Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 52,296 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 2,092
Set Bookmark
Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 12:53am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Timescape

Ah, but Data had literally just said the equipment wasn’t working. So, either Data forgot how the computer panels work, or we just have a glaring discrepancy.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:45pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: The Apple

I watched this episode last year and liked it. Watching it again today, it's gone up even further in my estimation. Indeed, it captures well what I like best about Trek: lots of planetary exploration, studying alien plant life, first contacts with primitive aliens, some political and philosophical conversations (the one in the hut is beautifully lit) and a very concise, allegorical or theatrical tale in the vein of early SF short stories. In an age of serialized drama, TOS seems so refreshing.

"The Apple" also neatly inverts the book of Genesis. Here we have an Edenic utopia in which aliens are ignorant of sex, violence and lack "knowledge". Instead of an Abrahamic God presiding over this Eden, we have a giant mechanical snake. In other words, the episode rightly portrays the Biblical God as a kind of tyrannical, oppressive figure. It reconfigures the Abrahamic God as a serpentine devil. The liberators of the Bible - Satan, who entices man with the apple of knowledge - become the humans here, in the form of Kirk and the gang. Completing the inversion is Spock, who resembles a devil, becoming a kind of spokesman for the Old Testament God: he urges against granting knowledge to the primitive aliens and urges fidelity to Starfleet laws (of non-interference). And from various philosophical perspectives, he's arguably right: a totalitarianism in which inhabitants are happy, or believe themselves to be happy, is not inherently worse than contemporary human conceptions of "freedom" and "individualism".

Episodes like this also highlight what Trek has lost in its slow shift toward "realism" and "naturalism". TOS and TNG were very stylized, theatrical, didactic, deliberately stilted, expressionistic, Brechtian and so forth. Their zany sets, orange skies, weird plants, giant snake caves and goofy aliens didn't really pull you out of the story, because the stories were already operating on very abstract levels anyway. Indeed, the type of imagination required to key into something abstract seems to make the stories even more powerful.

Modern Trek finds it hard to do this, to create forehead aliens which are simultaneously believable/symbolic, but it's still possible once you get the tone right (Dear Doctor, Duet, Outcast etc). Another option is to ditch anthropomorphized aliens altogether, and start doing hardcore xeno-science.
Set Bookmark
Sean Hagins
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:38pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Non Sequitur


I appreciate what you are saying. And you are right that a lot of people will not agree with the assessment given. Rather than create fiction to mass produce, I use my time in a ministry preaching to people about the bible's promises for the future (not here on an online forum, I am speaking of what I do "in the real world")

That said though, I can not ignore such things in my assessment. And religious beliefs aside, and even putting aside whether people follow God's word, the bible or not, seeing the rise of divorce, the increase in general relationship unhappiness (as can be seen by the rise in such things as counseling, self-help, and other things created to fix relationships), the failure of such "free love" seems evident to me.

Among people of my religion, the divorce rate is MUCH lower than the world average, and by following the bible's counsel, we have much happier relationships where people work on the bumps in marriage rather than moving on to the next one. This is not to say that we are better than anyone else, because we're not. It is just that following the Guidebook to life produces better, happier results.

Yes, they do value marriage in that they are getting married, but again, by entering into marriage without engaging in sex, the marriage will be stronger and more binding
Set Bookmark
Sean Hagins
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:28pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Parturition

Again, I don't understand the comments here. And as far as Neelix's jealousy, I think your relationships must be different than what I am used to: Neelix's feelings were totally understandable at least if they were married. Tom actually was developing feelings for her, and I know that typically a married woman (or man) wouldn't be alone with a member of the opposite sex the way she and Tom were.

