Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:
Clear bookmark | How bookmarks work
Note: Bookmarks are ignored for all search results

Total Found: 60,321 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 2,413
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:19am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

Sorry, half of my post was los for some reason and I don't want to write it again. Even though the central part is no longer there. Oh well.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:19am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel


It's just personal opinion, something feels a little 'off' with the bad robot spock for me, but it's not ruining my life or anything. I don't really like the portrayal of Scotty either and takes that character too far in the comedy direction. I digress. Perhaps STID and the role reversals thing also contribute to that off feeling too.
I would have bought Spock/Uhura over a longer period of time and perhaps better suited to TV, but the coming together had occurred off screen in the movie. Spock/Kirk also feels a bit forced esp. in STID, though Spock/Bones is always good.

Yes DSC Spock is emotional too, but he's recovering from the affects of the red angel visions and there's scope to gradually become at least similar to the TOS era Spock in spirit and hopefully at some point, appearance. It may or may not happen but I don't think me or other fans necessarily miss the point, we can just accept the DSC version for what it is. Maybe it would work better as a different Vulcan character but either way it's not going to be Nimoy.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:16am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

Did somebody say rating system?!
*In a strange cloud a social scientist appears*
Hello peasants!
So a four star rating is often used because it is easy to understand for the casual viewer. (0 stars: get torches and pitchforks) 1 Star: garbage, 2 Stars: meh, 3 stars: good, 4 stars: exceptional. As you obviously have noticed it is actually a five star system which is very common in social studies. Not much range but very good comparability and easy to understand.
Of course Jammer also uses half stars. So it is, as some have pointed out, actually a 10 star rating. 10 point scale rating are also often used. It gives a good mix between range and comparability. Everything above that of course lacks in comparability.
Problem with Jammers rating is that he watches shows that he wants to watch which leaves the
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:04am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions


i thought of that too, and I am sure they were tempted to have ti that the photo taken at the end of the episode was always on the phone.. just like Picard knowing how to play the flute. Tempting, fascinating, but I'm glad Seth resisted the urge to go there.

I loved this episode. I got so much out of it that I'm in tears thinking about how it moved me. Simple, elegant, and perfect
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:14am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

@ Boo.
It is interesting that people came up with a term for women in movies who make no mistakes. Sure, we had male heros who made no mistakes for 80 years and never invented a word for that. Why? because certain people don't have a problem with a man being awesome. The moment women get the same hero treatment that is of course a sign for sjw. Again let us not forget that people who hate women or whatnot cannot say this openly because most people don't accept that anymore so they have to come up with terms like mary sue.
Rey from star wars 7 is a good example. Certain people were shouting Mary Sue Mary Sue. The first time Rey flies a ship (which she obviously knows as she explains) she barely makes it off the ground and then crashes it into a building. Or when she fights Kylo Ren these certain people where shouting:" How can she beat him. He is trained and she is not." They ignore of course that Kylo is bleeding out and when he focuses for a moment almost instantly beats her.
A few male heroes that could do no wrong.
John Maclaine
All the Batmans
All the Chuck Norris
All the Clint Eastwoods
All the: Sylvester Stallone, Steven Seagal, Jason Statham, van Damme and so on.
Neo in the Matrix
Indiana Jones
Ethan Hunt
James Bond
And so on and so on and so on
But nobody has a problem with these Bros being infallible. No. And nobody ever came up with a derogatory term for this kind of hero even though we see that type far more often and for a far longer time. Certainly just an oversight.
Set Bookmark
Joe M.
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:08am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Sacrifice of Angels

I don't think I'd ever been as invested in a Star Trek series - maybe even a TV series in general - as much as I was in the Dominion War arc up to this point. The morality of the TNG federation was being tested and re-examined in a time of war. A rich cast of characters had to make difficult, sometimes dubious decisions in search of the greater good. And... wasn't enough? Wow! What's going to happen next? Oh. None of it mattered.

It's not a DEM, but that doesn't mean it's a satisfying resolution. I've read interviews with Ira Behr about this episode, and how he felt it was a great climax for Sisko and his relationship with the Prophets. Ok. I don't disagree...but there was so much more going on here than that. I've often wondered if perhaps certain voices in the writer's room had precedence, and their plots and ideas have a higher priority.

