to say I don't generally speaking like TNG. I just don't put it on some pedestal as the only way to do Trek or even the best way to do Trek.

Fucking nonsense 100%. I only watched TNG for the first time in the last few years. The only show I saw as a kid growing up was Voyager, and out of DS9, TNG and VOY, VOY is the worst one in hindsight. No nostalgia glasses here.

TNG still invokes a great sense of morality, discussions of what is logical and moral, what is ethical.

Picard deals with none of these issues, and instead is a horrible analogy for Trumps America.

In my opinion, most DS9 episodes are above and beyond the writing set here in Picard. Didn't bother with Discovery season 2, as season 1 was fucking garbage.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 15, 2020, 12:46:25 PM
100% of every holodeck episode in every iteration of trek is shit, so don't pretend old treks are flawless :lol

i'm two episodes back on picard but so far i am still enjoying it. definitely not TNG though heh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 12:48:14 PM
Who said they were flawless?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 15, 2020, 12:50:44 PM
holodeck or lwaxana troi = next episode button
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 15, 2020, 02:44:25 PM
Who said they were flawless?
okay pedantic ass :lol

they aren't as good as you remember. happy now? many of the episodes of the vaunted old trek shows suck balls.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 02:58:40 PM
TNG is flawed as fuck and a product of its era. It's a classic but get real.

Picard is assimilated into the Borg, doesn't have PTSD at all and it's not even mentioned besides the episode where he goes back to the farm and First Contact.

The show has almost no continuity.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 03:00:42 PM
TNG is flawed as fuck and a product of its era. It's a classic but get real.

Picard is assimilated into the Borg, doesn't have PTSD at all and it's not even mentioned besides the episode where he goes back to the farm and First Contact.

The show has almost no continuity.



That's the whole Borg/PTSD arc that Picard forgot about specifically that he got over it in First Contact about the only thing the TNG movies did right.

Who said they were flawless?
okay pedantic ass :lol

they aren't as good as you remember. happy now? many of the episodes of the vaunted old trek shows suck balls.

TNG is still light years ahead of Nutrek garbage. :neogaf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Imagine trying to tear down something good so you can put a literal piece of shit on a pedestal.  :sabu
[close]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xFxTV21KhM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZsbm7TDvUQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wCvXh_1vtQ

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





Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 15, 2020, 10:06:24 PM
There is no such thing as "Not Trek". It's fine if people like or don't like something. But "Not Trek" is meaningless imo. Especially when some people who've enjoyed Trek all their lives from TOS to the TNG era to the current era enjoy it. Like me.

My main point with RLM is that tossing that into the conversation generally does nothing. Especially when they are used as the arbiter of what is "Not Trek" when I disagree with at least 75% of what they say. I'm fine with people as individuals liking or not liking current Trek especially when they express their individual opinions about what they like or don't like. My argument is that

A.) Not all people will agree so let's not pretend there is one consensus opinion here that is the right one.
B.) Please don't use RLM as the appeal to authority. They are random dudes who post stuff on youtube. They have no special claim to what is or isn't trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 10:18:43 PM
People who don't like NuTrek are Trekkies people who do are Drekkies there is your distinction.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 15, 2020, 10:24:37 PM
To be fair I barely post in this thread anymore so its not like I actually care. I just saw the RLM stuff and that got me annoyed since among a certain group the opinions they carry seem to matter quite a lot.(which is quite odd to me)  And it tends to be a lazy form of argumentation to parrot what they say instead of actually having an original opinion. Carry on until the next time I do a drive by.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 11:10:58 PM
TNG is flawed as fuck and a product of its era. It's a classic but get real.

Picard is assimilated into the Borg, doesn't have PTSD at all and it's not even mentioned besides the episode where he goes back to the farm and First Contact.

The show has almost no continuity.



That's the whole Borg/PTSD arc that Picard forgot about specifically that he got over it in First Contact about the only thing the TNG movies did right.

Who said they were flawless?
okay pedantic ass :lol

they aren't as good as you remember. happy now? many of the episodes of the vaunted old trek shows suck balls.

TNG is still light years ahead of Nutrek garbage. :neogaf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Imagine trying to tear down something good so you can put a literal piece of shit on a pedestal.  :sabu
[close]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xFxTV21KhM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZsbm7TDvUQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wCvXh_1vtQ

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

Are you able to articulate an opinion without posting a bunch of youtube videos?

I like Picard and I find it to be very optimistic. Trek usually reflects its era. I think Picard is doing a fine job reflecting the dark/scary times of today. If you don't find it dark or scary that's on you. But I find it to be very optimistic and gets argues that even during the hardest of times we should strive to do what's right. I find it very encouraging that such a broken group of people can find common cause to improve the universe and I'm sorry that it has:

cursing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vrm8TV7K4zo

and smoking in it

Even Discovery, which has its flaws, has some good in it.

It's weird that some of the detractors from Picard argue it's not "real Trek" because there's alcoholics (!!!) in it as they pretend arguments between Synthol and real alcohol have never existed in Trek (O'Brien argues that synthol is nothing compared to a real beer) or that people don't drink actual alcohol regularly (remember Romulan Ale? What about Blood Wine?).

Then there's the argument that there's "too much brokenness" which is apparently impossible in Star Trek the same franchise that had a ensign get PTSD after he lost his leg in a battle, and refused to come out of a holodeck for days at a time because fantasy became better than the real thing. Or the time he was also on board a ship where members of the highest Federation cadet group reduced themselves to cultism as all of the higher ranking officials were murdered in battle.

Star Trek has never featured flawed people

(https://i.imgur.com/STsCT1V.jpg)

It has never had people with problems

(https://i.imgur.com/3UWHPjV.jpg)

Remember the time Kirk became a racist towards Klingons because they killed his son? Star Trek can never be negative or showed character flaws. Better judge an entire show because the first season is even over.

Remember during TOS when people judged Spock harshly because of his non human values?

(https://i.imgur.com/nu2USCr.png)

A lot of these criticisms are baffling and have persisted in Star Trek before. It's most people that critique Picard in particular have never seen an episode of Star Trek. It's baffling, really.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 11:36:23 PM
"You cold blooded devil!"

McCoy's racism is fine.

Someone falling into delusion and depression after they lose their Starfleet commission and purpose in life? That's pushing things too far! :tocry


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 11:37:33 PM
Outside of the china virus what is scary? Yeah Data curses in the dogshit TNG movies, uh McCoy is the space racist aspect of the trinity of Kirk/Spock/McCoy...remember how TNG had female McCoy Pulaski the also space racist? As for the use of youtube videos it proves my point by showing lore violations and other shenanigans and saves me time by not having to type.  :dice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 11:39:08 PM
The rise of authoritarian governments and fascism doesn't frighten you?

What a model Trekkie.

The conceit of the show is a commentary on the migrant crisis and peoples response to it. Greeks are growing increasingly intolerant of migrants and have turned to right wing politics in response.

Just the other day.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/world/europe/greece-turkey-migrants.html
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 11:42:02 PM
 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 15, 2020, 11:49:48 PM
Ok. Since you and the posters like you have shown you completely lack the ability to discuss, you can have this thread and I will post in the other one even if no one else posts in it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 15, 2020, 11:53:28 PM
Ok. Since you and the posters like you have shown you completely lack the ability to discuss, you can have this thread and I will post in the other one even if no one else posts in it.

"You cold blooded devil!"

McCoy's racism is fine.

Someone falling into delusion and depression after they lose their Starfleet commission and purpose in life? That's pushing things too far! :tocry




TNG is flawed as fuck and a product of its era. It's a classic but get real.

Picard is assimilated into the Borg, doesn't have PTSD at all and it's not even mentioned besides the episode where he goes back to the farm and First Contact.

The show has almost no continuity.



That's the whole Borg/PTSD arc that Picard forgot about specifically that he got over it in First Contact about the only thing the TNG movies did right.

Who said they were flawless?
okay pedantic ass :lol

they aren't as good as you remember. happy now? many of the episodes of the vaunted old trek shows suck balls.

TNG is still light years ahead of Nutrek garbage. :neogaf

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Imagine trying to tear down something good so you can put a literal piece of shit on a pedestal.  :sabu
[close]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xFxTV21KhM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZsbm7TDvUQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wCvXh_1vtQ

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

Are you able to articulate an opinion without posting a bunch of youtube videos?

I like Picard and I find it to be very optimistic. Trek usually reflects its era. I think Picard is doing a fine job reflecting the dark/scary times of today. If you don't find it dark or scary that's on you. But I find it to be very optimistic and gets argues that even during the hardest of times we should strive to do what's right. I find it very encouraging that such a broken group of people can find common cause to improve the universe and I'm sorry that it has:

cursing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vrm8TV7K4zo

and smoking in it

Even Discovery, which has its flaws, has some good in it.

It's weird that some of the detractors from Picard argue it's not "real Trek" because there's alcoholics (!!!) in it as they pretend arguments between Synthol and real alcohol have never existed in Trek (O'Brien argues that synthol is nothing compared to a real beer) or that people don't drink actual alcohol regularly (remember Romulan Ale? What about Blood Wine?).

Then there's the argument that there's "too much brokenness" which is apparently impossible in Star Trek the same franchise that had a ensign get PTSD after he lost his leg in a battle, and refused to come out of a holodeck for days at a time because fantasy became better than the real thing. Or the time he was also on board a ship where members of the highest Federation cadet group reduced themselves to cultism as all of the higher ranking officials were murdered in battle.

Star Trek has never featured flawed people

(https://i.imgur.com/STsCT1V.jpg)

It has never had people with problems

(https://i.imgur.com/3UWHPjV.jpg)

Remember the time Kirk became a racist towards Klingons because they killed his son? Star Trek can never be negative or showed character flaws. Better judge an entire show because the first season is even over.

Remember during TOS when people judged Spock harshly because of his non human values?

(https://i.imgur.com/nu2USCr.png)

A lot of these criticisms are baffling and have persisted in Star Trek before. It's most people that critique Picard in particular have never seen an episode of Star Trek. It's baffling, really.



The difference in these flawed characters is that they were likeable hell I am even able to sympathize with them on some level, the whole drunk thing is done off duty unless I am forgetting something I remember Scotty being drunk on duty because that's how he had a drinking contest against some godlike being and that was a totally done for laughs.

Who said there was never flawed people or personal conflicts or any political commentary the difference between then and now is nuance, orange man bad is not nuance.

The druggie thing though is I understand in a way, Raffi fucked up with her family and at the very least her son doesn't want anything to do with her and now she is depressed it's understandable but it doesn't make her likable.


spoiler (click to show/hide)
And don't get me started on Raffi basically giving Picard the check your privilege spiel, imagine "privilege" in a post scarcity universe.  :ufup :trash

(https://i.imgur.com/qF1I58o.gif)

[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 16, 2020, 12:54:08 AM
Holy shit are we going to argue about this forever :lol Some of us think nutrek sucks, to those who enjoy it, peace be upon you, but we really dont have to dig into each other's opinions, cause it's just that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 16, 2020, 02:19:36 AM
For what its worth before I sign out of the thread again I also love this level of deep discussion on characters you've known for like episodes when most of the TNG cast was not "likeable" or useless or not relevant to the plot for seasons not only especially in TNG but pretty much any trek show which generally takes seasons for characters to find their footing. If you think picard is crap after these scant number of episodes (which I don't) then that's pretty par for the course as its been the case with EVERY trek show in the early going outside of maybe tos. (Which also had plenty of useless characters who barely did anything on the show.)

I would have loved the shitalking if TOS came out today.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 07:09:35 AM
If by the first few episodes they are not likeable, then I don't give a shit about their plight. The Expanse is is pretty grim the outlook is dire but I give a shit about the characters and their plight if someone said D3RANG3D oh buddy oh pal this is a Star Trek prequel and it was always intended to be a trek show and not it's own thing, my first instinct would be to grumble about how it's not Trek, but I would come to the conclusion that it is a well put together show with it's own story to tell with compelling characters and shut my mouth, NuTrek does neither of these things so not an argument.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
We are at 8/10 episodes of Picard and it still isn't compelling

(https://i.imgur.com/ZZuMASg.gif)
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I only watched a few episodes of The Expanse btw so it could all go to shit :shaq.
[close]


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 16, 2020, 08:48:06 AM
characters not being likable within the first few episodes means TNG and DS9 are outta luck I guess. The first season of both those shows were pretty dire and didn't do a great job overall with the characters compared to later seasons.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 08:51:00 AM
characters not being likable within the first few episodes means TNG and DS9 are outta luck I guess. The first season of both those shows were pretty dire and didn't do a great job overall with the characters compared to later seasons.

Nah Sisko's wife losing her life and Sisko wanting to at the very least punch out Picard for it in the first episode.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Sisko BTFO'ing Q in the first season, Garak x Bashir homoerotic relationship. :rejoice
[close]

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 16, 2020, 08:52:05 AM
on the flip side kira was pretty insufferable that entire first season

sisko punking picard was awesome though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 09:01:58 AM
I rewatched the pilot of TNG recently Picard is a total dick to Riker.  :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel sorry for O'brien that episode where his wife is nice too him and he's like that ain't my wife.  :lol
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 09:36:28 AM
To be fair I barely post in this thread anymore so its not like I actually care. I just saw the RLM stuff and that got me annoyed since among a certain group the opinions they carry seem to matter quite a lot.(which is quite odd to me)  And it tends to be a lazy form of argumentation to parrot what they say instead of actually having an original opinion. Carry on until the next time I do a drive by.

So you didnt even bother to watch their videos critizing the dumbest shit in these episodes?

So you turn a blind eye to legitimate criticism under the veil of " oh they are just youtubers and have no authority to speak on Trek "

Sorry, but that is just hilarious.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 09:39:13 AM
The rise of authoritarian governments and fascism doesn't frighten you?

What a model Trekkie.

The conceit of the show is a commentary on the migrant crisis and peoples response to it. Greeks are growing increasingly intolerant of migrants and have turned to right wing politics in response.

Just the other day.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/world/europe/greece-turkey-migrants.html

Which is why its garbage.

I can understand countries not wanting to take in more middle aged men from countries where women are treated as subhuman pieces of shit.

What a surprise the greek arent so tolerant of migrants who show no respect for the greek culture, and way of life. Crime on the rise I suppose, just like any other european country who took in wayyyyyyy too many migrants.




So my impressions of Star Trek Picard:

- I really, really love it and look forward to it each week.
- I find it to be the successor to the old Star Trek formula.
- It gives me a lot of encouragement to fight in a cruel universe.
- It carries over the old Trekkian slow, deliberate pacing. So much of it is talking about feelings and stuff such as this scene.


How exactly is it a successor to the 'old formula' ?

What exactly gives you encouragement to fight in a cruel universe? How so?

Yes great, feelings feelings feelings, exactly what Star Trek was always about  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
DS9 has Garak..Bashir..Quark.. Odo (who is not likable in the first two seasons all that much, but a very interesting character)

Ofcourse they are flawed characters, I never claimed they were perfect. I dont even know where Cindi got that from.

But yes the main difference is that none of the Picard cast is likeable at all. They are all also very stereotypical characters, showing barely any depth.

Oh yeah and cursing has no place in TNG, or trek for that matter imo. Data's " Oh shit " is fucking stupid.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 16, 2020, 10:41:44 AM
To be fair I barely post in this thread anymore so its not like I actually care. I just saw the RLM stuff and that got me annoyed since among a certain group the opinions they carry seem to matter quite a lot.(which is quite odd to me)  And it tends to be a lazy form of argumentation to parrot what they say instead of actually having an original opinion. Carry on until the next time I do a drive by.

So you didnt even bother to watch their videos critizing the dumbest shit in these episodes?

So you turn a blind eye to legitimate criticism under the veil of " oh they are just youtubers and have no authority to speak on Trek "

Sorry, but that is just hilarious.

I haven't see the entire run of Picard yet. So I'm not going to watch videos that cover material I haven't seen yet. I've also seen plenty of RLM videos and I'm familiar with their material enough to know their particular brand of strengths and weaknesses when it comes to material like super hero movies, star trek, and star wars. They made some decent to good videos about the prequels along time ago. Good for them. Not everything was correct in those either. If you think they are the premium brand for criticism when it comes to criticism then that is just hilarious. Fuck off.

I'm fine with you stating and sharing YOUR opinion about Picard. I don't need parroted RLM videos to hear an opinion about Trek or anything else for that matter as if that is the winning argument. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 10:46:39 AM
I don't think they are a 'premium brand' for criticism, but I generally agree with their criticism of Picard.

I can totally understand not watching their videos if you havent seen all the new Picard stuff yet, I gave this a chance because I really grown to love TNG, yes it has its flaws and yes there are characters in that show that are unbearable, like lwaxana troi. But even in those episodes there is some fun to it, as Picard tries his best to dodge her  :lol.

I just think the new show isnt fun, the characters arent fun, they are all so negative and sour. I will continue to watch to see where the story goes, but at this point I have to already force myself to watch them. D3ranged said the new episode is good, I fail to see why. I like the slower approach, but 8 episodes in this is already setting up some grand ' save the galaxy ' type plot that is fucking boring.

I wish Trek could just go back to individual episodes, where each episode has a story that is resolved at the end of the episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 16, 2020, 10:52:03 AM
I just think the new show isnt fun, the characters arent fun, they are all so negative and sour. I will continue to watch to see where the story goes, but at this point I have to already force myself to watch them.

And I'm 100 percent fine with that. That is valid and fair and I like whenever people express their opinion even when its not my opinion. I just don't like when people use some other source as a sledgehammer to try to "win" an argument with an air of authority. This happens a lot with RLM on the internet which is super tiresome especially since they very clearly have their own set of biases when it comes to stuff. RLM are fine when it comes to bad movies and a lot of fun. They are less good when it comes to being the voice of what is right and wrong in entertainment in general imo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 16, 2020, 11:54:34 AM
I don't think they try to do that at all, they just express their opinions and feelings like anyone else. If people use their videos to "prove" their opinions as the right ones, that's not really on RLM.

As I've said I often don't agree with RLM videos period so there's that.  And secondly there is nothing more tiresome on the internet than someone just dropping a video on opinion based topics to replace the discussion which is doubly worse when the source material is meh to begin with. I don't give a crap what RLM thinks. Tell me what you think.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 01:31:26 PM
I don't think they are a 'premium brand' for criticism, but I generally agree with their criticism of Picard.

I can totally understand not watching their videos if you havent seen all the new Picard stuff yet, I gave this a chance because I really grown to love TNG, yes it has its flaws and yes there are characters in that show that are unbearable, like lwaxana troi. But even in those episodes there is some fun to it, as Picard tries his best to dodge her  :lol.

I just think the new show isnt fun, the characters arent fun, they are all so negative and sour. I will continue to watch to see where the story goes, but at this point I have to already force myself to watch them. D3ranged said the new episode is good, I fail to see why. I like the slower approach, but 8 episodes in this is already setting up some grand ' save the galaxy ' type plot that is fucking boring.

I wish Trek could just go back to individual episodes, where each episode has a story that is resolved at the end of the episode.

Maybe good is the wrong description and more like I didn't feel like my brain rotted for having have watched it like the other episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 01:35:05 PM
Point me where I spammed youtube links?

Quote the exact post.

edit:
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 01:40:51 PM
I might have read a quote chain wrong. But I take no responsibility at all :trumps


Since you're a moron, I think you're referring to the post where I posted the Data "oh shit" clip. I posted ONE. CLIP. to supplement my point. The rest of the post is nothing but text and images.

Deranged posted NOTHING. NOTHING. of substance. NOTHING. He just spammed a bunch of youtube links.

Because you're a moron you're going back on ignore taco
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on March 16, 2020, 01:43:02 PM
Yeah I'm out. Post RLM links as you please. I rarely participate in this thread and that will serve as reminder to continue that process outside of this posting binge of mine in the last two days.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 16, 2020, 01:47:51 PM
Can't we all just come together and like my trek memes?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 01:48:04 PM
I might have read a quote chain wrong. But I take no responsibility at all :trumps


Since you're a moron, I think you're referring to the post where I posted the Data "oh shit" clip. I posted ONE. CLIP. to supplement my point. The rest of the post is nothing but text and images.

Deranged posted NOTHING. NOTHING. of substance. NOTHING. He just spammed a bunch of youtube links.

Because you're a moron you're going back on ignore taco

Incorrect those videos prove my points.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 01:49:15 PM
Imagine bitching about how I DON'T LIKE THE CHARACTERS on the first season of a Star Trek show.

Deranged and Mmarsu probably bitched when the captain was black in DS9 and captain was a woman in Voyager.

Outside of TOS, every single first to second season of a Trek show is flawed as fuck. Especially weird how we are talking about Picard, whose predecessor had the great and timeless character Wesley Crusher.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 01:50:19 PM
No fuck no don't put that racism/sexism not an argument bullshit on me fuck right off and KYS.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Did I mention KYS?
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 02:02:18 PM
Let's get to brass tacks.

- Does Doc Crusher even have a character even after 7 seasons? Pulanski was better than her. Her only character I remember was that she's a mother and her relationship with Picard.

- Troi, whom I absolutely love, sucks ass almost half the show and has her entire character and utility given to Whoopi fucking Goldberg. Should we go to the federation counselor? Nah, we should just go to the mysterious black bar tender. And by the time Troi falls into her element it's too late and there's like two seasons left.

- Guinan. What the fuck is her point? Oh, she's mysterious. So the fuck what? Does she even HAVE a character besides the mysteriousness? Where does she come? What is she? All she provides is vague nothings. She's CRAP.

- La Forge is BALLS. He's always in the engineering deck. He's not interesting at all. He's basically a nerd and his best friend is an android.

- Tasha Yar. Need I say more? Oh wait, I do. Remember when TNG got popular so her actress decided to come back once a season? Yeah.

- WESLEY. CRUSHER.

Of TNG, only Data, Riker, Picard, and Worf are good characters. Characters like Ro, O'Brien, Nurse Ogawa are interesting and are barely explored.

It's weird how such a pedestal people put on TNG. It's a great show. It's a goddamn classic, and some days it might even be my favorite Star Trek. But god fucking damn stop riding it and the rest of the franchises nuts. They've always been flawed, the new characters in Picard have more development some like Dr. Crusher ever had. We don't know what direction they'll take the series in season 2 so this is all moot.

You guys didn't even want to give Picard a chance. It's just endless bitching, even about the most banal of things likes smoking and cursing (who cares).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 16, 2020, 03:16:18 PM
Vom, did you get to the third season of Enterprise or take a break?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 16, 2020, 03:30:25 PM
I personally think what's "trek" is it's fairly unique optimism about the future and the values that people adhere to in order to make that a bright future.

And as much as I like DS9, it veers into "not trek" as a result of rejecting that premise, which in itself I can't help but feel was a reaction to what Babylon 5 was doing.
DS9 being "trek" is that episode where Sisko refuses to take his uniform off because crazy luddite bitch is trying to break him and he refuses to give up on the principles of what the starfleet uniform represents.
DS9 being "not trek" is a fabricating casus belli to get the romulans to join the war against the dominion.

They're both good episodes. But one is "trek" in a way that the other demonstrably is not.


You might personally feel darkier edgier grimdark scifi is more interesting, or a more interesting way of exploring contemporary analogues, but its also pretty much dime a dozen scifi without that spark of hope and optimisim which - again - star trek is fairly unique in portraying.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 03:31:42 PM
Imagine bitching about how I DON'T LIKE THE CHARACTERS on the first season of a Star Trek show.

