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: 898 (Showing 26-50)

Set Bookmark
Thu, Jul 16, 2020, 12:46am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek: Lower Decks


I don't think I've ever seen the people here so united in their opinion of a new Trek show.

Looks like CBS has finally managed to do the impossible, and got most of us to agree on something for once. Even Jammer finally decided that he had enough of their sh*t.

They've crossed the line indeed.

"You're probably right that I'd enjoy some ORV episodes -- if there's a good story to be told and I have even a slight of appreciation for the characters, and the locker-room humor is kept to a minimum. But I believe that brand of humor is one of the pillars of the show -- isn't it?"

Not really.

They laid the juvenile humor really thick in the pilot, and it gets less prominent as the show progresses (though it's always there in the background). The show also greatly improves in other ways, too.

Besides, if you're enough of a Trek completist to endure the (literally) crappy humor of "Lower Decks", you have no excuse to avoid the Orville. It's the Trekkiest show we've had on TV in the past 15 years.

Look... I can't guarantee that you'll end up liking it. But you'll definitely like it more than this new Trek animated series (the stupid humor being a potential problem in both shows). And I'm pretty sure you'll like it more than Discovery or Picard as well.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 21, 2020, 5:57am (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2


Since you are perfectly willing to voice... ehm... "non-OTDP thoughts" anyway, I wonder why you don't just speak up about the things you wanted to talk about.

I apologize if your intentions here were sincere, but you've made a terrible first impression:

(1) A person whose sole contribution to this website is a direct attack on another poster.
(2) Peppering that comment with random Trek references, which just looks like you're jumping through artificial hoops in order to make your comment more "legitimate".
(3) Making the analogy between internet discussions and boxing fights. If that's how you view things, that's already a bad sign.
(4) Complaining about "suppression of ideas", yet not willing to write *anything* about those ideas.

All of this just looks like you're trying to pick a fight.

Again, my apologies if I've misunderstood your intentions, but that's how it looks.

So forgive me if I don't see any reason to "justify" or "defend" myself in front of you. I generally wait until the other person demonstrates he can have a civil discussion for at least 5 seconds, before I begin to care about what what they think.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 4:14am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

@Dave in MN
"It's pretty common for a intellectual conversation that's reached an impasse to get bogged down by linguistics."

The silliest thing about these semantic debates is that this left/right blame game is completely irrelevant. I mean, of-course, it is relevant when it comes to election day, but it isn't relevant when we're talking about the big picture.

The big picture is that the western world (Europe as well as the USA) is slowly transitioning into a 1984-style dystopia where people's lives are destroyed just because they are thinking "wrong" thoughts.

The combination of cancel culture and present day technology is downright terrifying, and it's getting worse every year.

This is no longer an issue of left vs right. This is *very* serious business, and every thinking person - regardless of which side of the political map they are on - should fight against these trends in any way they can.

The fact that some people still think this is some political game, or a minor quibble about economic systems, astounds me.

@Jason B.
"Elliott your focus on economics as the central axis of the conservative versus liberal paradigms in the USA is obsolete and not really relevant anymore."


When the biggest advocates of modern "liberalism" are the most greedy cooperations on the planet (hollywood, most TV networks, google, facebook, etc), that tells you how much the traditional definitions are worth...

@Cody B

"They don’t social distance very well when running out with merchandise or when they smell blood and swarm up for someone’s beating."

I actually LOL'ed at that.

Maybe we should give these thugs bigger sticks, so they can do social distancing properly when they beat a guy up?

What a mad world we live in...
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 18, 2020, 10:43am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

"I'm just tickled by this idea that the limousine liberals in Hollywood and elsewhere censoring TV shows and rebranding syrup and butter are considered 'the left.' "

Yes, I agree that this madness has nothing to do with traditional left ideals.

But that's exactly the problem: There's a considerable mass of people who hold very twisted (and very unliberal) beliefs and call themselves "liberals". From Hollywood to Silicon Valley to the mobs on the streets who vandalize statues.

Whether we like it or not, these people have decided to wear the colors of our political team. They also vote accordingly.

Most people - both on the left and the right - accepts them these guys as liberals. Both the Democrat and the Republican politicians treat them as being liberals.

