Author Topic: star trek  (Read 77050 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: star trek
« Reply #180 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.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2013, 02:00:56 PM by Nintendosbooger »

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #181 on: February 06, 2013, 01:47:37 PM »
one thing DS9 handles so much better is the klingons. i feel like i understand their practices a bit more. the whole death wish thing is ridiculous though if the Klingons were real theyd be the space equivalent of lemmings

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #182 on: February 07, 2013, 11:46:42 PM »
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 don't necessarily dislike this 'realism'. I'd like to think that it's something that shows that we humans will always have that element to us as long as we are what we are . I personally think a Section 31 show would be fucking fascinating, actually. I know what you mean though.

The question is, Voyager or TOS next. I'm having such trouble deciding.

Momo

  • c y b o r e p u n k
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #183 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

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #184 on: February 08, 2013, 12:00:17 AM »
fortunately i dont mind shitty special effects and I LOVE CAMP

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #185 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.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #186 on: February 08, 2013, 02:09:12 AM »
gowron :lol what a strange last minute development

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #187 on: February 08, 2013, 11:54:24 PM »
Alright, so i finished DS9. Feelings, man. I really enjoyed that ending. I feel more emotionally connected to TNG but for some reason it just ended so much better. The wonders of a coherent plot, i suppose. I'm watching TOS and i do enjoy it. I do feel the datedness. It's almost alien. The twilight zone type psychic catastrophe episodes, the way everything seems so sterile...

the chicks are :drool though

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: star trek
« Reply #188 on: February 09, 2013, 01:01:10 AM »
Green alien girls. :drool
@

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #189 on: February 09, 2013, 01:06:44 AM »
no, not even the alien chicks. seriously like every human chick i've seen on here with one or two exceptions would get a murderous boning.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
obviously the aliens would get it too :shaq

benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #190 on: February 09, 2013, 02:52:52 AM »
Diana Muldaur shows up a couple times.

Dr. Pulaski  :drool

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #191 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. 

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #192 on: February 10, 2013, 01:31:19 PM »
i really dont like the TOS klingons. they seem almost like racial caricatures of mongolians

Momo

  • c y b o r e p u n k
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #193 on: February 10, 2013, 01:35:34 PM »
I forgot thow weird TOS Klignons are if you watched TNG first :lol

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #194 on: February 10, 2013, 01:48:12 PM »
romulans are pretty funny too, like gay evil roman aliens

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #195 on: February 10, 2013, 01:58:40 PM »
i gotta say, the USS voyager might be my favorite ship design yet. shit looks slick.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #196 on: February 10, 2013, 11:48:51 PM »

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #197 on: February 11, 2013, 05:21:28 AM »
:lol

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #198 on: February 12, 2013, 10:27:42 AM »
So I'm on VOY season 2 and i think i'm far enough to make some comments. For one, it really sucks for this show that i'm watching it after new BSG, which obviously exploits the premise of this show about a hundred times better than Voyager does. Well, that and the fact that i know there are 7 seasons means that there is no suspense any time some method of going home is proposed.  But still, I am forgiving and I love some shitty TV so i'm continuing to watch this. That being said this show just has more holes than swiss cheese. There is just no real threat of anything happening to them because of Trek tech. replicators, and the essential nature of a starfleet vessel as a near infinitely self sustaining minicolony render the premise kind of...stupid. It probably would have worked a lot better if they had applied this premise to the Enterprise series time frame, actually. The idea of being far from home isnt bad, but they should have merged the concept with DS9, intertwining the Voyager's fate with a conflict in the quadrant that may have had some sort of effect on their voyage. But they must have been too unwilling to bet ratings on a single storyline. I suppose thats fair, it was 90s tv. But the show suffers from it way more than say, TNG would. I'm not gonna mention the reset buttons, or the fact that the show just has abysmal episodes. That Warp Ten episode was literally the worst television i've seen in years. The writing for this show, both in terms of character development and coherence of plot is literally awful, there is a plot hole in almost every episode, especially when it comes to shit like them being able to get home. 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. Really, an impossible 70 year car ride versus some debateable prime directive shit? smh.....

There are some pluses. The sfx hold up decently well, some of the characters are enjoyable, and the Voyager is a really really cool ship. Luckily i'm into that shit. Also the intro might be the best. Love that song.

Boss Tier
Chakotay, Tom Paris, Doctor, Tupac

Aight Tier
Torres, Harry Kim, Suder

Why did you make it onto this show Tier
Janeway, Neelix, Kes


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

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #199 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.


Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #200 on: February 13, 2013, 01:19:47 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.
its definitely not gonna be in VOY. as far as the show is written i just see little space for it.

benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #201 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.

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #202 on: February 15, 2013, 03:03:34 PM »
dog

Re: star trek
« Reply #203 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.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #204 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).

benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #205 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.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2013, 02:08:16 AM by benjipwns »

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #206 on: February 17, 2013, 06:37:59 PM »
The Pon Farr episode was one of the more entertaining vulcan specific ones though (even if the belanna thing was dumb). I have to say, Year of Hell was really really good- It's a shame that it was supposed to be a season, glimpses of BSG in that one. Overall, Voyager... has more good episodes than I anticipated. They really are bad with the villains though. These Hirogens or whatever just feel like Predators clumsily adapted to Trek.. The whole show just seems poorly planned, to try and generate short term excitement- but who gives a fuck about that when you KNOW there are no long term benefits?