Deranged and Mmarsu probably bitched when the captain was black in DS9 and captain was a woman in Voyager.

Outside of TOS, every single first to second season of a Trek show is flawed as fuck. Especially weird how we are talking about Picard, whose predecessor had the great and timeless character Wesley Crusher.

Reading this, really makes me believe you havent read anything me or d3ranged wrote in here. In fact, it seems this entire 'discussion' is pointless. Feel free to like Picard, we won't shit on you for it. But at least have the decency to read the posts made in the discussion you are partaking in.

Also you spouting an entire post about character development, when that is not something that was focussed on with TNG at all. Yes some of them were very static in their personality throughout the entire show, and did not have any meaningful growth. But that is a show that focussed on an event, something happening in the episode that one or more characters have to solve in order to work through the issue at hand.

And although that's not very different from Picard in a sense that Picard is more reliant on it's plot than it's characters, it still presents zero new, interesting and believable characters. Their motivations make no sense most of the time. They are also all very sour and negative. There is barely any fun. Also making Seven of Nine a generic bounty hunter was really the best they could do?

But whatever, it seems pointless to discuss this with you, because you don't even know what the discussion is about. It's not about flawed characters, thats for sure. It's not about character development.

Quote
It's weird how such a pedestal people put on TNG. It's a great show. It's a goddamn classic, and some days it might even be my favorite Star Trek. But god fucking damn stop riding it and the rest of the franchises nuts. They've always been flawed, the new characters in Picard have more development some like Dr. Crusher ever had. We don't know what direction they'll take the series in season 2 so this is all moot.

You guys didn't even want to give Picard a chance. It's just endless bitching, even about the most banal of things likes smoking and cursing (who cares).

This proves my point. It is you that is coming in here with preconceived notions.

If you wanna discuss the show, discuss the show. The rest of this shit is just pathetic. Noone is saying TNG is perfect.

You're a looney
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 16, 2020, 03:35:11 PM
DS9 is "not Trek" in that it can't escape consequences, all the rest get to warp away from them. Kirk on TOS breaks far more rules than everyone but Janeway. TOS leaves many planets in a no hope situation or without survivors.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on March 16, 2020, 03:35:14 PM
Picard is barely a season of star trek, anyway. If this had a lower budget and 22 episodes, sure, they might have some good episodes for the crew lying in the wings. But they didn't format it like a star trek show.

Because it isn't a star trek show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 03:44:23 PM
I personally think what's "trek" is it's fairly unique optimism about the future and the values that people adhere to in order to make that a bright future.

And as much as I like DS9, it veers into "not trek" as a result of rejecting that premise, which in itself I can't help but feel was a reaction to what Babylon 5 was doing.
DS9 being "trek" is that episode where Sisko refuses to take his uniform off because crazy luddite bitch is trying to break him and he refuses to give up on the principles of what the starfleet uniform represents.
DS9 being "not trek" is a fabricating casus belli to get the romulans to join the war against the dominion.

They're both good episodes. But one is "trek" in a way that the other demonstrably is not.


You might personally feel darkier edgier grimdark scifi is more interesting, or a more interesting way of exploring contemporary analogues, but its also pretty much dime a dozen scifi without that spark of hope and optimisim which - again - star trek is fairly unique in portraying.

Except that I've felt hopeful and optimistic from Picard precisely because it uses the dark setting and finds a way to dig into it.

It's also ridiculous to say only one of those episodes is Trek.

I really don't understand this. You're using DS9 as an example of Trek when DS9 is the darkest Trek there is. Garak loses his entire planet to what is practically genocide. There's an entire arc around a hostile takeover by a foreign authority in the Gamma Quadrant. The Dominion War is dark as fuck and yet it's also hopeful because so every single race in the franchise in Alpha Quadrant joins together to fight a singular evil. During DS9, Klingons, humans;etc are at war with each other because of saboteur changelings and yet it ends with the banding of every single race.

The difference is that Picard's structure doesn't allow for stories to end at the end of the episode. They're not stand alone and they blend into each other. But it completely shocks me that someone can't find the hope and optimism in Picard but can in DS9.

I truly find no difference between their methodologies.

If Picard isn't Trek neither is DS9.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 16, 2020, 03:51:37 PM
DS9 is "not Trek" in that it can't escape consequences, all the rest get to warp away from them. Kirk on TOS breaks far more rules than everyone but Janeway. TOS leaves many planets in a no hope situation or without survivors.

which is fair comment, that maybe that optimism has an underlying foundation of naivete or not following up on things and dealing with the repercussions (which is pretty much the premise of Wrath of Khan), but its still a fairly unique tone in sci fi and fairly identifiable.

If Picard isn't Trek neither is DS9.

Which was mostly my point - that DS9 is 'not trek' for a sizable portion, but it occasionally tries to be in a way that nu-trek just cannot be fucked to.

Having a unique voice is not an indicator of quality. Picard might as well be called Commander Shephard for all the unique tone it has in the eps I've seen so far, but I'm holding off to watch them in one go as a series as seemingly intended. It doesn't seem like they want to be particularly episodic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 03:58:36 PM
Imagine bitching about how I DON'T LIKE THE CHARACTERS on the first season of a Star Trek show.

Deranged and Mmarsu probably bitched when the captain was black in DS9 and captain was a woman in Voyager.

Outside of TOS, every single first to second season of a Trek show is flawed as fuck. Especially weird how we are talking about Picard, whose predecessor had the great and timeless character Wesley Crusher.

Reading this, really makes me believe you havent read anything me or d3ranged wrote in here. In fact, it seems this entire 'discussion' is pointless. Feel free to like Picard, we won't shit on you for it. But at least have the decency to read the posts made in the discussion you are partaking in.

Also you spouting an entire post about character development, when that is not something that was focussed on with TNG at all. Yes some of them were very static in their personality throughout the entire show, and did not have any meaningful growth. But that is a show that focussed on an event, something happening in the episode that one or more characters have to solve in order to work through the issue at hand.

And although that's not very different from Picard in a sense that Picard is more reliant on it's plot than it's characters, it still presents zero new, interesting and believable characters. Their motivations make no sense most of the time. They are also all very sour and negative. There is barely any fun. Also making Seven of Nine a generic bounty hunter was really the best they could do?

But whatever, it seems pointless to discuss this with you, because you don't even know what the discussion is about. It's not about flawed characters, thats for sure. It's not about character development.

Quote
It's weird how such a pedestal people put on TNG. It's a great show. It's a goddamn classic, and some days it might even be my favorite Star Trek. But god fucking damn stop riding it and the rest of the franchises nuts. They've always been flawed, the new characters in Picard have more development some like Dr. Crusher ever had. We don't know what direction they'll take the series in season 2 so this is all moot.

You guys didn't even want to give Picard a chance. It's just endless bitching, even about the most banal of things likes smoking and cursing (who cares).

This proves my point. It is you that is coming in here with preconceived notions.

If you wanna discuss the show, discuss the show. The rest of this shit is just pathetic. Noone is saying TNG is perfect.

You're a looney

The point is your argument is "I don't find the characters fun.";etc. The majority of your criticisms has been against the characters. But that means that previous Star Trek shows must have better characters - they don't! The point is, by endlessly shitting on Picard, you are by extension defending TOS, TNG, VOY;etc. Especially TNG because it's Picard's predecessor and the show that Picard is based on. To criticize Picard - which hasn't even had a full season for its characters - without turning some of it to TNG is hypocritical. TNG has always had flawed characterization. But somehow it gets off scott free.

Quote
But at least have the decency to read the posts made in the discussion you are partaking in.

What posts?

Posts like this?

https://screenrant.com/star-trek-picard-tng-ds9-morality-idealism-better-explained

Quote
Picard Is About The Good In Flawed People In An Imperfect World

Quote
The Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good

As per the article.

They've truly taken what was great about DS9 and are just exploring more of it :bow

No.

What riveting discussion.

Oh, now you want to discuss.

Fuck off, trash. Most of your posts in this thread have been low effort to begin with and now you're bitching about me not taking the time to read your crappy posts?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on March 16, 2020, 04:00:20 PM
Quote
I truly find no difference between their methodologies.

Don't know how you can look at how DS9 portrays something like section 31, things like xenophobia, and you look at MAGA Starfleet from Picard, and see no difference.

Just because DS9 was dark doesn't mean it's bad for Star Trek. It means clumsily handling those themes is nad for star trek.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 04:03:37 PM
Quote
I truly find no difference between their methodologies.

Don't know how you can look at how DS9 portrays something like section 31, things like xenophobia, and you look at MAGA Starfleet from Picard, and see no difference.

Just because DS9 was dark doesn't mean it's bad for Star Trek. It means clumsily handling those themes is nad for star trek.

Oh no, Starfleet is more xenophobic after a catastrophic war with the Dominion? The same people that used Changelings to turn into actual Starfleet major officers - including an Admiral?

Michael Chabon has said that the Dominion War is a big reason why Starfleet is like this but that would require too much explaining to those who are new and not caught up. But it's certainly hinted.

"Bad for Trek?" :lol In DS9 Starfleet uses Section 31 to infect the Changelings with a virus to kill them all. But somehow it means Starfleet would never resort to xenophobia? The same starfleet where its citizens rebelled because Federation gave its planets to Cardassians? The same Starfleet where it has racists that call Cardassians "spoonheads"? That Starfleet?

I forgot that the Federation is so prim and proper and absolutely perfect.

:sabu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 04:20:12 PM
Remember the time Picard gets orders from up high to escort Native Americans that emigrated to space from their new home because their planet sits on Cardassian territory after a new treaty? So he goes to the planet to tell them to leave their new homeland and will even do so be force? Then Wesley Crusher quits Starfleet because he thought they were better than this?

It feels like people who say "Federation would never act like this" have excised any negative portrayal of Starfleet from their brains. It's fucking baffling that a bunch of know it all nerds who can remember the specs of the Enterprise D doesn't remember important details like this shit. God fucking damn.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on March 16, 2020, 04:22:04 PM
The main issue I have with the shady Federation storylines is that Kurtzman is a boring hack, at least Orci's crazy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on March 16, 2020, 04:27:25 PM
The main issue I have with the shady Federation storylines is that Kurtzman is a boring hack

I agree.

I can understand if you find the storyline boring. What I don't understand is saying the Federation could never become that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 16, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Remember the time Picard gets orders from up high to escort Native Americans that emigrated to space from their new home because their planet sits on Cardassian territory after a new treaty? So he goes to the planet to tell them to leave their new homeland and will even do so be force? Then Wesley Crusher quits Starfleet because he thought they were better than this?

It feels like people who say "Federation would never act like this" have excised any negative portrayal of Starfleet from their brains. It's fucking baffling that a bunch of know it all nerds who can remember the specs of the Enterprise D doesn't remember important details like this shit. God fucking damn.

The whole marquis stuff is about how real world border disputes usually end up when peace treaties are drawn up; some people have to be relocated as a result and don't like it, but its big picture needs of the many realpolitik stuff.

Picards federation basically just said an entire fucking species in dire emergency because their sun went supernova can go fuck themselves... because some completely unrelated robots blew up a factory on mars.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 16, 2020, 05:07:08 PM
Spoiler

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Its not unrelated the Zhat Vosh or whatever they are called threw their own people under the bus, they were behind the android uprising and synth ban and the shift in politics of the Federaton all to stop some doomsday prophecy.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 16, 2020, 05:31:26 PM
I have no doubt the only two pieces of world building that the writers bothered to do turn out to be directly connected and the reason why is the big narrative pay off.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 16, 2020, 05:47:13 PM
My major point is that even though the story is stupid, it could be interesting if the characters were fun to watch, or interesting to learn about.

The story that Rios told about his captain meeting two synths was cool, I wish they would have filmed that, and put that as a prologue that you see before the first episode. The entire structure of the story is wack, the pacing is wack and there is so much wasted time that could be spent building these characters.

Then at least it would be more interesting, to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on March 16, 2020, 06:26:24 PM
Remember the time Picard gets orders from up high to escort Native Americans that emigrated to space from their new home because their planet sits on Cardassian territory after a new treaty? So he goes to the planet to tell them to leave their new homeland and will even do so be force? Then Wesley Crusher quits Starfleet because he thought they were better than this?

It feels like people who say "Federation would never act like this" have excised any negative portrayal of Starfleet from their brains. It's fucking baffling that a bunch of know it all nerds who can remember the specs of the Enterprise D doesn't remember important details like this shit. God fucking damn.

Case in point, imagine how much dumber this plot would be if this happened not because of a land dispute but because Starfleet hated Native Americans.  :dead That's why comparing it to Picard this way doesn't hold up.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 17, 2020, 12:31:02 AM
https://twitter.com/timruss2/status/1237852688202829824 (https://twitter.com/timruss2/status/1237852688202829824)




Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 17, 2020, 06:06:11 AM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article6451233.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200b/Jennifer-Lien-main.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on March 17, 2020, 06:26:11 AM
Vom, did you get to the third season of Enterprise or take a break?

Took a break amidst the cogenitor species episode for some reason.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 17, 2020, 06:33:05 AM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article6451233.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200b/Jennifer-Lien-main.jpg)
[close]
(https://i.imgur.com/EQSEQvw.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 17, 2020, 06:33:54 AM
https://variety.com/2015/tv/news/jennifer-lien-arrested-star-trek-voyager-1201594328/

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/HVwxDSM.jpg)
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/tpLYtwG.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 17, 2020, 03:09:45 PM
I can't live with this knowledge. I hope corona takes me
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 17, 2020, 07:15:15 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/JaQFhIQ.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 19, 2020, 02:09:16 AM
https://youtu.be/GyGGW3tqNPY

:dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 19, 2020, 01:22:40 PM
Oh my god

Just saw the latest episode

this show has gone off the fucking rails now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 19, 2020, 01:42:09 PM
Was it ever on the rails?  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 19, 2020, 02:07:14 PM
"Where we're going, we don't need rails"

(https://media0.giphy.com/media/G3EU3tRV0Xzji/source.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 19, 2020, 03:40:32 PM
Spoiler

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Soong has a made up son now.  :lol
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 19, 2020, 05:56:18 PM
Yeah that last ep was mind numbing, should have known I would be in for a shitshow when they hand waved the romulan penny dreadful dude following them as him predicting their destination based on course and speed. a) bitch this is space there are infinite points on a straight line b) last ep you made a 30 minute song and dance about Rios jumping and changing course after every jump or some nonsense, please fuck right off Kurtzman or whichever cunt wrote this ep
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 19, 2020, 06:15:40 PM
Yeah ridiculous that noonien soong now has a son who created a city of data like synths including golden skin and data eyes.

As soon as they learn of the reapers who will come and destroy organics they are down for it
😂
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 19, 2020, 10:18:28 PM
I never really played any of the Mass Effect games so I never picked up on it, but LOL ripping off ME3.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 19, 2020, 10:53:58 PM
This Picard shit sounds terrible.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 20, 2020, 12:10:16 AM
This Picard shit sounds terrible.

Hi Tasty WB :)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 20, 2020, 08:47:24 AM
https://youtu.be/jvdqCqiAe0s
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 20, 2020, 09:41:02 AM
This Picard shit sounds terrible.

Hi Tasty WB :)

:heartbeat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 20, 2020, 03:58:08 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/IhQgRiZ.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 20, 2020, 04:09:44 PM
"Attention Bajoran Workers"

 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on March 20, 2020, 06:23:45 PM
That Lore theory seems too smart for this show. I hope that's what it is, but I don't have much faith it it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 21, 2020, 04:12:49 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/p094l62ulxn41.jpg?width=599&auto=webp&s=7755409278bdd520e9e5daf675f9bdf2894c80d3)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on March 22, 2020, 10:19:16 AM
I rewatched the pilot of TNG recently Picard is a total dick to Riker.  :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel sorry for O'brien that episode where his wife is nice too him and he's like that ain't my wife.  :lol
[close]

s1, they were supposed to be antithetical to each other. The idea was that the first officer could go on Away Teams, but the captain could not. That didn't last long.

Also, O'Brien VS Keiko is always going to be welcome conversation to my ears. I could not believe what a horrible wife they straddled to such a stalwart cohort.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 22, 2020, 10:27:07 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Xl0y49F.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 22, 2020, 11:58:19 AM
She was nicer when she had the pah wraith take over her body
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 22, 2020, 12:49:29 PM
I rewatched the pilot of TNG recently Picard is a total dick to Riker.  :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel sorry for O'brien that episode where his wife is nice too him and he's like that ain't my wife.  :lol
[close]

s1, they were supposed to be antithetical to each other. The idea was that the first officer could go on Away Teams, but the captain could not. That didn't last long.

Also, O'Brien VS Keiko is always going to be welcome conversation to my ears. I could not believe what a horrible wife they straddled to such a stalwart cohort.

He totally was like seperate the ship manually, Rikers like say what? and Picard's like did I stutter bitch!?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: toku on March 22, 2020, 07:36:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=435HVYFEx6c
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 22, 2020, 08:02:05 PM
poor o'brien stuck in a loveless marriage for the sake of the kids when he'd rather be fighting pretend battles and getting it on with his best bro bashir :tauntaun

just was watching an episiode where keiko comes back from some trip after getting pregnant and she immediately cuts off his pussy access :'(
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 22, 2020, 08:34:55 PM
Is that the one where she came back from Bajor and was a bit too friendly with her Bajoran Cabana boy colleague?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 22, 2020, 08:42:34 PM
nah its where sisko gives up being the emisarry and o'brien questions his entire life at the prospect of another child with keiko and has to break up with julian but she gets sick of miles so she lets them hang out again.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 23, 2020, 04:55:50 AM
I like when Bashir and O'Brien cure space aids and the government tries to have them murdered and she's all "My husband NEVER drinks coffee after midday!" and at the end he's all "what? I drink that shit all day long" :rofl
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 23, 2020, 04:39:14 PM
https://preview.redd.it/o6trdou65ho41.gif?width=480&format=mp4&s=9926b6356b404bbeebafacba96a9b1438ed440d3
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 24, 2020, 04:25:06 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/DphaAsu.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 24, 2020, 07:36:54 PM
Picard is free until late April.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: recursivelyenumerable on March 25, 2020, 08:30:22 PM
https://twitter.com/palecur/status/1242689088865484800
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 25, 2020, 08:33:07 PM
.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 26, 2020, 06:13:36 AM
Holy fucking shit, I didnt think Picard could get any worse, this ending is atrocious :dead

There is just so much shit here it's going to take me days to recover :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 26, 2020, 09:51:20 AM
Deeeeeets


I need to know if Mike Stoklasa is gonna have a brain aneurysm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 26, 2020, 09:55:40 AM
Romulond really wants mommies milkies doesn't he lol.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 26, 2020, 10:46:00 AM
Deeeeeets


I need to know if Mike Stoklasa is gonna have a brain aneurysm
Mike is literally going to collapse in a pool of convulsion vomit. I'm on my phone so it's annoying to type more but I will later
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 26, 2020, 11:06:34 AM
Spoiler

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Did Mike or Rich totally call the death and resurrection of Picard as a synth?
[close]

My Picard rating
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/juLkJR0.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 26, 2020, 12:57:44 PM
whata show  :sheik to these writers
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 26, 2020, 12:59:49 PM
These spoilers... :thinking

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The final scene with Data sounds nice.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 26, 2020, 01:04:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOG2TQyjT_s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU4zka4YFe4
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 26, 2020, 01:18:30 PM
These spoilers... :thinking

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The final scene with Data sounds nice.
[close]
I actually liked that part, it's annoying that it stems from a relationship that was never there, but yeah it's nice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 26, 2020, 05:48:44 PM
Spoiler

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where did they get that magic tool from I dont remember hahaha lol.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 26, 2020, 06:47:33 PM
The android gAve it to them
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 26, 2020, 06:50:46 PM
The android gAve it to them

Was it in the previous episode?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 26, 2020, 06:52:10 PM
Yeah it was the one who got killed by getting stabbed in the eye  :doge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTL1upt_Vak
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 26, 2020, 06:58:56 PM
It was so stupid I guess I just blanked on it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on March 26, 2020, 07:15:43 PM
Yeah it was the one who got killed by getting stabbed in the eye  :doge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTL1upt_Vak

So do the holodecks safeties just not recognise data as a human and therefore don't protect him, and he still goes in all the time anyway?

:badass
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 26, 2020, 08:23:02 PM
The android gAve it to them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkOJ9uNj9EY
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 26, 2020, 08:31:05 PM
Yeah it was the one who got killed by getting stabbed in the eye  :doge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTL1upt_Vak

So do the holodecks safeties just not recognise data as a human and therefore don't protect him, and he still goes in all the time anyway?

:badass

Wasnt that when Q transported them to a Sherwood forest? So no holodeck safeties++
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 28, 2020, 09:57:23 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/YTEtZu0.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 30, 2020, 05:20:13 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/N9vBlB5.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 30, 2020, 06:02:35 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNOeWrLxcOM
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 30, 2020, 09:39:17 AM
okay so i finished picard and uh

okay :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 30, 2020, 11:27:46 AM
I have begun rewatching The Orville

Aside from a few corny jokes that fall flat, its superb in that its a fun sci fi romp where shit makes sense.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on March 30, 2020, 01:09:54 PM
https://youtu.be/qtq8eYpqRCg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 30, 2020, 01:11:29 PM
That's a great channel. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 30, 2020, 02:34:26 PM
I have begun rewatching The Orville

Aside from a few corny jokes that fall flat, its superb in that its a fun sci fi romp where shit makes sense.

It is on it's last season though... :fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 30, 2020, 03:04:09 PM
(https://i.redd.it/apnhrym366m41.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/RIpmUuE.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 30, 2020, 04:34:44 PM
I have begun rewatching The Orville

Aside from a few corny jokes that fall flat, its superb in that its a fun sci fi romp where shit makes sense.

It is on it's last season though... :fbm

Is it? I wasnt sure if S3 was going to be the last season.. I hoped with them going to Hulu we would get more seasons out of it.

Maybe Netflix picks it up? Or is there no intention to go beyond 3 seasons?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 30, 2020, 04:38:14 PM
They never applied for the tax credit for a new season, so It's kinda speculation at this point but Disney owns Fox now and Hulu and Seth moved to NBC.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3Ayzu6OAG0
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 30, 2020, 04:48:19 PM
I just kept thinking why couldnt they get the magical machine to fix picards brain? Just hold it against his skull and imagine that its not there anymore. You know, the brain abnormality which I forgot the name for

irumodic whatever
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 30, 2020, 05:42:55 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/dINcpCW.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on March 30, 2020, 05:50:54 PM
Way of the Prophets : Game of buttholes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 08:59:15 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DK--hirVwAAbTEn.jpg)

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVyeGdWY03s
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on March 31, 2020, 09:20:14 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqn0WhG53uA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 09:34:21 AM
https://twitter.com/redlettermedia/status/1244358834921058306
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 31, 2020, 09:39:04 AM
seems about the same as ds9 and voyagers crew fwiw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 09:51:40 AM
https://twitter.com/ParaSandy/status/1244390257841315840
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 31, 2020, 09:56:24 AM
"single parent" :gurl

my man worf is a deadbeat dad
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on March 31, 2020, 10:04:45 AM
"single parent" :gurl

my man worf is a deadbeat dad

Alexander ? On this Klingon battleship ? :pika
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 31, 2020, 10:07:14 AM
taking care of alexander was too much work so worf shipped his ass to russia and look what happened :putin
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 12:52:38 PM
Started Picard.  Mostly through episode 1 - the exposition in dialog is really off putting but I like the idea for the story so far. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 02:12:24 PM
When did the Alpha Quadrant go Irish?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 02:14:02 PM
Don't ask questions, just Consoom.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 02:16:33 PM
I'm good at that. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 02:25:43 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Picards slaves servants the O'Romulans are the best characters in this tripe.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 03:17:15 PM
4 episodes in:  this is the best TNG movie there is.  Not sure why you guys were hating on it so bad. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on March 31, 2020, 03:27:02 PM
I've got two more episodes left to watch on Picard. I really like it, particularly because it doesn't feel like a Trek show. Really does remind me of Mass Effect.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 31, 2020, 04:08:15 PM
I've got two more episodes left to watch on Picard. I really like it, particularly because it doesn't feel like a Trek show. Really does remind me of Mass Effect.

