Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 46,366 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 1,855
Set Bookmark
Sat, Dec 16, 2017, 3:58pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S1: Where No Man Has Gone Before

The big difference I see in season 1 is the somber, reflecting ending by the characters, rather than the laughing lighthearted mood seconds after a traumatic event, such as what occurred in the later seasons.
Set Bookmark
John Harmon
Sat, Dec 16, 2017, 11:07am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Demon

Just as the Mr Plinkett reviews are more entertaining than the Star Wars prequels, so is this review from Jammer a thousand times better than this episode. Bravo.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Dec 16, 2017, 6:46am (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S1: Charlie X

Why couldn’t the Thasians just take away Charlie’s powers?
Set Bookmark
Sat, Dec 16, 2017, 5:59am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness

Amazing episode.
History is written by the winners - that's the undeniable truth that can be applied to all wars. World War 2 is a shining example, especially throughout all Star Trek series with so many "evil Nazis" references it's almost ridiculous.
Set Bookmark
Volker T
Sat, Dec 16, 2017, 5:58am (UTC -6)
Re: ENT S2: Stigma

Much of the original review and most comments here suffer from a combined contemporarism-human-centered view of the plot. So the Vulcan virus *HAS* to be a metaphor to Aids and it *HAS* to be dealing with sexual topic and so this *HAS* to be taken as granted and all other ideas are not pursued.
We should get lose and not necessarily connect everything with our times and our species. In fact, if you eclipse the obligatory Aids interpretation for a moment, two thirds of the review fall into ashes and so do the reproaches.
Metaphors are fine but they should not become a burden or the only way to think, especially if they are reckoned to be so obvious they become angering in morality, as it happened to the blog author.
Instead, I took the story deliberately plainly as it was told and I did not follow the bait and connect it with parallelworld human Aids. And it did feel alright to watch the episode without that ballast around the neck.
So we learn at this time Vulcan mind-merging was resented and thought of as a despicable practice not yet accepted by Vulcan mainstream culture.
Yet we do know Spock will use it years later in TOS adventures openly without any bad feelings just as he is using the Vulcan greeting gesture, as an integral part of his socialisation. So Vulcan society losened up again in issues like this, like any other culture which sees times of regression and times of liberalization, up and down the ladder of freedoms.
I don't see what this has to do with a sexual topic. Mind-merging isn't about sex, it's all about the mind and higher spheres of conscience obviously. No use of private parts, no ideas circulating around the use of those or how to reach orgasm, nothing. However, most of commentators seem to reduce it to that restrained field, again, because the preset track of an alleged Aids-homosexuality-interpretation leads you into that. Human-centered and contemporary view, that's why. Imagine your discussion would have taken closely after TOS release if internet existed then, or in some fan magazine, perhaps. You would not even know about Aids. What you would then connect the portrayed virus with? Syphillis perhaps?
The B-plot was entertaining as well. And yes, it has relations with the A-plot. Both deal with taboos. I agree of course this time the thing is clearly about sexual content. Trip follows his human way of thinking (actually his personal way of thinking, as this happens often enough with other men) which gives him morale restraints about having an affair with a married woman and the Denobulans mock him for that. This sort of displaying culturally striking differences between crew members from different species seems appropriate for the show, and it is too often just reduced to the Vulcan-Human difference as the most prominent one.
I also disagree with the discontent most people show about the trivial lines Travis had about an alien ball game he has been enjoying. So why not?? You are also angered if each and every crew member down to the lowest rank is doing techbabble or philosophizing on a constant flow and never is allowed to act emotionally and not-so-clever, making the person a shallow character or 'pretentious'/'artifical'.
I think the scene with Travis adds life as well to the portrayal of life on board the ship. A young lad (and it has nothing to do with his skin color, has it?) just had fun with playing a strange new game on the planet's surface on leave, got some injuries from it, but is still impressed with his new experiences and bursts out in telling the doctor about them. What's actually wrong with that? Of course you would not expect a Picard doing the same, but this is a young ensign having the adventure/fun of his life, so he reacts like most of young men would on his place. If you excuse me for shifting over into human-centered view for once. :)
Even Archer and Trip did it once (episode 'Desert crossing') and you would not mind them having fun while they do venture into a new ball game and let loose.
Set Bookmark
Sarjenka's Little Brother
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 9:30pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: Too Short a Season

I'm definitely out of step with most of Trekdom on this one.