I like that DS9 addresses religion and spirituality. I love that it did politics and conflict so well. I'm just so disappointed it couldn't mix the two better than what we got in Sacrifice of Angels and the last two seasons.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 12:46am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

I thought of TNG’s The Inner Light, where Picard lives the life of Kamin so his doomed civilization would not be forgotten.
Set Bookmark
Mr Man
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 12:38am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

A so-so episode, ramping up the threat levels to 11, but that's par for the course with DISC. A few of things worth mentioning:

Michael now has her mother and her mother figure (Georgiou) in her life. I wonder how that's gonna work out...

Georgoou's motivation in the Stamets and Culber dynamic is one of enjoying other people's discomfort, nothing more. She used that mirror-universe information to make the other characters in that room uncomfortable. Much like it made a segment of the viewership uncomfortable...

Peck's portrayal of Spock works for me, that snarkiness is right on the money, very TOS. Glad there was some bridge building between Spock and Michael's characters.

What is it with this apparent dislike of an unexplained sister in Spock's backstory. It's not like it hasn't happened before (cough cough, Sybok, cough cough).

On that note, where is Sybok anyway...
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 12:29am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Project Daedalus


"speaking crew on the actual ship"

Bryce and Rhys are male characters; they're on the bridge in most episodes (in season 2, nearly every episode or perhaps every episode). They have names and talk. They're certainly more important characters than Pollard ('Replacement Doctor').

Not sure why you don't see the black man and the Asian man on the bridge. They're there.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 12:22am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

This was quite the episode! At first I was worried this would be just another filler episode that tried to sell an old TNG/VOY plot but with an Orville twist. I ended up really liking this episode, not only because it showed depth to Gordon's character besides being the practical joker, but also for the concepts of having affection for simulated people.

I think this episode hit very close to a perfect balance between humor, philosophy, and pulling on the emotions of the viewers. The latter is IMO the closest any Orville episode has scored since "Home" earlier this season. Viewers like myself who have watched all of Star Trek are reminded of similar episodes with the concept of characters becoming emotionally invested in an illusion, such as Barclay's episodes, "11001001", "Galaxy's Child", and more recently, "If Memory Serves". "Lasting Impressions" is unique in that the main setting is not in the time frame of the rest of the show, but in *our* time. It definitely left me feeling hyper-aware of my own mortality and the meaningless of my daily life in the perspective of humans hundreds of years from now. It was a little unsettling, but not enough to detract from the rest of the episode.

The episode cleverly pulls its message with an A-plot initially focused on holodeck - er, "simulator" - addiction. This concept is present throughout and is mentioned more than once by other crew members. However, the real thought provoker here is the question posed to viewers: if you know something isn't real, does that diminish the value you place on it? Fortunately this is left open-ended, and for good reason. With the rise of increasingly realistic digital content, is our modern society comfortable placing value on digital content at the expense of real life content?What does that mean for younger generations that are now dependent on technology - they're missing out on the benefits of old-school ways, but is that necessarily "bad"?

Back to the episode, I also have to give credit to Scott Grimes and guest star Leighton Meester (playing Laura) for playing these characters convincingly. I got the sense that they were "real" people with depth, which in Gordon's case, is something that has been lacking thus far. What would really help Gordon's character was if he had a recurring romantic interest on the show, and over the course of the show we see him develop a legitimate, deep, meaningful, and not holodeck - er, "simulator" - relationship.

The B-plot played a supplementary role. Bortus' and Klyden's addictions to "ancient" cigarettes played as the "minor" to the A-plot. It's a rather obvious in-your-face method of pushing the addiction concept, which oddly enough works to add subtlety to the other concept. I'm starting to wonder if the writers are able to write stories for Bortus without being 100% serious or 100% comedy, it seems all we get are extremes. To be fair though, I can imagine it's hard to write character stories for such an unemotional species; after all, almost every Star Trek episode featuring a Vulcan has been 100% serious and very little comedy, with the exception of Star Trek VI.