You don't say...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on March 31, 2020, 06:53:00 PM
I've got two more episodes left to watch on Picard. I really like it, particularly because it doesn't feel like a Trek show. Really does remind me of Mass Effect.

You don't say...

And? I'm tired of the stereotypical ST starship crew show, this was a nice change of pace. I also don't hold Star Trek sacred so that probably helps.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 06:54:36 PM
And the far superior DS9 doesn't cut it why?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 31, 2020, 07:04:19 PM
not sure if you were aware, they stopped making episodes of DS9 two decades ago
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 07:06:11 PM
If he was looking for a change of pace and doesn't like ST on a ship why not DS9 if he hasn't watched it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on March 31, 2020, 07:09:25 PM
I've got two more episodes left to watch on Picard. I really like it, particularly because it doesn't feel like a Trek show. Really does remind me of Mass Effect.

You don't say...

And?

I just thought it was a funny thing to say, the latest RLM review also mentions the show being very "inspired" by ME3.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on March 31, 2020, 07:14:56 PM
I like the series so far and think they’ve got a lot to really build on for a great season 2, but I think I might detest that finale episode.  Maybe not quite Nemesis hate, but it feels close.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on March 31, 2020, 07:20:20 PM
I like the series so far and think they’ve got a lot to really build on for a great season 2, but I think I might detest that finale episode.  Maybe not quite Nemesis hate, but it feels close.
same, i enjoyed the first season and i'm looking forward to season 2 but that last episode was pretty awful. i could see how you could compare it to mass effect but that's not really an original story idea to begin with so eh, not too bothered.

if you actually want mass effect the show, watch the expanse :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on March 31, 2020, 07:32:05 PM
And the far superior DS9 doesn't cut it why?

DS9 was awesome, still felt like a Star Trek show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 10:19:21 PM
This wasn't even the worst first season of startrek, nor the worst final season episode.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 10:25:37 PM
Yeah it is.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 10:26:11 PM
Honestly while watching the last 15 mins, I thought they were going to reveal that this whole season took place in the end moments of Nemesis, right when data saves Picard by beaming him off, Data put something on the beamer which would run this whole season as a simulation to force Daddy Picard to finally say I love you right before Data died.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 10:27:00 PM
Honestly while watching the last 15 mins, I thought they were going to reveal that this whole season took place in the end moments of Nemesis, right when data saves Picard by beaming him off, Data put something on the beamer which would run this whole season as a simulation to force Daddy Picard to finally say I love you right before Data died.

That is way too clever for this show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 10:28:34 PM
No, you're way too clever for this show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 10:29:16 PM
I know I am.:ohyeah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on March 31, 2020, 10:30:56 PM
But what am I?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on March 31, 2020, 10:31:37 PM
Who was phone?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 01, 2020, 07:11:57 AM
Yeah it is.

agreed

its utter garbage trying to appeal to old trek dams and non trek fans
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 01, 2020, 07:47:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EArdkwUyWa0

Starfleet : We need someone to command all these starships to one of the most important potential battles ever

Starfleet : Sends a retired old captain to command the fleet just because (fanservice)


Fans: WOOOO THIS IS SOOOO COOL (see comments)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 01, 2020, 07:48:47 AM
Apparently it was a last minute change originally it was supposed to be Admiral Hubris.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 01, 2020, 09:23:53 AM
ugh how gross. could you even imagine liking things? :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 01, 2020, 09:54:44 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqQhx4Wvoc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 01, 2020, 03:44:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCKF2_-Zsw0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 01, 2020, 03:51:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EArdkwUyWa0

Starfleet : We need someone to command all these starships to one of the most important potential battles ever

Starfleet : Sends a retired old captain to command the fleet just because (fanservice)


Fans: WOOOO THIS IS SOOOO COOL (see comments)

ADMIRAL SONYA GOMEZ ! :pika  :gamer
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 01, 2020, 03:55:27 PM
If wanting at the very least be given something watchable makes me a toxic fan, guilty as charged then. :rodney
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on April 01, 2020, 03:58:34 PM
To be fair, Trek fandom has been kind of toxic since before TNG began.  I’m pretty sure there’s BBS archives out there of fans being extra shitty about the TOS movies and up through the start of TNG.

Mind you, we’re not all that way.

We’re not all savages, like Star Wars fan.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 01, 2020, 03:58:40 PM
OK.  The punishment is death in the digitial realm.  *Bangs gavel 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 01, 2020, 04:04:50 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80e85OEmXb0
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 01, 2020, 04:14:51 PM
Fandom is inherently toxic. :yeshrug
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 01, 2020, 04:32:31 PM
Yeah let's not act like it's always been sun and peaches in the  Star Trek fandom.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 01, 2020, 04:56:57 PM
The argument that something has always been a problem isn't really an excuse. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 01, 2020, 04:57:21 PM
trek fandom invented fan fiction so it's been bad from the start :lol

ah well, i still enjoyed picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 01, 2020, 09:33:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCoBVhnUaNE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on April 01, 2020, 11:10:43 PM
I think we can all agree that those Federation/Romulan fleet shots and those warp sounds are awful. How has big budget CGI regressed so much the last few years?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on April 02, 2020, 04:28:27 AM
I watched the finale, I take back what I said. The show was great until they got to the synth planet.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 02, 2020, 04:32:42 AM
I watched the finale, I take back what I said. The show was great until they got to the synth planet.
I mean I didnt like the show, but I wasnt super hurt mad over it, that last two eps pissed me right off though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mr. Gundam on April 02, 2020, 04:35:46 AM
I watched the finale, I take back what I said. The show was great until they got to the synth planet.
I mean I didnt like the show, but I wasnt super hurt mad over it, that last two eps pissed me right off though.

It didn’t piss me off or anything but it tonally felt like a different show and just hand waved everything away.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 02, 2020, 04:39:14 AM
I watched the finale, I take back what I said. The show was great until they got to the synth planet.
I mean I didnt like the show, but I wasnt super hurt mad over it, that last two eps pissed me right off though.

It didn’t piss me off or anything but it tonally felt like a different show and just hand waved everything away.
I mean now you know how other people feel about the previous 8 eps and the entirety of Star Trek canon before  :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 02, 2020, 08:14:23 AM
Why didnt they use the little magical fixit all device by jammer it on Picards skull and just " imagining " the irumodic syndrome was gone?

Wasnt that how the little gadget works? You imagine it and it happens?

Fucking shitshow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 09:00:26 AM
I mean now you know how other people feel about the previous 8 eps and the entirety of Star Trek canon before  :idont
overly upset and babyraging over things not being an exact one to one clone of TNG forever across every show and movie for eternity? :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 02, 2020, 09:32:32 AM
I mean now you know how other people feel about the previous 8 eps and the entirety of Star Trek canon before  :idont
overly upset and babyraging over things not being an exact one to one clone of TNG forever across every show and movie for eternity? :lol

How about some decent fucking writing at least man. Do you really enjoy Picard and thinks it has good writing?

If so

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/HarshTatteredBagworm-size_restricted.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 02, 2020, 09:45:23 AM
I mean now you know how other people feel about the previous 8 eps and the entirety of Star Trek canon before  :idont
overly upset and babyraging over things not being an exact one to one clone of TNG forever across every show and movie for eternity? :lol
I mean if your complaint is the show doesnt follow it's own continuity/feel then this comparison is relevant  :engel
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 02, 2020, 11:12:56 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVFA1dIoPAU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 12:01:08 PM
I mean if your complaint is the show doesnt follow it's own continuity/feel then this comparison is relevant  :engel
that's not my complaint. i enjoyed the show. yet somehow this means something is wrong with me according to mmarsu. seems pointlessly aggressive to me.

i just think
spoiler (click to show/hide)
putting picard in a synth body is pretty goofy
[close]
otherwise i liked it.

i think star trek fanboys need to get over themselves much like every other obsessive fandom out there. either way i'm done with the topic of Picard as it's clear this thread is just going to be posting nitpicky asspainy youtube videos in order for the complainers to prove themselves right on the subject. :zzz

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 02, 2020, 12:03:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JsMtqTioOE
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 02, 2020, 12:43:12 PM
I mean if your complaint is the show doesnt follow it's own continuity/feel then this comparison is relevant  :engel
that's not my complaint. i enjoyed the show. yet somehow this means something is wrong with me according to mmarsu. seems pointlessly aggressive to me.

i just think
spoiler (click to show/hide)
putting picard in a synth body is pretty goofy
[close]
otherwise i liked it.

i think star trek fanboys need to get over themselves much like every other obsessive fandom out there. either way i'm done with the topic of Picard as it's clear this thread is just going to be posting nitpicky asspainy youtube videos in order for the complainers to prove themselves right on the subject. :zzz

I can write an essay in here about all the faults I had with Picard. Except I dont see much reason to, because most ppl here would agree with me.

You said it was good, so what about it was actually good to you?

What was the point of bringing a character like Hugh back,only for him to die a pointless death?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 12:45:21 PM
:nope

i have no interest in trying to convert anyone to my side or prove some kind of point so we'll just agree to disagree.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 02, 2020, 12:47:24 PM
:nope

i have no interest in trying to convert anyone to my side or prove some kind of point so we'll just agree to disagree.

Yeah, same here.

I just find that the people who seem to like it, try to shutdown any discussion about why its objectively bad, and why you are subjectively wrong.

While I could argue 10 points why its objectively bad, all you will respond with is "well why watch it then?" or "well I liked it so it cant be bad".

Talk about being toxic.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 02, 2020, 12:51:06 PM
My biggest problem with nuTrek is crapsack universe sci fi is a dime a dozen, I honestly don't see what the point of becoming more generic is when it already had a niche nobody else really works in.

Which is why the Orville feels more 'trek', even though it crams in unfunny wisecracks  needlessly; it still has that "hey, humanities basically alright" ethos.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 12:55:17 PM
i have no problem with people not liking it, that's your opinion. i just find the nitpicky stuff annoying so i'll mock it but i apologize if its unwanted. i didn't like discovery at all and never watched season 2, i also just don't post about discovery and honestly have forgotten most of the first season at this point anyway so i couldn't argue it if i wanted to. :lol

i liked the fresh feeling take from the show and i actually did like all the crew, it did feel some like mass effect and some like serenity(?) as well, but i saw that as a plus cause i like the idea of some non-federation focused stuff and also a look into the future of the trek universe. also it was a show i watched together with my wife, which isn't related to the quality of the show itself but just something i liked cause we usually don't agree on tv/movie stuff a lot. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 02, 2020, 12:56:17 PM
I'm personally a bit tired of metacommentary on fanbases. Ghostbusters and Star Wars just wore me the fuck out.

I'm 50/50 on nuTrek and am making my way through Picard now trying to keep an open mind. The only thing I will say is that while nuTrek has diminished with time for me (I had some high praise for '09 back in the day, now merely think it's a really good action movie, and possibly gold standard for rebooting something), old Trek just gets more compelling with age. :delicious
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 12:58:07 PM
as far as the new stuff i like beyond and picard and i think the rest are varying levels of meh to bad. i just also think that old trek is probably never coming back the way people want so comparing everything to it seems sorta pointless.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 02, 2020, 01:01:48 PM
Literally all I wanted in a new trek was that it takes place after voyager, and I got that.  There is a lot of trashy stuff in this season but season 1 of TNG was pretty much trash too.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 02, 2020, 01:03:23 PM
Literally all I wanted in a new trek was that it takes place after voyager, and I got that.  There is a lot of trashy stuff in this season but season 1 of TNG was pretty much trash too.

TNG S1 is trash but not irredeemably bad as Picard S1.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 02, 2020, 01:05:41 PM
If you say so.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 02, 2020, 01:09:28 PM
as far as the new stuff i like beyond and picard and i think the rest are varying levels of meh to bad. i just also think that old trek is probably never coming back the way people want so comparing everything to it seems sorta pointless.

That's true, but I just wonder if... hmmm...

Like there are times when a media franchise will do a big change, and it fucking rules, and people glob on and it takes the universe in an entirely new direction. And then there's the cases where it's more mixed, or negative. Sometimes the new direction takes hold, but sometimes it doesn't and the people who liked the series as it was originally either come back, or get promoted, because the new direction has run its course.

Media companies can and will try anything to stay relevant of course. Microcosms of this happen in the comics world every other year it feels like. In gaming it basically happened with Devil May Cry.

So I do think something *like* old Trek could one day carry the Trek brand again. Saying it can't happen is defeatist. I don't think anyone wants TOS remade shot for shot or anything, but a positive outlook of the future where the humans are mostly the good guys? Just like old Trek I gotta hold out hope.

Edit- My opinion on DS9 is that it was great but I mostly appreciated that it was concurrent with Voyager, so you still got something like the classic experience.

If today there were a more classic type show running alongside a darker show (or shows... is Section 13 or whatever still happening? Did it already happen?), I don't think the ire would be pronounced. But this is metacommentary which I'm trying to avoid...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 02, 2020, 01:13:10 PM
hey i couched it with "probably" lol. something in the old trek style certainly could come back but i'm not gonna sit around pining for it. for now, i'll just take each new property as its own thing i guess.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 02, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
If today there were a more classic type show running alongside a darker show (or shows... is Section 13 or whatever still happening? Did it already happen?), I don't think the ire would be pronounced. But this is metacommentary which I'm trying to avoid...

All something needs to do is be genuinely good to silence the nay sayers.
TNG had plenty of naysayers but it was actually good.
BSG reboot had plenty of prerelease doubt, and questioning the move to a a darker and edgier take.

Nothing in nuTrek has hit that. It's why the frustration.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 02, 2020, 01:51:33 PM
Exactly. I dont need something to be similar for TNG or DS9 otherwise its bad.. nah not at all.

I just want something intelligent. Something aspirational. Something fresh. Something good.

I dont care about the format
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 03, 2020, 10:08:21 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btm7eV5Vvgw
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 04, 2020, 10:13:33 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/u2929jA.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 04, 2020, 11:30:50 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o91XqlNSYg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MRKY-49JkM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeZ2Z5O-Z48

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 06, 2020, 01:32:33 PM
Quote
Star Trek: Picard Series Is a Psychological Character Study Says Producer Alex Kurtzman

 :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 06, 2020, 01:36:39 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElOkVc70F7U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJUt8k9zQ0o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 06, 2020, 01:43:12 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/vgwo67mac4r41.jpg?width=500&auto=webp&s=997bfce7224835bdadeaeb1d0e07114df052e038)

'proof that Odo eats ass'

:dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 06, 2020, 07:50:05 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfwRmO_2ghk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 07, 2020, 12:28:37 AM
All things considered, I think they made Q seem like a sympathetic entertainer. A lot of the negative things were played off as funny and they really went as far as "he could've been joking, but idunno"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 07, 2020, 12:30:41 AM
Anjohl definitely killed his wife tho.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 07, 2020, 11:30:06 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icL9iBLBOSo

:dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 07, 2020, 12:17:40 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/dnhbpmo5mer41.jpg?width=500&auto=webp&s=4504331c1eda008870ba94c141ac4b15bcecb0bc)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 07, 2020, 12:19:05 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/2bxgt3xx0cr41.jpg?width=636&auto=webp&s=43996453e675ecdab864a32042494d17993b6682)

 :nsfw
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://preview.redd.it/kj752d06xdr41.jpg?width=1024&auto=webp&s=1c5214415b5183ce2688ef6b4c942d5712719816)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 07, 2020, 12:19:44 PM
MornHub
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 07, 2020, 12:43:47 PM
Looks like one of those bone heads from Babylon 5 giving the lobe job :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 09, 2020, 01:08:54 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/d7YUqOw.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 09, 2020, 01:29:41 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Yl0Ba9y.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 10, 2020, 11:16:22 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/k17q9iw94xr41.jpg?width=547&auto=webp&s=2dd745e5d9a893104bc08a235de4e539b67871b5)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 17, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/OOEXayb.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 17, 2020, 04:26:44 PM
 :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 17, 2020, 06:28:48 PM
start wreck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 17, 2020, 06:29:59 PM
Star Wack
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 17, 2020, 06:33:58 PM
Should have had him in s1

Dont know why they are making s2 with this revived corpse
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 17, 2020, 06:38:30 PM
Because it's entertaining. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 17, 2020, 06:47:12 PM
Because what else is someone going to sign up to CBS All Access for?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 18, 2020, 01:21:41 AM
http://twitter.com/brianwatson80/status/1250396434777554944
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 18, 2020, 03:47:04 AM
That's why everybody knew their name and they never left that bar  :ohhh
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 18, 2020, 09:24:10 AM
Does that mean Woody and Sam were holograms like Vic Fontane? :omg
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 18, 2020, 02:17:39 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/J8Tpzni.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 19, 2020, 08:16:54 AM
Attention Bajoran Workers : We will reopen the economy. Return to your stations now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 19, 2020, 02:31:01 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr4P2vEdNQQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKSdkkYBcEA
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 22, 2020, 02:55:25 PM
Watching "Move Along Home"... immediately starts off by insinuating Sisko is racist over his son being interested in hip-hop bajoran fashion :larry

Shap two ha ha, move along home! Ha ha move along home! :dead

"But I did everything she did." "No you didn't. You didn't say the rhyme." :rofl this is the dumbest episode
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 22, 2020, 02:57:21 PM
Pretty trash episode only redeeming thing is the banter between Quark and Odo.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 22, 2020, 03:00:11 PM
Move Along Home is dreadful.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 22, 2020, 03:01:51 PM
Quark taking the shortcut because "trust a gambler" :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 22, 2020, 03:03:32 PM
I am going through DS9 as well man like half the season was pretty good and then shit episodes like that pop up and it never really recovers.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 22, 2020, 03:17:08 PM
that first season is pretty rough but the character bits are too good to skip on a first time watch
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 22, 2020, 03:21:32 PM
I think DS9 has less absolute stinkers than TNG on average. First season is uneven though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 22, 2020, 06:21:05 PM
I am going through DS9 as well man like half the season was pretty good and then shit episodes like that pop up and it never really recovers.
Battle Lines was amazing. Vortex was alright. The rest of this series must be pretty good if this is considered the worst season.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 22, 2020, 06:31:26 PM
I am going through DS9 as well man like half the season was pretty good and then shit episodes like that pop up and it never really recovers.
Battle Lines was amazing. Vortex was alright. The rest of this series must be pretty good if this is considered the worst season.

It's arguably the best first season of any trek, but I think TOS S1 is better.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 22, 2020, 06:36:41 PM
Ya DS9 and TOS are the only ones that could even be close to having a good first season and both have some pretty terrible episodes. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 22, 2020, 06:43:08 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/BNZk14s.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 22, 2020, 07:59:00 PM
Ok this made me want to get on the DS9 re-watch train.  Commander, Help meeeeeeeee.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 22, 2020, 08:05:10 PM
seeing my boy Nog succeed in turning OPPORTUNITY into PROFIT. :tocry  I hated these ferengi bastards but Nog and Quark are my favorite characters
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 22, 2020, 08:06:39 PM
I know there are people who don't like the Ferengi episodes, and they are wrong and should feel bad because those are great.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 22, 2020, 08:08:03 PM
not gonna spoil it for you, but Nog has one of the best developed character arcs in sci fi
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 23, 2020, 05:03:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W60kDRLU8_U
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 23, 2020, 05:04:50 AM
I know there are people who don't like the Ferengi episodes, and they are wrong and should feel bad because those are great.

The one episode where he goes to ferenginar does suck tho
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 23, 2020, 05:25:22 AM
Ferengi episodes are all over the place. The comedy really got kind of tired after a while. Better than Mirror universe episodes tho
Since we're on cursed Trek, Lwaxana's DS9 were among her best too and I say that as someone who didn't mind the character.

The other absolute stinker in DS9 I can think of is when Dax has that romance with dimension shifting dude. Maybe Dax and the serial killer in the last season too. I'm sure I'm forgetting a handful but overall it's not so much the episodes than some of the trends it finishes on (Bashir, Vic Fontaine, PROPHETS).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 23, 2020, 05:29:44 AM
I have a soft spot for mirror universe cuz evil Kira.  :whew

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Lwaxana actually has a decent episode in S1 of TNG where Diana was betrothed to some childhood friend ok that part was shit but Data saved that episode with his fascination of biologicals and their petty bickering.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 23, 2020, 07:37:38 AM
That bodysuit  :o
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 23, 2020, 07:43:22 AM
I have a soft spot for mirror universe cuz evil Kira.  :whew

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Lwaxana actually has a decent episode in S1 of TNG where Diana was betrothed to some childhood friend ok that part was shit but Data saved that episode with his fascination of biologicals and their petty bickering.
[close]

The actors have a lot of fun but the stories are really not that great. Way too many episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 23, 2020, 08:04:36 AM
Oh man evil Kira
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 23, 2020, 08:51:50 AM
(http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/misc/h-theemperorsnewcloak.jpg)
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VmbkXP1peLc/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on April 23, 2020, 09:08:28 AM
The only main criticism I have for DS9 with regards to its quality overall is that I felt Terry Ferrell ultimately was unable with her acting to match the material of her character.  The writers/showrunners clearly loved Dax’s character and gave her plenty of “meat to chew on”, but I don’t feel like she was ever able to really nail it, especially when you start comparing it to others like Quark and Odo, never mind even trying to stack her up against the likes of Kira or Sisko.  Maybe that was related to conflict she was apparently having behind the scenes?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 23, 2020, 04:02:10 PM
I've heard the argument made the other way, that she can act fine but the writing wasn't up to the character, there's definitely the feeling she was the eye candy of the cast for the producers. It's maybe a bit of both. Shosta mentioned how jarring it was that apparently there was no jurisprudence of any kind about the host and/or symbiote responsibility in case of a crime and overall the background mythology is surprisingly vague. I was not impressed by the Trill aquarium in a cave, to take another example. Odo and Quark are much stronger characters with very heavy traits, Brooks is a scenery chewer and Visitor is by far the strongest actor in the core cast. Farrell is not there but I think she's on the level of Siddig.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 23, 2020, 05:06:00 PM
The problem with Dax is you're supposed to buy that Jadzia Dax acts so similarly to Curzon that Sisko can't help but instantly recognise his traits and mannerisms and find it difficult to see Jadzia as her own person, but then they fuck that up first by showing Curzon as played by Odo, a totally fucking unrecognisable character, and then introducing Ezri, also a totally fucking unrecognisable character

e: also leaned way too fucking hard into wannabe klingon storylines
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 23, 2020, 05:18:34 PM
Yeah Worf the Klingaboo was enough.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 23, 2020, 07:56:56 PM
Duet was a great episode. I agree that #NotAllGermans were bad people.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 23, 2020, 08:00:54 PM
Duet was a great episode. I agree that #NotAllGermans were bad people.