And these guys are not a minority. We've reached the point where these crazies outnumber people like you and me in our own camp.

Pretending that this isn't happening isn't going to solve anything. Saying "but these aren't true liberals!" may be technically true, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation: It is these guys who are setting the tone for the "left" nowadays.

This, of-course, puts a traditional liberal like myself in a heck of bind. It's one of the reasons I'm no longer willing to "play" for either "team".
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 7:44am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

@Dave in MN

"We've started down the slippery slope .... when will the book burnings begin?"

I'll say we're already past the point.

Censoring classic films and TV shows online is the 21st century analogue of burning books. It's downright scary, what's going on in the world today... all in the name of freedom and equality and fighting prejudice, of-course.


Paw Patrol wasn't actually cancelled. The world is not *that* crazy... yet.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 6:55am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

The most ironic thing here, is that the first person to explicitly mention cancel culture here was me, and I'm not a conservative at all.

I always was a proud liberal. And you know why? Because liberalism *used* to be about fighting for human rights and for freedom and against prejudice.

Unfortunately this is no longer the case. I'm reading Trent's last comment, and it chills my blood.

Same with Booming, and - to a lesser extent - with Elliott. WTF? When did *my* side become this hateful and close-minded? We are supposed to represent the enlightened good guys!

It's downright amazing, how far people are willing to go to justify/trivialize rotten behavior just because it comes from their side. It's even more amazing to see Star Trek fans doing it. Seriously, guys, what the heck is wrong with you? Can't you see that what's our side is doing right now is WRONG?
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 4:25pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor


2018 is 2018. 2020 is 2020. In case you haven't noticed, the entire world has been completely transformed in the past few weeks.

And you gotta be completely blind to not realize what's going on right now. Just open the news, for God's sake. The entire nation is on fire, and it is OUR SIDE who are doing most of the burning.

Are you denying this is happening? Or perhaps you are claiming that the far right are doing even more monstrous things?

Look... This entire competition of which side has the worse villains is pointless. It does nothing except spread more hate, which is the last thing the world needs right now.

The sad truth is that both the left and the right have proven that they are capable of really despicable things. So perhaps we should speak up against the despicable acts themselves, instead of blaming a specific political camp?

Can we agree that what happened in Seattle is a thousand times of wrong, regardless of the ideology that sparked it?

Can we agree that bullying people due to the color of their skins is wrong, regardless of whether that color is black or white?

Can we agree that cancel culture is a terrible terrible thing, regardless of which side of the political spectrum is doing it?

Can we agree that the current attempts by certain groups to erase and rewrite history 1984-style is a terrifying prospect?

Can we agree that when such serious unprecedented things are happening, we need to put our political differences aside and collectively speak up against them?

Stop and think for a moment: What would Captain Picard say about this situation? What would Captain Sisko say?
Set Bookmark
Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 7:12am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S2: Carbon Creek

It is certainly bewildering to hear that "Far Beyond the Stars" got 5 stars, when Jammer's scale only goes from 0 to 4. ;-)

As for Carbon Creek: For some reason it's a polarizing episode. I don't really know why. I've seen some reviewers giving it a perfect score (some even lauding it as "the best episode of Enterprise) while others give it a low rating like Jammer.

It's funny because to me, personally, this episode is the epitome of mediocrity. It's gimmicky (in a good way) and fun, but that's all it is. Either 2.5 or a low 3 from me.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 11:02pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

"So I agree with Michael who is right to call out Elliott for, as I see it, trying to stir up something out of nothing for what must be some warped beliefs."

Shall I remind you that it was Michael who dug up this 9-year old post by Elliott and used it as an excuse to start a fight?

It indeed seems like somebody here is trying to stir up trouble, but it ain't Elliott (nor is it any other of the regulars). Let's not give them the satisfaction, alright?
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 6:02am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

"but, as Jason R said, that we hadn’t seen or at least featured any non-white Bajorans before."

I'm not sure this is true.

But if even if it is, why would the person who made the casting choices be aware of this tidbit? Does the DS9 writer Bible says "All Bajorans are to be light-skinned"?

Come to think of it, was he even aware of the character being Bajoran? It had zero implication on the story. If it weren't for
the makeup on her nose, she could have been human.