I think the episode is fair heading toward good. I thought Clayton Rohner did a good job, and so did the woman playing his wife. Not riveting, but good.

The situation was serious and treated thusly. Whatever else you think about it, it spares you the awkward goofiness and vague multidimensional creatures that populated the first half of Season 1.

And I'm not why the de-aging angle is such a turn-off to so many people. I like stories involving rapid aging and de-aging. I think it's a great subject for sci-fi.

It's not "must-watch" Trek by any means. But I'm definitely more entertained by it than the average Trek fan.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 6:30pm (UTC -6)
Re: ENT S2: First Flight

Enjoyed this history lesson and really appreciate the backstory told the way it was by Archer through the flashbacks. This is a good technique -- nothing special about it -- but just reliving those early days of Star Fleet back on Earth worked well. Nice also to get the backstory for Trip and how he got his nickname -- and that back then he was always willing to speak his mind and go to bat for what he thinks is right. And of course, the Vulcans and their modus operandi is further emphasized.

The actor for A.G. did a good job -- you could really get a sense of their competitive spirit. Yes, the bar brawl was silly but it could realistically happen between 2 testosterone-fuelled competitors. Why it took so long to get broken up is another valid question. Armstrong acting as then Commodore Forrest was also good -- some nice subtle facial expressions when he realizes that the rogue flight was a success.

The one gripe is being able to get around whatever security there may have been to undertake the rogue flight. Just the 3 of them pull it off seems a bit of a stretch to me. What's easier to buy is that Archer/A.G. get off with a slap on the wrist.

In the end the tie-in with the beauty of the nebula illustrated why A.G. and Archer both wanted so badly to get out into deep space. Good part when Archer just told T'Pol to observe the nebula.

As far as lessons like taking risks -- can't argue with that although, a fair bit of calculation has to go into taking these risks. That always gets seems to get glossed over.

3 stars for "First Flight" -- this is what ENT is for: to fill in the details leading up to TOS and there's plenty more of this kind of work to do. Plenty of good details here although we know things end up working out given that Archer captains the NX-01 so there was never any real tension here, but this is a different kind of episode.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 6:09pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S5: Gravity

Some absolutely shocking writing in this.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 4:11pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness

This episode always struck me as immensely subversive and daring. Consider that the Voyager and the events depicted in the museum are very much reminicent of the holocaust with the Voyager a standin for Nazis and the Kyrians jews in modern day Germany.

But of course in this version the holocaust deniers turn out to be right! Again, pretty gutsy move for Voyager writers to even dip a toe in those waters. I'm frankly amazed an episode like this got made.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 2:43pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

The pilot finally aired on Fox in the UK.

It was OK. Good enough to persuade me to watch the next episode, not good enough for me to want to offer loads of comment. I do understand what Outsider65 means and 'm inclined to agree.

I'll see what next week brings.

Set Bookmark
William H
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 1:35pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S7: Endgame

I'm OK with the abruptness of the end. I prefer it to the drag that is the second half of DS9s end anyway, though there's probably a golden mean somewhere that's better than either.

Honestly my biggest problem is probably that Admiral Janeway is too much in the DS9 cynicism and that sours the ending for Voyager a bit. The story would have worked better for me if they hadn't been able to "have their cake and eat it" and this hadn't been the final episode.

