Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 236 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 10
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Nov 12, 2017, 6:25pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

It's not *that* dark and creepy! I mean, it is, but there's a real sense of camaraderie, adventure, and wonder, as well as there being a lived-in, almost cozy quality to the worldbuilding that makes up for it. For example, BSG was extremely dark right out of the gate, but at the same time it... wasn't...? Watching Adama and Tigh eat noodles in the very first episode after the pilot or Baltar cavort around or simply watching Lee and Roslin form a quiet bond over a shared tragic experience... The Expanse has that similar comforting feel of flawed yet relatable and at their core decent people doing what they can to make the world a better place one small step at a time.

This will sound like a crazy example, but are Stranger Things dark and creepy? In a way, yes, but that show is also a love letter to the 80s pop-culture, that special brand of kid movies that were popular then (remember Goonies?), King, D&D, adventure of all kinds but, most of all, it's a celebration of innocence, childhood, and friendship. That's what resonated the most with the audiences and the show a hit, not creepy mirror universes, Cthulhoid monsters, paranormal powers and the like.

Now obviously, Expanse is a much more mature, political, and -- yes -- dark series. But the point is, that's not the point (if you'll pardon the pun). It has its heart in the right place with a compelling ensemble of fundamentally decent characters and a good old-fashioned true sci-fi mystery at the core.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Nov 12, 2017, 4:48pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Two seasons with S3 on the way; 23 episodes aired thus far. Give it a try, see how you like it. I wholeheartedly recommend it.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Nov 12, 2017, 2:51pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

"Jammer, have you considered reviewing the series The Expanse? IMO, it is the best sci-fi show on TV right now by a mile. Also, if you haven't seen it, you should watch!"

Seconded. I know Jammer has his plate full with job, family, not to mention DIS and ORV, but he'd really really want to watch (and review! heh) The Expanse. It's without a doubt the best space-based SF show since BSG: good characters, great sci-fi plot, outstanding production values, wonderful worldbuilding and a lived-in immersive sense of place. An almost perfect blend of serious and well-executed factional politics, character drama and a series-long creepy real-deal sci-fi mystery (and, it must be noted, Avasarala's dresses are a reason unto itself to watch the show. That old lady must be the best-dressed SF character in the entire space-time continuum. Just sayin'.) The series is a feast for the senses... while it lasts, that is, because with how much it allegedly costs and how low the viewing numbers are, I fear it might not get a fourth season. Hope springs eternal though!

Seriously Jammer, you should give The Expanse a go, maybe in the DIS/ORV off-season. I think it'd be right up you alley. At least watch it! And frankly, the site that has all these ST, SW, BSG and even Andromeda reviews deserves to be made even better with some Expanse goodness! It's a perfect fit.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Nov 11, 2017, 5:57pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

@Skupper: "Because I dislike how certain characters are introduced or portrayed doesn't make me intolerant. In fact I believe it's quite the opposite. The fact that you don't care, is more indicitive of your own ignorance, rather than mine. I actually care how people of different backgrounds are treated in the show. All that seems to matter to you is that they exist. I believe that many of these characters were created to fill quotas, and nothing more. If you are willing to accept characters like that, so be it. I want something more of them.********** I want them to have a reason to exist on the show, and to be integral parts of it. Having a gay person or an autistic person on a show just to make it look good is ridiculous.*************

Exactly as I said in my previous post. Anyone who "deviates from the norm" has to have a special justification to exist. Straight white guys and non-threatening women, sure. Occasional person of color to make us feel good? Bring it on. Anything other than that though? You want a gay couple? An autistic person? An uncomfortable percentage of dusky cast members? Whoa there! I need some reasons and I need them now! Why are all these people cluttering my TV screen? Quotas! Quotas everywhere!

Seriously now, there is something unsettling to me when confronted with this school of thought. Why the hell can't Stamets be just an engineer who happens to be a gay who loves to brush his teeth together with his nice doctor partner? What, does his gayism (that's the word) need a special gay-oriented storyline to justify his existence? I really can't wrap my head around this thing.

This doesn't man that there isn't real "pandering to diversity" -- tokenism -- in cases where unimportant or side characters are black/gay/pink/whatever in order to simulate a sense of superficial inclusiveness or where the entire purpose of those characters are to be black/gay/pink/whatever and their whole storyline revolves around their affiliation to a particular group. But frankly, Discovery for all its problems, hardly belongs to that kind of TV show.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Nov 11, 2017, 1:23pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

@Ubik: "If you think the writers didn't deliberately decide, in advance, that Kirk was going to be a straight white male, before deciding anything else about him, then you're living in a fantasy land."

Exactly. I wonder where all these "I'm all for diversity, but..." people come from lately. I'm all for people of color, but look how they're shoving people of color down our throats. I'm all for strong independent women, but look how they're showing strong independent women down our throats. I'm all for gays, but look how they 're shoving gays down our throats. I'm all for disabled people, but look how they're shoving disabled (or autistic) people down our throats.