Duet is the best episode in S1. This is something they'll revisit a lot with a lot of success but rarely better than it does.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 23, 2020, 08:46:26 PM
S1 finale was good. I like the fundamental message of that episode, that there should be a place for both faith and science in our schools, and that if you try to create a conflict between them it just causes problems.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 23, 2020, 11:09:21 PM
I remember watching the first season of Voyager and drifting away from it. I'm watching s2 off-and-on, and it's basically TNG methadone. It's nearly TNG, but it doesn't get me high.

I should just go back to DS9, but I can't watch that and do dishes or laundry at the same time. I have to focus on it. It's good TV.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 24, 2020, 06:33:59 AM
If Voyager is TNG methadone, does that make The Orville TNG Ketamine? :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on April 24, 2020, 08:30:54 AM
I've heard the argument made the other way, that she can act fine but the writing wasn't up to the character, there's definitely the feeling she was the eye candy of the cast for the producers. It's maybe a bit of both. Shosta mentioned how jarring it was that apparently there was no jurisprudence of any kind about the host and/or symbiote responsibility in case of a crime and overall the background mythology is surprisingly vague. I was not impressed by the Trill aquarium in a cave, to take another example. Odo and Quark are much stronger characters with very heavy traits, Brooks is a scenery chewer and Visitor is by far the strongest actor in the core cast. Farrell is not there but I think she's on the level of Siddig.
I think Farrell is a completely capable actor, it’s definitely possible that the actual scripting for her was weak, but for whatever reason I felt that she wasn’t able to fit/make work the role of Jadzia.  Especially the Klingon stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on April 24, 2020, 06:29:59 PM
On ep 3 of S2 (the siege). I think this whole thing is a great analogy for how Russia is interfering in our electoral politics behind the scenes by pitting us against each other.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on April 24, 2020, 07:28:15 PM
If Voyager is TNG methadone, does that make The Orville TNG Ketamine? :thinking

And Picard is TNG Kratum.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on April 25, 2020, 06:49:33 AM
Yeah I have mixed feeling about the Klingaboo stuff too. Obviously the contrast with Jadzia stature is part of the bit but it often came across as LARPing (and thus shallow). It still works because Worf is also a poseur and it's more of Klingon culture nerd couple than a Klingon marriage... And there's undertones of the fantasy rubber meeting the reality road a couple of times for Dax. It's hard buying Dax (even Curzon) would be taken seriously by the old school Klingon legends even when the script tries to address it though.

She's not comic relief proper but Jadzia is kinda the ditz / aloof punctuation and I think there was missed opportunities on having more meat to that character. The S7 turn was super clumsy but in a way it was a more palpable and concrete depiction than just talking about the "old man".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 28, 2020, 07:27:33 AM
This reddit comment is too good :dead

Quote
If TNG used Discovery's format every episode would be: Riker gets dressed down for bringing a strange space STI aboard the ship > Something happens that moves the season arc an inch and a half > Riker stares doe eyed out his window while wearing space pajamas > Something else happens that moves the season arc an inch and a half > Geordi and Troi tell him that he's doing a great job and mean old Picard and the Admirals just don't get it > Stuff blows up > Picard tells Riker that his reckless and impulsive space STI possibly saved the day > Roll credits.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 28, 2020, 08:22:56 PM
I finished Picard. I more-or-less binged it this time, and tried to pay better attention than my first attempt, when I was doing chores and stuff while it was playing. I got four episodes in that time, and had no idea what was going on. So... for me, that's a little bit anti-Trek: there aren't many other OST, TNG, or VOY episodes where I can't just tune-in halfway and have a decent idea of what's happening. Picard uses nonsequential storytelling and more of an adventure/quest storyline than the semi-procedural pattern of previous series.

tl;dr: I liked Picard a bunch this time. It suffers from the same problem as the TNG movies, where Picard and Data are overwhelmingly the focus of the story. But it's not like the series own title and the very first shot in the show (Picard and Data playing poker) don't pretty much let you know that this will be the case. And in fairness, the new crew does get some reasonable amount of background and development over the course of this season's 10 episodes. I like it. I'm ready for more. And I say that as someone who probably won't ever go out of his way for more VOY or another season of DISCOVERY.

There are questions brought up which bear near-PKD levels of scrutinizing reality and the legitimacy of consciousness. There is a consistent presentation of the concept that life's preciousness is inherently tied to its limited nature. Death is what gives life meaning. That said, there are a couple of inherent missteps. Picard spoilers:

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The first synth, Dahj, is killed in front of Picard in the end of the first episode from whatever acidic spit-sac the Romulan assassins are using in place of cyanide capsules. She dies without ever mentioning her twin, Soji. It's likely that she never knew about Soji -- but Soji knew about Dahj. Sure, both of them were living lives that were couched in false memories, but why give one the memory, and not the other? And why is Dahj's life so casually tossed aside? And why is there a gold-skinned version of her which has no twin?

In the coda for Data, he requests that Picard turn off the quantum simulation in which Data remains conscious. This is the culmination of "life has meaning because it is finite." Data wants to benefit from that same awareness of limit, thus gaining further, final insight into the human condition. While it could be argued that, even with triple-redundancy on the quantum simulation, it is eventually going to fail. Nothing is forever, so this is less about awareness and finite-ness, and more about assisted suicide. I'm also OK with that.

What surprised me was pushing Picard's consciousness into an equally frail body, with a life expectancy of "more or less what you would've had if not for the brain tumor." Picard had his run, he lived a good life, has died of misadventure a couple of times -- but converting his consciousness into a new body seems to fly in the face of the series' main message. This is your one life. Use it as best you can because it is singular and precious. Unless you're Picard, in which case you'll be saved from a brain tumor, or a Nausicaan stabbing you through the heart, or whatever.
[close]

One more thing, when they're in the bar and Vajazzle Bijayzl is first introduced, I thought she was Deanna Troi. I thought, "Holy hells, Marina Sirtis has held up well!" That was a hell of a bodysuit. Anyway, yeah, I'll be in my bunk.

http://twitter.com/Jwhitbrook/status/1230868218065104896
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 28, 2020, 08:32:52 PM
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on April 28, 2020, 10:42:58 PM
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[

My general impression is that you're not a positive thinker about many things. Which is fine. It does make me sad for you though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on April 28, 2020, 10:47:25 PM
I honestly thought it was Marina Sirtis or a relative when I saw her.  had to pause the show to look it up.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on April 28, 2020, 11:13:17 PM
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[

My general impression is that you're not a positive thinker about many things. Which is fine. It does make me sad for you though.

It's more of an issue with this show turning Star Trek from a thought provoking Scifi with a near Utopian future where moral dilemmas are shown not told to the audience, and turning it into generic bleak Scifi with turrible writing and elder abuse.

Shit characters
Shit Writing
Shit Dialogue
Nonsensical "plot"

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I guess the special effects look good, but fuck those ship designs are bad.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
They benched the only likeable characters the O'Romulans.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
This shit is worse than Discovery.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on April 29, 2020, 02:19:31 AM
The last two eps and especially the ending to Picard was offensively bad. The rest was ugh to meh.


However
spoiler (click to show/hide)
(https://i.imgur.com/QlTQkSh.jpg)
[close]


:lawd
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on April 29, 2020, 03:54:50 AM
It really is garbage though. Im not saying that because I dislike it. Im saying that because objectively its a really bad show
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on April 29, 2020, 09:32:29 AM
this thread rules

anyway can't wait for season 2, i get 2x the entertainment. once from the show and once from the autistic spergouts in here :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on April 29, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
I don't know if Sonequa MArtin-Green is a bad actress, because the only other thing I've seen her in is a bit part in The Good Wife as a secretary, but she is awful as the lead in Discovery, and charitably she's either woefully miscast or the character is just terribly written.

That's why comparing her to Riker in that reddit comment doesn't work. You'd still be rooting for Riker.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 02, 2020, 08:40:08 PM
https://twitter.com/GoodAaron/status/1256653776271728641

https://twitter.com/GoodAaron/status/1256727556016861184

i don't remember this at all but that's hilarious :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 02, 2020, 10:38:34 PM
He could be making that entire thing up and I wouldn't know. :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 02, 2020, 10:41:54 PM
I don't remember any of that shit, but I guess its a callback to Voyage Home...?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 02, 2020, 10:46:20 PM
someone get benji in here to confirm/deny
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 02, 2020, 10:55:30 PM
I assume it'd be easy enough for someone to check a copy of the TNG Technical Manual. The Okuda's and others weren't above putting obscure references on things that were never expected to be seen like computer screens and stuff so labeling a door out of something wacky in the Technical Manual sounds like the kinds of things they did all the time. These became recursive because the Okuda's then wrote the Chronology and Encyclopedia which referenced a ton of them. Then later series referenced them.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 02, 2020, 10:57:28 PM
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Cetacean_Ops
Quote
The term "Cetacean Ops" was only heard in the "background chatter" during the episode. The facility might also exist in the regular timeline as dolphins are mentioned to be aboard the ship in "The Perfect Mate". To date, the facility has never been shown on screen. Conceptual artwork at Andrew Probert's website shows that the facility may be have been featured in the original version of Star Trek Online. The subtitles for the episode on streaming services including both Netflix and Amazon, as well as the TNG Season 3 Blu-ray release, give the facility's name as "station Ops."

According to the 1996 reference book Star Trek: The Next Generation USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D Blueprints, lifeboats for the cetacean ops crew were located on deck 13. [1]
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Dolphin
Quote
The dolphins aboard the Enterprise-D were originally to have been referenced in TNG: "Relics". In the first draft script of that outing, Geordi La Forge remarked to Montgomery Scott, "Wait until you see the dolphins." However, that statement, in the final draft of the script as well as the final edit of the installment, became, "Wait until you see the Holodeck." [1]

The Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual indicates that the dolphins were part of the ship's complement, serving as navigational specialists. This would indicate that they are, in fact, a sentient species. They likely operated out of Cetacean Ops.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 02, 2020, 11:09:05 PM
I assume it'd be easy enough for someone to check a copy of the TNG Technical Manual. The Okuda's and others weren't above putting obscure references on things that were never expected to be seen like computer screens and stuff so labeling a door out of something wacky in the Technical Manual sounds like the kinds of things they did all the time. These became recursive because the Okuda's then wrote the Chronology and Encyclopedia which referenced a ton of them. Then later series referenced them.

That's how I assume most of these situations happen... when you insert an in-joke into Star Trek, it becomes canon...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 03, 2020, 03:30:54 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/T5bUoA2.png)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 03, 2020, 05:57:25 AM
I finished Picard. I more-or-less binged it this time, and tried to pay better attention than my first attempt, when I was doing chores and stuff while it was playing. I got four episodes in that time, and had no idea what was going on. So... for me, that's a little bit anti-Trek: there aren't many other OST, TNG, or VOY episodes where I can't just tune-in halfway and have a decent idea of what's happening. Picard uses nonsequential storytelling and more of an adventure/quest storyline than the semi-procedural pattern of previous series.

tl;dr: I liked Picard a bunch this time. It suffers from the same problem as the TNG movies, where Picard and Data are overwhelmingly the focus of the story. But it's not like the series own title and the very first shot in the show (Picard and Data playing poker) don't pretty much let you know that this will be the case. And in fairness, the new crew does get some reasonable amount of background and development over the course of this season's 10 episodes. I like it. I'm ready for more. And I say that as someone who probably won't ever go out of his way for more VOY or another season of DISCOVERY.

There are questions brought up which bear near-PKD levels of scrutinizing reality and the legitimacy of consciousness. There is a consistent presentation of the concept that life's preciousness is inherently tied to its limited nature. Death is what gives life meaning. That said, there are a couple of inherent missteps. Picard spoilers:

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The first synth, Dahj, is killed in front of Picard in the end of the first episode from whatever acidic spit-sac the Romulan assassins are using in place of cyanide capsules. She dies without ever mentioning her twin, Soji. It's likely that she never knew about Soji -- but Soji knew about Dahj. Sure, both of them were living lives that were couched in false memories, but why give one the memory, and not the other? And why is Dahj's life so casually tossed aside? And why is there a gold-skinned version of her which has no twin?

In the coda for Data, he requests that Picard turn off the quantum simulation in which Data remains conscious. This is the culmination of "life has meaning because it is finite." Data wants to benefit from that same awareness of limit, thus gaining further, final insight into the human condition. While it could be argued that, even with triple-redundancy on the quantum simulation, it is eventually going to fail. Nothing is forever, so this is less about awareness and finite-ness, and more about assisted suicide. I'm also OK with that.

What surprised me was pushing Picard's consciousness into an equally frail body, with a life expectancy of "more or less what you would've had if not for the brain tumor." Picard had his run, he lived a good life, has died of misadventure a couple of times -- but converting his consciousness into a new body seems to fly in the face of the series' main message. This is your one life. Use it as best you can because it is singular and precious. Unless you're Picard, in which case you'll be saved from a brain tumor, or a Nausicaan stabbing you through the heart, or whatever.
[close]

One more thing, when they're in the bar and Vajazzle Bijayzl is first introduced, I thought she was Deanna Troi. I thought, "Holy hells, Marina Sirtis has held up well!" That was a hell of a bodysuit. Anyway, yeah, I'll be in my bunk.

http://twitter.com/Jwhitbrook/status/1230868218065104896
They could’ve saved that final episode for me if after
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Picard’s body dies, we see him wake up in Tom Hardy’s body.  That way at least something good eventually came out of that rancid piece of shit, Nemesis.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 08, 2020, 03:04:33 PM
So I finished up Picard. I'll post some spoiler stuff after this but my no spoiler comment is that I liked it, but I think the last two episodes are kinda dumb and drag down what was a pretty good initial season for a trek show. I prefer Discovery if I'm being honest. That show keeps me more on the edge of my seat and delivers what I want a bit more from a modern trek but its fine to have a different kind of trek show in some ways in Picard. Read no reviews or anybody's else comments outside a few in this thread because I don't give an f about what Red Letter Media or any other nerd groupthink fountain thinks about things  On to the spoiler stuff.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The cast is mostly fine. I like them. I wasn't sure about Rios early on as it seems they were leaning heavily into a type but he grew on me and I like the silly bit where he plays all the other AI stuff. Rafi, Jurati are fine. I don't get the complaints about likability. They seem fine to me. Flawed sure but I'm perfectly fine with that. The Elnor/Legolas characters is seemingly the worst so far for me as he is very predictable and generic and they need to kinda do something about that.

The show starts off slow and things take maybe a little too long to juice the plot but once it got going, I was invested to see where it was going. I quite liked the first episode with Riker and Troi. It hit the right notes of nostalgia and emotion for me. I was quite excited to see where things were going once everything got going. But I must say I did not like those last two episodes much at all.

I'm generally the type of person who kind of favors emotion over plot. So when things don't kinda make sense plot wise mechanically I've very willing to let that go if the emotional element is strong. But if the plot is kinda jammed down my throat its harder to overlook and I feel like that last stretch of plot is both jammed down my throat and pretty dumb. When they show the future serpent robots traveling in space and time to come destroy things, my eyes were rolling into the back of my mind. Not only did it look goofy but thematically the threat here should be sort of be implied rather than shown. I felt that would have been more effective. Not only that but the whole conclusion is way too damn fast and convenient and put on a perfect bow. I didn't like the whole fleet magically showing up with riker in the chair. Too fan-servicey. I get that Star Trek is historically often like this. With 2 minute conclusions to rather complicated plots. But that's always been a flaw imo. Why not improve on that rather than just falling back on it. It felt like they crammed what should have been about 4 episodes into 2 and it wasn't the best writing on it also.

Some of that sounds pretty negative but mostly I enjoyed the show outside of large swaths of those final two episodes. Patrick Stewart pretty much effortlessly delivers great work in this role. I'd love to see other TNG members come back and deliver good cameos. I like the little mini-crew we've established for the most part. I'm down for it. I loved TNG as much as the next person but I never honestly wanted TNG 2.0 just in 2020. There are certainly flaws and things that need to be improved upon but that is true of every single trek show that has ever been on the air. The magic sauce has always been where the show eventually ends up going versus where it starts.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 09, 2020, 02:22:25 AM
I expect the second season of Picard to be worse than the first imagine being such hacks that you do the opposite of Real Trek shows and make shit worse than the first season.  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 09, 2020, 01:34:15 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Y1ip8Rm.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 12:38:41 PM
https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/star-trek-series-anson-mount-ethan-peck-rebecca-romijn-cbs-all-access-1234607259/

 :obama


Good News for me.


Sad news for the rest of the thread.

 :sabu

Although most will probably need to wait for an RLM video to form their opinion first.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 12:43:27 PM
I loved Picard until the last episode of so whichnwas flawed. So I love it but didn't find the conclusion satisfactory.

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/star-trek-series-anson-mount-ethan-peck-rebecca-romijn-cbs-all-access-1234607259/

 :obama


Good News for me.


Sad news for the rest of the thread.

 :sabu

Although most will probably need to wait for an RLM video to form their opinion first.

I just feel we don't need another trek show. But I'll give it a chance.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 12:45:31 PM
Also I haven't clicked on this thread in weeks. Wastoid thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 12:50:57 PM
My serious response is that three shows are a lot. But I also get hitting where the iron is hot. Trek on TV is hot for the first time in awhile so they are going to push it for all its worth.

I'm fine with it as long as the shows can keep a distinct separate focus and identity which is admittedly tough for trek. 

Anson Mount was really good as Pike so I understand wanting to keep him around for stuff as was Peck as spock. Romijn was kinda meh imo but maybe she can up her game if given more to do.

At one point there was also talk of a Michelle Yeoh Spin off show. Not sure if that is dead in favor of this or not.


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 15, 2020, 12:54:02 PM
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 15, 2020, 12:57:08 PM
Ew more Star Drek for the Drekkies.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:00:06 PM
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.

I can't remember but even if they weren't syndication repeats were a thing at the time so it felt like they all ran at the same time because most of us watched the repeats right along with the new content.  (Although I dipped out on voyager really early)

The fact that syndication doesn't really exist anymore kinda helps a bit with the over-saturation. But yeah all three of these shows are fairly young with Discovery only being in season 3. Corona will of course slow down production on some of this stuff.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:01:03 PM
Ew more Star Drek for the Drekkies.

Don't worry. You will have more jack materal RLM videos. It's a win win.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:02:54 PM
My serious response is that three shows are a lot. But I also get hitting where the iron is hot. Trek on TV is hot for the first time in awhile so they are going to push it for all its worth.

I'm fine with it as long as the shows can keep a distinct separate focus and identity which is admittedly tough for trek. 

Anson Mount was really good as Pike so I understand wanting to keep him around for stuff as was Peck as spock. Romijn was kinda meh imo but maybe she can up her game if given more to do.

At one point there was also talk of a Michelle Yeoh Spin off show. Not sure if that is dead in favor of this or not.

It isn't three shows though. It's five. There's also the comedy show and the Section 31 Michelle Yeoh show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2020, 01:05:22 PM
Yeah there's at least four shows (Discovery s3, Picard s2, Section 31 s1, Strange New Worlds s1.)

Which is ridiculous.

Viacom must be panicking they have fuckall to compete with Disney+ and HBO Max and are milking the Trek teat as much as possible.

Only this time it makes less sense than Disney with Star Wars -- SW is a global franchise. Trek is pretty US-centric sales-wise... Viacom putting all their eggs in the Trek basket does not make sense financially.

It does explain a lot of the creative decisions made with these shows though, there's a lot riding on them so they have to appeal to as broad an audience as possible.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:06:52 PM
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.

No. It was a slow drip. DS9 aired while TNG was on. I remember. Then TNG ended as DS9 headed into s3.  Then Voyager aired soon after TNG ended because of the babies complaining.

TNG ended in may 94. DS9  was already on the air. VOY premiered January 95.

FYI, Enterprise aired like three MONTHS after Voyager ended. MONTHS. They didn't give any time to let these shows breathe. Just constant milking.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:07:09 PM
I don't count the animated show. For me that its own thing in a completely different format and tone. That will be nothing like a traditional trek show. I don't know about the Michelle Yeoh thing if that is still happening. I'll judge them independently of course. Three Shows are a lot. But its also not like they are cranking out 22 season mandatory episodes where you are forced to feed the beast at that rate. That was equally a problem of old trek as with all television. They had to crank out a good portion of shit just to feed that massive amount of episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Madrun Badrun on May 15, 2020, 01:07:46 PM
I don't think 3 or 4 shows is a lot when they are all like 10-13 episodes and seem to have longer times between seasons.  I don't see why we can't have them spaced out so ever three months we get 10 episodes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:08:35 PM
I don't think 3 or 4 shows is a lot when they are all like 10-13 episodes and seem to have longer times between seasons.

I think its a lot of shows but I also think your point is fair which was also my point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2020, 01:10:30 PM
Damn yeah there's two other shows in development too, Lower Decks (two season pickup out of the gate??) and some cartoon show Nick is making maybe?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2020, 01:12:52 PM
The thing is I'd be fine with a lot of Trek shows, but why are the majority of them Discovery-era? What about the people that don't like Discovery era or prequels? They're fucked if they don't like Picard either.

Strange New Worlds would be more interesting if its placing in the timeline was ambiguous. The temptation in these prequel shows to touch and smudge up TOS stories is too great for the writers, and they routinely cock it up IMO.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:13:10 PM
Damn yeah there's two other shows in development too, Lower Decks (two season pickup out of the gate??) and some cartoon show Nick is making maybe?

Lower Decks I knew of but not the Nick show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:14:08 PM
The thing is I'd be fine with a lot of Trek shows, but why are the majority of them Discovery-era? What about the people that don't like Discovery era or prequels? They're fucked if they don't like Picard either.

Strange New Worlds would be more interesting if its placing in the timeline was ambiguous. The temptation in these prequel shows to touch and smudge up TOS stories is too great for the writers, and they routinely cock it up IMO.

I'm sick of them sucking TOS' cock. Give me another post-Voy show. I'm fucking begging you!

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:20:53 PM
I like New Trek so I'm fine with this until I stop liking the shows. When that happens I will mention it personally. Everybody is of course entitled to their own opinion and preferences (once properly vetted by an RLM video of course)

My secret wish for a trek show was the rumoured original pitch for Discovery and that it was going to be an anthology show where you focused on a different cast and experience each season. I loved that idea. But I also understand why from a business perspective it was shot down.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:24:59 PM
I also like that idea.

Personally, I'm miffed Lower Decks is a comedy show. I love the idea of turning the episode Lower Decks into an entire show. A series about non-officer Starflet members fresh out of academy would be excellent and refreshing. Put it post-VOY and we could explore the state of the universe in a refreshing new way. Make it have the same format as DS9 where it's self contained but also serialized. I think that could be the traditional Trek show for diehard Trekkies.

The benefit of having all these shows is that they can appeal to every Trek fan under the sun: the people that like action and Borg plots, the people that like the politics, and the people that like the adventure. I hope they realize they need a traditional Trek show on the wings as well to placate their audience. People are starved for oldschool Trek. Give it to them. You have multiple shows. You can afford it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:30:40 PM
I am going through DS9 as well man like half the season was pretty good and then shit episodes like that pop up and it never really recovers.
Battle Lines was amazing. Vortex was alright. The rest of this series must be pretty good if this is considered the worst season.