With this type of behaviour, I can see why there are so many divorces among people

As far as the episode goes, this is one that I remember watching back when it came out. I think it was enjoyable seeing the two make up, and the catalyst (the hatching of the egg and taking care of the young bird/creature) was endearing
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Non Sequitur

@ Sean Hagins,

I'm going to say this in all seriousness: assuming you're speaking from faith in your various comments here when you mention your religious conviction, I would like to inform you that the likeliest result of mentioning your faith *in this way* is to discredit it and make it sound dismissive and foolish. And I'm not saying that it is foolish, but this is what's going to be received. Is it your intent to convince people through these comments? If so I'll suggest that your method is counterproductive to your intent. If not...then why mention these things at all? Here's an example:

"The second is much more important. It's disturbing the immorality even in shows like Star Trek. Why couldn't that girl be his wife and not his fiancee? Then Harry would not have been fornicating with a woman, and rather be sleeping with his wife?"

Did it occur to you that the reason is because the writer doesn't share your beliefs and doesn't see it as immoral? That there is literally no good reason for someone who doesn't agree with you to have foreseen your objection and write it differently (or to want to)?

But let me try another tack while I'm at it. If your problem is sexual immorality, you might want to consider that by writing in that they value marriage we're already talking about a situation better - by your standard - than the newly popular notion that marriage doesn't mean very much and isn't really the natural 'end-point' of a relationship any more.

I'll say this too, without any irony: if you believe strongly in certain values and are unhappy that they aren't portrayed on TV then maybe you should be taking steps to try to create artistic material that's both quality and moral in your view. Not a joke - if you don't like what you're seeing it's up to you to try to put something better out there. If not you, then who? I say this as an artist, so this isn't armchair advice.

Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 8:23pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S1: Hide and Q

If you start this episode after Tasha's meltdown on the bridge, this is actually a pretty great 30 minutes of Trek. The music is tense and moody, Riker at times feel threatening, Riker and Picard share a number of excellent conversations (you really get a sense of Picard as a skilled gamesman, as he manipulates both Riker and Q) and there's mercifully no Troi.

The standout scene, though, is this one between Picard and Q...

Q: Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

PICARD: I see. So how we respond to a game tells you more about us than our real life, this tale told by an idiot? Interesting, Q.

Q: Oh, thank you very much. I'm glad you enjoyed it. Perhaps maybe a little Hamlet?

PICARD: Oh, no. I know Hamlet. And what he might said with irony, I say with conviction: What a piece of work is man. How noble in reason. How infinite in faculty. In form, in moving, how express and admirable. In action, how like an angel. In apprehension, how like a god.

Q: Surely you don't really see your species like that, do you?

PICARD: I see us one day becoming that, Q. Is it that what concerns you?

...which as Peter G explains above, creepily hints that humanity is potentially destined for some kind of Godhood (a byproduct of Roddenberry's Utopianism and SF's techno-transcendent fetishes, tropes which fell out of fashion in science fiction come the birth of cyberpunk, several years before TNG aired).

BTW this episode has the saddest Trek quote ever:

LAFORGE: Worf, is this your idea of sex?

WORF: This is sex. But I have no place for it in my life now.

And Q just makes the moment even sadder ("No place, micro-brain? What possesses you?")
Set Bookmark
Sean Hagins
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 7:49pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Non Sequitur

Several things bother me about this episode:

The first is very trivial, but shows a lack of continuity. That is that Harry said earlier to Paris that he has to sleep with a sleep mask to block out all light. I would think that his not wearing one in bed was the first clue that something is wrong.

The second is much more important. It's disturbing the immorality even in shows like Star Trek. Why couldn't that girl be his wife and not his fiancee? Then Harry would not have been fornicating with a woman, and rather be sleeping with his wife? It's this kind of thing that is one of the reasons I don't watch much television.

The plot elements themselves were ok. I think it was a creative idea that was well executed
Set Bookmark
DmR of AtoZ
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 6:34pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S2: Elogium

First off . . quite a thing to see the comment threads stretching for up to 10 years ( so far ! ) . . huh ?

Less than a week ago, I kind'a fell into a cherry-picking binge w/ Voyager again. I began w/ some of my biggest faves: "Timeless", "Relativity", "Blink of An Eye" . . . than started using Wikipedia's episode listings to zero in on other candidates.

3 days ago, or so, I discovered Jammer's Reviews when Googling info on an ep and have been referring to it since. Or just reading thu the seasons for other perspectives.