News flash guys: maybe you're not as tolerant as you think. It's easy to be "above these issues" when you're straight white male (which I am by the way). So many people don't even register that the vast majority of important, plot-relevant, "heroic" characters are straight white males (aka people like me, hurray!). We take it for granted without even thinking. It's so ingrained in our psyche that any deviation from the norm automatically sends warning signals. "Huh, gays holding hands. Must be diversity quota!" And maybe it sometimes is, but why is it no one ever questions when a straight couple is holding hands. How come they can do it without comment in literally every TV show every created in the history of universe, but the moment a gay couple appears, it's "diversity quota"? Ditto for the above comments on Tilly: "Gee, they only included her cause autism, duh! How tolerant of us."

In other words, straight white guys can appear wherever and whenever, no questions asked. But we apparently need special approval, adequate plot relevance and sufficient character impact to dare to even contemplate having anyone else around.

Or in the words of my grandmother: "I don't hate gays, they can do all they want behind closed doors. I just don't want to see them." Ain't that peachy?
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Nov 4, 2017, 10:44am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad

@mal: "It is implied in “Magic" that if Starfleet didn’t have a rule threatening a courts martial of a captain if such an animal was not rescued, the Discovery would not have rescued this fish. That’s incredible. Even in our own day and age, most decent people don't need a sledgehammer-like threat of a courts martial to do the right thing. It says something that this Starfleet has to have such a draconian law on the books to enforce basic decency. And it says something far worse that the law had to be explicitly invoked for the Discovery to do the right thing here. How far we’ve fallen - and I’m not even saying from the moral high of Picard - but this is a fall even from the moral low of Archer."

This right here is the perfect example of arguing in extreme bad faith (even with outright fabrications) that haters (yes, haters) of Discovery engage in every day on this site. Anyone who watched this episode with a modicum of good faith couldn't and wouldn't have interpreted it the way the above poster did.

In fact the scene goes this way: Saru informs the captain that gormaganders life readings are "highly unstable". Michael and Taylor, warned by Stamets about the time loop, immediately try to dissuade Lorca from helping the "space whale" at which point Saru interjects and advises the captain on the provisions of the Endangered Species Act and the possibility of court martial if the ship doesn't follow regulations. This entire time Lorca doesn't utter a single word and in fact has no opportunity to do so as this entire conversation between his officers takes a couple of seconds. To construe this as Lorca backing off from screwing over an endangered species only when threatened with court martial is intellectual dishonesty of the highest order. But than again, I've come to expect that from certain posters.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 11:42am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Butcher's Knife Cares Not for the Lamb's Cry

I myself am not quite sure of this show yet. Storytelling and plot have to improve, especially when compared to mindblowing sci-fi shows like The Expanse. That said, it's very difficult to have a productive argument with people whose primary motive for watching Discovery, when all is said and done, is to relive their youth. Trek as comfort food... I guess I can see it, but it's hardly a compelling starting position.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Sep 30, 2017, 3:52am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Vulcan Hello / Battle at the Binary Stars

"This isnt Star Trek at all. It is just some random-generic Sci-Fi-series which happens to have Star Trek in name."

Google defines generic as "characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things; not specific". Regardless of whether we consider DIS good, bad, or in between, I'd like to know to what Sci-Fi "genericness" in your mind this series compares to. For example, we could say that various CSI spin-offs are generic in that they bear striking similarities to numerous other TV shows. We could say the same about a lot of court dramas or police dramas or hospital dramas.

I am having a tough time thinking of TV shows that look and feel like Discovery so I am not entirely sure how one call it "generic", whataver its failings may be.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Sep 26, 2017, 5:13pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Vulcan Hello / Battle at the Binary Stars

So let me get this straight: Omicron still hasn't watched Discovery and continues with the hate? This keeps getting better and better.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Mon, Sep 25, 2017, 6:37pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Vulcan Hello / Battle at the Binary Stars

Or BSG... Clearly an awful show for rebooting/reimagining the original...

I dunno. The amount of focus hardcore fans, be it Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, BSG, GoT/ASoIaF etc put on canon to the exclusion of so much else has always been so strange to me. But to each his own I guess.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Mon, Sep 25, 2017, 5:44pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Vulcan Hello / Battle at the Binary Stars

"I wonder what the "don't prejudge the series" folks are going to say now. Are we finally allowed to state with confidence that Discovery is a sneaky reboot of the TOS era? Are we now allowed to state with confidence that the creators of this show have zero regard to continuity?

I mean, it was BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS from the moment the very first trailer came out. Actually, it was blindingly obvious from the moment the very first promotion pics began circulating a year ago. I called it all the way back in November 2016, and I was right on every count.