Torres is a fucking idiot. Least competent officer of any crew ever.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2013, 06:51:27 PM by Eschaton »

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #207 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.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #208 on: February 17, 2013, 09:23:42 PM »
i maintain that klingon society would be impossible. too circuitous and outright sstupid to survive in interstellar diplomacy and politics. not to mention science. they just seem like single minded fucktards.

Re: star trek
« Reply #209 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.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2013, 10:36:57 PM by Nintendosbooger »

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #210 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.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #211 on: February 18, 2013, 12:33:52 AM »
The vulcans i've always rationalized as sure, theyre part of the Federation and arent overtly ambitious (on an individual OR societal level) apart from sociological control. They seem to be extremely competent at most things, but for no defined reason. Exactly fryinghigh, if the Klingons were portrayed more like interstellar vikings using mostly plundered and refurbished tech from other civilizations, their position in the quadrant might be justified. But as it is now, Nintendosbooger's assessment is correct. Klingon children couldn't be hunting and learning hand to hand combat, they would have to be spending years and years catching up on STEM subject matter just like Federation children too. IIRC they did say once long ago the klingons were less militaristic, but how long can such educational and cultural stagnancy work in an society responding to interstellar pressures?

By all means, the Romulans should pretty much be the bosses of the Alpha Quadrant. All the ability of the Vulcans, and ambition to boot... What Star Trek needs more is evidence of intellectual divides inside of the various forces in the alpha quadrant. Where are the ambitious vulcans? The scholarly klingons? We see glimpses of it, like the Romulans cooperating with Spock... But only glimpses. Given the state of our own union and world politics, I find such ridiculous consensus in all of these societies to be super unrealistic. It simply can't happen with a group of individuals. These aren't gestalts.

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #212 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.


chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #213 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.

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: star trek
« Reply #214 on: February 20, 2013, 09:14:48 PM »
And I guess Neelix was supposed to be an anthropomorphic Tribble. :yuck
@

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #215 on: February 22, 2013, 01:00:56 AM »
i finished voyager. It sucked. there were like 10 legit great episodes. 7 seasons of trash

almost afraid to watch enterprise

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #216 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.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #217 on: February 22, 2013, 01:33:16 AM »
then again i did skip like 4 seasons worth of  the show lol. i regret nothing. watching the enterprise pilot. seeems way more interesting

Cindi Mayweather

  • you took the chip, dipped it, took a bite, and dipped it again
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #218 on: February 22, 2013, 01:34:53 AM »
How many eps per day do you watch Escha?

Momo

  • c y b o r e p u n k
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #219 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

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #220 on: February 22, 2013, 01:44:58 AM »
How many eps per day do you watch Escha?
i pretty much come home and have em running in the background while i work on research or work out. i really did skip a shit ton of episodes in all the series, seasons upon seasons worth. i dont feel bad about it either because as much as i like trek, its unfocused and prone to boring shit sometimes. its like fryinghigh said. its boring. but the incredibly interesting side of boring.

i pretty much skipped all of voyager though. all the borg shit bkred the fuck out of me. i was on season 4 and skipped to 7.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #221 on: February 22, 2013, 01:50:19 AM »
dont read this fryinghigh. voyager spoilers

spoiler (click to show/hide)
i did :lol endlessly at future Janeway being like. " yeah i was a dumb self righteous cunt at your age

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #222 on: February 22, 2013, 10:10:10 PM »
as for enterprise.... acting is pretty corny but that intro is crny in a great way. vulcan chick is top 5 hottest trek sluts easily also

we shall see

benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #223 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*

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #224 on: February 22, 2013, 10:57:28 PM »
will do. i did love equinox, year of hell, omega directive and a few others. by skipped i mean if i wasnt intrigued before the intro started playing i went to the next one. as you can imagine thats a lot of episodes.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #225 on: February 25, 2013, 01:23:36 AM »
yeeeeeaaahhh so I stopped watching this and now my go to background noise is Highlander TV which ive never seen. enterprise is just bad. and I've ODed on bad trek for a while. think I'll watch the movies soon.

Re: star trek
« Reply #226 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?

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #227 on: February 25, 2013, 10:48:29 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?
the romance wasnt weird, the timing was. they had become close over alexanders care. it should have happened in S5 or something. The series makes weird, unrealistic turns with romance sometimes. like a certain couple at the end of voyager, or the mai captains never seeming to have anything lasting apart from sisko.

riker had no problem with sloppy seconds, he was downright enthusiastic about alien pussy.

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #228 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.
 

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #229 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.

benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #230 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:

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #231 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.


benjipwns

  • is trying his local libraries
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #232 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?)

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #233 on: February 28, 2013, 08:09:11 AM »
Yeah, okay, it sucks in Nemesis, but its better than the tv show... :lol

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #234 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?

Stoney Mason

  • Our racist president
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #235 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.

Esch

  • no investigation, no right to yeet
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #236 on: March 04, 2013, 01:28:42 PM »
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?
intro cracks me up. agreed. i like the movie. ill admit that trek is better when its not about the action sequences, but that was about as good of a blockbuster explosion movie as it could have been. to be honest, that movie was more like star wars than any trek

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #237 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.

cool breeze

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #238 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?

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #239 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?