Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 219 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 9
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Jul 29, 2017, 7:31am (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: A Private Little War

Rahul, my main problem with this episode stems from the fact that I can't ignore real world politics analyzing it, especially considering its on-the-nose allegory of the Cold War. Frankly, the very same vomit-inducing sentiment is alive and well in this day.

I DESPISE beyond words the fake self-proclaimed liberal and neoliberal human rights and democracy chest-thumping while "crying" about necessary evils of supporting vilest scum and reducing whole regions to ash.

We love life and human dignity so much that we simply must, in order to defend it!, napalm and agentorange everything, arm Pinochet's death squads, support medieval headchoppers in Saudi Arabia and so on and so forth.

This ep wants to cry over evils of war and basically supports it at the same time without stopping for a second to consider alternatives. It's an awful thinly veiled imperialist BS we can see in contemporary geopolitics all the time.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Thu, Jun 1, 2017, 3:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

Damyen, how about you take a chill pill? Every single post of yours, and I do mean every single one, is full to bursting with barely contained rage, defensiveness, and constant belittling misrepresentation of other posters' positions. It's frankly insulting not only to the people you converse with but also to intelligence of bystanders like me. Please come off your self-imposed pedestal and try to engage others with some goddamn good faith.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, May 28, 2017, 11:21am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: It's Only a Paper Moon

Truth be told, Trek has been way too conservative in its casting for a long long time. The diversity of The Expanse's cast, for example, puts Trek to shame. And it's not only the cast, but characters too. The overwhelming "anglo-saxon-ness + other assorted Germanic peoples-ness" of Trek is grating to say the least.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, May 28, 2017, 6:05am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: It's Only a Paper Moon

Luke,

I shared a similar sentiment on other threads here. Funny how no one ever finds it curious when white people only date other white people. For example, every single one of Picard's love interests were white (that I am aware of). Huge majority of white characters on various Star Trek shows dated or were romantically interested in other white characters and everyone is apparently OK with it. But the moment a black character shows what appears to be exclusive interest in other black people, we get remarks about that.

I agree that it's somewhat strange that 24th century humans still seems to think in racial terms, but that goes for ALL humans, black or white.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 4:29am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

Hey, glad you got the early copies of Discovery! Having watched the first season, could you tell me why you think it's not Star Trek, but 'something else entirely'? I am sorry you didn't like new series, but I hope I'll still enjoy it!

Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Wed, Feb 15, 2017, 9:15am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S7: Nightingale

"It honestly made no sense to have a bridge officer, who went on dozens and dozens of life threatening away missions, did have his fair share of creative ideas to solve their problems, and was in senior meetings week after week, to never be promoted."

Speaking of which, it actually made no sense to make a fresh Academy graduate on his first posting a senior officer on Voyager. Maybe on some small escort ship or unimportant shore facility... On a state-of-the-art vessel with a crew of 150, he'd probably be training under a division head for a year or two before getting a promotion and assuming more responsibilities.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Oct 30, 2016, 5:38am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

karatasiospa,

I am afraid Fuller pretty much *is* gone. The exec producer credits are a standard way of acknowledging significant contributions to the making of the show. There are multiple examples of TV shows with a bunch of guys who have this title that are barely if at all involved with the show after a certain point. I don't doubt that Fuller will be available to chime in with advice from time to time, but as I understand it he's no longer seriously involved with Discovery. Disconcerting news.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 4:28am (UTC -5)
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 6:36am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Technically, I guess. But wasn't Nero basically "dormant" and did nothing of consequence (in the theatrical cut at least) until the events of ST09? For all intents and purposes, ST:D doesn't need to bother with acknowledging this or that timeline.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Oct 15, 2016, 7:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Liya,
"If that were really the case, then why even bother setting Discovery in the prime universe rather than the reboot universe? The audience is going to be fragmented by default."

Because CBS doesn't have rights to the rebooted universe. They can't set their show there as that's Paramount's playground. If they are worried about confusing audiences with alternate universes (which honestly they shouldn't be, because... who cares except a few hardcore fans), one option is to pick a time before the split occurred -- and that's shortly before Kirk's time.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Oct 15, 2016, 5:11am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

CBS owns the series, Paramount the movie franchise. I guess one of the reasons that the Discovery is set before Kirk might be that CBS doesn't want to risk fragmenting the audience between these two alternate universes. By placing the show before the movie reboot, they avoid all the talk about competing canons.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Fri, Oct 14, 2016, 11:57am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Robert,

You are right that ENT writers shot themselves in the foot by not sticking to their premise, introducing time travel garbage and being generally lousy in a variety of ways. Hopefully Discovery doesn't have the same problem. For one, I don't believe the prequel concept was forced on them. If I am not mistaken, it is something Fuller and his crew are fully on board with. Secondly, good stories can be told within the constraints of an established canon.

Take FX's The Americans, for instance. A fantastic show I wholeheartedly recommend. It follows the secret lives of embedded KGB agents in 80's America. We obviously know that USSR lost the Cold War; we know that a nuke won't unexpectedly destroy downtown New York in Season XYZ finale. Although big earth-shaking revelations and huge political plot twists are never gonna happen, there is more than enough narrative space left in exploring crazy faux-lives of the KGB agents as well as taking a look at the 80's America from a somewhat different perspective.

I see no reason why STD (what an acronym!) shouldn't be able to do the same.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Fri, Oct 14, 2016, 7:42am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Eh, I think some of you guys give the prequel concept way too much weight. Discovery will live or die on the strength of its writing and overall quality, just like Enterprise lived and ultimately died because of its quality (or lack thereof).