You know . . I've never been a heavily "judgemental fan" of anything I'm into.
Never a "The Beatles rule !! . . McCartney's lame, but go Fabs !!" . . what ?!?

Mind you . . I'm not blindly accepting of any & everything either. I like lots from any show or musical group "less" then their other output . . . but I still don't have that "well That sucked !" gene.

I rewatched "Projections" on "NetTricks" based on Jammer's review, and let it roll into "Elogium" . . which I then fully enjoyed.

Until I read the 99% of comments here pronouncing it "1 Star Awful !!"

Many points made that saw me go "Oh . . huh ! . . yeah . . . Damn it !"
Sure . . Wildman's been w/ child 6 months and just confirmed it ??

But I found no embarrassing acting from Jennifer.
Quite the range, actually.

But then ? . . I've always loved her and that voice !
That voice that gives me a shimmer across my shoulders, and then drapes warm velvet over it !

I know I could go on about all the nasty realities you digital critics made me consider . . but I believe I'll leave it there, with a tattered warm velvet drape to protect my foolish idealism . . . .
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 6:02pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S7: Emergence

This is definitely one of the episodes that is better high. I love it when Trek makes weird, almost psychedelic scenes as in Masks and that one where they're watching the operating table materialise.

I also like that this is, in a sense, the Enterprise's very own Family Tree episode.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 5:56pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S6: Tsunkatse

This is pretty basic TOS Trek updated to factor in the WWE phenomenon -- I was actually reminded of "Bread and Circuses" more than "Arena" or "The Gamesters of Triskelion". It's pretty predictable but it benefits from the guest acting of Hertzler and Combs a great deal. Another good episode for 7 who puts in a good physical performance and does the emotional "regaining humanity" thing well, although that part seemed like a tiny afterthought instead of being played up more throughout the episode.

I suppose having The Rock also helps -- he does his eyebrow-raise and his "rock-bottom" move on 7. Impressive that VOY got some pretty famous actors like him and Jason Alexander for guest roles.

7 is about to kill (or not) when she and Hertzler are beamed back to the ship -- of course the timing of this is arranged perfectly so that Hertzler can't escape and 7 doesn't actually kill. This kind of convenient timing is tiresome -- the show lacks balls.

Wonder if Chakotay and the others have a different perspective on the sport now? The episode didn't address that. Anyhow, violence is bad blah blah -- the episode doesn't do anything new to address the issue. It's just pretty superficial entertainment.

2.5 stars for "Tsunkatse" -- basic entertainment here and nothing really annoying or weak. The ending with 7 and Tuvok, who can provide interesting dialog, was good -- the Vulcan tells her she has regained her humanity and the "weakness" was just that. 7 is not an animal and didn't kill Hertzler although the simple, convenient nature of the show avoided any serious repercussions.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 5:00pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S5: Unification

"Commander Sela-sit down please and welcome to your end of year appraisal.
Please do not be distracted by the sounds of disruptor pistols and screams from down the corridor.
That is just Senator Pardek taking the honourable exit following the inevitable failure of your invasion-well can we really call it a 'plot'?"

Part One had such promise but Part two was so rubbish despite some gravitas laden performances by Nimoy and Stewart.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 5:00pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: Rejoined

Many of the comments here are criticizing 'Jadzia' for jeopardizing 'Dax's' future, as though the two are functioning separately and Jadzia is making decisions over Dax's head (figuratively speaking).

But that's not how joined Trill operate. It's Jadzia Dax, a combined being, who decided to accept the consequences of reassociation. Dax the symbiont was as much the maker of that decision as Jadzia the host.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 4:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

"Trek was in its coffin as of the exact moment the Borg Queen balled up her fist and cursed "Janeway!" and became a cartoon villain."

Exactly Peter - Voyager ruined the Borg the way Enterprise ruined the Vulcans and Discovery ruined the Klingons. (A similar analogy can be drawn with the moment that Dukat went from three-dimensional to "cartoon evil" on DS9; fortunately it didn't happen to the Cardassians as a whole though.)
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 3:50pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S6: Virtuoso

There's too little quality material in this episode and far too much fluff (Doc's singing -- which isn't bad, just that it's not what I watch Trek for). The Qomar were a dreadful new introductory alien species in VOY -- just plain annoying and what I really can't stand is terrible guest acting which is so evident in the Tincoo character.