A lot of trekkies suggest to outright skip it because trekkies are bitches. DS9 is good tv straight through. Move Along Home is the only truly bad episode in my opinion. The quality of the show ranges from alright to fucking spectacular. There are some episodes I'm not keen on (mirror universe) but they're not "FUCK THIS IS AWFUL" tier either.

Easily the most balanced, best Trek show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 15, 2020, 01:31:12 PM
I think everyone liked Pike in Discovery because he was a glimpse of a real trek captain doing real trek captainty stuff, so if they want to give him a show thats more like star trek while michael burnham stoically unemotes to every problem that she is either the cause of or the solution to over on discovery while pining over Clem Fandango, fair play to them.

:idont

I thought the chemistry between pike and number one was pretty good. Presumably there's some kind of economy to be had by building a permanent ship set, then slightly redressing it for each of the different shows that makes filming multiple series sort of concurrently make sense, because for all its faults, Discovery sure didn't look low budget in the sllightest.

TNG and DS9 overlapped slightly at the start of DS9, and DS9 and VOY overlapped at the end of DS9, but there's only so much they could do in the way of recycling sets for all three (although goddamn they got their moneys worth out of the stuff they built for ST:TMP :lol)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 01:41:17 PM
I like New Trek so I'm fine with this until I stop liking the shows. When that happens I will mention it personally. Everybody is of course entitled to their own opinion and preferences (once properly vetted by an RLM video of course)

My secret wish for a trek show was the rumoured original pitch for Discovery and that it was going to be an anthology show where you focused on a different cast and experience each season. I loved that idea. But I also understand why from a business perspective it was shot down.
keeping on with this RLM shtick when everyone in this thread pretty much gives their opinions 5 mins after the show aired is distinguished mentally-challenged fellow fuel, but hey I guess it worked on me  :shaking :engel
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 01:44:02 PM
Nah he's right. I don't even watch RLM as a channel anymore. The people are too bitter, too cynical, and aren't pleasing to watch at this point in time. There are far better movie Youtube channels that offer criticism without wallowing in their own Gen X/older Millennial piss.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 01:47:21 PM
No he's not right, the people in this thread, ostensibly the readers of this thread have all shared their opinions well before RLM has given their opinions, that we laugh along with RLM later does in no way seed those opinions unless you've secretly discovered time travel.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 15, 2020, 01:47:38 PM
https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/reused_ship_interiors.htm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 01:52:54 PM
I like New Trek so I'm fine with this until I stop liking the shows. When that happens I will mention it personally. Everybody is of course entitled to their own opinion and preferences (once properly vetted by an RLM video of course)

My secret wish for a trek show was the rumoured original pitch for Discovery and that it was going to be an anthology show where you focused on a different cast and experience each season. I loved that idea. But I also understand why from a business perspective it was shot down.
keeping on with this RLM shtick when everyone in this thread pretty much gives their opinions 5 mins after the show aired is distinguished mentally-challenged fellow fuel, but hey I guess it worked on me  :shaking :engel

yep. Gonna keep doing it too because it continues to make me laugh. Get use to it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 01:55:06 PM
Hey like I said, you got me. Denying the agency of my own thoughs is a cheap laugh but it sadly works on me  :engel :mike :notlikethis
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 15, 2020, 02:19:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWFggtIPoq0

This is better than Picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 02:20:32 PM
Nice Power Ranger costumes.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 15, 2020, 02:22:09 PM
No he's not right, the people in this thread, ostensibly the readers of this thread have all shared their opinions well before RLM has given their opinions, that we laugh along with RLM later does in no way seed those opinions unless you've secretly discovered time travel.

Expecting Discovery fans to fucks with logic :nope
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 15, 2020, 02:23:39 PM
everytime the klingons showed up on discovery

 :snore

(https://i.imgur.com/08QR99U.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 02:25:36 PM
Ok, back to not clicking this thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 02:47:34 PM
love it. Triggering those RLM fanboys

 :phil
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 15, 2020, 03:19:59 PM
love it. Triggering those RLM fanboys

 :phil

I see if you like RLM you are a fanboy

if you like Drek, you hate RLM and pretend that they aren't 100% on point with their criticism of this wack ass show. So delusional basically.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 03:23:42 PM
Keep feeding me boys. I'm hungry


 :D
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 15, 2020, 03:24:07 PM
I thought the klingon stuff in discovery was pretty universally disliked even by people that otherwise enjoyed the show.
I mean... I don't think its coincidence they seemed to shitcan the whole thing and wrap it up ASAP as soon as they changed showrunner :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 15, 2020, 03:44:32 PM
New klingons are gross

they have no honor
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 03:52:25 PM
love it. Triggering those RLM fanboys

 :phil
I'm not triggered, just hoping we can find jovial mutual disgust in each other's viewing habits without attributing it to third party puppet masters. I for one would rather be called a dumbass than a dumbass by proxy because I have standards dammit  :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 03:55:33 PM
love it. Triggering those RLM fanboys

 :phil
I'm not triggered, just hoping we can find jovial mutual disgust in each other's viewing habits without attributing it to third party puppet masters. I for one would rather be called a dumbass than a dumbass by proxy because I have standards dammit  :quark

Not gonna happen. But luckily I post in this thread about once every three months or so. So at least you won't have to see it that much. So small comforts and all that.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 03:57:24 PM
Nah, I want you to post more, I actually most look forward to reading posts I disagree with, especially when chrono posts cause he tends to be verbose and specific.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 04:00:07 PM
nah. I contribute as much as I can tolerate as I really don't care for the thread. No offense and not specifically aimed at you. But I generally post a review of each season of each show as I watch them. So there's that. Still need to watch season 2 of orville so I'm sure I'll do a post for that and eventually season 3 of discovery. God Bless chrono. I don't have his level of patience.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 04:05:41 PM
Orville gets so much better season 2. I feel like the show was pitched as a light comedy and Seth is slowly making it more like what he actually wanted. It's highly derivative but not in a negative way, most episodes entertain me and leaves me in a better mood than it found me. I like that the show doesn't feel like it needs to be edgy, high concept or whatever else is going on in new trek but just decided it's goal was to give you a solid 42 minutes of entertainment
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 04:09:06 PM
I liked the first season of Orville. Probably not as much as some but I did like it. Personally I'm happier with sci-fi ship shows than I've been in quite a while or at least in recent years.

I have plenty of trek. The orville exists. And the expanse exists which is my favorite of the lot by far currently. So I couldn't be happier at the moment.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 04:11:42 PM
I cry long tears between seasons of the expanse, I don't want them to rush it but I do wish there were would be more of it everytime they choose to bless us with a seasonal drop.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 04:16:53 PM
Yeah I adore the Expanse. By far my favorite sci-fi show on tv. Nothing else is even close. I wanted to make a post on the most recent season in the tv thread but forgot to. It was a paradox for me. I thought it was the weakest season of the 4 so far. But I still thought it was really good and I was hooked throughout the season. But I love that show and that universe. I need to read the books when I find some time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 15, 2020, 04:23:19 PM
I've been meaning to watch The Expanse.

Also Orville s2 is excellent.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 04:23:52 PM
My only complaints about the show is that outside the crew of the rocinante a bunch of characters feel underutilized, making me want slightly longer seasons with a bit more character building for the rest. I get that if you do it too much it would feel highly unfocused but i find that the non roci chars (apart from Amos) are generally my favs
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 04:31:32 PM
I knew I was gonna love the Expanse from the pacing of the first season which some people label as too meandering and not focused. But that's exactly what pulled me in.  That it had this world focused on different elements like the belt, mars, earth, holden and the group, etc. I love that it spent the time to set up that kind of world. I wish more sci-fi had the patience and world building chops to set that kind of stage. But its hard to do when an audience is always overly looking for super showy moments.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 15, 2020, 04:35:19 PM
Yeah in the later seasons it feels too focused for me, the roci shouldn't really be the center of everything but a small part in the whole.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 15, 2020, 04:42:52 PM
I agree a bit although I've still very much enjoyed it and since I'm not familiar with the books, I'm assuming they are still following that guideline. Season 4 was very laser focused which is was part of why I considered it the weakest of the four seasons but all that being said, I'm critiquing something I still very very much like. I hope it eventually opens back up like Season 1 was but I'm down for whatever.   
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 15, 2020, 07:28:48 PM
"I think you've made a terrible mistake. All of you. Maybe we could have helped you. Maybe we could have helped each other. The Skreeans are farmers, Kira. You have a famine on your planet. Perhaps we could have made that peninsula bloom again. We'll never know, will we? Fifty years of Cardassian rule have made you all frightened and suspicious. I feel sorry for you. You were right. Bajor is not Kentanna."

:tocry
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 16, 2020, 11:53:27 AM
Rewatching Voyager

much more fun than dull picard where everything is dreadful
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 16, 2020, 12:30:50 PM
watch year of hell and get back to me :ufup

 :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 16, 2020, 12:35:01 PM
year of hell is fantastic, the citizen kane of tv
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 16, 2020, 01:16:24 PM
watch year of hell and get back to me :ufup

 :lol

Ive seen em all but forgotten this one where the hirogen are prey and the doc leaves voyager to help them

Pretty good episode I always enjoy the holo rights stuff

Year of hell yeah not a fan but eh 🤷🏼‍♂️

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 07:55:27 AM
https://youtu.be/TwF1iri1GjQ

So good
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 19, 2020, 08:18:16 AM
Ok, since I still haven't watched Picard, I guess I'll have to do it now. Is it really really bad? On a scale of 1-10?
(No spoilers, please).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 09:25:11 AM
look how the other autismos in here reacted to it and there's your answer
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 09:30:10 AM
look how the other autismos in here reacted to it and there's your answer

😂

Hating on a show thats written like shit

= autismos

😂😂😂😂

I wonder what you think of shows like The Wire or Sopranos. If you think THIS is good, you couldnt even fathom how good those shows are.

Your mind would most positively be blown.

Its funny how its the people who love this show cant seem to deal with any criticisms, and gp straight for calling others autismos.

Man what a trip. Good one nachobro. Intelligent discussion very good.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 09:30:45 AM
see i didn't even have to drop a name and they come flocking :lol

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 09:32:22 AM
see i didn't even have to drop a name and they come flocking :lol

"they"? do you have some sort of delusion?

Also can you not call other members autismos its really denigrating as fuck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 09:32:57 AM
post some more rlm shit disguised as your own opinion, that will surely convince me that the parts of the show i liked aren't real :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 19, 2020, 09:33:41 AM
Ok, since I still haven't watched Picard, I guess I'll have to do it now. Is it really really bad? On a scale of 1-10?
(No spoilers, please).
It's shit. If you have the ability to shut off your brain and just want to see familiar faces and be mildly entertained (about as much as when the kettle boils for tea) go ahead.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 09:34:14 AM
also shaddup you dutch autismo :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 09:34:35 AM
post some more rlm shit disguised as your own opinion, that will surely convince me that the parts of the show i liked aren't real :lol :lol :lol

Motherfucker Ive been posting as soon as I saw the episodes you miserable fucking cunt.

Go cry some more about how we all post RLM opinion as gospel you fucking simp
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 19, 2020, 09:35:19 AM
 :nothing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 09:35:46 AM
i too just repeat slang i read on the internet. what an autismo :lol :lol :lol

imagine having a full meltdown over every topic where people disagree with you. hopefully no one posts about epic today or you might completely lose it
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 19, 2020, 11:15:46 AM
Lotta Gerardo fans in here.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx64_N4AA04
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 11:23:28 AM
lmao is there any situation you don't react to with distinguished mentally-challenged over moderation?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 11:30:46 AM
i guess that's a no :lol

editing posts like a true autismo distinguished mentally-challenged fellow
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 19, 2020, 11:34:06 AM
You bored, Nacho? 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 19, 2020, 11:50:23 AM
He just kicked me out of his discord after pitching a fit.  :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 11:52:36 AM
i figured you needed some time to cool down. all that posting can't be good for your fat heart. just worried about your health ;)

unlike power tripping bore mods, it wasn't a ban and you are welcome to return any time.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 19, 2020, 11:53:33 AM
i figured you needed some time to cool down. all that posting can't be good for your fat heart. just worried about your health ;)

OK, one good turn deserves another!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 11:53:39 AM
i too just repeat slang i read on the internet. what an Rico Suave :lol :lol :lol

imagine having a full meltdown over every topic where people disagree with you. hopefully no one posts about epic today or you might completely lose it

It has nothing to do with people agreeing or disagreeing with me.

My point is insulting me and other posters because RLM shares our sentiments, then you pretend we are instead parroting RLM when actually most of us posted our thoughts on Picard way before RLM did.

This was also pointed out (to you?) a few pages back that its just a way for you to kill and any discussion or criticism. "HURR DURR RLM PARROTS LMAO" Is how your posts come across.

Some of us were even looking forward to Picard, but I guess all that's too much for you to handle. So instead of actually discussion something, all you post is the same "Hurr durr autists for liking RLM/parroting their opinions".

Lmao, yeah I suppose RLM is influencing our thoughts before they even put out a discussion video or review. Its not hard to pick out all the shit thats just messed up, doesnt make any sense, or is just plain stupid in Picard.

Now you can either try to discuss this, or put your fingers in your ear and scream "LALALA AUTISTS DONT LIKE IT LMAO RLM NERDS" but it just makes you seem like a fucking asshole.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: nachobro on May 19, 2020, 11:54:10 AM
i figured you needed some time to cool down. all that posting can't be good for your fat heart. just worried about your health ;)

OK, one good turn deserves another!
like i said, unlike power tripping bore mods it wasn't a ban. prove me wrong.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 19, 2020, 11:54:11 AM
 :nothing
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 19, 2020, 11:55:16 AM
i figured you needed some time to cool down. all that posting can't be good for your fat heart. just worried about your health ;)

OK, one good turn deserves another!
like i said, unlike power tripping bore mods it wasn't a ban. prove me wrong.

You said some really fucked up shit to me.  Insulting my wife and unborn child is crossing the line.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 19, 2020, 11:59:36 AM
why do we always have to get so upset at each other's opinions of star trek of all things  :snoop
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 19, 2020, 12:01:52 PM
Shitty thread continues to be shitty for lots of various reasons. news at 11.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 19, 2020, 12:04:21 PM
Also new Shit RLM video posted! Hooray!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 19, 2020, 12:08:31 PM
More word filters and bans, what a joke. Alsotoo, nacho, go smoke one, fam.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 19, 2020, 12:20:37 PM
God damn it, now I have to watch Picard
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 19, 2020, 12:52:38 PM
get off the vent or I'll have you bent
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 19, 2020, 01:01:09 PM
MFW Drekkie tears.

(https://i.imgur.com/0CGn2Vx.jpg)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 19, 2020, 01:02:15 PM
Anyone want to summarize what the argument was even about?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Ghoul on May 19, 2020, 01:04:48 PM
RLM bullied Nacho's favourite show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 19, 2020, 01:05:24 PM
I can't even figure out what the word filter is!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 19, 2020, 01:10:14 PM
I remember it was something like that but with some flair, like retargarillo crocadillo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 01:13:16 PM
It was autis .. mo's
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 19, 2020, 01:44:14 PM
Quote
"I am the culmination of one man's dream. This is not ego or vanity, but when Doctor Soong created me he added to the substance of the universe. If by your experiments I am destroyed, something unique, something wonderful will be lost. I cannot permit that, I must protect his dream." - Data, Star Trek TNG

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
"I would be profoundly grateful if you terminated my consciousness." - Data, Star Trek Picard
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 19, 2020, 01:54:25 PM
Data in a post TNG current Picard world

"Please kill me now  :rkelly "
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 19, 2020, 02:27:53 PM
Quote
"I am the culmination of one man's dream. This is not ego or vanity, but when Doctor Soong created me he added to the substance of the universe. If by your experiments I am destroyed, something unique, something wonderful will be lost. I cannot permit that, I must protect his dream." - Data, Star Trek TNG

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
"I would be profoundly grateful if you terminated my consciousness." - Data, Star Trek Picard
[close]

Since when did Data become a millennial?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 19, 2020, 02:50:40 PM
Quote
"I am the culmination of one man's dream. This is not ego or vanity, but when Doctor Soong created me he added to the substance of the universe. If by your experiments I am destroyed, something unique, something wonderful will be lost. I cannot permit that, I must protect his dream." - Data, Star Trek TNG

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
"I would be profoundly grateful if you terminated my consciousness." - Data, Star Trek Picard
[close]

To be fair

spoiler (click to show/hide)
by the time of Picard synths aren't special, unique, or wonderful. So in the sense that Data in TNG was speaking of his existince as a unique Android, it's not a stretch that Data could see himself as outliving his usefulness.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 19, 2020, 03:01:04 PM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Synths are slaves in the way that Picard fought against, so in the end Maddox won and fuck that's depressing.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I would want to kill myself too if I was in this show.  :-[
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 19, 2020, 03:18:01 PM
I like Picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 19, 2020, 08:15:28 PM
I like Picard.

I don't.

I'm sorry cindi, we have to kill each other now.

Alright.

(https://i.imgur.com/CLq0zvd.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 19, 2020, 09:34:16 PM
This bodysnatchers episode of DS9 is unbelievably bad :lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 19, 2020, 10:32:24 PM
I like Picard.

I don't.

:bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 20, 2020, 01:30:19 AM
This bodysnatchers episode of DS9 is unbelievably bad :lol

Which season? I’m finally up to season 3 now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 20, 2020, 01:39:42 AM
I'll just guess season two, "Invasive Procedures", where the trill dude tries to steal Dax?

That means "Cardassians" would be next up on shosta network. Garak episode. :hyper
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 20, 2020, 01:39:52 AM
I'm midway through S2 - going pretty slowly unfortunately.

That means Cardassians would be next up on shosta network. Garak episode. :hyper
This was a solid episode. I enjoy the intrigue... lately though I've been really disliking Bashir. Just an annoying character overall.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 20, 2020, 01:43:20 AM
The backhalf of season two really starts to ramp up a lot of the arcs that'll be for the rest of the series. Not just The Dominion, but the Maquis, etc.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: benjipwns on May 20, 2020, 01:46:53 AM
Bashir takes a while... they really didn't know what to do with the character and it shows.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 20, 2020, 02:00:17 AM
Since I'm here I might as well post my thoughts about season 2 in general so far...

First three episodes were a strong start. I like basically every episode about the Bajoran political developments and their relationship with DS9. Invasive Procedures was fine but I'm starting to agree with what other people have said about Dax... I don't know if the writers really know what to do with her character and she splits the difference too much between sassy woman and aloof old man.

I already said it but Cardassians was a great episode. Although, I think the final decision was pretty strange - the boy clearly wanted to stay on bajor and be raised as a bajoran. Visitation rights might have made sense but airlifting this kid into the Nazi homeworld on a technicality? Not awesome.

Melora sucked but it was worth it for that Superman punch at the end :dead

Rules of Acquisition is one of my favorite episodes. All of the Ferengi episodes are good. All of them.  :quark

The noir episode with Odo threw me off :lol but it was good! Odo is a solid character.

No opinion or comment on Sisko falling in love with a psychic projection

Sanctuary had potential but those warts seriously grossed me out and there wasn't enough variety - seriously weak writing

Rivals was fun :lol

All the character development in The Alternate  :whoo

Armageddon Game was alright but, as I mentioned, Bashir is seriously wearing me out. His personality is grating and they still haven't given him any interesting motivations or flaws. Also, the ending of this episode when O'Brien says he likes afternoon coffee :rofl

Whispers was stunningly bad and that "he was a clone!" ending was shockingly dark. Maybe I was just in a bad mood today from declaring war on every poster in the politics thread :trumps

All in all - more bad than good. Hopefully the tail of this season is as good as you say.

Bashir takes a while... they really didn't know what to do with the character and it shows.
I wrote this in my post before I read yours so I'm glad I'm not just imagining this.

Anyway this is a good series. Thanks all for the recommendation
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: shosta on May 20, 2020, 02:08:09 AM
I might have just forgotten but it also seems like we haven't gotten any Jake or Nog time at all this season besides them getting in a fight with the Skreean boys.

The entire cast, ranked:
- Quark
- Nog
- Odo
- Kyra
- Gul Dakat
- Garak
- Sisko
- O'Brien
- Dax
- every other supporting character
- every extra
- Odo's bucket
- Dr. Bashir
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 02:57:05 AM
Quote
Rules of Acquisition is one of my favorite episodes. All of the Ferengi episodes are good. All of them.

My man :bow

Trekkies HATE those episodes and all I can scream is WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 20, 2020, 07:22:47 AM
I think you'd be hard pressed to find trekkies who hate the ds9 ferengi episodes...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Coffee Dog on May 20, 2020, 09:00:09 AM
Yeah, while I'm sure there are people who don't appreciate their sheer volume the ferengi stuff generally makes for a really good hour of tv.

DS9  :heartbeat
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 20, 2020, 09:07:43 AM
Keeping Up with the Cardassians
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 10:06:38 AM
I think you'd be hard pressed to find trekkies who hate the ds9 ferengi episodes...

Are you fucking kidding me? It's so common to find people who hate them. Usually if you like them you tend to stick out.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 10:53:25 AM
:confused

there are some real duffers in ferengi episodes, but theres also some real highlights, including the iggy muhfucking pop cameo in the magnificent seven ep.

its not like Lwaxana Troi episodes
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 11:11:55 AM
It's a pretty common opinion. It even has its own section tvtropes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/tnlze/why_are_the_ferengi_episodes_of_ds9_reviled_by_a/

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/311dw8/i_love_deep_space_nine_but_most_of_the_ferengi/

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/fwcw8/i_love_quark_but_i_hate_all_the_ferengi_episodes/
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 11:22:38 AM
Even those links are why "why do some people hate them?" and a bunch of people saying they don't :confused

Its not like beverly crusher getting fucked by a ghost, which is near universally reviled as fucking awful trash
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 20, 2020, 11:29:41 AM
Sub Rosa was so goddamn awful.  :yuck
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on May 20, 2020, 11:37:34 AM
DS9 Whispers was OK in my book. There's another dark O'Brien episode that is not so removed from that (and another, lighter one) and the conga line effect of trauma cheapens them all a bit.

Bashir gets better. Then reverts to bad in the tail end of the show but at least you have more sympathy for him by that point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 11:44:14 AM
spoiler (click to show/hide)
remember when ds9 makes a point (a very good one btw) for sisko not to go to club because back then black people wouldn't be allowed to go? And then Miles and Bashir end the series DEFENDING the battle of the Alamo? Texans were fighting to have slaves lol.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: VomKriege on May 20, 2020, 11:48:19 AM
I like when Bashir and O'Brien cure space aids and the government tries to have them murdered and she's all "My husband NEVER drinks coffee after midday!" and at the end he's all "what? I drink that shit all day long" :rofl

Relevant.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 20, 2020, 11:48:31 AM
Its not like beverly crusher getting fucked by a ghost, which is near universally reviled as fucking awful trash

WTF?  :lol

Quote
Dr. Crusher attends her grandmother's funeral, and spends time in her grandmother's haunted house, romanced by her grandmother's non-corporeal lover.

 :whatisthis

Quote
At the cemetery, Geordi and Data have found an energy source in Beverly's grandmother's grave. They open the grave, and the grandmother rises and attacks them. Beverly arrives and orders Ronin to get out of her grandmother's body. Ronin does so and tells Beverly to give him the candle. She has by now discovered that he is an anaphasic alien who can only survive because the plasma-based candle is his energy receptacle. Beverly destroys the candle with a phaser and vaporizes Ronin when he attempts to possess her body.