Would I love to see the new show set in the future? Sure. Am I a bit confused by all this prequelitis Trek seems to be suffering from for the last 15 years? Yeah. But at the end of the day, writing, characters, and artistic vision are all that really matters. I have no reason to doubt Fuller and Meyer on that front. I expect to see a pretty big departure from NextGen-era Trek (TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT). Fans too stuck in their mindsets on what "Trek is supposed to be" should be wary not to have their hopes dashed. That's my interpretation anyway. Can't wait to watch!
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Oct 8, 2016, 3:28am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S3: The High Ground

Eh, let's not go so far and proclaim Israel to be a democracy. They are an apartheid state, pure and simple. Doesn't mean they deserve to be wiped off the face of the Earth, but c'mon. They are as far from liberal and human rights-loving as you can get.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Thu, Sep 15, 2016, 3:39pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

@Yanks: "I still do not understand this.... 185 mill to make the movie, and how much on advertising? Seems a large spike to 350 million."

You need to factor in the cut that goes to theaters and distributors. Only a portion of the total box office income goes to the production company that financed the movie. So yeah, it's pretty much expected that a movie has to earn double or more its budget to turn profitable. Of course, in the long run there are also DVD/Blu-ray sales, TV rights, etc.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Aug 28, 2016, 5:52pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S2: The Maquis, Part II

Hey RT,

I guess if Nechayev was only in charge of the Cardassian situation, it's not too bad. For some reason, I was under the impression that she had a bigger presence than that.

That said, I generally dislike how Trek handles admirals. Those guys never DO anything! They show up, give some vague and absolutely useless orders and then go away. I worked at a firm where the management operated that way and let me tell you it was one painful experience.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Aug 23, 2016, 5:47pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S7: Thine Own Self

Yeah, I have no problem with Troi becoming commander. It's the bridge officer part that drives me up the wall every time I think about it (and with Beverly too). Doctors and psychologists don't just get to pass a single test and become freaking bridge officers, just like you can't pass a test and jump careers in the other direction. It takes 4 years at the Academy and a dozen more of field experience to get there. The notion that a person can achieve the same thing via a silly holodeck test is preposterous.

And yeah, I'm taking this way too seriously for my health! :)
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Aug 23, 2016, 8:54am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S2: The Maquis, Part II

RandomThoughts,

I never liked Nechayev. She was way too rigid and one-dimensional as a character and had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. She was a stock boneheaded admiral ready to be inserted whenever plot required a higher-up to vex our gallant heroes. Also, it doesn't make much sense that in the vastness of the galaxy, dealing with a bunch of different species, she was always the one in charge. What, was she following Picard all the time?

In this episode she was especially insufferable, bordering on the caricature of a clueless bureaucrat.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Fri, Aug 19, 2016, 8:52am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Yanks,

And then they made a massive warp breakthrough years before Starfleet, commissioned their own superfast revolutionary ship... and were forgotten by history in a couple of years. Nah! :)
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Wed, Aug 17, 2016, 3:56pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Robert,

Since this thread is obviously no place for esoteric arcana that is 22nd century Trek canon, I apologize.

ST: Enterprise established that NX-01 was the first Starfleet deep space high warp-capable vessel. Prior to her, ships in operational service were pretty much limited to Warp 2 which took months and years to get anywhere. There were experimental testbeds that were faster than that, but it's heavily implied that Archer's Enterprise represents a "revolution" in human space age with the advent of Warp 5 engine which is many times faster than previously possible. True, it doesn't directly contradict the existence of the Franklin, but if by the time NX-01 was launched, there had already been a very fast (for the standards of the time) deep space capable Warp 4 ship in service, the whole ST:E backstory doesn't make much sense.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Wed, Aug 17, 2016, 10:30am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Ah yes, Robert, sorry for not making myself clear. In Star Trek Beyond appears USS Franklin, first Earth Warp 4 capable vessel, which apparently predates NX-01. That is, of course, not really possible under the old canon.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Wed, Aug 17, 2016, 10:26am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Yanks,

Sure, but the point is the NX-01 was the first operational Earth deep space vessel capable of relatively high warp. No place for a Warp 4 USS Franklin in the canon, I'm afraid. As I said, I don't care about such things, just a fun thing to note.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Wed, Aug 17, 2016, 7:36am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Robert, that may well be, but the whole story behind NX-01 aka Archer's Enterprise doesn't make much sense if Earth already had Warp 4 capable ships. Enterprise was supposedly the first ship to break the Warp 2 barrier which made it possible to venture out into deep space for the first time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not the kind of fan that cares about inconsistencies like these, but they are there. I don't really view Abramsverse as a parallel timeline, but as a total reboot anyway.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Aug 16, 2016, 4:39pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Yeah, I checked out TNG Blu-ray reviews a long time ago and they really are beautiful. Staggering visual quality. Hard to believe it's been almost 30 years since TNG premiered...

Pity about the poor sales though. It's the reason DS9 will probably never get the remastered treatment.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Aug 16, 2016, 2:36pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Speaking of DVDs and such, Amazon.co.uk (don't know about US) has a great deal on the blu-rays of all 7 TNG seasons. I always wanted those, but they used to be insanely expensive for my tastes. Now I'll just have to buy those suckers and watch TNG in glorious remastered quality.

Next ►Page 1 of 9
▲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.