Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 34,182 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 1,368
Set Bookmark
Corey
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 12:46pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

"In the Federation/Kirk's defense, he's shown trying to reason with Krall for several minutes in the film before resorting to violence. But Krall's methods are clearly the more violent of the two. And yes, sometimes you need to act violent to stop violent people. That's just self-defense."

The villain's still a giant "they hate us cos of our freedoms" strawman.

Set Bookmark
Yanks
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 12:46pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Brain S.,

"So what did Abrams do with all his hard-fought cinematic space and freedom? Ripped off Wrath of Khan. Badly. Word for word, in some cases. Even Melania Trump thought it was too blatant (:P)"

The use of Khan at all wasn't needed. Harrison could have been an augment from Enterprise and told the same story.

This and not giving us an original story are what tanks STiD for me.

"Seriously, go re-watch the Spock-Khan battle scene in STID (or not), and then watch the end Kirk-Khan battle scene from Space Seed on YouTube. That's the same guy Kirk fought and won against? I know we're trying to modernize some of the old special effects a bit, and yeah, those old TOS scenes could be quite cheesy at times.....but Space Seed looked much more like something based in reality."

I call him "INCREDI=SPOCK"!!! :-) Khan and Spock were superhero like at the end of this movie. Almost laughable at times. (although, I concede, watching Spock run after Khan was pretty awesome. How many times did Uhura have to stun Khan? :-)
Set Bookmark
Chrome
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 12:44pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

"when the Enterprise is being attacked by Krall's swarm and getting torn apart, there is a moment when you realize even Scotty's not going to be able to fix this, the ship is doomed; your next thought, of course, is 'not to worry, we have transwarp personal transporters that can beam a person from Earth to Chronos instantaneously and fit in a duffel bag- they'll all be back on Yorktown or Earth (or Ceti Alpha V!) in no time.' So, in the context of the preceding films, it is wildly disappointing to see them all in generic escape pods, and being immediately captured. "

I'm sorry, I don't usually call comments out like this, but you're missing a big part of the movie by saying this. The Enterprise was on a rescue mission to the planet Altamid which was blocked by a nebula so dense it blocks communications to Starfleet. So if they can't even get a com signal out of the nebula, how would you expect them to attempt long range transport? This doesn't even get into to the fact that the ship was already severely damaged and it's transporters were probably offline.
Set Bookmark
Rob
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 12:34pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Tapestry

At this point in Season 6, the best episode BY FAR.

I would have been tempted to give it that extra 0.5 of a star due to Marta being very attractive, but the reality is that whilst this is a solid episode, it's just not quite at the same level as The Inner Light, which was exceptional.
Set Bookmark
E2
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 11:37am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

Well said, FlyingSquirrel.


Iā€™m very happy to see a review for 'Beyond' up so quickly.

I was, however, a bit perplexed to see that Jammer rated it below 'Into Darkness.'

I have a theory that may explain it, though:
If it had been a stand-alone film, or a new reboot, it would have been fine, but as it is the third of the series, and they worked hard to tie it to the previous films (the Beastie Boys song in the trailer and the film's climax are ample evidence of that,) it runs into problems.

It's possible that Jammer placed it below the earlier, 2009 & 2011 movies because of ways it fails to live up to the precedents established by the J.J. Abrams directed films.

For example, in 'Beyond' when the Enterprise is being attacked by Krall's swarm and getting torn apart, there is a moment when you realize even Scotty's not going to be able to fix this, the ship is doomed; your next thought, of course, is 'not to worry, we have transwarp personal transporters that can beam a person from Earth to Chronos instantaneously and fit in a duffel bag- they'll all be back on Yorktown or Earth (or Ceti Alpha V!) in no time.' So, in the context of the preceding films, it is wildly disappointing to see them all in generic escape pods, and being immediately captured.

This leads to the next conundrum- why didn't they resurrect any or all of the crew Krall drained? Kirk had been killed in the 2011 outing by a massive dose of radiation; physically what that means is that a huge number of fast moving large particles (such as neutrons) pass through you and break molecular bonds- a great many of your cells come apart; your organs fail (this is what kills you) and slough off, it's a horrible, but well understood way to die. But we already know that the blood of genetically engineered 'supermen' from the '90s, or Khan's at least, can save you. It can undo all of the tissue damage, the cell damage, and the DNA damage caused. And they've had this to study and reproduce for at least the last 3 years- so it's safe to assume it would be carried in reasonable quantities on every starship, every outpost, and in every Starfleet first aid kit.

Failing to utilize these rather obvious options would mean, at the very least, that Scotty, McCoy and Spock all somehow forgot the technologies they themselves invented/discovered. This would make them less believable as explorers than the crew of the Sir Ridley Scott's Prometheus!

