Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 138 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 6
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 3:36pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Field of Fire

"Mr. Plow
Nutshell: The Silence of the Trills"


It's okay. Derivative, but okay.

Could do without the spiritual ceremony stuff to bring out the repressed memories. Joran doesn't seem dark enough here either.

Would have been far better to have a twist where Joran is actually the killer through Ezri.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 25, 2017, 2:29pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: The Emperor's New Cloak

I think people here have a sense of humour bypass.

It's Ferengi silliness, it's Mirror Universe silliness, cast get to have fun in different characters.

It's not a work of art, it's not high drama. It's just a bit of fun.

2 stars, pushing 3. For me, because it's watchable and fun.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 6:35pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: It's Only a Paper Moon

Excellent episode. Better than "The Siege of...". That was a strong episode though let down slightly by the cliches and cheap set. It's "war is hell" which is fine but this is a more powerful episode on mental health and coping with adversity. Brilliantly done, even though I'd normally tire of Vic Fontaine, he's perfect for this story. Aron Eisenberg puts in his best performance here.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 13, 2017, 4:38pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Take Me Out to the Holosuite


I have zero interest in baseball and even if I did, if I wanted to watch a baseball game I'd, well I wouldn't want to.

Add in a B story or some Trek, and it may be good. This is just actors we know from Star Trek playing a game of baseball. It's also so forced. It's like watching a corporate team building exercise. Yuck!

1 star though, or maybe 0.5. Just for the few chuckles.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 6, 2017, 5:21pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: Timeless

Harry Kim screws up, time paradox garbage, and another story disjointed from the rest of the show.

But it's a bit harsh. It's enjoyable. Could have been a two parter. However it's still massively flawed and still I come to rewatching and think meh because it's just an alternate timeline that never happens, reset at the end.

3 star.
Set Bookmark
Tue, May 30, 2017, 6:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: The Sound of Her Voice

@Josh - "What does this episode have to do with "Eye of the Needle", "

Simple. They are both about conversing with someone unknowingly in a different time and ultimately their attempts are hopeless, with the time difference in a big reveal at the end.

On seeing this I immediately thought this has been done before and a bit obvious. But they are done differently. This one I feel is better as there's more of an emotional element and sadness.

As for some saying why the time element at all, well if they'd just got there late it would mean they failed in their mission and let her down (although that would have made for a nicer darker ending). This ending means it wasn't really their fault. At least if we ignore that they could have easily worked out she's out of time up front, but then the same could be said of "Eye of the Needle".

Anyway, nothing amazing. A gentle episode, with bit of Trek scifi, bit of humour in the B story, bit of emotion in both.
Set Bookmark
Mon, May 29, 2017, 5:33pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Time's Orphan


Made me chuckle as a Brit :D

Many flaws, especially on the paradox front. Frustrating reset button ending. However on rewatching I see it more as an episode about parenthood and the challenges involved. Not perfectly done, but a mix of serious and light hearted. Doesn't progress anything though.

(for non-Brits, bollocks is both a swear word and used to describe something as rubbish).
Set Bookmark
Sun, May 28, 2017, 2:08pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: In the Flesh

I can understand a possible reasoning for this episode being that by introducing an alien species that is worse than the Borg, they've diminished the Borg and just created "yet another really bad guy". I suppose also continuing with a CG race would have been costly.

However on first watch it really was very frustrating as species 8472 was finally a truly alien non-humanoid species and something to fear, then suddenly they've been humanised, turns out they're not so bad after all and they all end up having a hug. Hated it because of that. Re-watched and still find it frustrating. It wouldn't be so bad if they were developed further as a species infiltrating the Federation and other worlds. Though is derivative.

In actual story and delivery, it worked well until the happy ending. That and the frustration of ruining a good alien wrecks the episode. Could have been a 4 star, more like 1.
Set Bookmark
Wed, May 10, 2017, 3:52pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S4: Living Witness

It's nicely done, but it's another I struggle with wanting to watch as it's just way detached from the 'now' events in Voyager. I resist as I'm really not interested in something hundreds of years in the future that has zero impact on the now. Interesting and enjoyable once I watch it, but feel so detached at the end. Best Voyager ever? Hardly. 3 stars maybe.

Still I'm ultimately happy to watch it once I'm past my initial reservation. Unlike "11:59".
Set Bookmark
Wed, May 3, 2017, 3:41pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: First Contact

"So they were vastly different from the Jean Luc Jones of Captain's Holiday, Gambit or The Chase? Or John McClane himself from Starship Mine?"