Literally nothing happens for the 1st half of the episode -- basically Doc singing and getting admired. It's fun for the 1st 5 mins. or so but after that it needs to go somewhere. Where it goes has potential with Doc deciding to resign and arguing with Janeway about his right for self-determination. This idea of Doc's sentience and desire to grow is a good one and a Trek staple, but here it's drowned out by too much crap. But the arguments made by Doc/Janeway are good and one feels that Doc striking out on his own will be revisited in a future episode. Doc basically needs to be treated like flesh and blood crew. That's fine.

However, I can't believe Janeway would allow Doc to engage in his fantasies to such an extent and allowing the Qomar to dictate the relationship so unilaterally -- there was no mention of getting anything in return for all the music and Doc's performances. For a supposedly more advanced race, you'd think they might not be so selfish/inconsiderate -- or maybe this is simply poor writing/conception.

Clearly Picardo's one of the more engaging actors on VOY and the holographic doctor, along with 7 are the 2 stars of the show. Doc has a fun personality and it's clear him and 7 have a special bond -- the emphasis of that in 2 scenes in this episode is one of the few highlights. Paris is also useful for analyzing the human condition from his particular angle.

Doc gets a slice of humble pie -- that much is nice for his development. He realizes he has mis-judged the situation when the Qomar audience applauds the "improved" hologram -- makes sense. But the whole interaction with Tincoo was terrible. I don't think I can think of a more wooden character / terrible actress in Trek.

1 star for "Virtuoso" -- very close to 1.5 stars for me but there is far too much wrong with this episode. Talk about terrible execution of a mediocre premise. One can enjoy the lighthearted parts (there are many) before the real issue of the episode is underway. I think this episode is symptomatic of what was wrong with VOY -- the series has built quality relationships (between Doc/7, Doc and the crew) but it doesn't always come up with the right situations to make those genuine feelings get expressed.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 2:50pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

Yeah, I mean the Trek recycling has been going on for awhile but I wouldn’t lump Spock with the Borg Queen and the like. Also one big difference is that Voyager and Enterprise had to make extremely convoluted scenarios to include TNG characters but given DISC’s time period you’d expect to see a lot of TOS characters naturally.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 1:58pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

@ wolfstar,

"This started towards the end of Voyager, not just with the increasing overreliance on the Borg, but also when the Ferengi ("Inside Man"), the Klingons ("Prophecy") and other Alpha Quadrant races ("Unimatrix Zero", "Flesh And Blood") were rolled out to unsuccessful effect with no solid scriptual underpinning, as if to say "Look! It's the Ferengi/Klingons/the Borg Queen! Are you not happy?" - as if their mere presence would make Trek fans rapturous, so who cares about the script?"

Trek was in its coffin as of the exact moment the Borg Queen balled up her fist and cursed "Janeway!" and became a cartoon villain.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 1:01pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

The franchise is eating itself.

This started towards the end of Voyager, not just with the increasing overreliance on the Borg, but also when the Ferengi ("Inside Man"), the Klingons ("Prophecy") and other Alpha Quadrant races ("Unimatrix Zero", "Flesh And Blood") were rolled out to unsuccessful effect with no solid scriptual underpinning, as if to say "Look! It's the Ferengi/Klingons/the Borg Queen! Are you not happy?" - as if their mere presence would make Trek fans rapturous, so who cares about the script?

It continued with the atavistic Enterprise, the very premise and name of which represents an attempt to recapture past glory (thereby undermining the whole canon through the sudden invention of another Starship Enterprise a century before Kirk). Even the casting was backward-looking, an attempt to reproduce the Kirk-Spock-McCoy trinity in the form of Archer-T'Pol-Tucker that didn't really work (Archer being the weakest and most inconsistent character of the three), while making the Spock equivalent double up as the resident Space Babe. Enterprise at least tried to do something new with the Suliban and Temporal Cold War (largely unsuccessful, but an original and interesting concept) and the Xindi (largely successful, especially as the season came together), but the atavism reached a head in season 4 which, unlike many, I don't consider a success. I'm with Jammer in that a lot of what season 4 attempted was good, but it often didn't pull it off. (I love the augments trilogy and In A Mirror Darkly, and the Andorian trilogy is fairly solid too, but the rest of it didn't work for me because the writing wasn't good enough.)