I don't like to give out ratings, since the method of awarding stars is subjective to each viewer. I'll stick with a Vague Scale™. "Lasting Impressions" is in the upper third on the Vague Scale™ of Orville episodes.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 12:15am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

Very good episode. At last Orville can take it's place among high quality Star Trek.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 11:53pm (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S3: The Shipment

So much for copying their rifle. Whoops!
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 11:50pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

I do wonder if the threat of Control is the reason we won't be seeing any cyborgs or technologically enhanced humans post Discovery. I can see Starfleet quietly, politely purging the ranks to prevent another Airiam incident. What would that mean for Detmer, though?
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 11:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S3: Exile

Good episode, creepy, but believable. The telepath stuff gives me the Heeby-Jeebies
Set Bookmark
Brian Lear
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 11:23pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

thank you, Wolfstar, for the most accurate description thus far for why Michael Burnham isn't working as a character.
Set Bookmark
Alan Roi
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 10:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions


I think this would have been a stronger intro to the season that what we ended up with. It was a very affecting episode, IMO. However, what it comes down to is will advertisers fork out the cash for comercial time. From what I know, same day advertising brings in the most $$$$, +7 DVR viewing, not so much. I watch it same day, but as I am not a neilsen family I have no input where it counts.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 10:20pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

I really enjoyed this episode, and Bortus smoking on the bridge was hilarious. My only real nitpick was that it seems a bit of a stretch that they would have so little knowledge about life in the 21st century, to the point they didn't even know what a cell phone was, yet they watch old movies all the time and the captain even has Kermit the frog sitting on his desk. It also seems pretty unlikely that all the stuff from that time capsule would still look brand new. Not a big deal though, still a great episode. This show just keeps getting better.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 9:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S1: The Squire of Gothos

Ah I'm round to this one. Q Beta (or Discord Alpha, for those who follow deLancie's equine appearances)

This HAD to be the inspiration for Q, no doubt about it.

I do give it a great deal of credit for being watchable twice - the first time with Trelane as malevolent, and the second time with him as a child playing with "pets". Also a very early take on the argument of having pets to begin with.
Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 9:21pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: Rules of Engagement

To clarify some more:

Sisko does say that they don't put civilians "even potentially at risk," so Sisko does seem to believe that the situation was not a grey area in terms of what the correct command decision was. But again, I get the impression it's because Worf focused on the wrong thing in a grey area, which is made worse in retrospect because Worf's heart was impure.

I don't like Sisko's "smile because the troops can't see vulnerability" stuff, don't get me wrong. And I can understand why you view this as a key to his behaviour throughout the episode. It certainly maybe is what Moore was trying to get across, and seems consistent with the way he writes military material. But I don't really think Sisko's behaviour in the episode body reads that nefarious to me. I think he fully believed the truth was that Worf's actions didn't earn extradition; that they were a bad call, not in keeping with the spirit of Starfleet, but not criminal.
Set Bookmark
Alan Roi
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 9:05pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

@ Boo

What Michael Burnham is is a lead. Again, these days some people think Mary Sue can mean whatever they want it to. But the more they broaden their use of the term the more meaningless it becomes. Your definition is entirely subjective and could cover anyone from Sherlock Holmes to Dorothy Gale to Thomas Magnum to Ellen Ripley. Sorry, FAIL.

The people writing this series don't need to explain anything. All they have to do is continue telling the story. Whether the people who don't like how Discovery is told, the character of Michael Burnham or her existennce in Star Trek is their problem.
Set Bookmark
Alan Roi
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 8:57pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Project Daedalus


I go by recurring characters who have a significant amount of dialogue and character time and in around 1/2 the episodes or more. So for me its been, Tilly, Michael, Stamets, Saru, Lorca/Pike, Tyler, Georgiou. There's a mix of male/femaile minor background characters which are about even, but Culber, Sarek and Leland have gotten a lot more story time than any of the other female characters who've either been in one or two eps or are background characters.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 8:53pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Red Angel

@ Alan Roi

Mary Sue has became an umbrella term used by people to identify pretentious lead characters whose importance is too much overinflated in the story, and everything revolves around them and only them in a way that feels forced. They don't need to be flawless. A lot of leads are like that because many writers cannot write authentic characters perhaps but it isn't arbitrary for leads to be like that. That isn't the definition of lead.

" As for Spock never mentioning her, what about his wife, his father, his brother, his ex-gIrlfriend. Absolutely none were mentioned before we met them and he was forced to acknowledge them. "

They weren't as important as Michael is.
I don't understand why you all insist still comparing her to previous never mentioned before characters like Sybok when the writers themselves acknowledged Michael is different and they promised a canon explanation for the retcon that wasn't needed for those other characters. You don't need they need to explain but they do. You don't think it's weird Spock never mentioned her, but they do.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 8:50pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

Great episode, and love the 11-year-long discussion in this thread.