Yes, they were.

"Look, you may not like that particularly aspect of his personality, but they flirted with the Captain being an action hero off and on for the final FIVE YEARS of TNG. It wasn't a new thing."

No they didn't. They never reduced Picard to a shallow one dimensional character like that. There was no, "Data, this is something I have to do" moment on the TV series, where Picard picks up a phaser and single-handily dispatches a few dozen bad guys.

"That said, TNG's bombs were, in my opinion, not nearly as painful as the TOS movies that sucked."

Only if you're viewing them in a vacuum. Yes, Nemesis > STV, but Nemesis killed TNG. We never got an "Undiscovered Country" for TNG. If STV had been the final TOS installment I think TOS fans would be justifiably bitter. First Contact is basically the best TNG movie, "best" in this case being a dumbed down action movie, with the only real "Trek" moments occurring toward the end of the Earth plot.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 4:31pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S5: Let He Who Is Without Sin...

Rewatch and puzzled by the zero stars as don't remember much about the episode and don't remember it being anything I'd hate. Was almost going to skip it given the opinions here but on watching it, no way it's zero stars. 1.5 or 2.

Reason being. It's daft, full of holes maybe, but it's watchable and a bit of fun in places. Doesn't quite work but it's harmless.

There are a number of episodes that are more highly regarded but I struggle to watch, especially when they don't serve any function like flash back episodes (bloody vision quests) or fillers like 11:59 that have nothing to do with Star Trek (okay, both Voyager). 11:59 in fact I'd give a zero for a Star Trek episode.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jan 7, 2017, 5:29am (UTC -5)
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Rogue One isn't very good. I didn't care about any of the characters and was bored for 50% of the running time. Damn shame.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Oct 28, 2016, 3:42pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: 11:59

0 for me. I always skip it now. It's daytime telly stuff and while it may be a reasonable story and production it has absolutely *zero* to do with Star Trek. This is like someone stuck the wrong tape in when broadcasting. Even accepting that it's filler material I don't find the story that interesting anyway.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Oct 28, 2016, 3:32pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Threshold

Was going to post exactly what Mikey posted. This is a stinker of an episode for being just plain stupid, but I find it more watchable than stuff like Tattoo. I'm doing a rerun now and I skipped Tattoo. Bloody vision quests do my head in (and I'm sure are an insult to Native Americans) and pan pipes every time, worse with flashbacks of no relevance and then the spirits are actually aliens, yeah right. I can't bring myself to watch that. Threshold I struggle with but I can watch it for a laugh. I get no laughs from Tattoo, just irritation.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 27, 2016, 2:17am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S3: Rajiin

Wait, why is Archer concerned about sex slavery now? Just recently he condemned an entire gender of an alien race to sex slavery, even refusing asylum to a refugee who was so distraught by their captivity that they killed themselves.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 1:29am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: Suddenly Human

This was a terrible episode. I found this website searching for controversy surrounding this episode and found little other than user comments here.

There is no way that kid should have been given back.

Not sure how this played in whatever year it was originally released but after 3 seasons this is the first episode I really disliked.
Set Bookmark
Red Tim
Wed, Sep 7, 2016, 3:10pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S4: Retrospect

Reading these comments, I'm glad I'm not the only one left disturbed and angry by this episode. I think the worst part is how everyone acts as though the whole thing was Seven's fault, when she's either
a) A woman who's been assaulted and violated, and then blamed for her attacker's death because she had the temerity to accuse him; or
b) A woman who's been convinced by a trusted medical professional that she experienced a horribly traumatic event, and reacted accordingly.
Which she is depdends on whether Kovin is guilty or innocent (and the evidence is by no means conclusive either way), but in neither case is she at fault - she wasn't making up the allegations for fun, she really believed that Kovin had "violated" her. At least the Doctor partly acknowledges that if Kovin really was innocent, then he (the Doc) is the one mainly to blame for Kovin's death (although, to be honest, the person mainly to blame is the one who opened fire on a much bigger starship and overloaded his own weapons in the process).

The other thing that really bugs me is the investigation. In previous Trek incarnations, it's been established that by scanning someone's "memory engrams" it's sometimes possible to detect whether memories have been implanted or suppressed using some kind of psychic powers or alien tech. No-one ever even mentions engrams as far as I can recall. No-one tries to find the woman that Seven remembers assisting Kovin, no-one tries to find the alleged new-born Borg drone (which would be a serious security threat, right?), no-one even mentions the possibility of memory-altering technologies being used, even though if what Seven 'remembers' really happened, Kovin must have suppressed the memory somehow. For that matter, maybe someone else stole the nanoprobes and altered Seven's memory to make her *think* it was Kovin (I never did trust that Magistrate...). The possibility is never mentioned. it's almost like the writers had decided that Kovin was innocent, so they didn't bother writing a proper investigation.