So, are we finally allowed to say the obvious now? I hope so."

I don't want to be rude, but... who the f*** cares about canon? ;) Okay, okay, I'm being a bit silly here, but not really. I am a hardcore Trekkie that watched TNG as a kid when it premiered so I'm far from new kid on the block. TNG and DS9 are by far my favorite TV Trek. Movies 2-4 are probably the best Trek movies taken together. But this fixation on continuity and canon is baffling to me. I mean, I like it just fine, hey cool, respecting finer points of what came before. But the heart and soul of Trek has always been in its themes and writing, not whether Galaxy class Type X phaser array emits enough power to blast a Bird of Prey in 7 or 23 blasts or if Klingon have ridges or if Warp scale makes any damn sense.

Yes, this is obviously a soft reboot, but so the eff what? It was always going to be a soft reboot because frankly there was no other way to justify the new aesthetics. And there WERE going to be new aesthetics no matter what. Even if this show was set in 25th century, anyone who thinks old races and earlier history would remain untouched is very much in error.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Sep 24, 2017, 2:34pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: General Discussion

"And my point it that "red carpet screening impression" are completely meaningless. It's 100% aritifical hype (have you ever heard of a negative red carpet reaction for anything?) which means absolutely nothing. "

Of course I have. Plenty of times early reviews or first impressions of various TV shows have been mixed or negative. That doesn't mean that we should put absolute faith in those, but it's neither stupid nor naive to be enthused by positive news. I will most definitely wait to see the show for myself before I form my own opinion, but that doesn't mean I can't welcome encouraging early words.

That is completely different from what you've been doing on this site for months: incessantly hating and dissing a TV show based on practically nothing that is indicative of the final's product quality. I mean, I get that you might not be overly happy with this continued prequelitis syndrome or that you might not like the Klingon redesign from a purely aesthetic or canonical perspective or that you are uncertain about the implied "darkness" of the setting. But those things, while certainly legitimate things to worry about from a subjective standpoint, stand in no direct correlation with Discovery's level of quality.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Sep 23, 2017, 6:33pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: General Discussion

"Funny how the same people who accused some of us of "prejudging discovery without seeing a single episode" are now arriving at far-reaching conclusions based on things like "long episode titles" and reactions from red carpet screenings (which mean absolutely nothing)."

Le sigh. Le yawning sigh of the tonsils-revealing type.

I trust it's not that hard to notice the difference between:
(a) Huh, these long unusual titles seems cool. Hey, first red carpet impressions are positive. Hope these things bode well for the show!
(b) Prequel! Hate! Dark'n'edgy! Hate! Swearing! Hate! New Klingon design! Hate!

Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 2:29pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

I can't take almost any of the conversation in this thread seriously. Really, I can't. There are literally dozens of negative comments here about Discovery, a TV show WE HAVEN'T SEEN YET! We know NOTHING about it except that it seems to be darker in tone and has redesigned Klingons. Oh, and USS Discovery has holes in her saucer. We don't know A SINGLE THING about the quality of the scripts, directing, and editing. We don't know what it's about except that Klingons will be prominent. WE. DON'T. KNOW. SHIT!

And here we are, writing and reading comment after comment about how unTrek this whole thing is. It's disgusting. More than disgusting, actually. And sooooo effing unoriginal. I have to witness the same drivel regarding every single sequel/prequel/reboot/adaptation. There are always hordes of CoreFans(TM) carrying torches and pitchforks who are out in force to safeguard the Purity of the Holy Flame and smite the Heathens who would desecrate the The One True Thing. It's so trite and old and seen a million times before. Where do these people get the strength and perseverance to so endlessly twist and hate and prejudge that which they supposedly cherish the most? I will never ever understand this mindset.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Sep 12, 2017, 5:26pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

Can't say I'm surprised. Brannon Braga's name should have set off all the alarms the moment his involvement was announced. Everything I watched with him at or close to the helm was terribad: Voyager, Enterprise, that Dinosaur thing a few years back, Salem...

He's probably a good organizer and gets things done no matter what, which is Number One quality to have in Hollywood. It's all about moving things along.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Thu, Sep 7, 2017, 9:56am (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: General Discussion

Orville seems to be getting rather tepid reviews...
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Tue, Aug 22, 2017, 7:17am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S2: The Collaborator

"The other is a question--the Cardassians have been off Bajor only about a year, right? Because wow did their city look incredibly pristine! I had assumed Bajor had been pretty well ravaged by the invaders--perhaps not."

Well, Paris looked OK right after the German occupation. I imagine Cardassians strived for nice Orwellian public face of peace and contentment while they plundered and butchered behind the scenes. It is not unexpected to see big cities relatively untouched while the countryside suffered.
Set Bookmark
Paul M.
Sat, Jul 29, 2017, 7:31am (UTC -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
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 -6)
Next ►Page 1 of 10
▲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.