Also I wish the Queen hadn't mentioned the whole "grandfather paradox" thing. It wasn't consistent with how time travel worked in this episode and was very unnecessary
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 1:25pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S6: The Quality of Life

@Spearced, I enjoyed reading your post very much. I like this episode a lot (possibly disproportionate) and you've hit on many of the reasons why.
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 12:57pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness

I never did write about this one, so maybe I'll take a gander at why I liked it (briefly): I think the episode makes some smart choices about getting us to think about the issue of how valuable the truth is, when it's in the distant past. Our natural instinct (well, if "we" like Voyager) is to want to rehabilitate the crew in the eyes of the Kyrians and Vaskans, because we "know the truth" about who the Voyager people are, even if we don't know the particulars of this encounter. The episode also plays the Evil Voyager material as black comedy, partly to get our defenses down. But we also get some hint about what social function this narrative about Voyager serves. So when the Doctor comes in and tries to correct the record, we're on his side, but also not entirely; he stumbles blindly with a truth-uber-alles approach, because he has (like us) an emotional connection to the crew, but hasn't quite considered what the social impact of the truth will be. It also makes clear that the Doctor's interest in correcting the narrative isn't really purely altruistic in terms of abstract beliefs about the value of the truth, but his way of dealing with the loss of the crew (and centuries having passed); it's personal rather than purely political. Quarren, meanwhile, fancies himself an arbiter of truth until he realizes that his own investment in the story he's been told is actually really important to him. Both men are scientists and are supposed to be impartial, but discover their own investment in their respective "sides" in the initial clash are partly based in other concerns, and have to, to some extent, grow out of them. And yet the episode ends with a stirring affirmation that the truth matters. Maybe the deck is a little stacked, by showing how the propaganda is currently being used somewhat oppressively against the Vaskans, and certainly the "the truth must out" ends up being consistent with what we are inclined to want anyway, so it's maybe not *as* challenging as it could be. But I think that's mostly okay. I think that the Doctor moves in the final stages of the episode from wanting to redeem his crew's reputation because he cares about them, to wanting to redeem his crew's reputation because the truth matters, and hopefully the truth will even have some social good. Meanwhile, Quarren's coming around to recognize that what he's been taught are probably lies and wanting to go forward anyway strikes me as a believable heroic narrative. The episode takes some risks by suggesting that the short-term negative consequences of revealing some "dangerous" truths -- rioting, for example -- are maybe still necessary for long-term stability, because lies which serve social functions are often used to benefit one group or another and create an imbalance that will probably collapse on itself.
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 12:27pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness


"And I don't buy that the Kyrians would make Voyager out to be this sadistic psychopathic crew of genocidal murderers. They don't have much evidence of that, in fact it seems they have little evidence of anything at all, so why would they go that route? Especially if they want to make the Vaskans look like the bad guys.

The Vaskans weren't as evil as they were made out to be according to the Kyrians recreation itself. The way the recreation portrays it, Voyager betrayed the Vaskans by exterminating hundreds of thousands of Kyrians, against the objections of the Vaskan dude. He didn't want that. He just wanted them to help a little.

DALETH: I'm asking you to intimidate the Kyrians with your technology. Help me capture their leader. This ship has superior firepower. He won't risk a conflict with you.
DALETH: Captain, don't you think that's excessive?
pJANEWAY: You picked a bad time to have second thoughts, Ambassador.
DALETH: I want them defeated but, but this is genocide!
pJANEWAY: Defeat? Genocide? Why quibble with semantics?
DALETH: This wasn't our agreement. "

This element of the episode makes sense to me (and is one of the reasons I like it). Here is what the Kyrians (and in particular, the Kyrian leaders, who are the ones who get to control the narrative) want: The war ended, and an uneasy peace is produced. The Kyrians want to be able to continue to interact with the Vaskans -- they don't want to exterminate them, either because the Kyrians are not purely evil or because they want a servile species who they can dominate and get to do their less-attractive jobs. So the narrative that they present here is one where the Vaskans are mildly treacherous and have extremely poor judgment, by bringing in the evil Voyager crew; however, they themselves are not so evil that they need to be wiped out. This narrative creates space for the Vaskans to be a species which has to continually atone for the destruction they wrought by bringing Voyager into the war, and which also demonstrates that the Vaskans have poor judgment and cannot be trusted in positions of authority -- while still allowing the Vaskans to be redeemable enough to be allowed to participate in society, as long as they don't get too uppity or try to escape from the benevolent domination of the Kyrians. This version of history sends the message from the Kyrians to the Vaskans: we will forgive you for your poor judgment and for the hell you unleashed on us by bringing the evil Voyager into the war, as long as you never forget your place again.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 11:39am (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: By Any Other Name