Oh, and what's the final scene of the episode - Seven coming to terms with her traumatic experience? Seven reflecting on her vulnerability and (misplaced) remorse? No - the Doctor, making it all about him. Almost as though the writers were just using the Seven's analogous-to-rape experience as a convenient plot point to tell a story about so-called 'recovered memories'. Almost as though a woman being effectively raped (or believing that she had been effectively raped) wasn't really that important to them.

Well, never mind. I'm sure this episode hasn't added to the widespread, incorrect and highly damaging perception that false rape accusations are a common occurrence. Nah. Probably nothing to worry about.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 11:02am (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S7: Endgame

I just finished watching "Voyager" on Netflix this past weekend. I remembered why I was so irritated with this show at that time.
They use time travel as a fast way to get a plot point across without using any logic. (Not to sound Vulcan) Paradox after paradox, returns to the point, that once you create a new timeline, it will loop to the point of it's beginning. And start again. And repeat.
Janeway's solution was to go back in time, and give high tech equipment to her prior self, and bring them home earlier. Coming home earlier, erases everything, including the need to be brought back. So, by not doing this, they are not brought back and they stay, until, They once again are brought back, which eliminates their need...
Set Bookmark
Red Tim
Thu, Aug 18, 2016, 5:20pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Macrocosm

Normally, the technobabble on Star Trek doesn't annoy me, but whoever was the science consultant in this episode needs locking up (in that hideous day-glo club Tropicana holoprogramme Neelix seems to like so much). If you want to destroy a virus, you use an antiviral. Not an antigen - that's only any use if there's an immune system around to detect it. It's pretty obvious really - "anti" "viral" - clue's in the name. And what the actual flip was the life cycle of those things? Virus infects host, host spawns little flies, flies grow into massive CGI things, CGI things infect more hosts... where did the original virus come from? The normal virus, not the massive ones - I think those miners would have noticed if they'd been attacked by massive flying things like pyramid teabags with tentacles.

And let's not even get into the whole issue of conservation of mass, or the ridiculous idea of a virus absorbing a hormone. Or how rubbish Voyager's quarantine protocols are - they can detect alien viruses during transport buy they don't automatically kill them?! Or how a virus moves from the transporter buffer to A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PART OF THE SHIP (I thought stuff in the buffer was dematerialised, but apparently not). Or how, apparently, a bio-containment field doesn't actually, you know, contain biological organisms.

So, yeah - very silly episode. Captain Janeway is not Ellen Ripley. An "antigen" does not create a massive green fireball. A phaser rifle has no recoil, so doesn't need bracing against the shoulder. And none of those things would matter if the script kept up the tension, but it doesn't, so you end up noticing all the stupid little things that are wrong. And that's where this episode fails.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jul 24, 2016, 8:15am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond


The reboots have churned out three movies so far, the first of which I would rate as "acceptable", the second as "trash" and the third as "enjoyable". None of them qualify as classics of either sci-fi, space opera, or Star Trek, as the original movies managed in five out of six attempts.

But that said, the fact of the reboot's existence does not negate the many hundreds of hours of material that came prior. Why would you feel uncomfortable calling yourself a Trekkie? In a universe with six different TV shows (soon to be seven!) and now thirteen movies, there are many different interpretations of the term and all of them are going to mean different things to different people. Who gives a damn what others think?

You can totally still profess your love for Star Trek in the reboot era. The only people it's actually going to matter to are other fans of Star Trek and science fiction. And whether they are hardcore Voyagers, Niners, Booters or TOS-OR-NOTHING! types, that profession is going to lead you to a great nerdy discussion of what made your particular flavour your favourite.

I guess what I'm saying is, there are certain criticisms of the reboots that I feel are valid and relevant (for instance, Into Darkness is a failure because the story claims a seriousness it doesn't earn). But criticising them for simply being what they are - effects-driven action-adventure space movies - is not. Within that genre there is ample scope for a successfully entertaining film with a Trekkian spin, and I think Beyond finally nailed it.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jul 23, 2016, 10:34am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

I'm with you on most of this, Jammer, right up until the end. Why? One word: stakes.