So the crux of this argument would be: People who were able to put the other reboot films out of their minds while watching 'Beyond' tended to like it better; People who honestly liked or had invested themselves in them would have a harder time enjoying the latest movie.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 11:31am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: True Q

@ Chrome,

Given what was done to the Q and the Borg in Voyager, I think "cannon" was the correct word choice :)
Set Bookmark
Chrome
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 10:59am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: First Contact

@George Monet

You didn't like "The Undiscovered Country"? I think you better watch it again. It's easily one of the best Trek films out there.
Set Bookmark
Chrome
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 10:50am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: True Q

@Peter G.

The word is canon. Cannons are things you 'asplode buildings with. šŸ˜‰
Set Bookmark
FlyingSquirrel
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 10:32am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

@Jammer:

I didn't exactly see the engineering scene as "heresy." I just found it a little too self-conscious and not entirely justified in story or character terms. It bore the fingerprints of some writers and producers sitting around thinking, "Hey, what if *Kirk* is the one who sacrifices himself and then *Spock* is the one that yells 'KHAAAAAAAAN!' like Shatner did in the original?" Well, OK, it's an interesting idea, but there needs to be a reason for it.

Kirk sacrificing himself is fine as far as I'm concerned. Spock losing it and screaming like that? Eh, not so sure about that. We know that Vulcans do in fact have strong emotions and are simply better at controlling them and not relying on them to make decisions. Is Kirk's apparent death enough to push Spock over the edge? Maybe, but having him then start beating the crap out of Khan, possibly to the point of killing him if Uhura hadn't intervened, seemed excessive and indicative of the movie not really "getting" what Trek and its characters are supposed to be about. Maybe it could have worked if the movie had checked in on Spock later and he was disturbed by his own loss of control, but IIRC it's left entirely unaddressed after that.

Personally, these "reboot" movies have reinforced for me something along the lines of what you said during some of the weaker moments of (I think) Voyager and/or Enterprise - there's a ton of Star Trek out there and it doesn't need to keep going and going and going. If the only ideas for big-screen Trek movies (or, at least, the only ideas that the studios are willing to fund) involve turning it into a wham-whizz-bang sci-fi action franchise, then what's the point? Why not just let Star Trek rest in peace and put the money that it costs to make these movies towards the Star Wars franchise or some other new property?
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 9:34am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: True Q

Interesting points, DutchGamer,

If you're right that the Q are evolved from corporeal species it would explain why they're locked into protecting the status quo of the universe. It would also explain why they'd be so risk averse that they would be all but paralyzed to do anything significant with their powers, which might explain events such as we see in "Death Wish."

However an alternate explanation of what their deal might be is that although they're the most powerful entities we've seen so far, there is no reason to believe they are *the most* powerful entities out there. They may even be taking their orders from higher up for all we know. It's not cannon yet at this point, but Q in "Death Wish" does imply that the Q are not omnipotent, even though they are masters of space and time. "The Q and the Grey" even posits that they employ technology to do what they do, much like Trelane did in TOS (suggesting to us that Trelane was a juvenile Q, maybe even Delancie-Q's son). Although these weren't cannot during TNG, they were always things I wondered about all the same.
Set Bookmark
FlyingSquirrel
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 9:20am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

Anyway, if I have one lingering problem with this movie, it's that at times it still feels more like a generic sci-fi action movie than a Star Trek movie per se. An example is the scene where they tip the Franklin off the cliff in order to gain enough velocity to take off. Someone (Chekov, maybe?) asks Sulu if the distance is long enough for this to work, and his response is something like "We're about to find out."

Now, OK, the Franklin is old and damaged, but IIRC, it was functioning well enough that some sort of "distance until impact" indicator was visible. In which case, unless gravity has somehow started working differently, they should pretty much know whether the distance to the bottom allowed for enough acceleration - the only "wild cards" would be any air resistance or slowdowns due to impacts against the cliffsides while they're falling. Admittedly, *I* don't know exactly how to calculate the exact effects of these wild cards on the Franklin's acceleration, but Sulu ought to know how to do that. (Heck, Data probably would have done it in his head in about two seconds.) And I don't think that the intention here was to portray Sulu or anybody else as dumb - rather, I imagine they just took the standard formula of "our heroes attempt some death-defying stunt to save the day" from plenty of other action movies and plugged it in.