I don't understand this. They want to conquer our galaxy but are headed back home ? to Star Trek Original series
Set Bookmark
Dan Bolger
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 7:36am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Into the Forest I Go

I quite enjoyed the first half of season 1. Not all of it because some episodes were a bit samey and routine in an expositionary sense. But have been some definite highlights and stand out moments throughout, thus far. Excellent but not over the top production values, special effects, and the discovery ship looks fantastically unique. Favourite characters of the crew for the actors strong character acting abilities would be, for me, cadet Tilly, saru, burnham, and sarek. The theme tune was a bout underwhelming due to no real melody hook or a grandiose enough melody of distinction. Not a patch on the late, very great, theme scores of James horner and jerry goldsmith. It'll be good tomwatch the concluding half of season, Jonathan frakes directing the episode himself. Should be hopefully intriguing.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 6:00am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S6: One Little Ship

Everything in the episode was sloppy writing.
First, there's an apparent "break" from the war, but previous episodes were irrelevant to the war arc (and yes, there's always a sub-space anomaly, somewhat...)
The Jem'Hadar apparently know everything about the Defiant, but they can't notice what Sisko is really doing in engineering (at the end, the first order the rest to make the repairs, so they should know what to do and what the Feds were really doing).
In the middle of a shoot-out, Sisko goes casually from one console to the other, slowly, and the blood-thirsty, ultimate-soldier Jem'Hadar can't fire at him... yeah... Then, of course, the ship & co. return to normal without so much to explain, "magically" they could go inside the sub-space anomaly again without shrinking further (they never stated it had a shrinking limit, how could they know if it was going to result?)
The alpha vs gamma rivalry was utterly stupid. You are having shortage of reinforcements, the last thing you want is to create that rivalry among your ranks. The reason why they make the difference should've been the scarcity of the White (the only reason to make them different), or by making them stronger, as they now face the Klingons.
If by introducing a different breed of Jem'Hadar the writers intended to do something interesting, why they wouldn't forget about a "tiny ship" and introduced the "elder" Jem'Hadar as someone who offered to defect from the Dominion in exchange of free passage to the Gamma Quadrant (because his "gamma" brothers are suffering from withdrawal from the White? Remember? The Federation destroyed a White depot, big one, some episodes before.) Sisko would demand them to attack their forces to show the truthfulness of his request.
But no, the show's Achilles Heel was always bad planning, and the writers showed always how to make plotholes and inconsistencies throughout the 7 seasons. Maybe they should had paid Straczynski to know what he was planning with his space station story...
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 5:11am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: Datalore


You haven’t explained why an academy-award winning film is “garbage” let alone why “good fiction” requires villains with clearly written backstories, so you haven’t provided anything to discuss.

Though I’ll provide another example. The Mule in the Foundation novels has no clear backstory and no clear motive, yet it’s his very chaotic nature that the order-focused Seldon Plan is vulnerable to. Not all antagonists need an agenda, sometimes lacking reasoning is enough to catch a reasoning hero off guard.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 4:46am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Retrospect

I disagree with you totally.

I think we all know what rape is. I don't think I need to go into any more detail. But you and I and everyone else knows what rape is.

A medical procedure to remove nanoprobes, or even my sperm, isn't rape. It's completely wrong, and terrible, and a total invasion, but it isn't rape.

And the point of the episode was that maybe Seven had false memories implanted. That's it. People trying to make it about something else are reading too much into it, I think.

Set Bookmark
Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 12:03am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness

I certainly don't see this the way most everyone else did.

I like continuity for one thing, so the fact that there was a backup Doc is already a big distraction.