In short, I really think you're reading way too much into this.

Also, I think that John's point *is* relevant here, albeit indirectly. If Avery Brooks, who is black himself, specifically asked for Sisko's girlfriend to be black as well, this sets a precedent. When we have this example, I find the notion of such a decision to be "offensive" quite hard to swallow.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 5:38am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

"but we all know full well what was behind the casting choice in the real world- some executive was afraid if blowback for depicting a black man with a white woman, even one in alien makeup."

We "know" that? No we don't.

I agree with you that, from a production perspective, this casting choice wasn't a coincidence. So what? That executive you're talking about may have simply defaulted to what he personally found natural.

If the first image that comes to my mind for "the wife of a guy of ethnicity X" is a gal of ethnicity X, does that make me a racist?

You could argue that it doesn't make much sense in-universe.

You could also argue that since this is Star Trek we are talking about, we should expect the people in charge to make a conscious positive effort to avoid this kind of thing - if only to emphasize the point.

And these arguments have some merit.

But calling it a racist decision? Or in Elliott's own words: an "offensive" one? I think that's taking things way too far.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 11:59pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor


I have no idea why your post would be deemed "ugly" either. Some people are really touchy these days.

The craziest thing here is that I can't tell which side Michael is on. Was your post too PC or not PC enough? It's funny when reality is so insane that we can't even be sure which side we are offending with our alleged terrible thought crimes.

That said, I completely disagree with your claim that the casting here was racist in any way. Why shouldn't Jake's wife be black? And why should the matter of race even be an issue in an episode that has absolutely nothing to do with race?

Besides, if you hold this kind of casting choices against DS9, then I'd argue that the rest of Trek is equally "guilty", including Voyager.

Indeed, let's look at the Voyager crew. Where are all the Chinese and (asian) Indians who make up almost half of the current population of our planet? Where are all the North Africans and Arabs? Should we start knocking off points for random Voyager episodes, just because the major guest star was a white European?

This way, madness lies.
(and if you don't believe me, look out a window)
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 8:31pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S5: Empok Nor

You didn't just claim that modern Trek has better writing then DS9, did you? Modern Trek gave us clear story arcs? Seriously?

While it is true that shorter seasons *could* have the effect of more focused writing and tighter story arcs, this isn't what we got in reality.
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 8:07am (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

"Sounds like you're a bit brow beaten by us haterz. As much as I find it rather bizarre in this case, like what you like."

Was that sarcastic remark really necessary?

It's a two-way street. Fans who defend the show should not be mocked any more than those who dislike it, and Tommy's latest posts were quite reasonable and balanced.

Not that I *agree* with the things he posted, but that's what this discussion forum is for. It's fine to disagree. IDIC and all that, you know.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jun 8, 2020, 6:32pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

I just love how these people drop out from nowhere, scream "those who disagree with me are being bad bad boys", and then disappear back to oblivion without saying a word about Star Trek.

Such an agreeable, friendly, respectable thing to do, don't you think? We tripods should definitely learn about courtesy and social etiquette from these guys.

Now back to Trek:

I think the statement of "the Trek writers of today have no imagination and go straight to the gutter of the lowest common denominator" is 100% true.

Anybody who disagrees with this statement is welcome to say why.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jun 8, 2020, 5:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S3: The Savage Curtain

That Lincoln/Uhura dialog sure makes me long for Star Trek's future. Imagine that: A future without EITHER racism or the PC garbage that's going on right now.

(I wonder how many people are going to misinterpret the previous paragraph as me being racist. What a surreal world we live in, these days)
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 2, 2020, 12:13am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Face of the Enemy

Is that really a plot hole, though?

Troi was attending a seminar and was kidnapped while returning to her guest quarters. Even if the people in charge of the seminar routinely checked on their guests (and why should they, really?), it would have been easy for the Romulans to fake a message from Troi saying that she doesn't feel well and she wants to rest in her quarters.

Anyway, I agree that it's a great thriller of an episode. Definitely one of the best in season 6.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jun 1, 2020, 11:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

@Peter G.

Nothing Freudian about it. Just a word I didn't know how to spell until you corrected me.

@James White

"Why do I come here? I really don't know. At first, it was a whim. Now, I realize many of you are some of the most thoughtful and decent people out there."