But a Starfleet crew doesn't really fit the bill of the action heroes who improvise and scrap their way out of tough situations. They're supposed to be trained professionals with a strong science background who wouldn't just be guessing at whether something like that is going to work. If they had even just taken a second to establish that there was some reason they couldn't be sure (uncertainty about the rock formations and possible instructions, maybe), it probably wouldn't bother me. (And in fact, it didn't bother me until I thought about it later.) But they shouldn't give Sulu a generic line like "We're about to find out." Even something as simple as "We should have enough room to accelerate, but if we hit a ridge on the way down, all bets are off" would have been preferable.
Set Bookmark
FlyingSquirrel
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 8:57am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

Finally got around to seeing this last night. It's probably my favorite of the three Abramsverse movies, though still not at the top of my list for Trek in general. As somebody who really grew up on TNG and saw (I think) every episode of DS9 and most of Voyager, I suppose I have a little trouble accepting this much "sound and fury" from Star Trek. Not even just the higher action quota, but the visual design and how "busy" the screen is in some of the outer space shots. I guess this is inevitable with long-running sci-fi franchises that don't always move "forward" in the timeline, but I had a similar reaction to the Star Wars prequels - the design and detail is much more impressive in Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith than in A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, or Return of the Jedi, even though the prequels were supposed to be taking place at an earlier time. Trek is now in a similar situation - the tech in these movies looks more impressive than what Starfleet is supposedly using 70 or 80 years later. (Enterprise, for all its faults, avoided this problem - the NX-01 didn't look like it could or should outclass the NCC-1701s.)
Set Bookmark
Del_Duio
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 4:50am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: First Contact

He screams "Khaaaaaan!" Into his communicator, they were having a whole conversation up to that point (?)
Set Bookmark
mephyve
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 4:43am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Scorpion, Part I

15 Borg ships. Let's follow them.. I want to see what they're up to.
Janeway is an idiot who puts her selfish desires ahead of the safety of her crew.
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 3:38am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: First Contact

Star Trek: First Contact, is by far the best Star Trek film ever made. There's a lot of moving parts with 3 different plots occurring simultaneously but they reinforce each other instead of working against each other or apart from each other and add to the movie as a whole. Needless to say I've watched it many times, the first time my dad took me to the theatre to watch it, so that's probably what sets it apart for me.

Everyone always gushes over Wrath of Khan, but honestly I severely dislike that movie for its over the top silliness and ham fisted acting (Kirk screams Khan!!!!!! only after Khan had already transported him to the planet and was no longer in contact with Kirk, resulting in Kirk making a scream that would only be heard by the people marooned with him, except Kirk knew that he wasn't actually marooned and would saved in a few hours, so that means the scream was for the benefit of the viewers and broke the 4th wall). Voyage Home is the best movie in that series in my opinion. The 1st movie was pretty awful, and the 5th and 6th were flat out unwatchable from what I remember of them. Of course they were so bad I've only seen then once each so I don't really remember them at all.
Set Bookmark
JD
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 3:38am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S7: Body and Soul

Why didn't Jeri Ryan become an impressionist? That was definitely a franchise highlight. I will always remember two small things about this episode.

1. Tuvok seemed to show amusement and a smirk/laugh/grunt when talking to Paris. (Does he like Paris more than he lets on when he's not compromised?) And he does it when you'd think he would be at his least tolerant of him.

2. "The Doctor" purposefully giving that captain the cheesecake slice he'd already eaten some off of so that he would have a new whole slice to himself. That was a hilarious small touch. He was completely overcome by gluttony, but he still had the presence of mind to do that.


@Kieran. Okay, I managed to get through the episode without wondering but you forced me to now. Thanks!

@TRIP Now you're doing it! Oh...God.

Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 3:10am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Macrocosm

I'm with James, 1.5 stars was generous for an episode where nothing worked and everything was completely out of place and over the top ridiculous. Even the camera work suffered this episode, absolutely everything was wrong.
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 3:01am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: The Q and the Grey

I know it's a flawed episode, but I love it anyways.
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 2:50am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Warlord

Any episode that features Kes finally breaking up with her perverted uncle Neelix gets full marks from me. That horrible relationship has always been a blemish on Voyager.
Set Bookmark
mephyve
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 2:33am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Worst Case Scenario

Nice episode (***)
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 2:12am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Future's End, Part I

Sorry!

But one last bit, really, the last.

If Braxton comes back because he found Voyager's hull in the debris, and it was his traveling back that caused the explosion in the 29th century resulting in the destruction of Voyager and his shuttle and our solar system, then there is no way that Janeway saved the day. The only way this all works is if events play out the way they are supposed to, with Voyager blowing up. So the only way we can believe this time travel episode is if Voyager blows up. The entire timeline is Braxton trying to blowup Voyager, Voyager damaging his ship causing both Braxton and Voyager to go hurtling back in time. Janeway tries to stop Starling from heading to the 29th century which causes Braxton's time travel to fail and leads to both ships blowing up. These are events which have to happen. Everything we see is part of the timeline that Braxton was trying to prevent. But he couldn't, that's why the paradox happened, because events are inevitable. So there is no way that Janeway saves the day because we know that she fails which is why Braxton finds a piece of Voyager's hull.
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 2:01am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Future's End, Part I

Final thought.