Then we got the literal reboot films which recast the TOS characters with new actors while telling stories that had none of the ideas, themes, grit, style or character core that the original had (with the exception of the decent character scenes in Beyond, which I really appreciated despite the last third of the film being a mess).

Then we got Discovery which again totally rewrote canon and desperately aims to capitalise on the recognition factor by relying on Vulcans and Klingons as tropes without having any real understanding of what Vulcans and Klingons are. And another pseudo-Vulcan in a lead role. The Orville is also an outright rehash - I generally enjoy the characters but for many episodes it's too easy to pick out which TNG/TOS/VOY episodes the plot is obviously derived from. Now on Discovery we're getting Pike and Spock, and apparently a lighter tone in places that (judging by the elevator scene in the trailer) cribs directly from The Orville. Great.

What TNG did with the Borg was new. What it did with the Cardassians, and what DS9 then did with the Cardassians, Bajorans, Dominion and reinvented Ferengi was new. What VOY did with the Vidiians and Hirogen was new. All of it was compelling. I'd add that what DIS has done with Saru is also new and compelling, but was unfortunately only a minor part of the season.

Trek has to stop looking back and relying on TOS (and TNG) tropes as brand recognition factors. Vulcans hardly appeared at all in TNG and especially DS9, but a lead Vulcan or adoptive-Vulcan character has been a fixed part of every iteration since (Tuvok, T'Pol, Abrams Spock, Burnham, and now New New Spock). The Borg were only in 6 episodes of TNG and none of DS9, but as Voyager struggled to stay compelling and original it relied on them more and more to the point it ran them into the ground.

Saru and his people are the most original and compelling thing about Discovery, and huge potential riches (ethics, trauma and survivorship, and connections to real world issues from the legal definition of a person to animal rights to refugees, persecution and minority stress) lie in exploring them in the hands of the right writers. This is an example of what Discovery should be doing. Not "Look, here's Pike! Look, here's Spock!"

I'll be just as pissed if in a decade's time, having mined the TOS and TNG nostalgia to death, the franchise creates some cynical DS9 spinoff/reboot with a recast new Sisko, a new Kira, a new Garak, a new Odo etc. The thing about Trek is that most of the great characters really are synonymous with, and inseparable from, the actor that plays them. William Shatner IS Kirk. Leonard Nimoy IS Spock. Michael Dorn IS Worf. Avery Brooks IS Sisko. Jeri Ryan IS Seven. Robert Picardo IS the Doc. Connor Trineer IS Trip. John Billingsley IS Phlox. And Doug Jones IS Saru.

I'm just so sick of this endless recycling. Like when you've worn and washed a t-shirt hundreds of times until the colors have all faded. The more this approach is taken, the more you just end up with a copy of a copy of a copy that eventually bears no resemblance to the original. Or that looks like it and tries to emulate it on a superficial level, but is hollow and has none of the heart. You end up with B-4 instead of Data. Simulacra Trek.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 10:29am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

Well it’s not exactly a shocker considering Burnham’s relationship to Spock. It’s also logical we’d see Spock if we see Pike, I just wonder how much screentime they’ll get.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 10:02am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

I am at least mildly intrigued at Stewart's return to the franchise. There are still interesting issues to explore with Picard's character (which doesn't necessarily mean that they'll do it right, but at least there's the potential).