And I don't buy that the Kyrians would make Voyager out to be this sadistic psychopathic crew of genocidal murderers. They don't have much evidence of that, in fact it seems they have little evidence of anything at all, so why would they go that route? Especially if they want to make the Vaskans look like the bad guys.

The Vaskans weren't as evil as they were made out to be according to the Kyrians recreation itself. The way the recreation portrays it, Voyager betrayed the Vaskans by exterminating hundreds of thousands of Kyrians, against the objections of the Vaskan dude. He didn't want that. He just wanted them to help a little.

DALETH: I'm asking you to intimidate the Kyrians with your technology. Help me capture their leader. This ship has superior firepower. He won't risk a conflict with you.
DALETH: Captain, don't you think that's excessive?
pJANEWAY: You picked a bad time to have second thoughts, Ambassador.
DALETH: I want them defeated but, but this is genocide!
pJANEWAY: Defeat? Genocide? Why quibble with semantics?
DALETH: This wasn't our agreement.

And I really wish they would stop using 'race' instead of 'species'. These were not 2 different races. They were different species.

An OK episode. I don't understand all the praise it's getting. Unless some people are influenced by what Jammer thought of it. Not that people can't think for themselves, but sometimes what the 'almighty reviewer' (no offense) thinks, can color someone's own opinion.

2 stars from me.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Dec 14, 2017, 10:52pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: Datalore

So, villains need clear backstory and motivation? I think The Dark Knight's Joker would disagree.

Dark Knight and that whole trilogy are badly written garbage. So, yes, good fiction does require it.

Set Bookmark
Sarjenka's Little Brother
Thu, Dec 14, 2017, 9:27pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: 11001001

If "Next Gen" had a greatest hits album, it would be on there. It's no "Inner Light" or "Best of Both Worlds" or "Yesterday's Enterprise," but it's a bona fide hit.

This is the first episode where they really pulled it together. I remember being thrilled back in the day, because after this episode, I knew they had it in them to deliver really good episodes. Even little scenes were done well like Tasha and Worf going off to the sports competition.

I liked the evacuation scenes and pulling into and out of the Starbase. I think the weak part was Minuette, but it was good enough.

I wish the Bynars had showed up another time or two. They were an interesting species.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Dec 14, 2017, 8:36pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S3: Favorite Son

This episode is terrible, but it’s also a heavy inspiration for Mass Effect. It’s clearly this episode that gave them the idea for the Asari, from the female only/mainly female species, preferring but not necessarily needing alien DNA to procreate, the head spots and the name (though they’re named after the enemies of the Taresians, the Nasari). It’s very blatant and it makes me laugh. Of all the Star Trek episodes to use for your pseudo Trek game, I ask you!

There are some interesting parts like B’Elanna nearly dying and Harry’s guilt, or Tom’s mix of worry and jealousy on the planet, but they don’t go into it enough. They don’t even go into why the Nasari fire without warning on detection of an infected alien - clearly because as neighbours of the Taresians they are or at least feel especially threatened by their vampiric activities. I don’t mind reading into an episode, I wouldn’t come and read these reviews and comments if I didn’t enjoy it, but this one is just so thin. You pretty much have to read all of it in, apart from maybe the Janeway-mum stuff.
Set Bookmark
Trek fan
Thu, Dec 14, 2017, 8:16pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S3: Turnabout Intruder

@Jammer -- Why not defend your original review of this episode? You made a great argument: Shatner's acting is highly entertaining in this one, and that's enough. Despite some retroactive gender critiques, which I feel are unfair, "Turnabout Intruder" is a solid episode and I'm going to elaborate here on its strengths.

As I wrote in my review of "All Our Yesterdays," there's something very uncomfortable and weird about watching Shatner play a woman in his own body and the female guest star do likewise, but that is both the weakness and strength of TOS's final episode "Turnabout Intruder." This story by Roddenberry takes the classic Sci-Fi concept of people switching bodies -- later cheapened by Tom Hanks's "Big" and other sitcom-style imitators on TV and film -- as the vehicle for a fresh and tense examination of the great Kirkian fear of losing his ship. There are strong echoes of the Hitchcockian "wrongly accused man" trope in watching the helpless Kirk, trapped in the body of an ill woman, struggle to make people believe him as two enemies continually sedate him (her?) with claims he is delusional. Again, I think "All Our Yesterdays" is the superior episode, but I agree with Jammer's review and give "Turnabout Intruder" a solid three stars.

