Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 942 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 38
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 9:43am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Captain's Holiday

I'm sorry to have obscured your point.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 9:30am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Captain's Holiday

@Tara, I was worried I would come across as nitpicking and point-missing. I tried to indicate that I agree with you overall on the dearth of female guest stars. I also missed that you said that you weren't including children -- which is obviously my fault. I *agree* with the point of your post, and I should have said that. I am normally worrier, obviously, but am on my tablet and took some shortcuts. I just thought, having missed your statement that you weren't including children, that Lal was a major character -- as much so as, for example, The Dauphin, or Janice Manheim. I agree that she doesn't model an independent woman, and that she doesn't fit with Vash, K'Ehleyr and Ro. Unlike The Dauphin and Janice, say, I think she's a great character -- so I wanted to bring her up, to "defend" Lal herself as a character of value, even if her value is very different than that of Vash, K'Ehleyr and Ro. I shouldn't have butted in though and I agree wholeheartedly with your point.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 12:30am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Captain's Holiday

Of course, one could read Lal as a "weak" character. I suppose we could say that it is sexism storytelling that she essentially dies by having too many feelings. I don't want to argue against whathe you say in general. But I feel like many fans of both genders identify readily with Lal, especially as children, but also as adults who still bravely face a world they are unprepared for, which, more importantly, is not ready for them. (I am including myself here, while male.)

The other guest stars in s3 which are significant also Tasha again and captain Garret in Yesterday's Enterprise, Shelby who is very important in the finale and is meant to be Riker's rival and near-equivalent. They are action heroes, stars in some of the series' most beloved episodes. The other important female guest stars, I will grant, are love interests, and not very well developed ones (the woman in the Ensigns of Command who falls for Data, the hologram of Leah Brahms, Yuta, etc.).
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 12:17am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Captain's Holiday

...which isn't to say you have to like her. But certainly, she is a guest star who matters, in an episode beloved by many fans (see Peter G.'s excellent recent comment), and while partly a way to tell a story about Data, Picardy and the Federation, I think she is memorable and poignant in her own right.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Jan 24, 2017, 12:13am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Captain's Holiday

@Tara, while there are a dearth of important female guest stars, I would put Lal from s3 as one of the most memorable one-episode characters in the series.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Nov 1, 2016, 7:50am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: Doctor Bashir, I Presume

@Peter, I agree. I decided (partly since I was/am on my phone) not to get into why I thought Starfleet's rule is justified. I do think it is "discriminatory," but I mean that as a descriptor more so than judgment. I think that Bashir doesn't seriously challenge the ethics of the Starfleet ruling because, while he hates that he is limited by something he didn't choose himself, he probably gets deep down that he doesn't have much of a leg to stand on particularly when the horrors of the Eugenics Wars are taken into account. I more wanted to say he *could* attempt that argument, and that it would be *more easily* argued that Bashir had broken an unjust law than that he broke no law at all, though I don't ultimately agree that the law is unjust either.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Nov 1, 2016, 6:58am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: Doctor Bashir, I Presume

If he didn't know it's not a lie, but he did know. He knew he wasn't allowed to serve in Starfleet by Starfleet rules, so at the least he's guilty of fraud.

Now, Starfleet's rules ARE discriminatory. I don't think they're "racist" because "genetically engineered" isn't really a race (arguably). But it's also a different problem from colour blindness. The restriction on genetically engineered people serving in Starfleet, as stated in the episode, is more about deterrence on a societal level than individuals with genetic enhancements. Maybe based on Statistical Probabilities we could also argue that genetic engineering gone wrong is seen as a potential ticking time bomb liability, but that wasn't brought up here. Bashir could maybe argue that the rules for Starfleet ate sufficiently discriminatory that he was morally justified in breaking the law, frame himself as an activist. Some laws are unjust.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 7:47pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S1: Learning Curve

@Robert -- fair enough! I just wanted to defend the right of shows to introduce one-episode characters without exploring them, and I think "Lower Decks" is a particularly good example of why it can be good to do so.