I see no potential at all, however, in the casting of Ethan Peck as a younger version of Spock in the second season of Star Trek: Discovery. Haven't we had enough Original Series homages/ripoffs (depending on how you feel about that sort of thing) already? We've already got Zachary Quinto playing Spock in the film series, and I wasn't thrilled with the endless aping of the classic films in "Into Darkness" and "Beyond". Enough already! If you can't write something original, find another job.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:54am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Timescape

Tim, in defence of the episode, we can presume that the computer processes information at such a high rate of speed that even at 1/1000 its normal speed (or whatever the rate of time in that area) its response time would still be essentially instantaneous from the point of view of anyone using it.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 8:17am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Timescape

I must have seen this episode 5 or 6 times, and it’s always been an enjoyable viewing... until now. Suddenly it’s all the little details they get wrong, even within the same scene

For example, when Picard, Data, and Troi bean over the bridge, Data makes a comment that the equipment is no longer working, which makes sense given that time is “frozen” (or moving infinitesimally slowly as we later learn). However, Picard marches right up to the top of the arch and starts tapping away, complete with standard computer sound effects, and learns all of this information. They go to the transporter room and Picard happily types away. They go to engineering, Data happily types away.

Crusher gets shot, time rewinds, and Troi is suddenly there to point a phaser at the romulan. Crusher is unphased by the sudden appearance of Troi: a) her apparent best friend on the ship, and b) a member of the senior staff who’s been away at a conference for a week. Then she goes on to say “oh, it’s ok, he wasn’t shooting at •me•, he was shooting at an alien.” How did she know he was shooting at all? How did she know there were fake romulans? Both Crusher and the romulan seemed to be aware of the time rewind.

Geordi stresses that their armbands are only good for an hour or so. Picard asks Geordi to beam them to engineering, Geordi says “can’t, low power. Walk there instead.” Walking to engineering, through the Jeffries tubes, turbo lifts that don’t work, going around (in)conveniently placed crew members, would take most of their hour. Then, after Picard’s temporal psychosis, we are beaming back and forth every 10 minutes. What happened to the low power concerns?

Why leave dying Geordi on the warbird?

I appreciated the callbacks to previous episodes and the writers realizing that the crew should remember and go back to things they learned before. But the crew should also remember things they said or did earlier in this same episode.

These simple errors were enough of a distraction for me that it seriously hampered the episode. 2 out of 4.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 6:55am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Heart of Stone

Unlike most of you, I haven't yet seen the rest of this series, so I had no idea while watching that Nog's Starfleet arc would become important until after I read this comment thread. And like most of you, I do not understand why Jammer dismissed this B-story. It was much better than the A story! The only thing that made it unbelievable was that we saw Nog acting like an absolute jerk in the previous episode--Sisko should have mentioned something about it, like, "In Starfleet, you must respect everyone, including women." Or at least said, "Starfleet officers do not try to bribe their superiors to get what they want."

It does seem a bit of a stretch that Nog would have a shot at even getting in--but does everyone have to go to the Academy? Did Miles? Or only officers? Could he be a crewman if not an officer?

The A story was fine--I was fooled throughout--and mad as hell at the writers when they had Kira say she loved Odo. I thought, "Good lord, are they not even going to acknowledge that the man she loved had JUST DIED? This makes no sense! Dammit!"

Then I laughed at the reveal.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 5:54am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S2: The Maquis, Part II

On the subject of the Cardassians, there are some interesting traits that may help explain Garak's behaviour. As Peter mentioned, Garak may have done what he did for the sake of love and devotion to his father, Tain, but not out of loyalty to the state.

Filial devotion is one of the defining traits of Cardassians, as we saw through the Dukat character, not just through exposition but actions.

He sacrificed his career for the sake of his daughter (even if he needed a push from Kira) and even before he made that decision, he justified his attempt to murder her as being for the sake of his legitimate family. He's kind of the exception that proves the rule - even this supremely self-centred unprincipaled individual was bound to respect the power of family, even if that impulse was usually perverted to serve his own goals sooner or later.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 5:40am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: The Search, Part I

Given how meticulously JMS planned Babylon 5, it wouldn't surprise me if the White Star was part of the material he shared with Paramount.
Set Bookmark
Gul Densho-Ar
Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 3:13am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Rascals

Amazing how long it took them to find a cure. A few years later, EMH would just have changed their young DNA back to old DNA, problem solved. This may sound nonsensical, but that has never stopped EMH.
Next ►Page 1 of 2,092
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2018 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.