 :titus
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 20, 2020, 11:58:06 AM
Its not like beverly crusher getting fucked by a ghost, which is near universally reviled as fucking awful trash

WTF?  :lol

Quote
Dr. Crusher attends her grandmother's funeral, and spends time in her grandmother's haunted house, romanced by her grandmother's non-corporeal lover.

 :whatisthis

Quote
At the cemetery, Geordi and Data have found an energy source in Beverly's grandmother's grave. They open the grave, and the grandmother rises and attacks them. Beverly arrives and orders Ronin to get out of her grandmother's body. Ronin does so and tells Beverly to give him the candle. She has by now discovered that he is an anaphasic alien who can only survive because the plasma-based candle is his energy receptacle. Beverly destroys the candle with a phaser and vaporizes Ronin when he attempts to possess her body.

 :titus
Remember in Saved by the Bell when Jesse developed an addiction to caffeine pills and has that big “druggie freak out”?  Watching Sub Rosa is similar levels of embarrassment-by-proxy when you watch it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 11:58:44 AM
 :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 12:01:27 PM
Bashir starts off as horny frat boy, and then becomes IRL bond ??? because he has a british accent ??? and enjoys grey market Bond knock off holodeck novels ???

O'Brieshir bromance saves the character though
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 20, 2020, 12:02:05 PM
bork the Trek virgin :uguu
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 20, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
the clock is now ticking till bork starts taking gold pressed latinum bribes for forum favours  :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 12:31:42 PM
Bashir starts off as horny frat boy, and then becomes IRL bond ??? because he has a british accent ??? and enjoys grey market Bond knock off holodeck novels ???

Bashir is cool because of the whole
spoiler (click to show/hide)
genetic modified super human/intelligence thing. I really enjoy his dedication to his patients. I'd trust him over any other doctor in the series besides EMH. You're forgetting the episodes where he tries to help his fellow genetic modified folks. Those were always good
[close]

Find it weird you remember the Bond stuff (I don't) but don't remember a crucial part of his character.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 01:37:23 PM
Bashirs fascination with Garak comes from his spyfic interests, and Garaks amusement at him comes from the discrepancy between what Bashir thinks spycraft is about and what it actually involves, and his later
spoiler (click to show/hide)
involvement with Sloane and Section 13 is entirely down to Sloane manipulating him based on those same preconceptions - and you could say he was picked because of his genetic engineering, but it's pretty clear when he is 'recruited' part of the plan is that he would fuck it up and go off plan because he thinks he's James Bond.

In actuality, both Sisko and O'Brien show better tradecraft, with Siskos cointelpro and O'Briens undercover / infiltration gig later on.

The genetic engineering stuff never really comes up outside of those couple of eps with the starfleet braintrust, and it sort of undermines his character that being part of it, as instead of just a smart dude who became a doctor, he's a genius level intellect slumming it as some kind of underachieving dilettante. Like, when he's embarrassed when an alumni is coming to visit, because their career is going so much better than his, and they don't have supersoldier serum to account for it.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 01:41:28 PM
Quote
Bashirs fascination with Garak comes from his spyfic interests, and Garaks amusement at him comes from the discrepancy between what Bashir thinks spycraft is about and what it actually involves

This is a fan head canon.

It's garak that inserts his way into a relationship, not the other way around. Bashir is sitting, eating his lunch and then Garak comes pushing his way into his space.

His engineering is more central to his character imo. I never got any spy crap from Bashir outside of his holodeck trips. On the contrary, Miles is the spy.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 01:43:46 PM
I haven't rewatched recently, but its super early on that he goes to Sisko "I think that tailor might be a SPY I'm going to get closer to him" and sisko is all "whatevs doctor"

:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 20, 2020, 01:47:08 PM
I haven't rewatched recently, but its super early on that he goes to Sisko "I think that tailor might be a SPY I'm going to get closer to him" and sisko is all "whatevs doctor"

:idont

He thinks Garak might be a spy. True. This doesn't make it conclusive that Bashir himself has a fascination with spying or considers himself to be James Bond, which is your main point and something I've never seen an inkling regarding the character.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 20, 2020, 01:50:52 PM
Remember in Saved by the Bell when Jesse developed an addiction to caffeine pills and has that big “druggie freak out”?  Watching Sub Rosa is similar levels of embarrassment-by-proxy when you watch it.

I think I'm going to have to watch this episode now.   :lol

bork the Trek virgin :uguu

Yeah man, outside of some original series stuff, some TNG episodes, and the movies...I don't really know what's going on with it.  Every time I find out about some weird or crazy shit, I have to check it out.  :P  Last time I went hunting for an episode or two was after finding out that Ryker had a clone or whatever who ended up doing his own thing.
:ryker :ryker

the clock is now ticking till bork starts taking gold pressed latinum bribes for forum favours  :quark

:confused
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 01:58:53 PM
He thinks Garak might be a spy. True. This doesn't make it conclusive that Bashir himself has a fascination with spying or considers himself to be James Bond, which is your main point and something I've never seen an inkling regarding the character.

His motivations are part of what makes his character; why is he taken with the idea that there might be a spy? It's not for professional reasons, that's Odos job. So it is for personal reasons.
And over the course of the show him being into spyfic stuff is explicitly laid out, culminating in his involvement with you know who.

Also FWIW I think Dr Phlox is best Trek Doctor (and Andy Dick is worst  :yuck) in being the doctor I would most want to be treated by if I had something wrong
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 20, 2020, 02:13:32 PM
Remember in Saved by the Bell when Jesse developed an addiction to caffeine pills and has that big “druggie freak out”?  Watching Sub Rosa is similar levels of embarrassment-by-proxy when you watch it.

I think I'm going to have to watch this episode now.   :lol

bork the Trek virgin :uguu

Yeah man, outside of some original series stuff, some TNG episodes, and the movies...I don't really know what's going on with it.  Every time I find out about some weird or crazy shit, I have to check it out.  :P  Last time I went hunting for an episode or two was after finding out that Ryker had a clone or whatever who ended up doing his own thing.
 :ryker :ryker

the clock is now ticking till bork starts taking gold pressed latinum bribes for forum favours  :quark

 :confused
it will be very profitable for us both  :money
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 20, 2020, 02:22:40 PM
Also FWIW I think Dr Phlox is best Trek Doctor (and Andy Dick is worst  :yuck) in being the doctor I would most want to be treated by if I had something wrong

Andy Dick was on Star Trek!?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MnQcVLOCPE

:mindblown :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 20, 2020, 02:34:08 PM
Someone break out the Star Trek guest star list for bork  :cornette
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 02:42:19 PM
Seven of Nine smells what The Rock is cooking in an intergalactic cage match
Sarah Silverman drives a shitty campervan
Steven Hawking plays poker
Iggy Pop is a deadpan middle manager in a totalitarian regime
Frasier is caught in a timeloop

...that's all I got :trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 20, 2020, 03:27:34 PM
Ashley Judd was wet for Wesley.

There’s more Jeffrey Combs characters than there are red shirts.

Wallace Shawn is conceivably the most powerful Ferengi.


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 20, 2020, 04:18:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X-2d4COiKs

David Warner the GOAT :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 04:52:33 PM
there's loads of "oh hey it's that guy" type cameos from Max Headroom through Paulie from Goodfellas (and an early kirsten dunst) but I was thinking mkore famous in their own regard before cameoing type cameos :idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 20, 2020, 07:51:53 PM
https://www.startrek.com/news/the-humbling-of-admiral-picard

Mother Fuck this show and anybody who worked on it.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
And anybody who likes it.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 20, 2020, 08:43:54 PM
I watched the much discussed Plinkett review which was more a 'Mike review'.

I understand where he is coming from but this outcome was expected. He says there's a bigger audience for old school Star Trek but I highly doubt that.
As far as I remember from the mid to late 90's Star Trek was the show that families watched together on the living room TV.  You could miss half of it and the stations would just repeat episodes and didn't give a fuck.
People liked it because it was better than most TV shows, it wasn't violent so no one really objected watching it and especially later on it filled airtime between bigger prime time shows.
My dad like the science, my older brother the stories and as a kid I just thought it was cool with the space ships, computers, aliens and all. Mom was just glad we all sat down and weren't fighting over some dumb shit.

Fans simply got lucky that it was made and written as well as it was. TV shows were sort of seen as B-entertainment while the A-list actors would do movies.
There was a clear distinction between 'lesser' TV actors and well paid movie stars. After all TV content was basically there to get people hooked to watch the commercials.
Over time they discovered they could do that easier and cheaper with reality TV and repeating the same formats. Something that took quite some time and skill to create like Star Trek wasn't necessary.

The entire entertainment world has flipped upside down. Shows on streaming services (i.e. content) is where the money is and millions of dollars are spend on research to figure out what the audience wants.
And unfortunately for Mike, today's' audience isn't the family that sits down after a week of school and work to watch Star Trek together. Instead they target the people that consume a lot of this type of entertainment.
Currently the hot shit is Marvel and character drama. Add in some modern day angst and you have Picard. They sort of bet that fans will watch it anyway (to see if it is a trainwreck or not) and then they move on to reel in the rest.
A cool guy with a sword for the boys, a few 'empowered' women for the ladies etc. plus everyone can watch it on their own personal phone/tablet/PC/TV. Even if mom and dad don't like it, it doesn't matter because the kids probably will.
There's no longer one screen in the house and it just becomes part of a growing 'compelling content library'.

Do the creators care about butchering the lore, characters and everything else?
Nope, because Star Trek is an IP, a universe they can take inspiration from and that has name recognition.
They can break, change and rewrite whatever they want. No one except a few hardcore fans like Mike are going to remember the character traits of Picard or his relationship with Data.
Some people might notice that Star Trek has gotten more violent and dark (but what hasn't?) but that's about it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 09:37:18 PM
https://www.startrek.com/news/the-humbling-of-admiral-picard

Mother Fuck this show and anybody who worked on it.

Quote
Number One the dog represents a marginalized community
(https://i.imgur.com/hun3hnG.png)

Quote
Ruth is a black/Latinx freelancer based in Istanbul who writes about culture, travel, and wellness. She still hasn't finished all of DS9.
:mike
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 20, 2020, 09:51:42 PM
I understand where he is coming from but this outcome was expected. He says there's a bigger audience for old school Star Trek but I highly doubt that.

The problem with this assertion, is it's just assumed to be true because nobodies making that kind of show (except for the Orville, which was pretty much critically panned but was still getting decent ratings).

If you want darker, violent, highly serialized scifi there's literally dozens of options available to watch and stream right now.
And stuff like WestWorld  is waaaaaaaaaay fucking better than Picard is.
You can see episodic TV still exists and is still successful in other genres - shit, the procedural has this down to a fine art by now with your mid season and whole season arcs but syndication friendly episodic format - and there's still a spread in tone between like, a Criminal Minds, an SVU or a Lethal Weapon.

What Star Trek had was a unique selling point; it had its own niche. What it is now is directly competing with your Expanses and your WestWorlds, and frankly, it needs to seriously up its writing game if it wants people to buy a CBS sub over an Amazon or HBO.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 01:22:55 AM
stuff like WestWorld  is waaaaaaaaaay fucking better than Picard is.
I really hate Picard, but let's not go wild  :cenk
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 21, 2020, 06:00:15 AM
I understand where he is coming from but this outcome was expected. He says there's a bigger audience for old school Star Trek but I highly doubt that.

The problem with this assertion, is it's just assumed to be true because nobodies making that kind of show (except for the Orville, which was pretty much critically panned but was still getting decent ratings).

If you want darker, violent, highly serialized scifi there's literally dozens of options available to watch and stream right now.
And stuff like WestWorld  is waaaaaaaaaay fucking better than Picard is.
You can see episodic TV still exists and is still successful in other genres - shit, the procedural has this down to a fine art by now with your mid season and whole season arcs but syndication friendly episodic format - and there's still a spread in tone between like, a Criminal Minds, an SVU or a Lethal Weapon.

What Star Trek had was a unique selling point; it had its own niche. What it is now is directly competing with your Expanses and your WestWorlds, and frankly, it needs to seriously up its writing game if it wants people to buy a CBS sub over an Amazon or HBO.
I think the issue is the combination of the setting and type of show.
Shows set in current times or history have the problem solving and relationship arcs. Because that's what the target audience wants to see and expects.
I would say a good example are the earlier seasons of Game of Thrones minus the cheap violence and softcore porn it was just about the character interactions, problem solving, politics etc. .
That also changed in later seasons because the audience responded really well to the big fights, doomsday plot and over the top violence. The production values went up, the writing took a dive.

Sci-fi set in space across the board is more action or more thriller focused and when a movie comes out that doesn't do that, people hop online to complain that it is 'boring' and 'dull'. 
I think we're finally seeing a shift in that with the audience rejecting an action packed roller coaster Star Wars and instead preferring the Mandalorian instead.
Still, the largest chunk of the audience wants to see action, just look at what's trending on Netflix daily. It's usually the latest Originals action flick they just dropped.
I think a good example is Blade Runner, it was assumed that because the original had built up a cult following a sequel would be a big hit and the IP would finally get the attention it deserved. Instead it flopped.
Not to mention this show is also for modern audiences that liked the J.J. Abrams movies. Because that was so successful it sorta became the template for bringing back old IP's.
It is going to be interesting to see what the Dune reboot is going to be like.

As for the writing of Star Strek, they sort of copy pasted the plot from Mass Effect and did it poorly so yeah these people are talentless hacks.  :doge

Who knows maybe if they went with the 1 story = 1 episode structure it might've been praised like The Mandalorian for being 'different' but that would've been a big risk compared to creating a long action packed Star Trek movie
starring Patrick Stewart based on the plot of Mass Effect.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 21, 2020, 12:27:18 PM
stuff like WestWorld  is waaaaaaaaaay fucking better than Picard is.
I really hate Picard, but let's not go wild  :cenk

Yeah the WestWorld comparisons made me do the collar-grab/grimacing thing. "Mike wat are you doing"
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 12:29:12 PM
But they've now announced that the new Captain Pike series is going to be lighter in tone and more episodic, so I dunno if fling shit at wall and hope it sticks is an ongoing strategy as they churn through showrunners and keep announcing new spin offs, if the direction they've taken with discovery and Picard is actually generating business and CBS subs and validating their strategy, or if their continuing resistance to giving the fans what they've been clamouring for actually does just boil down to
(https://i.imgur.com/ti1Navy.gif)

:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 12:31:06 PM
I really liked WestWorld S1 and S2, I haven't seen S3 yet.
Compare Picard S1 to WestWorld S1 - both a highly serialised reboot of an existing property. Which would you rather sign up to a service to subscribe to after watching the first couple of episodes?

:trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 01:26:51 PM
So what are our hopes for the planned Section 31 show?  For me, I want the actions of their lead protagonist(s) to be fatalist and grimy (kind of like how Vic Mackey does his job, but with less selfishness), but tonally contrasted by constantly presenting us the utopian veneer of Starfleet and the Federation.  Things like brutal assassinations of diplomats and their families against propaganda level backdrops of Starfleet as benevolent caretakers, research into biological warfare to be used against allied races like the Vulcans and Klingons, in the event they become “existential threats” to the good of the Federation. Shit like that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 01:38:24 PM
I have no idea to expect from it. I figure it could be a procedural like Law and Order. IDK.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Mandark on May 21, 2020, 01:45:46 PM
I like Q

this goes in the hungrynoob thread
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: BIONIC on May 21, 2020, 01:50:27 PM
I like Q

this goes in the hungrynoob thread

:nintendo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 01:54:53 PM
Westworld season 1 is fine but 2 and 3 are star wars tier  :nope
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 01:55:31 PM
Picard was barely a Star Trek show. It was generic space drama pew pew with a veneer of Star Trek. Both this and Discovery are embarrassingly vapid "Star Trek" shows.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 02:08:42 PM
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 02:12:14 PM
So what are our hopes for the planned Section 31 show?  For me, I want the actions of their lead protagonist(s) to be fatalist and grimy (kind of like how Vic Mackey does his job, but with less selfishness), but tonally contrasted by constantly presenting us the utopian veneer of Starfleet and the Federation.  Things like brutal assassinations of diplomats and their families against propaganda level backdrops of Starfleet as benevolent caretakers, research into biological warfare to be used against allied races like the Vulcans and Klingons, in the event they become “existential threats” to the good of the Federation. Shit like that.

Which would be great, but they've already kind of handicapped themselves on that front by making it a crapsack universe where starfleet are already morally compromised, so they can't pull a Demolition Man where nobody expects federation members to act like that because they already do anyway.

The ideal show would be something like the OG Mission Impossible TV show, where they're doing shit like pulling long con mindops on people, like that ep of DS9 where they kidnap Kira and gaslight her into thinking she's a Cardassian to try and smoke out a high ranking Cardassian traitor by making him think she's his daughter.
Realistically my expectations are set at the Mission Impossible films, where there is a nominal plot, but its just action setpieces and gadgets.

Michelle Yeoh is great though, so I'm sure her hamming it up as undercover Rita Repulsa will be entertaining regardless of what she has to work with.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 02:17:05 PM
Thread merges and closing threads like the skyler one because someone doesn’t like them, this place is a fucking prison on planet bullshit!  :rage. All mods are cops
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 02:19:15 PM
Thread merges and closing threads like the skyler one because someone doesn’t like them, this place is a fucking prison on planet bullshit!  :rage. All mods are cops

Indeed. Who is doing this shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2020, 02:25:23 PM
But they've now announced that the new Captain Pike series is going to be lighter in tone and more episodic, so I dunno if fling shit at wall and hope it sticks is an ongoing strategy as they churn through showrunners and keep announcing new spin offs, if the direction they've taken with discovery and Picard is actually generating business and CBS subs and validating their strategy, or if their continuing resistance to giving the fans what they've been clamouring for actually does just boil down to
(https://i.imgur.com/ti1Navy.gif)

:idont

Captain Pike was pretty inoffensive but Spork was. :trigger
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 21, 2020, 02:28:03 PM
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?

Your entire thread wasn't merged with this one.  Just the few posts made today.  I thought Tuckers Law bumped the wrong thread and figured I'd help.   APOLOGIES FOR SUCH A MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER AND DISRUPTION.  ::)

What the fuck is with the hostility in this thread?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 02:31:05 PM
I actually forgot new Spock existed till now. Michelle Yeoh was about the only thing from new trek that didn't feel like swallowing twice regurgitated vomit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 02:36:53 PM
https://www.startrek.com/news/the-humbling-of-admiral-picard

Mother Fuck this show and anybody who worked on it.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
And anybody who likes it.
[close]

Quote
While TNG positioned Captain Picard as an ally to marginalized groups, from Klingons to androids, Picard challenges him to check the privilege he’s enjoyed through various series as an able-bodied male Earthling of elevated Starfleet rank.


HAHAHAHA what in the absolute fuck. Klingons... a marginalized group??? This shit right here. This author is a fucking idiot.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 02:40:02 PM
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 02:47:21 PM
Everything pre-Picard showed the Romulans as aggressively territorial, xenophobic, monocultural, homogenous and totalatarian, with a territory the size of the Federations (where the Federation are comprised of hundreds of different cultures and species up compared to the Romulans ROMULUS FOR ROMULANS empire) but Picard makes them space irish and suddenly they're the underdog minority resisting the colonisers I guess

:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2020, 02:48:53 PM
Unironically Picard's Housekeepers the O'Romulans are the best characters in Picard.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 02:50:25 PM
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 02:57:44 PM
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.

Star Trek has always been progressive and tackled controversial real world issues. But Picard has the inherent flaw of both not understanding the Star Trek universe and the general hopefulness for the future that it has, and handling social issues with all the subtlety of a rabid Targ.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:02:47 PM
If Britain was a V For Vendetta fascist dystopia that had never been in the EU, and a long history of fucking about in other countries politics and aggressive military confrontations along its borders, and Brexit was the EU refusing to help us out when a natural disaster rendered most of the island uninhabitable, then sure, great analogy
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 03:04:21 PM
Why wasn't Seven seeking revenge for Icheb (who she was practically a mother to) instead of Hugh, who she had just met for the first time?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:05:30 PM
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.
recent history, every show I've watched that's put our modern boogaloo shithole in their promo material instead of promoting how strong the writing is or such has usually been a preemptive shield against criticism. Picard is no different
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:06:05 PM
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.

Star Trek has always been progressive and tackled controversial real world issues. But Picard has the inherent flaw of both not understanding the Star Trek universe and the general hopefulness for the future that it has, and handling social issues with all the subtlety of a rabid Targ.

True, but my question was for Momo who said Star Trek tackling Brexit - a modern issue - was inherently bad. I'm not talking about Picard's handling of it. I'm talking about Momo finding fault in real world issues placed in Trek which according to him made him know we were  "in for some pain." Which hints that Momo finds placing real world issues in Trek to be bad period.

A big criticism I have with many critics of this is that as said, Trek has ALWAYS put progressive issues at the forefront and showed a spotlight in a futuristic analogy to modern problems. Always. Yet somehow Trek is now seen as "sjw", something Trek has always been. My conclusion is that these people didn't mind in the past because it was further away from them. So now, as they support things like Brexit, they're personally attacked. Now, this isn't the case for every critic. But it is for a lot of them. Politics and Trek mingle like peas and carrots.

Your move, Momo.

(https://i.imgur.com/KpMjbZd.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:06:55 PM
Lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:08:07 PM
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:11:09 PM
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?

Again, you're talking about what's in Picard. Momo said because Patrick Stewart was talking about Brexit in the shows hype season that it meant we were all in for a bad time.

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:11:32 PM
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?
I don't even know, nor do I care the show was bad. From where I stand they just used trump and brexit to distract from what they probably knew will be a poorly received show.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:16:06 PM
I don't take issue with anyone that doesn't like Picard or critiques it.

My issue immediately starts and begins with the very common mindset that modern tv shows using modern real world politic as a commentary for their stories is inherently bad. Even regarding shows that have a vast history of it like Star Trek.

Criticism is fine. Saying Star Trek is getting too political is where I LOL.

Momo's post was,"Patrick Stewart was talking about Brexit therefore I knew it was going to be bad!" can be construed in many ways. So I asked him to expound.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:18:49 PM
It's also funny how the same people shit on Star Trek for this also praise things like Black Mirror or Orville's social media episode.

Speaking of Black Mirror, I have no idea why CBS doesn't just make new Star Trek shows in that vein. Black Mirror shows that modern sci-fi doesn't need mass serialization to work or even be popular.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:18:55 PM
It's actually kinda nuts if you think about it, Patrick Stewart out there saying Star Trek can't be optimistic anymore because we live in a post brexit world. Like the 90s and the countless horrific civil wars was any better? Prolly was for him cause that shit happened somewhere else lmao
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 03:19:22 PM
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:21:37 PM
Quote
my question was for Momo who said Star Trek tackling Brexit - a modern issue - was inherently bad. I'm not talking about Picard's handling of it. I'm talking about Momo finding fault in real world issues placed in Trek

Quote
Trek has ALWAYS put progressive issues at the forefront and showed a spotlight in a futuristic analogy to modern problems. Always.

Quote
So now, as they support things like Brexit, they're personally attacked. Now, this isn't the case for every critic. But it is for a lot of them. Politics and Trek mingle like peas and carrots.

Quote
Again, you're talking about what's in Picard.