It's a very good point that Voyager really does seem to need serialization. I think part of the frustration is not just that it's in the Delta Quadrant and isolated, but the way the show really sets it up that they are On the Edge and also against their will. By contrast, in TOS there were very rarely starbases or other ships, because the Enterprise was very much meant to be on the frontier, often far from other humans (not counting the dozens of Alternate Earths they landed on) and sometimes far from Federation. And this wasn't a problem, first because it's a 60's show, but also because it made sense for the crew to be very outward-facing because that's what they signed up for.

I should also add -- though you didn't point this out -- that I was sort of conflating "serialization" with "robust supporting cast," and those are two slightly different things, though they are related.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 2:19pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S1: Learning Curve

@Peter (& Robert)

Well, I was mostly responding to Tidesfromnebula's point, and Robert's implicit agreement by saying that these characters appeared more than ten episodes from the end of the series, unlike the "Lower Decks" characters. And even then, unlike with "Lower Decks" where I genuinely do think that having those characters remain backgrounded (or absent entirely) is part of what makes the episode work, I'm not saying it's necessarily better that Tuvok's charges in this episode don't return, just that I don't think it's any real mark against the episode (which, again, I don't really think is great or anything -- I haven't seen it in around two decades though, so...).

And...I mean, yes. While (spoiler) Naomi Wildman, Icheb by the time we got to the last season, and a few others were good additions to the Voyager recurring cast, none of them added as much to the show as Garak, Dukat, Martok, Weyoun, Nog, Rom when the show wasn't specifically doing the bad Ferengi stuff, Damar eventually, etc. did to DS9. It is even possible to have a vibrant supporting/recurring cast without long-term storytelling, and I think that Q, Guinan and Ro added a lot more to TNG than Voyager's supporting players...and then when Barclay eventually became a recurring who could carry an episode on Voyager, well, even that was basically just porting over a character that was established as being able to do the same on TNG! Voyager didn't end up working that much for me as a series and having a larger set of supporting players would probably have helped a lot, and even if it did not work it would have demonstrated a kind of effort and commitment that the show maybe needed.

So I don't think they should have closed up the possibilities offered by a large supporting cast by not particularly trying for a long time. I don't entirely know why they didn't. It is possible that their early attempts, with someone like Seska, didn't quite work out for them. But still, TOS was a very, very good show which worked in an anthology-esque format, with minimal connecting tissue between episodes. That serialization became more popular, and that its advantages became clearer, does not necessarily mean that every show has to be so serialized in order to be good. As it happens, I don't think that Voyager really succeeded at what the artists behind it were apparently trying to do (a kind of TOS/TNG-ish combination of main cast character pieces with sci-fi anthology stories), though I'm mostly operating off memory from a long time ago.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Oct 27, 2016, 1:33pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

@Peter, you maybe sound dismissive of Herbert's son and Anderson's books (though fan fiction could be meant in a value-neutral sense -- there is good fan fiction and bad fan fiction), but I was curious whether there are any books in the series by those two you recommend, or if they're mostly a waste of time? I finished the Dune series by Herbert a year or two ago.
Set Bookmark
William B
Wed, Oct 26, 2016, 9:31pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S1: Learning Curve

I dunno. I do think Voyager could have benefitted from a more robust supporting cast. But there is a long tradition of episodic television, and in general of short-form narratives generally. I don't think this episode is great or anything, but it still seems to some extent like the story that they were telling for Chell or whoever was concluded. The story is also mostly about Tuvok, who *is* a regular and who returns. Yes, it would be neat to follow Tuvok's relationships with the recruits to whip into shape here, and the episode's drama is a little blunted because it's hard to believe he could make such progress in such a limited amount of time and then that the Maquis recruits are all good now that he's left them. But I think even a very small rewrite of the episode could still be done to smooth over these problems which are internal to the story, and the episode could more clearly be about Tuvok having a certain task to help some people become better officers, before going back to his regularly scheduled duties, where Tuvok learns something and we learn something about Tuvok along the way.