Thank you for the compliment.

Now let me ask you this:

Do you really think "the most thoughtful and decent people out there" have decided to dedicate their entire lives to bitching on a Star Trek website? And that we need a person like you to tell us to help people in need and so forth?

I mean, that's basically what you have assumed here. Knowing the kind of people we are, does this assumption make any kind of sense to you?

"Protest. Tell politicians to go fuck themselves. Stand for something."

One of the things I stand up for, is the importance of continuing to live our lives as normally as possible, even in the face of crisis.

From spending time with our families to discussing our favorite TV shows, it is the little things that make our lives worth living. Even if it occasionally means that we get into heated debates on "trivialities". That's part of life too.

So you want to me protest? Very well:

I protest against the notion that Trekkies should stop discussing Star Trek on a website dedicated to Star Trek just because things have gotten rough in the real world.

Oh, and lest I forget: The politicians (from both sides) *can* go and **** themselves. There. I've said it. Not that this will make any kind of difference, but venting against a crummy situation is also part of life.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jun 1, 2020, 3:23pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

"I'm not sure what "this" is. I have written several papers about the USA."

"This" means actual reality.

Unfortunately, given the stuff you've written here on the subject so far, understanding reality does not seem to be your strong suit.

Not really surprising, for a person who believes that writing academic papers on a country makes him more knowledgeable then the people who actually live there...
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jun 1, 2020, 3:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

@James White
"It's why I continuously harp on people for bitching about silly things in ST when the world is on fire."

Mind telling us what we should do instead?

I'm serious. This isn't the first time you've said this. You seem to imply that we are being irresponsible and that we should be doing something active about the situation.

So I'm asking you straight out: What, exactly, is it that you expect the people here to do? If you have any useful ideas in this area, I'll be very interested in hearing them.

Because I've been wrecking my brains on this for three months now, and I came up empty-handed. The situation sucks, but right now I see no alternative to sitting tight and waiting it out.

At any rate, while we are waiting it out, we might as well continue with our lives. And if we're on a Star Trek discussion board, we might as well talk about Star Trek.

Besides, the current state of Star Trek is closely related to the current state of the world. You're not seriously suggesting that we stop talking about what TPTB are doing to Star Trek, are you?
Set Bookmark
Sun, May 31, 2020, 10:35am (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2


Looks like the currently fashionable cynicism has stuck to you too...

I don't like Elon Musk either (to put it mildly) but this doesn't change the fact that today is a big day for space enthusiasts all over the world.

The Flacon 9/Dragon combination isn't just "a new bus". It's a technology that's far beyond anything else we currently have, both in terms of cost and versatility. It's the first step towards returning to the moon and beyond.

You know, for a person so desperate for some positivity in their life, you sure are bent to look at the negative side of things...
Set Bookmark
Wed, May 27, 2020, 8:49pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

@James White
"...decided that success would be exclusively defined by immediate viewership."

You know what's the saddest part is?

If CBS had actually done what's needed to maximize immediate viewership, Star Trek would have been in far better shape.

First step would be to realize that when you have a Star Trek show that's hidden behind a paywall, the vast majority of your viewers are going to be Trek fans. Trek fans of many different types and personalities and ages and needs... but Trek fans nevertheless. So it makes little point to pander to any other demographic.

Seems like CBS realized this when they first conceived ST:P, because they've found the PERFECT pitch to hook Trekkies with: The legendary Patrick Stewart portraying the even more legendary Jean Luc Picard.

So far so good. That's "shut up and take my money!" material, right there.

But then, unfortunately, they seemingly forgot who their target audience is. In the end, there is very little in ST:P that is even remotely aimed at Trek fans.

The one big exception is the nostalgia factor. CBS got that part right (at least from a business perspective). There's a reason why "Nepenthe" is the most well-received episode of ST:P. There's also a reason why Jammer was willing to forgive ten hours of nonsense when the endpoint was a touching scene between Picard and Data. Most of us love this stuff.

The problem is that you can't base an entire season on nostalgia, even with Picard as your main character. That's why we have all the cheesy action scenes, the mcguffins, the violence, the torture porn, the mystery boxes, the nonsensical plot... and the fact is that all these were aimed at a mainstream audience THAT DOESN'T EVEN WATCH THE SHOW.