:confused

I can't help but feel if they're talking about a hot button topic pre-release, and there is zero reference to that subject in the actual final product, its difficult to rebut the claim they were pre-emptively trying to do some damage control by invoking culture war
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:21:42 PM
It's actually kinda nuts if you think about it, Patrick Stewart out there saying Star Trek can't be optimistic anymore because we live in a post brexit world. Like the 90s and the countless horrific civil wars was any better? Prolly was for him cause that shit happened somewhere else lmao

I saw it differently. I watched Patrick Stewart's "I'm back!" speech and how TNG brought so much hope to so many people and read it that the new show would be the hopeful Trek we are looking for. It wasn't exactly that, but I still found it to be optimistic and hopeful in its own way.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:25:02 PM
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.

(https://i.imgur.com/1FND7ja.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/BoLwuu2.png)

Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:26:51 PM
You're not even reading anyone's posts Cindi
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 03:28:04 PM
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?

Your entire thread wasn't merged with this one.  Just the few posts made today.  I thought Tuckers Law bumped the wrong thread and figured I'd help.   APOLOGIES FOR SUCH A MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER AND DISRUPTION.  ::)

What the fuck is with the hostility in this thread?
I posted that comment mostly in jest.  Like we saw with Nacho, us Star Trek fans are always angry about something and lose sight of the ultimate truth: at least it’s not Star Wars.

Apologies for calling you a cop.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:30:44 PM
You're not even reading anyone's posts Cindi

Pretttttty sure I am. But the points you're making are highly, highly flawed and in your case, just undeveloped. Saying that Trek made message secondary is a laughable claim to me.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:34:27 PM
You can tell a story while respecting lore, everyone is saying new Star Trek is so obsessed by making their points that they have to throw out lore to do so. I'm not sure what you didn't understand, but I am sure you aren't reading anyone's posts to try and understand what they are saying and just doing so in order to further whatever it is you're doing here. So goodday, I can't be arsed
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 21, 2020, 03:35:27 PM
Continue, the Star Trek wars do
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:36:00 PM
You can tell a story while respecting lore, everyone is saying new Star Trek is so obsessed by making their points that they have to throw out lore to do so. I'm not sure what you didn't understand, but I am sure you aren't reading anyone's posts to try and understand what they are saying and just doing so in order to further whatever it is you're doing here. So goodday, I can't be arsed

How is Star Trek throwing out lore?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 03:36:49 PM
Not today Satan.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:37:41 PM
What was the contemporary political analogue that Picard handled?

Throw out the concept that humanity has evolved into a more utopian society in a post-scarcity universe, and make them racist assholes?
But then the actual nazi-analogues who are the victims of the racist assholes are still even worse, and sort of brought all that shit on themselves anyway, making the racist assholes sort of justified?

e:
Like, I get what you're saying about pre-emptively kneekerking about MUH ESS JAY DUBYAS RUINT MUH STAR TREK mouth breathers, but what does Picard actually do to put its money where its mouth is? Where is its smart writing leaving parallels to be drawn?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 03:39:07 PM
I will say that compared to other Treks, Picard does seem to lead less into the speculative side and more in the reactive side of messaging and commentary, which I could see some mistaking as being more upfront and obvious.

Still: Star Trek is and has always had both subtle and overt messaging in its stories, and I’m okay with it as long as they’re trying to say something about “us”, even if it’s hamfisted.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: stufte on May 21, 2020, 03:42:05 PM
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.

(https://i.imgur.com/1FND7ja.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/BoLwuu2.png)

Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.

That DS9 episode still respects the source material over the message. It talks about the hardships, the struggles of the past within the Star Trek timeline, and the optimism of a future that has moved past those hardships. It doesn't treat Sisco as a victim, it shows how far humans have come as a species. Star Trek has moved from "shit was hard, but we're better now and we want to show you how we deal with these ancient issues as an enlightened species" to "shit is hard NOW, and look how much we suffer for it, please suffer with us".
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:42:46 PM
What was the contemporary political analogue that Picard handled?

Throw out the concept that humanity has evolved into a more utopian society in a post-scarcity universe, and make them racist assholes?
But then the actual nazi-analogues who are the victims of the racist assholes are still even worse, and sort of brought all that shit on themselves anyway, making the racist assholes sort of justified?

I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 03:49:40 PM
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.

(https://i.imgur.com/1FND7ja.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/BoLwuu2.png)

Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.

That DS9 episode still respects the source material over the message. It talks about the hardships, the struggles of the past within the Star Trek timeline, and the optimism of a future that has moved past those hardships. It doesn't treat Sisco as a victim, it shows how far humans have come as a species. Star Trek has moved from "shit was hard, but we're better now and we want to show you how we deal with these ancient issues as an enlightened species" to "shit is hard NOW, and look how much we suffer for it, please suffer with us".

But the message is the source material.

Even Kirk gave in to his own racism, although he later realized his error. Admirals are routinely shown as corrupt. Sisko, the very person you're defending, literally was a co-conspirator in assassinating a Romulan leader to force them into fighting against the Dominion. Much of the most renown DS9 quotes revolve around flawed humanity.


And I quote:

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."

But suddenly humanity is incapable of ills? Remember in DS9 when they institute fear mongering and even genocide against a species because of shape shifters?

This is a highly flawed premise.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:51:47 PM
Still: Star Trek is and has always had both subtle and overt messaging in its stories, and I’m okay with it as long as they’re trying to say something about “us”, even if it’s hamfisted.

which is why I've found both Discovery and Picard deeply unsatisfying for scifi shows using the Star Trek name, because... in the end they don't really have much to say, and threw out what made star trek special because their mystery box plots needed them to do that for the plot to work.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 03:55:18 PM
I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

But that just begs the question, if you have nothing political to say and no analogous insights to make, why would you imply what you have created does exactly that before release?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:01:53 PM
I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

But that just begs the question, if you have nothing political to say and no analogous insights to make, why would you imply what you have created does exactly that before release?

Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 04:04:50 PM

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."
Fucking love Quark  :rejoice
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:05:21 PM
Many Trekkies:

Federation would NEVER abandon refugees like this! This goes against Federation principles!

Also Trekkies:

Star Trek Picard has NO political messages or analogies!

(https://i.imgur.com/IZR9oDX.gif)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:06:01 PM
I agree that most shows/movies where the pre-hype media involves talking about hot button political issues instead of the show itself regardless of if the show touches or doesn't touch said issues usually aren't high quality in the end. That's not exactly the same thing as "media that uses current issues analogues are always bad", but they do tend to intertwine a lot.

This is fair.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tuckers Law on May 21, 2020, 04:06:31 PM
Real talk: when we gonna get Nic Cage as Starfleet captain?  Can you imagine?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:09:38 PM

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."
Fucking love Quark  :rejoice

Trekkies: Humans are perfect in the future  :six:

Also Trekkies: says DS9, the show that is highly critical of the Federation, humanity, and what it takes to maintain such an utopia, is the best Trek

 :crowdlaff
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on May 21, 2020, 04:11:23 PM
Continue, the Star Trek wars do

It’s 20XX and people are mad online about Star Trek
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2020, 04:12:10 PM
TOS is best Trek though.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 04:13:30 PM
Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

Well I was asking you what the message was for multiple posts and this is the closest you've come to answering that instead of just saying "but I didn't say they did!".

What's the contradiction?
That I don't see the modern U.N. denying humanitarian aid to a country wracked by a natural disaster, no mattera how shitty that counties history is, and I don't see how an even more evolved society that doesn't even have actual logistical concerns about sacrificing their own resources to assist someone else would do that either?
Except that they have to do that or the plot doesn't work.

That a demonstrably shitty group will do shitty things, but instead of doing it in secret as every other appearance they have made has shown to be their preference, would instead choose to do it openly and clumsily?
Except they have to do that or the plot doesn't work.

I'm not trying to shit on something you enjoyed, but there are so many "it has to be like this so the plot works" aspects that makes me frustrated, because the plot just isn't fucking good enough to justify everything they sacrifice in order to make it happen.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:19:39 PM
Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

Well I was asking you what the message was for multiple posts and this is the closest you've come to answering that instead of just saying "but I didn't say they did!".

We were arguing two different things at first. Then what we argued just intertwined.

I find most of the critiques of Picard's politics in the Federation are almost all flawed. They're so bad. Arguments like,"Federation would never be that xenophobic". A big flaw Picard makes is not referencing the Dominion War and its effects on post-war Federation. After the Cardassian border conflict, Dominion, shape shifter sabotage I think it would be fairly realistic for the Federation to grow more xenophobic after that war. The problem is that Michael Chabon and ilk said they didn't want new viewers to to get too wrapped up in lore. Big mistake. But I understand the reasoning and why the Federation is like this.

You say Picard makes no modern political analogies but I find the western world growing more xenophobic. This is directly in Picard. So the idea that Picard has no political relevance or commentary is baffling to me.

:idont
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:23:38 PM
Also, first Momo says recent shows that put political message above the story are bad.

Now he's liking your posts that says Picard has no political analogies.

Momo doesn't even know what he wants nor can he argue for himself.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 04:24:49 PM
Fact Check: I'm liking everything I can that will annoy you because you still refuse to actually read anything I posted.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:27:41 PM
Either way, Son Son, your argument that Picard has no political messaging goes against what many people in this thread have actively argued.

(https://i.imgur.com/XBdzqIi.gif)

Isn't that right? How isn't that contradictory?

Fact Check: I'm liking everything I can that will annoy you because you still refuse to actually read anything I posted.

You gonna post an RLM video next?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 21, 2020, 04:28:27 PM
Off to mandark world for you  :nope
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2020, 04:28:44 PM
I don't think that having something to say is bad, but these people can't write to save their lives.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I will say for my part that it immediately raises a red flag to me when they start going on about muh blumpf or muh brexit or whatever, because I don't think I have ever come across any media that doesn't go on about that stuff before a product is delivered and then said product turns out to be complete gobshite Pukehard included.
[close]

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:31:32 PM
Off to mandark world for you  :nope

Thanks!

I'm honored.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 04:38:54 PM

I find most of the critiques of Picard's politics in the Federation are almost all flawed. They're so bad. Arguments like,"Federation would never be that xenophobic". A big flaw Picard makes is not referencing the Dominion War and its effects on post-war Federation. After the Cardassian border conflict, Dominion, shape shifter sabotage I think it would be fairly realistic for the Federation to grow more xenophobic after that war. The problem is that Michael Chabon and ilk said they didn't want new viewers to to get too wrapped up in lore. Big mistake. But I understand the reasoning and why the Federation is like this.

You say Picard makes no modern political analogies but I find the western world growing more xenophobic. This is directly in Picard. So the idea that Picard has no political relevance or commentary is baffling to me.

:idont

But it's not like DS9 ended with the federation saying "nah, FUCK cardassia, collaborating assholes".
What you're talking about is a post-scarcity society that is even shittier than contemporary alliances are.
And apparently more xenophobic than contemporary society, despite being literally a federation of multiple cultures, with literally their prime directive being about respecting other cultures, but just letting an entire species nearly die despite being able to help, because they're just dicks.

And by the plots own premise, are still the good guys for all of that.

Is this an American thing? That because you see America getting more xenophobic that means the world is?
Because the Federation isn't America, let alone 21st century empire-in-decline America.
Why are the Bolians going "nah, fuck romulus.". Why are the fucking Vulcans, when Spock risked all kinds of shit in an attempt at reunification?

I just don't see a scenario in our contemporary universe where, say, China has a giant fucking earthquake tomorrow and the U.N doesn't step in and help.
Would the U.S. under Trump assist? Probably not, but all the fucking rest of the U.N. member states would, even despite all of Chinas fuckery.
Because governments aren't people.
The only way you get to the point of credulity in Picards premise, is that the United Federation Of Planets are bigger more useless assholes than scarcity and resource limited modern earth is, and yet are still the good guys for that.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 21, 2020, 04:39:29 PM
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?

Your entire thread wasn't merged with this one.  Just the few posts made today.  I thought Tuckers Law bumped the wrong thread and figured I'd help.   APOLOGIES FOR SUCH A MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER AND DISRUPTION.  ::)

What the fuck is with the hostility in this thread?

Star Trek is serious business  :doge
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 04:55:51 PM

I find most of the critiques of Picard's politics in the Federation are almost all flawed. They're so bad. Arguments like,"Federation would never be that xenophobic". A big flaw Picard makes is not referencing the Dominion War and its effects on post-war Federation. After the Cardassian border conflict, Dominion, shape shifter sabotage I think it would be fairly realistic for the Federation to grow more xenophobic after that war. The problem is that Michael Chabon and ilk said they didn't want new viewers to to get too wrapped up in lore. Big mistake. But I understand the reasoning and why the Federation is like this.

You say Picard makes no modern political analogies but I find the western world growing more xenophobic. This is directly in Picard. So the idea that Picard has no political relevance or commentary is baffling to me.

:idont

But it's not like DS9 ended with the federation saying "nah, FUCK cardassia, collaborating assholes".

This is a very bad point to make.

For one thing, Picard isn't even over yet and you're comparing a show with 7 seasons and over 170 episodes to a show with 1 season and 12 episodes. Second, Picard season 1 literally ends with the Federation sending in help to defend the Synths planet. So even Picard shows hope amid strife despite being labeled as completely cynical show without hope.

Trekkies are so jaded now that they are they completely unwilling to give new shows a chance despite everyone knowing that every single first (and second) season of Trek (sans TOS) is flawed af.

Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

Well I was asking you what the message was for multiple posts and this is the closest you've come to answering that instead of just saying "but I didn't say they did!".

We were arguing two different things at first. Then what we argued just intertwined.

I find most of the critiques of Picard's politics in the Federation are almost all flawed. They're so bad. Arguments like,"Federation would never be that xenophobic". A big flaw Picard makes is not referencing the Dominion War and its effects on post-war Federation. After the Cardassian border conflict, Dominion, shape shifter sabotage I think it would be fairly realistic for the Federation to grow more xenophobic after that war. The problem is that Michael Chabon and ilk said they didn't want new viewers to to get too wrapped up in lore. Big mistake. But I understand the reasoning and why the Federation is like this.

You say Picard makes no modern political analogies but I find the western world growing more xenophobic. This is directly in Picard. So the idea that Picard has no political relevance or commentary is baffling to me.

:idont

This makes no sense at all to me, the new viewers audience for Picard has to be under 5%. A nostalgia revival/spin off/continuation but you're more worried about the tiny fraction of viewers who have never seen Star Trek shows than the audience the show actually appeals to? :what

Chabon said exactly that on his instagram and I vehemently disagree with it.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 21, 2020, 05:11:34 PM

Is this an American thing? That because you see America getting more xenophobic that means the world is?

This is a very hilarious point to make especially during a European refugee crisis. It's like you're not even in tune with the news cycle or the world at large.

Right wing xenophobia and isolationsim has only grown in the past few years, especially in Europe, and especially after Trump's victory.

The refugees in Picard are an analogue to Syrian refugees. This is a profoundly hilarious point to make. I'm like, actually laughing at you, mate. I'm sorry.

https://apnews.com/4fc82489d5bc44fab6edccb91b0c896f

https://www.brusselstimes.com/all-news/belgium-all-news/97587/european-commission-alarmed-by-growing-racism-in-europe/

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/30/how-europes-nationalists-became-internationalists/

So a show about extremists wanting to destroy what they deem a threat to them, their sovereignty, and existence is in actuality, topical.

Further, your premise is even extra flawed because the Federation has always been an analogy for America. Star Trek, I hate to remind you, is an American show.

I'm sorry but most of the arguments surrounding Star Trek Picard are outright bad. I hated Star Wars: The Last Jedi and still thought most of the fan arguments made against it were outright daft. Shit like,"Luke Skywalker would never try to kill his own nephew". The same guy that fought between his dark side and light side and nearly killed his own father in rage. These arguments remind me of that. The only difference is that I don't hate Picard the way I do TLJ.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 21, 2020, 05:42:56 PM
How much is Kurtzman paying you?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 21, 2020, 05:47:37 PM
This is a very bad point to make.

It's a rebuttal to your point, that because the Federation was at war... 20? years ago in universe time they wouldn't accept new entries to the Federation.
When DS9 shows them virtually begging the dudes they were literally just at war with to get their shit together then join up.
Same deal with Undiscovered Country. Same deal with Reunification pts 1 and 2.
Everything in Trek shows the Federation will bend over backwards to get people to join if they'll subscribe to federation ideology.
Doesn't matter what they did in the past. If the Borg would chill with the assimilation, they'd be welcomed in.


Trekkies are so jaded now that they are they completely unwilling to give new shows a chance despite everyone knowing that every single first (and second) season of Trek (sans TOS) is flawed af.

This is an argument to make before the shows been released, not afterwards when people are criticising the shows actual contents, not what they think it might be based on trailers.
And no, sorry, a made-to-order 10 episode run with zero network pressures for weekly ratings released exclusively on streaming services in the 21st century doesn't get the "oh, shows released in entirely different circumstances needed to find their feet" excuse.
Apart from the fact that seems like a tacit admission that... well, its just not a very good show, other shows on other streaming services under similar structures make their mark with their first season. They kind of have to. That's todays landscape.

The people in charge of nutrek have jad three swings at the plate now. How many more chances do they get?
How many more do-overs before conceding that they're just not making what a lot of people want to watch?
The amount of showrunner churn and mid season pivots doesn't suggest that the people in charge are confident in this creative direction.
Assurances from execs that things will get better doesn't suggest that audiences are happy with this creative direction.

This is a very hilarious point to make especially during a European refugee crisis.

Is it though?
European countries are accepting sometimes up to 10% of their entire population overnight of people who have paid no taxes, and are in urgent need of clothing, food, accommodation, education, social work, medical care and employment.
That's a huge amount of people putting additional stress on an already stretched thin social security network, and its a 'right now' type of deal, there isn't lead up to prepare for it.
And yes, that kind of stress on existing infrastructure creates societal tension. How could it not?
And they still fucking accept them. Because it's the right thing to do.

Meanwhile, the federation, with fucking empty planets that can be colonised, near instantaneous travel across the planet, all the food, clothing, habitats, medicine, health care and provisions an industrial replicator can churn out, and no need for money or employment can't fucking help them out?

Maybe they don't have enough starships to ferry them.
Oh, wait, except for the fucking giant armada of starships that are doing fuck all else important that can show up at the end of Picard.

That's what a post-scarcity society means. You choose not to help because you're a fucking dick. Because you have all the help anyone could possibly want at literally the touch of a button.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 21, 2020, 06:40:58 PM
Europe is so racist that we send our own naval ships to save drowning refugees scammed by Turkish smugglers and Somali pirates to cross over to Europe on a raft and provide them with food, shelter, welfare benefits and if fleeing from war a permanent invitation to stay and start a new life.

You know, just like Picard.

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)

If Picard wanted to do Brexit and Trump they shouldn't have made space Hillary Clinton the one to yell at Patrick Stewart about his fucking hubris.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 21, 2020, 06:44:02 PM
:mindblown the fuck happened here
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 21, 2020, 07:24:00 PM
Real talk: when we gonna get Nic Cage as Starfleet captain?  Can you imagine?

https://youtu.be/xia1qQ9uNQc
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 22, 2020, 02:13:11 AM
lol when PatStew's voice comes out of bald Nic :dead
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 22, 2020, 06:38:03 AM
Europe is so racist that we send our own naval ships to save drowning refugees scammed by Turkish smugglers and Somali pirates to cross over to Europe on a raft and provide them with food, shelter, welfare benefits and if fleeing from war a permanent invitation to stay and start a new life.

You know, just like Picard.

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)

If Picard wanted to do Brexit and Trump they shouldn't have made space Hillary Clinton the one to yell at Patrick Stewart about his fucking hubris.

Nah man Europe is racist so Star Trek has to be as well!

How dare you criticize a show thats only been on for one season?

you fucking racists never even gave it a chance!

Leave Kurtzman Alone!
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 22, 2020, 07:16:37 AM
:mindblown the fuck happened here

I like talking about star trek and I have work I'm avoiding doing
:trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 22, 2020, 10:09:28 AM
Europe is so racist that we send our own naval ships to save drowning refugees scammed by Turkish smugglers and Somali pirates to cross over to Europe on a raft and provide them with food, shelter, welfare benefits and if fleeing from war a permanent invitation to stay and start a new life.

You know, just like Picard.

(https://i.imgur.com/zivpc1G.gif)

If Picard wanted to do Brexit and Trump they shouldn't have made space Hillary Clinton the one to yell at Patrick Stewart about his fucking hubris.

Nah man Europe is racist so Star Trek has to be as well!

How dare you criticize a show thats only been on for one season?

you fucking racists never even gave it a chance!

Leave Kurtzman Alone!

I have not once defended Kurtzman. Go suck a fuck.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 22, 2020, 10:24:13 AM
You have defended him by saying this show is worth a damn, or that the writing is good. Which honestly is pretty laughable.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 22, 2020, 07:12:38 PM
So, I just watched the first episode of Picard. When Dahj came to Picard, my first thought was that she was supposed to be Lal.
Heh.
Anyway, ignoring the nonsensical explanation how some of Data had survived and could be "cloned", I didn't hate it.
Seems like an ok continuation of Nemesis (which was the most awful Trek I had ever seen up to that point).
Back when Data "died" in Nemesis, I fully expected another Spock moment in the next movie, when we would learn he successfully transferred his consciousness to B4. Of course that never happened because Nemesis bombed just as badly as it deserved to, so there never was a sequel until now.
Should I quit while I'm ahead?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: chronovore on May 22, 2020, 07:30:59 PM
So, I just watched the first episode of Picard. When Dahj came to Picard, my first thought was that she was supposed to be Lal.
Heh.
Anyway, ignoring the nonsensical explanation how some of Data had survived and could be "cloned", I didn't hate it.
Seems like an ok continuation of Nemesis (which was the most awful Trek I had ever seen up to that point).
Back when Data "died" in Nemesis, I fully expected another Spock moment in the next movie, when we would learn he successfully transferred his consciousness to B4. Of course that never happened because Nemesis bombed just as badly as it deserved to, so there never was a sequel until now.
Should I quit while I'm ahead?

There are good moments throughout the show, and I like the new crew very much. I would watch a show with the final cast, even minus Patrick Stewart. I don’t mind a darker and more rebellious feeling Star Trek. At this point in my life, I do not have much faith in the government, as a constant I feel revolution is inevitable, eventually. The kind of corruption and back-channel dealing represented in Picard provides a more honest look at where things are than the original Star Trek series provided. The United Federation of planets is an optimistic look at where we were with the UN at that time. The representation of it in Picard shows more of what it has become.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 22, 2020, 07:40:50 PM
I have no idea why people don't find Picard optimistic in its own way. But then again, when you come in expecting to hate something of course you're going to hate it. I know that lesson all too well. People say Raffi taking drugs isn't Star Trek, but the crew accepting her despite it *is*. Star Trek Picard stars a host of broken or beaten down people who have an opportunity to rise up. I don't see how it gets more optimistic than that.

Furthermore, as someone wrote in a reddit post today, most struggle with the differences in format between classic Trek and Picard. Classic Trek is episodic; Picard is long form serialization. Here is the relevant quote:

Quote
if Best of Both Worlds part 1 was the first episode of the season, and it stretched out for 14 more of Picard as Locutus tearing through the beta quadrant towards earth, while Riker and Shelby bicker the whole time about the best solution. what if Past tense was 10 episodes of Sisko and Bashir stuck in the sanctuary zone having to fight for scraps, while the complacency of the upper class is laid bare in Dax's story, and Kira and O'Brien become increasingly desperate to locate them while running low on resources and dealing with whatever dominant power exists in that timeline. consider Yesterday's Enterprise, The Drumhead, Hard Time, or For the Uniform stretched out with active consequences and repercussions as opposed to just being one and done. Voyager was going to have Year of Hell be an entire season, but then tptb decided it would be better as two episodes that ended with a reset button.