And with "Lower Decks," it is certainly true that the series was about to end. But I don't think that's the most important reason why the characters (save Ogawa) didn't return. They didn't return because the whole episode is specifically about the experiences of all crew members on the ship who are not seen every week. The episode suggests that there are all kinds of stories that are littering the halls of the ship -- and in fact, far too many for us to be able to keep track of even if the show did expand its cast out further. The drama of the episode also focuses on the escalation from what we would normally not care about at all -- junior officer promotions to off-screen ops? -- and eventually revealing that one of the characters we got to know over the hour died taking part in an anonymous mission, where, presumably, her death stands in for *many other deaths* which are heroic but due to the circumstances are not widely known in universe, or without. That we had seen Sito before (in "The First Duty") is a nice touch, but the episode would not have the same power or meaning if Sito were replaced with someone we actually knew quite well, because then her anonymity would only be to other characters in the show and not to the audience.
Set Bookmark
William B
Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 11:06am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S4: Body Parts

Also, "The Nagus" is quite good and functions as something of both a Quark piece and a Ferengi comedy generally -- partly because it's really something of a mafia comedy, which turns out to be a genre that is for whatever reason easier to work within for the show. I tend to like "Rules of Acquisition" as a drama, as well, which I think is generally underrated, though I don't think it's particularly funny.
Set Bookmark
William B
Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 8:23am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S4: Brothers

Two points to add:

As even stated in Remember Me, the primary purpose of the Enterprise is exploration, along with diplomacy, aid, scientific research, defense, etc. Certainly risking families the way they do is an issue, though I think the idea is still that it's a calculated risk for most family members and life on starships may be safer than on colonies. But even if a single crew member can run the ship, in ordinary circumstances (Beverly could probably not stop a warp core beach), they couldn't do anything else. The Enterprise is like CERN and a military base and embassy and aid station all in one moving package, and the purpose of the ship is for these functions to be served by the crew.

On the issue of Data commanding a ship solo, that would be possible (not on the Enterprise with its mission, but maybe on a different ship) but I think it would depend on Data. Data does actually want to be around people, even if he does not suffer "psychologically" from loneliness acutely the way most humans (and presumably most humanoids) do. Starfleet probably avoids putting individuals alone mostly for psychological reasons and post The Measure of a Man, Data could presumably appeal putting him on a ship alone because he's an android as discriminatory if he does not want to do that mission.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Oct 13, 2016, 6:05pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S6: Lessons

@Peter, excellent point about the connection to "Tapestry." I think maybe we could also say that Neela is a more optimistic version of the alternate Picard in that episode. Picard was Assistant Astrophysics officer rather than stellar cartography department head, and lower rank. However, Neela seems to have no command ambitions and is comfortable with her choice to eschew this. There is some criticism of "Tapestry" for the implication that life as a scientist would be *so bad* for Picard. In some ways, this episode addresses that point -- though I presume that it was not directly the plan. What's important to remember is that "Tapestry" was ultimately didactic, and this is not (IMO) a flaw in the episode but a function of the fact that Q himself was being deliberately didactic, to teach Picard something in particular about his reckless streak. However, with Neela, Picard gets to see an alternate version who really did *choose* that alternate life rather than drifting into it, the way alternate Picard was presented as having done by Q.

So the difference between Picard and Neela is not as stark as it is between the two Picards, but it is probably still there: Picard gives the orders for her to hold, and Neela has to hold. Neela does her job, even bravely, but I think the exchange at the end says quite a bit:

NEELA: At first, when you told us to hold our positions, I didn't question it. Of course we would. That was our job. But when I saw that storm coming toward us.
PICARD: Part of you must have blamed me.
NEELA: A small part, maybe. But in the end, I was more afraid that you would blame yourself if I died. Would you have?
PICARD: I've lost people under my command. People who were very dear to me. But never someone I've been in love with. And when I believed that you were dead, I just began to shut down. I didn't want to think or feel. I was here in my quarters, and the only thing I could focus on was my music, and how it would never again give me any joy. Then I saw you standing on the transporter pad and I knew that I could never again put your life in jeopardy.