It may be politically incorrect, and a dramatized reflection of Shatner's own preening egoism projected into the body of Kirk, but "Shatner plays a hysterical woman out for revenge" (not that all women are hysterical, of course) is entertaintly executed in all its details from Shatner doing his nails to clucking his tongue. The early pre-credits line "your world of starship captains doesn't admit women" is clearly a reference to Kirk jilting Lester and driving her mad with the desire for revenge. Her ensuing revenge plot, carried out with the aid of her quack doctor minion, generates real tension in this episode as we watch Lester and Kirk squirm around in each other's bodies like two parasites. Say what you will, but "Intruder" is EDGY about pushing gender boundaries in a way that still feels fresh to our present debate about the impact of sex change operations on public restrooms, and this edginess generates a real discomfort that makes us wonder how the crew will resolve this situation.

Indeed, the fun of "Intruder" also includes Lester-as-Kirk testing the depth and strength of the crew's loyalty to him, especially the response of McCoy and Spock to the crisis. The threat here is really to the Big Three, as Lester threatens to destroy their three musketeers vibe by killing Kirk and replacing him. It's enjoyable to watch Spock -- him going rogue on the security guards with neck pinches is a nice touch -- and McCoy unravel the mystery and figure out how to fight Lester-as-Kirk. Incidentally, did anyone else notice that Nurse Chapel (Majel Barrett) has given up the platinum blonde hair of seasons one-two and gone brunette for this season three? There's still some blonde highlights there, but it's nice to see Barrett wearing her own hair color. As for the rest of the crew, Uhura doesn't appear in this one and only the Big Three appeared personally in "Yesterdays," so it's interesting to note that "Savage Curtain" is really the last TOS show with the full cast of regulars -- minus many of the semi-regulars like Chapel.

Finally, I don't see how the "jilted ex-lover out for revenge" plot is necessarily sexist or demeaning to women, as it's still a staple of modern-day relationship fiction. And frankly, let's admit it: Kirk can be a colossal jackass even at the same time he is impossibly heroic. Since it's clear that Captain America in Space loves only his ship, and we've seen countless women on this show end up thrown to the side of the road after entering his life briefly, I find it totally plausible that one of them might come back to haunt his paunchy butt. And what's really infuriating is that he's so freaking heroic: How the heck do you win against someone who keeps saving the universe? That seems more than enough to drive someone like Dr. Janice Lester, who really acts no less hysterical than Commander Ben Finney in Seasone One's "Court Martial," crazy. And let's remember that Lester is a DOCTOR -- a rarity for the 1960s, she's obviously a very smart and accomplished woman who (like Finney) can't stand a pompously self-assured ass like Kirk passing her by in life on his long climb to galactic fame. So yeah, I totally buy this story, and I welcome it as a sign of imperfection in the Trekverse that dissenters to the Legend of Kirk exist and are willing to go to the mattresses to wipe the smug grin off of his face. (That sounds more hostile than I mean it, as I personally love the Kirk character, but I think it makes the motives of a Finney or Lester quite relatable to us 21st century plebes.)