Into Darkness immediately handicapped itself before it even left the gate, when it decided to go down the path of aping The Wrath Of Khan. There's a lot of reasons that TWOK is still considered to be the best Trek movie, but chief among them is that the story has genuine stakes and genuine consequences. It took a lot of balls to kill off Spock and leave him dead when the credits rolled, but the story was so, so much better off for it. It drew on three seasons' worth of familiarity with the characters and the actors and employed it to devestating effect.

How the fuck did the writers think that they were going to get the same audience reaction with characters and actors who we've only met once before, in a story that didn't even really develop their friendship??!! The mind boggles. Then, compounding their error, they hit the infamous Reset Button and just undid it all with Magic Khan Blood.


Sure, The Search For Spock also hit a reset button of sorts. But that story, too, had genuine consequences. Kirk had to self-destruct a long military career, blow up his own ship, and lost his son just to even get a *shot* at saving Spock.

Into Darkness does have quite a few things in its favour. But to me, it's a textbook example of how a shitty ending can undermine an otherwise strong story. They could have gotten away with their riffing on TWOK if they'd done it in a way that fit with the reboot theme of just being Dumb Fun Action Movies. Instead, they wind up trying to instill it with a gravitas that it hasn't earned and tarnish the entire effort as a result.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jul 23, 2016, 10:16am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek Beyond

:D Somewhat serendipitously, I just typed out a comment about this movie on Ars Technica's Facebook post of their negative review. CTRL-V in 3, 2, 1...

Yes, this is a dumb action movie, with none of the gravitas that a cast with a multi-decade history can bring to the party. But that is what the reboots have been going for since they started out. At this point - the third movie - if you haven't accepted that bedrock fact, you just come across as a bitter old complainer.

So, then, the standard to judge these by is: Do they successfully bring a recognizably Star Trek flavour to the Dumb Action Movie, and does it taste any good?

The answer in this case is a resounding yes. Beyond beats the pants out of both Into Darkness and the first reboot. It is *fun*, with an effortless breeziness that we haven't had since the heyday of the original movies. It correctly puts its focus on the interactions between the characters, who are all impeccably cast. It gives us novel action scenes that have yet to be seen in a Star Trek movie. And underlying it all is a very Trekkian message that unity is strength and peace is worth fighting for, albeit not as well-highlighted by the script as it could be.

In thirty years time, I'll still be watching the original movies, and I'd be happy to add this entry to the list, lightweight as it is. It is the reboot finally standing on its own two feet and making good use of the materials it has. Not perfect, and not even great. But it is unquestionably *good*.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 9:48am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S4: Divergence

I'm a longtime TNG fan and I recently made my way through DS9 and VOY which I never watched regularly while they were on. I then decided...what the heck...may as well finish the job with Enterprise which I never watched at all. I agree with everyone that Season 4 is leaps and bounds better than what came before.
However I came on here to point out a plot hole in this episode that I haven't seen anyone mention. How exactly did Reed 'help' the Section 31 mission? The Section 31 bloke said at the end that it wouldn't have succeeded without him ....but why? At most he delayed them a few hours with his sabotage of evidence but Archer would still have likely allowed Phlox to finish his work.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Dec 28, 2015, 8:40pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: Legacy

I can't help but like this one; good action scenes, Tasha Yar backstory and references, and good character growth for Data. Why is it reviewed so harshly here? The biggest gripe I can come up with is the clich├ęd scene that cues the audience in on the pending betrayal. I think it would have been better to surprise the audience with it.

Incidentally, in regards to the comment about Picard chewing out Riker; of course he did. Riker did have an emotional reaction and take unnecessary risks. That doesn't mean Picard doesn't care about the "native." It means he cares about his first officer and recognizes that their mission wouldn't be made easier by his death or (worse) capture by The Alliance.

3 stars from me.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Dec 28, 2015, 1:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: First Contact

"take RLM with a grain of salt. He's pretty biased against the TNG movies as a whole, because he saw the TNG films as a misplaced studio attempt to merely turn a smart franchise into dumb action movies."

Sadly, I don't disagree with this conclusion. In Generations they destroy the Enterprise (a character in of herself) for the sake of a crash landing sequence. In the next three films we get to watch the enlightened Earl Grey drinking Shakespeare quoting Jean-Luc Picard channel his inner John McClane. Yawn.

RLM speaks for a lot of us; I personally find the "character" annoying (too much toilet humor) but the underlying insights are hard to disagree with.
Next ►Page 1 of 6
▲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.