I think Neela wants to be a scientist and an artist, and is willing to be a leader in the scientific sphere the better to do her research, but she mostly would prefer to let other people make the kinds of life-and-death decisions we see at the end of the episode. And Picard does not want to offload them. His guilt over Jack is because he refuses to abdicate personal responsibility. To some extent, Neela is willing to defer to Picard, and interpret her own life-and-death struggle in terms of what he would think of it. The trade-off we see is that Neela is mostly able to live with this arrangement, and seems to be a mostly happier person, whereas Picard cannot divest himself from responsibility and guilt for each of his choices, even if they were the right ones. This is perhaps part of what makes the recklessness of young Picard so important -- that awareness that every moment in life is a choice comes partly from that Nausicaan attack but also generally his early rebellious recognition that one cannot just trust in convention to guide ones actions. This also ties in with "The Inner Light," where part of Picard's ability to accept life as Kamin depended on his eventually coming to a place where he accepted first that he was not going to find a way back to the Enterprise, and then that he was not going to be able to save the planet from extinction, and chose to focus on his personal life instead.
Set Bookmark
William B
Sun, Oct 2, 2016, 5:09pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: Sub Rosa

"I'm almost more concerned that the last two posts *weren't about* the previous post by Nonplussed, than I was with that post itself."

Well, also in the spirit of...me, maybe those posts are also some ironical statement about sexism and priorities:

"This bad episode reminds me, all women are liars and whores."
"He raises a good point, this episode is bad."
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Sep 30, 2016, 5:35pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: Things Past

There are certainly advantages to the way the episode played out, but I do think that having Odo have to deal with Kira seeing the truth (rather than her finding out about it afterward) probably would have made a kickass episode. However, I suspect that the primary reason Kira couldn't be included is pragmatic -- I think that Kira may have been excluded so as to lighten Nana Visitor's load during her pregnancy. One could say that the amount of material in The Darkness and the Light coming up suggests that they weren't really trying to do that, but I think that episode is an exception -- like they decided that if they were going to have Kira in much of an episode late in NV's pregnancy, they would make it count (and also make it a story which has to happen while Kira is pregnant).
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Sep 23, 2016, 2:14pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Hollow Pursuits

Peter, great analysis and I agree that this episode is great. I love the point that the episode finds ways to show how everyone does badly outside their comfort zone, and that for Reg this is all the time (for the moment). Just an aside -- Cliff Bole is the director, not the writer. That his episodes tended to be strong does suggest that while (like most television) Trek is mostly writer-driven, a strong hand behind the camera does add quite a bit.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 6:33pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S5: Hero Worship

That would be some trick, for him to give those films those ratings while also giving them 3 and 3.5 stars.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 4:01pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S5: Thirty Days

Thanks. I agree that a sensible ordering of General Orders would have the most important first, and have the most important have the greatest punishment, in general; if Starfleet as any death penalty, it should generally apply to the Prime Directive?

My suspicion -- putting aside that they didn't have the Okudas, of course -- is that the Prime Directive is aka General Order One, and then there were five other General Orders of high importance by the time The Cage happened. I suppose according to Enterprise, Starfleet predates both the Federation and the Prime Directive, so let's assume that at some point the Prime Directive and other such rules were instituted. Either a few General Orders were instituted at once, or a few were established and then gradually others were added. If they were all instituted at once, they would all be in descending order of importance; otherwise, they'd probably be put in chronologically.

Whatever the case for the first six General Orders, General Order Seven is "don't go to Talos IV," which seems to have been thrown in, ad hoc, in the handful of years between The Cage and The Menagerie. Seeing what the Talosians could do with their mind control, Starfleet immediately created a new general order. I think the reason they added "death" here was probably a result of newfound panic that the Talosians could take over the universe if people got to close to them, which is probably a little bit exaggerated. I forget whether the Talos IV ban is ever brought up explicitly post-TOS; I would imagine that given enough time, and especially after encountering all the Godlike beings they encounter in TOS, the Talosian threat would seem less existential, or at least, less *uniquely* existential.