Why does no one from the 29th century come back to the 20th century to stop Sterling from gaining access to the timeship and altering time? Isn't preventing changes to the timeline the whole point of the 29th century Starfleet? Yet not one single person comes back in time to the 29th century where the changes are actually going to occur when Sterling studies the 29th century timeship which he shouldn't be able to access because Braxton should have put the ship on self destruct and the ship should have had locks on its doors and the computer should have required one of those unbreakable passwords they used in Star Trek First Contact.

So Braxton comes to the 24th century, where no changes to the timeline are occurring, to blowup Voyager because he believes that Voyager changed the timeline of the 29th century, but no one in the 29th century comes to the 20th century where an actual change to the timeline was occurring?

Wouldn't the Earth blowing up just be part of Earth's history and be perfectly normal to Braxton? If that is how history is supposed to play out, then Braxton is bound as a member of Starfleet to let history play out the way it is supposed to play out, so he was duty bound to not go back in time.

This entire episode could have been fixed if Braxton's ship had broken in the 29th century, throwing him into the 24th century. Believing that he fixed his ship enough to return home, he attempts to return to 29th century Earth but in fact he didn't fix the problem and he pulls himself and Voyager back to 20th century Earth. Nothing else would have to be changed.
Set Bookmark
DutchGamer
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 1:59am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: True Q

Oh and about the people saying the Q somehow did not destroy the universe :

1 how would you know they didn't? -> they could destroy it and recreate it, in the same second, no sweat and if anything was changed you would never know.
The universe we percieve as ancient, may be just created by the Q, and cease to ecist in a fraction of a second (in fact we could be 20 gazillion universe reboots further before I finished this sentence)

also why would Q even NEED a universe, as such, there is no sence to protect it, unless... my suspection is true : that the Q are locked in a corsality loop :
-humans eventually evolve to become Q (the traveler story, showing an early example of it) (though not only humans are Q their may be multiple races eventually becoming Q at the universes end.
-as such the Q influence their own origin, but also must protect the races they originate from, else their whole spiecies never excisted.
in such a case, it would make it logic to not like to much tampering with the universe.. and while saving a planet full of people may seem harmless if a billion year in the future a decendant of those saved people does something you do not want (aka saving a young hitler, or as simple as trampling a plant or sneezing on something) it could lead to the Q never come to existance.. and that thats why they not want people doing it who cannot see the consequences of it during the entire duration of the universe.
-> still that could not prevent a single Q from chancing stuff none the less.
Set Bookmark
DutchGamer
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 1:52am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: True Q

A good episode, however the ending leaves unsatisfied.

here is my line of thinking : if I would discover I would have limitless power, but than would have been told I have not the freedom to use that power as I see fit, not even a small portion of it, would I not use that limitless power to destroy the very ones that prohibit me from expressing it the way i want?

infinite times infinity does not equal more infinity, than 1x infinity..
as such a single Q should be as powerfull as the entire continuem and able to block any decissions of said continuem you do not want to have imposed on yourself (like having your powers removed and such) One thought and you wipe the Q (exept yourself) out of excistance (though they can block that with a counterthrought, you get my point, they are unable to do anything to you if your not willing them to do so.

What good are powers if you are forbidden from doing good with them, or live as a hybrid, or anyway you please.. and if they try to block that, hell has no fury!

so her "ok guess I go, bye" attitude does not befit me at all.. would be better to have seen her again in voyager, at the Q rebels side.. "lock and load.."

But thats my personality projected on this "gurl" oh no I would not want to be human, but I not would want to give up my normal life too, I would pick path 3 wage war against the continuem to defend my own freedom, or die trying (and take as many of them with me if I have too)

But I guess thats why Q are so affraid of a Q-Human Hybrid... as it would I suggest do exactly what i just said -for freedom- burning halve the galaxy if needed - heck can recreate it afterwards if neccecary.
Set Bookmark
George Monet
Wed, Aug 24, 2016, 1:37am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Future's End, Part I

Finally, I'm glad that Starfleet of the 29th century is just as lax about its security protocols as the Starfleet of the 25th century.

A timeship is going to blow itself up if it is forced to go back in time and becomes inoperable specifically to avoid making changes to the timeline. The ship would also have a lock that would prevent someone from opening the ship and gaining access to it in order to prevent unauthorized access to avoid changes to the timeline.

But this timeship has absolutely no security in place to prevent changes to the timeline. That is actually in character for the inept Voyager Starfleet where everyone and their mother can easily bypass Voyager's nonexistent security.
Next ►Page 1 of 1,368
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2016 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.