While this is undoubtedly Trek at its best, I always wished that the end scene would have revealed that this whole series of events never really happened. Instead, what if it was revealed that this whole episode was really a story that young Jake wrote? Not only would that avoid the reset issue, but it would truly make us believe in Jake as a writer. Imagine the look on Ben's face as he finished reading this story by his son. It wouldn't take away from the character development, either. Instead, it would show that Jake really internalized the lessons this episode stresses. What self-realization this would be!

Set Bookmark
William B
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 8:48pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: Rules of Engagement

@Elliott, "It seems to me that the episode presented the case pretty clearly that Sisko's priority was protecting Worf, not ferreting out the truth. That's what that whole coda was about, no? "

Hm.... I think I agree with you in broad contours. But I think my read of the episode is different enough that Sisko's behaviour isn't so objectionable in my read.

The episode's title is "rules of engagement" and the subject is obviously on that, but the actual, literal 'rules of engagement' that Worf was supposed to/not supposed to abide by are never discussed. This is one of the episode's many flaws. But I think that the intent of the episode was that Worf was in a legal grey area. The priority is to protect civilians, but the odds of a civilian entering a combat situation *are* extremely low. The Defiant was in mid-battle. If the odds were zero, obviously Worf is right; if the odds were high, obviously Worf is wrong. If the odds are infinitesimal -- well, where is the line drawn? I think even if we assume that there are official rules of engagement, they necessarily will involve some wiggle room, so that even if the situation depicted in this episode is incoherent, that it is attempting to *represent* a grey-area situation. The episode is so badly done that it's hard to know if my hypothesis of what the episode is attempting to depict is correct, but that's still how it read to me.

At the episode's end, Sisko tells Worf he's damn right he shouldn't have fired on civilians...but I think this instruction is not because Worf did break any laws or violate any regulations, but because, with retrospect and clarity, Sisko can tell that Worf erred on the side of fighting when he should have erred on the side of protecting civilians. However, if the situation were somewhat different, Worf would have been right. So I don't think this means that Sisko was lying or misrepresenting the situation in his opening statement and in his general approach to the defense. The only thing in his opening statement that seems to be an exaggeration is when he describes the accident as "unavoidable," which is a word that I'd say is too loaded for him to use given that he believes it could have been avoided. But otherwise Sisko's argument that Worf should not be extradited because he made a command decision based on the information he knew at the time is not only made because he cares about and wants to protect his officer, but because he believes this is true. I think it's possible for Sisko to both believe that Worf made a poor command decision and that he did nothing illegal, and certainly not extradition-worthy.

So anyway, with that in mind, I want to distinguish between two points here. One is whether Sisko is more concerned with helping Worf or finding out the truth. I agree with you that his *priority* was helping Worf.

The other is whether Sisko's strategy suggests dishonesty. You seemed to be reducing Sisko's argument to impugning the character of the other captain, which is not only "protecting Worf" but illogical and cruel. I don't think that's the case, because I think finding out why the other ship decloaked is both relevant and is seeking out the truth. If the captain decloaked because he was aggressive or incompetent, that does seem to me to be relevant.

I think another place where the situation is different from Picard in The First Duty and The Pegasus is that Picard wasn't acting as Wesley or Riker's attorney. The Measure of a Man makes clear that in these JAG trials where command officers are advocates, they are responsible for zealously representing/prosecuting their case. Obviously that doesn't extend into lying or other trickery, but I don't think that's what Sisko is doing here. I think he's trying to find any facts of the case that will help his client, which is what, as Worf's counsel, he should want to do, given that the adversarial legal system is still in place.

Now, all that said, maybe Sisko *shouldn't* have been Worf's counsel. Maybe it's inappropriate for Sisko to be both the CO who needs to find the truth about Worf's actions and the lawyer who needs to zealously defend him. It actually does seem like an obvious conflict of interest. In "Dax," Sisko didn't have any responsibility for the actions that Curzon had ostensibly taken and so there wasn't much conflict in him representing Jadzia Dax, but in this case he probably "should" be impartial when trying to investigate what happened and also be *required* to be partial while actually dealing with Worf's case. I think this is part of what makes the, uh, "pro-military masturbating" tone of the final scene rankle.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 8:46pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Lasting Impressions

One thing this episodes showed is that they don't need to pay for space spectaculars like the one in Identity 2 to produce a good episode. The economics of production must be crucial in decisions about whether a show is viable.

But of course if big space spectaculars are needed to get viewers...
Next ►Page 1 of 2,413
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2019 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.