What's interesting is why Starfleet Command kept Talos IV, and why one shouldn't go there, a secret, and imposed the death penalty, which they apparently don't even give for the Prime Directive, as their deterrent. Probably they recognized how easily people would be taken in by the Talosians if they knew that the Talosians could give them whatever they wanted, and wanted to keep it a secret. However, given that they've kept it a secret, they cannot properly explain why going to Talos IV is so strictly forbidden. While they trust that Starfleet officers will abide by regulations that they understand, Picard's interpretation as he says to Data in Redemption, is that Starfleet would rather have people who don't blindly follow orders (without there being a good reason). So usually, while the Prime Directive comes with all sorts of ethical and pragmatic arguments, which they assume will be enough to (mostly) deter people, "Don't go to Talos IV" comes with none, and Starfleet falls back on death threats. It's perhaps overly optimistic to believe that less deterrent is necessary for the Prime Directive because there is an ethical argument for it, especially since (as we see in this site, for example), the general principles that justify the Prime Directive often break down in individual instances or break down under many ethical frameworks.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 2:48pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S5: Thirty Days

I was going off The Menagerie:

KIRK: What every ship Captain knows. General Order 7, no vessel under any condition, emergency or otherwise, is to visit Talos Four.
MENDEZ: And to do so is the only death penalty left on our books. Only Fleet Command knows why. Not even this file explains that.

However, in Turnabout Intruder we have this dialogue, after Lester-as-Kirk sentences death for the mutineers:

CHEKOV: Starfleet expressly forbids the death penalty.
KIRK: All my senior officers turning against me?
SULU: The death penalty is forbidden. There's only one exception.
CHEKOV: General Order Four. It has not been violated by any officer on the Enterprise.

The most probable explanations on the writer's level are, to me: 1. the writer was thinking about The Menagerie but misremembered the number (confusing Talos Four with General Order Seven), or 2. the writer just threw in that there is an exception because it sounded reasonable that Starfleet might occasionally have the death penalty. I think 1 is more likely -- I feel like the line plays more as callback than dramatically necessary for the scene, and the use of "General Order" suggests it's probably a reference to the earlier dialogue -- but I'm not sure. In-universe, either Chekov is misremembering the number (important to remember that he's an ensign and maybe not that much of an expert) of the General Order, or Starfleet has changed the rules surrounding death penalty recently, apparently reducing the penalty on General Order Seven while upping it on Four. Or maybe Starfleet simply renumbered their General Orders.

More broadly, though, it could just be a retcon which results from the changing dramatic needs of the universe.
Set Bookmark
William B
Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 12:01pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S5: Thirty Days

"In theory Paris could have been executed for that, not that Janeway has any kind of moral high ground with her track record."

Well, Starfleet code only has the death penalty for Talos IV, if I remember my Treklore correctly. I actually think that Janeway would have been within her (legal) rights according to Starfleet charter to shoot Paris down before he interfered, for the same reason that she'd be within her rights to sacrifice the ship to avoid any PD violation. But I don't think she could punish him with death afterwards legally.

But generally, yeah, like, 30 days and a demotion is nothing. It's mostly ceremonial. I don't really blame Janeway for not permanently relieving him of duty given their situation, and that he's both their best pilot and apparently their only non-holographic medical officer, but she could have legitimately given him a permanent dishonourable discharge.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Sep 20, 2016, 12:08pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: Hide and Q

"I would suggest that this moment - the one when he asks Picard "How did you know?" is the moment Riker made a subconscious decision that he'd rather be Picard's #1 than be in charge himself. He had a chance right here to "be in charge", and he recognized that serving under a great man is better than pretending you are one because you've been granted powers. Whether those powers are those of the Q or those of a captain doesn't change the basic equation."