Other thoughts: As a series ending episode, I like how the show played its cards close to the vest here, generally running "Intruder" like an ordinary episode but including great callbacks to earlier shows as a sign of self-awareness of the ship's history. In addition to Kirk-as-Lester describing earlier Season Three stories to Spock, the Sulu/Chekov reference to the only death penalty offense being General Order 4 (visiting Talos, as we learned in "Menagerie Part I" back in Seasone One) is a nice touch. For an episode series, these overt continuity references are stronger her than in any earlier episode, giving a sense that the producers were at least aware the series cancellation might actually stick this time even as they were holding out for another writing campaign to get Season Four. As for the "Five-Year Mission," I have always considered the two seasons of "Star Trek: The Animated Series" to represent the final two years of that mission, despite Roddenberry later trying to exclude them from the franchise continuity. Since that continuity is completely muddled after 50 years of self-contradicting incarnations, and Roddenberry-produced TAS (with all its original cast, writers, and sequel episodes) explicitly cites the five-year mission in its opening narration and presents itself as "Star Trek," a continuation of the original show, I feel quite free to claim it as part of the franchise. Now I say to Jammer: Give us some TAS reviews!!! There are only a few 30-minute episodes and you've got plenty of time before "Discovery" (next month) and "Orville" (next fall) come back.

And I'll also say this for "Turnabout Intruder": There's a strong sense that the cast has matured as a unit as TOS ends here. I love how Spock and McCoy doubt almost from the start that Lester-as-Kirk is himself, how they quickly form ranks to investigate and help, and how they instantly risk their careers to fight the intruder. Scotty, Chekov, and Sulu planning mutiny is also a cool bit -- showing how the other series regulars (foreshadowing Star Trek III) have also grown close enough to the Big Three that they will likewise throw their careers under the bus for the group. It's too bad there's no Uhura in this final episode, but I think we can assume where her sentiments would have lain. That this series and TAS ends without trying to "resolve" anything doesn't bother me since the movies (especially Star Trek VI) do that quite well, and TNG has the opposite problem of a great final episode ("All Good Things") and a final movie ("Nemesis") that much like "Intruder" didn't fully admit its own end.

Anyway, at the end of my first-ever chronological marathon of remastered TOS on DVD, I feel I've rediscovered what makes this show great and grown in my appreciation of it. And watching all of those dull TNG and Voyager reruns on BBC USA, plus ho-hum Enterprise and DS9 (which is excellent but somewhat overrated, as there are long stretches of weak shows in seven seasons) on Netflix, I've felt energized by the reality that TOS remains the most original and striking of all Trek shows. There was something really special about this show back in the 1960s, before Paramount reduced everything to a cynical moneymaking formula and brought in soap opera actors to keep rehashing the same story concepts, and I say that as someone who came of age when TNG/DS9 was airing first-run. Part of it, for me, is simply that that TOS cast (even Shatner in his mellower older years) are genuinely lovely and humble people who feel vibrantly real every time they are interviewed or appear in public -- there's something about the light and unselfconscious way they wear their status as cultural icons that just makes me want to hang out with them (the few who are still alive) more than the cast of any other Star Trek series. For whatever reason, I've always felt that the other casts were just cashing their checks, including the current "Discovery" that I actually like very much so far.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Dec 14, 2017, 7:40pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: Mad Idolatry

Wow read all the comments. The conversation that this episode brought definitely adds some points to the show.

I won't be an apologetic though, if someone is really religious and sensitive about it, and this episode felt personal, then it was meant to be.

If someone is open minded, and it allowed them some leeway into how religion today really is nonsensical at times like the show portrayed, as no one has _any_ proof that we didn't have a "Kelly", then that's awesome.

The TNG quotes shown and etc were apologetic. Star Trek has been very silly sometimes in trying really hard to make it seem like somehow many of our religions are still maybe true/right when they have met things that are hugely proofs of the opposite. The prophets, the center of the universe, the aliens that made all humanoid aliens, etc etc. It's pandering to viewership to allow them to feel comfortable watching it.

It does get supernatural a bit, Star Trek, which is always fun.

The Orville once again is showing what "would really happen". A society that evolves past spaceflight and sees all sorts of stuff like that would respect religion, but it would not "follow" it as systematically as we do today. It becomes things like Chakotay's spirit journey, the Klingons rituals, etc. Not something you would be ridiculed for not believing or such a permeation through all of society.

I am religious, but I'm also a being with logic, and I can't fathom our society behaving like it does today in the future.
Next ►Page 1 of 1,855
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2017 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.