A massive flaw with old Trek is that serious things happen and it's never followed up upon. If Star Trek TNG were made today and the MAIN CHARACTER becomes a bad guy do you honestly think the show wouldn't go in a dark place after the fact? In TNG after Lotocus, you've got the episode Family, where Picard goes to his home to heal from his experiences, and then his experiences as a mass murderer (although programmed by the Borg) are conveniently swept under the rug the rest of the franchise, a few mentions (DS9 ep1 and First Contact notwithstanding).

(https://media.giphy.com/media/U6Rxe2NUe4ckQSU4Do/giphy.gif)

Flaw.

Remember when Picard ends up living an entire life time on an alien planet, has a wife, kids, and entire community and they die out? And he just kind of like, doesn't even have to go Troi for therapy for it?

Flaw.

Voyager regularly made reset button episodes so that nothing of consequence ever sticks. Remember the time when the original canon Kim DIES in an episode and a Kim from a literal alternate dimension replaces him and it's not mentioned again?

Flaw.

Old Star Trek is flawed as fuck, Deep Space Nine being the lone, sole exception (which I must remind you that at time of air date was considered "not Trek?" and is the darkest in the series) because nothing of repercussion ever fucking happens. All Picard does is rather than ignore these things happening and going to another fucking unrelated episode, it continues it.

Big whoop.

You have defended him by saying this show is worth a damn, or that the writing is good. Which honestly is pretty laughable.

No your argument is laughable. I have not, in any way at any time inferred that I view Picard as perfect you simpering troglodytic chuckle fuck. I liked Picard and thought it had a lot of good moments. Was it perfect? No. Could it be roundly improved? Yes. That still doesn't take away that I really enjoyed the Riker episode, or the slower pacing. Chuckle fucks like you have no ability to think for yourself. You're a robot constantly bitching like a complete and utter fa.ggot. Saying the show that takes three or four episodes just for the cast to get to outer space, is too break neck and too pew pew.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 22, 2020, 07:42:41 PM
I actually paused the episode when Dahj appeared at Picard's vineyard and googled Data+Lal to check how exactly she looked, and thought to myself, close enough.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/TrekWest5/S03.Joey.png)
That would have been a much better explanation than "cloning a positronic cell"...
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 22, 2020, 09:24:05 PM
Old Trek is episodic or long form with some turds here and there, Picard is long form green apple splatters diarrhea out of the gate.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
it will most likely get worse on it's second season there is precedence for this STD S2.
[close]
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 02:02:54 AM
Should I quit while I'm ahead?
Personally I hated it, but watch it until such a point you don't want to anymore and if that point never comes, great! Not sure if you're into trek before, but the opinions in this thread mostly come from a deep history with the show, I imagine most normies would find the show meh - ok.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Occam on May 23, 2020, 03:02:18 AM
Come on, my first thought when Dahj came to Picard was that she was Data's daughter Lal. Does that sound like someone who doesn't like Trek? ;)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 03:17:23 AM
Well then be prepared to have an extremely polarised opinion on Picard either way  :engel
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2020, 04:09:24 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AevIMamDGvo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 23, 2020, 06:32:57 AM
Saying the show that takes three or four episodes just for the cast to get to outer space, is too break neck and too pew pew.

Hey you silly uptight fucking cunt, once again you havent even read any of my posts when the show was even on, but keep repeating nacho that its all about RLM. When did I ever say that it takes thrse episodes to get to space is too "break.neck and pew pew".

Jesus christ Cindy you really are a distinguished mentally-challenged fellow

I never even said anything like that, or that old trek is perfect, or that nutrek is flawless or any of that other bullcrap you just wrote.

You seem.hellbent on making some fucking drama in here each time though.

I actually liked the first few episodes so get that sand out of your cunt you nasty bitch
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 23, 2020, 06:45:57 AM
Anyways, let's actually discuss the show.

Episode 6 was fantastic.

The reunion with Hugh, the Borg reclamation project scenes were the most positive Trek in DECADES, the tension and build up to Soji's dream. I like all of the characters and how it's a show about the struggle to find good in a harsh universe. I love this show and I'm excited as FUCK for the next episode.

It also looked like Soji's father looked sort of like Bashir. I'll be giddy if that's the case.

"These aren't monsters, they're victims."

:bow

RLM complainers: WHEN IS IT GOING TO BE POSITIVE TREK AGAIN reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Also reusing the old Hugh actor :hyper

And this week we get to see Riker and Troi :hyper

Look at this trash opinion. "The reunion with Hugh and the Borg reclamaition project is the most positive star trek in years"

 :lol

Their struggle to find good in a baaaaaad universe :lol

Bitch was even crying about RLM when none of us were posting about it all that much. What's your general malfunction that you want us to respect your opinion, but when its our opinion ( that happens to be shared by many including rlm ) its not worth listening to or is just outright wrong?

Because u are delusional.

I wish you would go back to your safespace Trek thread, where noone comes because u are a grade a chipolata cunt
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 23, 2020, 06:50:53 AM
Should I quit while I'm ahead?

Nah, watch the whole thing and decide for yourself if you liked it or not.

Furthermore, as someone wrote in a reddit post today, most struggle with the differences in format between classic Trek and Picard. Classic Trek is episodic; Picard is long form serialization.

yeah, some rando on reddit nailed it; rick and morty copypasta.
Dumbos just don't understand the difference between episodic and serialised. That's the problem.

 :foodcourt

A massive flaw with old Trek is that serious things happen and it's never followed up upon. If Star Trek TNG were made today and the MAIN CHARACTER becomes a bad guy do you honestly think the show wouldn't go in a dark place after the fact? In TNG after Lotocus, you've got the episode Family, where Picard goes to his home to heal from his experiences, and then his experiences as a mass murderer (although programmed by the Borg) are conveniently swept under the rug the rest of the franchise, a few mentions (DS9 ep1 and First Contact notwithstanding).

I really don't know why you want to lean into this.
How many minutes of screentime of next season of Picard do you think they are going to spend on the repercussions of Season 1 and the fact that
spoiler (click to show/hide)
he's not even human anymore?
[close]
"Oh, but, it only has 10 episodes now! They can't waste time on that when there is this brand new mystery to unravel, in what I am sure will turn out to be a logical and plothole free carefully crafted narrative!"

People forgive a lot in the service of a good story.
People will nitpick the shit out of sloppy writing if the end result is a mess.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 23, 2020, 07:29:44 AM
uptight fucking cunt

distinguished mentally-challenged fellow

get that sand out of your cunt

you nasty bitch

Bitch

Because u are delusional.

u are a grade a chipolata cunt
:jeanluc :iface
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 07:45:49 AM
Yeah MM you need to seriously calm the fuck down.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: MMaRsu on May 23, 2020, 07:49:51 AM
She started with the insults over a tv show fuck her
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 23, 2020, 08:19:11 AM
When two dudes say to another dude to chill the fuck out, the dude should say: "Sorry breh, yeah I went over the line"
and the dudes would respond with: "Don't worry bro, we got you"

If we ignore the basic rules and act like inaudible screeching bitches because our feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

(https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/1epKt0dxABhFb5KlUgRQrD4sTdk=/0x23:1842x1059/720x405/media/img/mt/2014/09/Big_Lebowski_2/original.jpg)


Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 08:54:27 AM
Just bail on the quote thread if you get this mad man, no need to reply to everyone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Great Rumbler on May 23, 2020, 09:29:59 AM
Are we really gonna have to start banning people because of Star Trek again?  :notlikethis
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 09:48:55 AM
Seriously, what is with this thread?  MMaRsu, you reported others' posts for being nasty to you, only to go and do it right back?

It's time to stop having meltdowns and insulting each other OVER STAR TREK.  Keep it civil.  Can't do it?  Stop responding to the person you don't agree with.

Are we really gonna have to start banning people because of Star Trek again?  :notlikethis

Time for Bore Section 31?
:expert
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Yeti on May 23, 2020, 10:58:35 AM
Y’all are making Star Wars fans look sane and dignified
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:07:05 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile. So you can stop memeing over declaring your love for a place that is shitty in its own right. This thread is a perfect example of it and there are plenty of others. Just saying. Just enjoy the downward spiral.



Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:08:44 PM
She started with the insults over a tv show fuck her

Fuck her? FUCK YOUUUUUUUU
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 12:14:20 PM
Ban everyone who posted in this thread
Leper everyone who hasn't
Mod filler
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:21:23 PM
She started with the insults over a tv show fuck her

Fuck her? FUCK YOUUUUUUUU

This thread has brought out the worse in everybody in the last year. Myself included which I happily admit. I don't understand many things. I don't understand why people can't accept that people like or dislike something. I can't understand why people won't shut up about said dislike or like in post after post after post and instead post at a normal human ratio. I don't understand why posting videos replaced the actual discussion that people use to have about their own opinions on specific episodes. What other thread is like this. Who posts movie reviews from critics in the movie review thread instead of just talking about their own opinions. I can't understand why what use to be a fun thread about watching Star Trek that like 5 people posted in has devolved into this embarrassing shitshow. Like a lot of things on the board, I just shrug and say fuck it at this point. If everybody is going to fling shit, I'm gonna happily fling my shit too whenever I get the urge.

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:22:40 PM
You guys broke Stoney, go to your rooms
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:22:44 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile. So you can stop memeing over declaring your love for a place that is shitty in its own right. This thread is a perfect example of it and there are plenty of others. Just saying. Just enjoy the downward spiral.

I don't know if this is what you're referring to, but I'm just tired of the negativity (happening everywhere) and am done with it.  Don't need that crap and will stay positive.  We shouldn't be shitting all over each other- doesn't that go against everything Star Trek is supposed to be about?  :)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:23:44 PM
This forum is what you make it by who you interact with and how
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:26:16 PM
This forum is what you make it by who you interact with and how

It's time for the negativity and shit posting* to stop.  We all have enough problems in real life as it is.

*Other forums thread doesn't count :P
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:29:09 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile. So you can stop memeing over declaring your love for a place that is shitty in its own right. This thread is a perfect example of it and there are plenty of others. Just saying. Just enjoy the downward spiral.

I don't know if this is what you're referring to, but I'm just tired of the negativity (happening everywhere) and am done with it.  Don't need that crap and will stay positive.

I've stated my opinion on the board many times and the direction I think it has gone in the last couple of years so I won't rehash it. It is what it is. And I don't envy any of the mods. Outside of a few threads I don't really enjoy posting on the board. This use to be one of them. That went away too. Maybe the gaming side is better at this point. Which is pretty crazy considering most of the entrenched fandom wars use to be on that side. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:30:24 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile. So you can stop memeing over declaring your love for a place that is shitty in its own right. This thread is a perfect example of it and there are plenty of others. Just saying. Just enjoy the downward spiral.

I don't know if this is what you're referring to, but I'm just tired of the negativity (happening everywhere) and am done with it.  Don't need that crap and will stay positive.

I've stated my opinion on the board many times and the direction I think it has gone in the last couple of years so I won't rehash it. It is what it is. And I don't envy any of the mods. Outside of a few threads I don't really enjoy posting on the board. Maybe the gaming side is better at this point. Which is pretty crazy considering most of the entrenched fandom wars use to be on that side.

Yeah.  Gaming has improved a lot recently.  Would be nice to see this side head in that direction.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 12:30:26 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile.

:social2 Let's not get carried away.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:31:07 PM
This forum is what you make it by who you interact with and how

It's time for the negativity and shit posting* to stop.  We all have enough problems in real life as it is.

*Other forums thread doesn't count :P

Just delete it, dummy. Respectable posters don’t go there  :snob
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:33:40 PM
This forum is what you make it by who you interact with and how

It's time for the negativity and shit posting* to stop.  We all have enough problems in real life as it is.

*Other forums thread doesn't count :P

Just delete it, dummy. Respectable posters don’t go there  :snob

It has its place and stuff stays quarantined in there- I post plenty in that thread but TBH I wouldn't care if it went away.  People would have meltdowns if it got deleted.  Look at the backlash I got just for moving it to the member-only subforum (which is just awful).
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:33:44 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile.

:social2 Let's not get carried away.


I'll absolutely go there. I'd rather post there than here a million times over for various reasons. But you are of course entitled to your opinion. I see the same agenda posting bullshit over there that I see here. We are zero percent better and often worse. I could make a mock thread for this board just like the mock thread that exists for resetera era over here.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 12:34:14 PM
I really need to fix the Ignore Thread extension so it stores more than ~1000 threadblocks.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:34:48 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile.

:social2 Let's not get carried away.


I'll absolutely go there. I'd rather post there than here a million times over for various reasons. But you are of course entitled to your opinion. I see the same agenda posting bullshit over there that I see here. We are zero percent better and often worse.

You're both right. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:34:56 PM
It has its place — false
It stays quarantined — also false

Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:36:33 PM
It has its place — false
It stays quarantined — also false

We can debate over the former, but all the posting about off-site stuff has stayed in that thread.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:38:42 PM
Categorically untrue, my dude. All the shittiest posters on this board have been people drawn in by that shit show and then spilling over. You just like posting in there. People gonna be reee and leave if you delete, of course. That’s the point
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:41:32 PM
Categorically untrue, my dude. All the shittiest posters on this board have been people drawn in by that shit show and then spilling over. You just like posting in there. People gonna be reee and leave if you delete, of course. That’s the point

We're talking about two different things here.  I'm only referring to the content.  If you don't like some posters that's a different thing. 

Also thanks for causing more drama and lots of shit directed towards me after making a thread on something I pm'd you about.  :-\
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:43:19 PM
You’re welcome. Content, too, though. You’re lying to yourself or just haven’t seen it if you think it contains itself. But whatever, I’ll just hang out until the lights are out
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 12:43:57 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile.

:social2 Let's not get carried away.


I'll absolutely go there. I'd rather post there than here a million times over for various reasons. But you are of course entitled to your opinion. I see the same agenda posting bullshit over there that I see here. We are zero percent better and often worse.

Even in a hypothetical situation where The Bore and RE are equally negative, just by sheer volume this place is more manageable and more enjoyable to post on. And yes, gaming side is fine.

Also, this place is better off than it was during the Dark Times 2-3 years ago. It goes up and down. But I have a RE account and I've lurked RE and there is no comparison. I know where I'd rather have a discussion.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 12:47:00 PM
Had a reply for Cats, but nah- deleted.  I'm done posting about this.  All it's doing is making this thread even shittier. 

Let's talk about Star Trek.  :)
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:47:52 PM
I still like Q the best (no maga)

Edit: what, you didn’t edit out a reply, you edited in more of a reply! Lol
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:50:28 PM
Anyway, I’m starting Picard today. I’m sure to have some opinions that will make half of you upset
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: GreatSageEqualOfHeaven on May 23, 2020, 12:53:18 PM
rank the final fantasys star trek films:

wrath of khan > voyage home > the motion picture > undiscovered country > first contact > Beyond > Star Trek feat. Sabotage By The Beastie Boys > Into darkness >Insurrection > Generations > Final Frontier > Nemesis
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 12:53:46 PM
Anyway, I’m starting Picard today. I’m sure to have some opinions that will make half of you upset
Sign off every post with a picture of Necar Zadegan and no one will be upset  :noah
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:56:24 PM
feelings got hurt on a message board we might as well be ResetEra posters

Board is worse than that forum. Has been for quite awhile.

:social2 Let's not get carried away.


I'll absolutely go there. I'd rather post there than here a million times over for various reasons. But you are of course entitled to your opinion. I see the same agenda posting bullshit over there that I see here. We are zero percent better and often worse.

Even in a hypothetical situation where The Bore and RE are equally negative, just by sheer volume this place is more manageable and more enjoyable to post on. And yes, gaming side is fine.

Also, this place is better off than it was during the Dark Times 2-3 years ago. It goes up and down. But I have a RE account and I've lurked RE and there is no comparison. I know where I'd rather have a discussion.

All I can say is that if this is the kind of environment you want to post in so be it. It isn't for me. It was once. It isn't anymore. It hasn't been for quite awhile. And its pretty easy to just dismiss the whole board as not a positive experience but just kind of a shithole that I'd prefer not to waste time on excepting a few small pockets. This use to be one of those pockets. It's not anymore just like a lot of things. The more and more of these pockets that get removed, the easier it makes it not to visit.

I'll make that my last post on the subject since the thread is supposed to be about "star trek" or maybe RLM at this point.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2020, 12:58:23 PM
Where did RLM touch you?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Stoney Mason on May 23, 2020, 12:59:06 PM
Where did RLM touch you?

The same place your mom did.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 12:59:24 PM
The heart?
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2020, 01:00:24 PM
Your Mama has a glass eye with a goldfish in it and peg leg with a kickstand.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:03:20 PM
:peach

Maybe this thread needs a reboot, like Star Trek got with those movies. :thinking
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: D3RANG3D on May 23, 2020, 01:04:08 PM
Nah it just needs people to have some standards with the media they consume.  :P
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 01:05:49 PM
I swear to watch Picard today and add Star Trek content within the week
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:09:42 PM
I swear to watch Picard today and add Star Trek content within the week
:bolo
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 01:13:11 PM
I think a new thread with the following rules would be fine:

- No RLM discussion (can be touched on, but I'm fine with RLM videos being in the RLM thread, clearly it's become a distraction no matter how you feel about them)
- No personal attacks or saying shit like "You're an idiot if you like X"

For the latter, it's less about censorship of free speech and more that everyone has trotted that line out at least four different times in support of their "argument" except it doesn't support any argument and I'm sick of reading it.

I think this board could support a healthy Star Trek discussion and it wouldn't take much, just people not acting like fucking howler monkeys flinging shit at each other basically.

Cindi was on the right track with her separate thread. If it was allowed to stay separate and was retitled instead of merged, this mess would have been avoided.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 01:13:22 PM
Rebooting the thread won't help bork, the words may disappear but these feels will stay. I don't have an answer either, for me personally I just disengage when I can tell shit's about to get hairy, I had a lovely arguement with Stoney the other day and I felt it ended okay, kinda bums me out to see how mad/sad everyone is tbh :fbm
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:15:31 PM
Rebooting the thread won't help bork, the words may disappear but these feels will stay. I don't have an answer either, for me personally I just disengage when I can tell shit's about to get hairy, I had a lovely arguement with Stoney the other day and I felt it ended okay, kinda bums me out to see how mad/sad everyone is tbh :fbm

The answer is "talk about Star Trek and debating is OK, but stop shitting on each other for having differing opinions."  Be like the federation and do it diplomatically or whatever.  Sorry, I don't know enough about Trek for this.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 01:19:04 PM
Rebooting the thread won't help bork, the words may disappear but these feels will stay. I don't have an answer either, for me personally I just disengage when I can tell shit's about to get hairy, I had a lovely arguement with Stoney the other day and I felt it ended okay, kinda bums me out to see how mad/sad everyone is tbh :fbm

The answer is "talk about Star Trek and debating is OK, but stop shitting on each other for having differing opinions."  Be like the federation and do it diplomatically or whatever.  Sorry, I don't know enough about Trek for this.
Federation diplomacy requires compliance, Ferengi diplomacy only needs the will to make profit  :quark
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 23, 2020, 01:22:03 PM
I think a new thread with the following rules would be fine:

- No RLM discussion (can be touched on, but I'm fine with RLM videos being in the RLM thread, clearly it's become a distraction no matter how you feel about them)
- No personal attacks or saying shit like "You're an idiot if you like X"

For the latter, it's less about censorship of free speech and more that everyone has trotted that line out at least four different times in support of their "argument" except it doesn't support any argument and I'm sick of reading it.

I think this board could support a healthy Star Trek discussion and it wouldn't take much, just people not acting like fucking howler monkeys flinging shit at each other basically.

Cindi was on the right track with her separate thread. If it was allowed to stay separate and was retitled instead of merged, this mess would have been avoided.

I'm not allowed to have a separate thread because constant modding.

Can't have it both ways. We have people completely at odds with each other so I make a new Star Trek thread. It gets posts. Mod moves those goddamn posts and FORCES us to interact, when we all know we are volatile. THANKS MODS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 01:24:02 PM
I agree it was a poor decision. The thread should have been retitled.

Thread-based message boards allow people to avoid entering threads they don't want to participate in; being forced into a thread makes interacting with others inevitable and Super Ignore doesn't scale for everyone.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:25:15 PM
I think a new thread with the following rules would be fine:

- No RLM discussion (can be touched on, but I'm fine with RLM videos being in the RLM thread, clearly it's become a distraction no matter how you feel about them)
- No personal attacks or saying shit like "You're an idiot if you like X"

For the latter, it's less about censorship of free speech and more that everyone has trotted that line out at least four different times in support of their "argument" except it doesn't support any argument and I'm sick of reading it.

I think this board could support a healthy Star Trek discussion and it wouldn't take much, just people not acting like fucking howler monkeys flinging shit at each other basically.

Cindi was on the right track with her separate thread. If it was allowed to stay separate and was retitled instead of merged, this mess would have been avoided.

I'm not allowed to have a separate thread because constant modding.

Can't have it both ways. We have people completely at odds with each other so I make a new Star Trek thread. It gets posts. Mod moves those goddamn posts and FORCES us to interact, when we all know we are volatile. THANKS MODS.

Sigh.

Nobody said you couldn't post in your other thread.  Your other thread is still there.  I thought the thread was bumped accidentally and merged the last couple of posts here.  We've already had this discussion.

I'm getting so tired of this fucking shit. 
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Himu on May 23, 2020, 01:28:12 PM
Also thanks bork for snitching on MMrasu. Now we know why mods are suddenly in this thread. It's because you're a PUSSY THAT REPORTS.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:30:51 PM
Also thanks bork for snitching on MMrasu. Now we know why mods are suddenly in this thread. It's because you're a PUSSY THAT REPORTS.

He's not the only one who has reported posts here.  Also stop.  That goes for everybody- stop it with starting up more shit. 

All of you.  Move on or get a ban.  It has come to that now.  Over fucking STAR TREK.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 01:32:35 PM
You should just ignore all reports, stop moderating and only add emotes when you feel like it, make it someone else's problem  :asuka


I get along with you well bork, and I honestly think it's not worth your trouble, you catch a lot of shit on here for situations you're asked to get involved in via reports and I don't think it's right for you to carry this shit, our shit.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Tasty on May 23, 2020, 01:33:44 PM
bork is not immune to taking shit too seriously either. :trumps
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:34:07 PM
Momo, please stop posting about this.  I'm just going to close this thread if it continues.
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Momo on May 23, 2020, 01:34:54 PM
reading through the last few pages is making me regret ever submitting post on this thread :dead
I actually read the first few pages of this thread yesterday, thread was banging back then  :ryker
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: CatsCatsCats on May 23, 2020, 01:35:04 PM
I’m sentencing all of the bire to attend a zoom meeting on nonviolent communication
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: Nintex on May 23, 2020, 01:36:30 PM
Also thanks bork for snitching on MMrasu. Now we know why mods are suddenly in this thread. It's because you're a PUSSY THAT REPORTS.
I reported him  :klob :biden

Has anyone ever tried the Star Trek VR game?, its on sale right now
Title: Re: star trek
Post by: bork on May 23, 2020, 01:36:51 PM
OK, that's it.

The other Trek thread is now the Star Trek thread.

http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=47141.0