Agreed. It reminds me of that line Riker says to Wesley in season two about asking oneself "What would Captain Picard do?" I think he comes on board the ship expecting that maybe he can learn a little from Picard but it's still basically another step in his big career rise, but as of here he realizes Picard is not just a great captain but a great man, and that learning from him isn't going to be some speedy process. It will take more than a couple months to grow to be one (or even grow to have the potential to be one) himself.
Set Bookmark
William B
Mon, Sep 19, 2016, 9:49pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S1: Hide and Q

Well, Q's operative dialogue as quoted by Peter G. was with Picard, not Riker -- though it's to Riker that Q specifically makes his "future of humanity" pitch. "Hide an Q" is a very unpolished episode, but it's got quite a bit going for it and has some of the brazenness that makes TNG s1 interesting even amongst the failures, and this is not really one of those failures.

Re: the point about Riker's corruption by Jason R.: well, I think it's partly a distraction. Riker doesn't get corrupted; that's the point of the episode. Riker doesn't even do anything that bad. He has some mild jerkiness and arrogance, but in fact it's pretty consistent with his s1 characterization (such as it is) -- he is more disrespectful to Picard than he would otherwise be, but I was looking at the transcript for Encounter at Farpoint earlier today for unrelated, nerdy reasons, and he's such a jerk to Geordi in their first scene. Riker does not abuse his power in this episode, but seems to take the opportunity to jump outside the chain of command, which can really be an early hint that he's not as wild about the Starfleet command structure as he's letting on, and he's also not yet at a point of Picard having really earned his respect (which this episode is a step forward in developing). In retrospect we can also maybe conclude that Riker really is longing for a chance to break out of his stiff Gary Cooper-type persona and hasn't figured out he can relax and hang with this crew (which, out of universe, is because the character was somewhat modified to be more fun and interesting and more in tune with who Frakes is, starting with things like 11001001).

I think it's notable too where this episode exists in Trek history; this is something of the TNG update of "Where No Man Has Gone Before." And yes, Gary Mitchell took a longer time to develop his full-blown God complex than Riker took to start being a bit of a jerk, but that "bit of a jerk" is still incredibly mild considering the amount of power he has. Mitchell downplays what he is thinking about for a while until suspicion has built up between him and Kirk and Mitchell has stopped seeing Kirk as, not only a peer, but as any being of worth at all. Riker doesn't let things stew for long but confronts the new truths head-on and as a result keeps his head in the long run. I think that Riker recognizes, correctly, that if he is going to seriously deal with the power that he's just been given, he should drop some of the pretenses of politeness and try to confront the situation head-on, which means acknowledging that his relationship to Picard and perhaps all of humanity has just fundamentally changed and that he has to decide how to deal with it. It'd be pretty dishonest, really, to pretend that nothing has changed, and to start deploying Jean-Luc's makes sense to me as a bit of boundary-testing to see how Picard deals with the situation, and as he figures out how he's going to deal with this power, after all. In fact, some of it really does seem to be that Riker wants to see how Picard deals because he wants to know if Picard really *is* wiser than him or just a pompous, albeit competent captain. Riker isn't planning to go evil like Gary Mitchell did, but he is debating whether or not he should restrict himself to The Starfleet Way or whether to break off and improve humanity's lot. Picard still acts as his conscience, but the episode wouldn't work if Riker gave up his powers because he still felt obligated to follow the chain of command; Riker accedes because he believes Picard is wiser as a person. The jerkiness is this episode's rather blunt instrument of showing that Riker is willing to test boundaries and is not going to tow the line *just because* he is supposed to, but without much malice.
Set Bookmark
William B
Sat, Sep 10, 2016, 10:27am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek: Discovery

For what it's worth, Jeffrey Combs has played 5 different alien species, off the top of my head.
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Sep 2, 2016, 12:10pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: Lower Decks

Margot Rose was *so good* as Eline in "The Inner Light," it's downright criminal that the producers wrote her out by killing her and then revealing that her character actually died (or was a representative of a person who died) millennia ago so they wouldn't have to pay her to be a regular in s6. Bad working environment.

Don't get me started on Harris Yulin in DS9's "Duet."
Next ►Page 1 of 38
▲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.