The percentage of actual viewers of ST:P who think these things are good is tiny. Even among the fiercest defenders of the show, you are not going to find many who argue that these things make the show *better*.

In short:

If CBS had seriously tried to reach the goal of maximizing immediate viewership, they would have created a much better show. And then we would not be sitting here, arguing with one other whether the show is good or bad.

Instead, we would be sitting side by side, enjoying a thoughtful well-written story worthy of Picard's iconic legacy. A show that gives this beloved character the proper farewell he deserves.
Set Bookmark
Wed, May 27, 2020, 11:17am (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

"(And less of the comments on others comments about comments on comments ;-P)"

I just have to comment on this.

Does this make my comment "a comment about a comment on comments on other comments about comments on comments"? ;-P

"Is a media franchise capable of having a culture? A pop culture sub-culture, if you will? Is adherance to that established culture important? Or does distancing from it allow "This isn't X" to be a valid argument? Or is that merely a fandom practice that has no bearing on a final produce, its success or failure, and something creators should ignore?"

These are indeed interesting questions, and I don't pretend to know the answers.

But I think you're ignoring a very important consideration here: What did the original creator of the franchise want? Should that have relevance as well?

Star Trek was created with a very specific vision in mind: To show us a better humanity and give us hope for the future. This fact isn't the invention of some geek culture. It was mentioned countless of times in Roddenberry's own words.

Leaving everything else aside, doesn't this vision deserve to be protected? At least to some extent?

We should also remember that we aren't just talking about some crazy caprice here. It's not like Roddenberry had an obsession to broccoli and the color purple. We are talking about a genuinely important, hopeful, positive vision for the future.

Is it okay for the current IP owners to just throw all this away as they please? I don't think so. Nor do I think that the fans who feel betrayed and/or angry are "overreacting". This *is* a big deal and it should be treated as such.

"DS9 was vastly different to them both, but again, the changes to the universe and show culture happened because of good storytelling. I mostly blame Ron Moore for this, but hey, he had a vision for a slightly less perfect Federation."

DS9 is really a borderline case.

On the one hand, they made a very real effort to respect everything that came before.

On the other hand, it *did* become increasingly dark and warlike, to the point where the question "is DS9 still Trek?" was a valid one.

I know of some Trekkies who can't accept DS9 as Star Trek because of this. I get where they are coming from, even though I do not share their opinion. This is a grey area where a variety of individual opinions can make sense.

With the new shows, however, the situation is quite clear cut. If you removed the words "Star Trek" from the title and changed a few iconic names, the result would be simply UNRECOGNIZABLE as Star Trek.

Some people don't mind this. Others are positively excited by these changes. Both reactions are perfectly fine. To each his own.

The problem begins when people are denying that these massive changes are even taking place. No, there is no precedent for this kind of complete overhaul in the history of Star Trek. Anybody who says otherwise is either lying or delusional.
Set Bookmark
Tue, May 26, 2020, 3:58pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

If it were just a matter of Stewart participating in ST:P, I doubt it would have had the same effect. It's the fact that the actor actively campaigned for this change, combined with the knowledge that this was always how he felt about the character.

"As for Stewart himself, he's an actor. They're usually not nearly as clever as the characters they play. What do you do..."

LOL. Well, that certainly made me feel better ;-)

(doesn't really solve my problem. But at least I can now laugh about it instead of feeling miserable, so thanks)
Set Bookmark
Tue, May 26, 2020, 3:32pm (UTC -5)
Re: PIC S1: Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2

@James White

I personally recommend both Black Mirror and the Expanse, and I'm known for being *very* picky in the stuff I watch.

Doesn't change the fact that having more variety would be better. Why does EVERY sci fi show be dystopic and grim these days? Heck, Black Mirror isn't even American...

"Just declare Picard 'over' with All Good Things. Or maybe even Nemesis if you can stomach it. Kurtzman sucks so bad that honestly I don't consider his shows ST."

Sure. That's not the problem.

The "only" thing that's ruined for me is the enjoyment of watching one specific actor when he plays one specific role: Patrick Stewart portraying Picard.

I know it sounds petty, but I'm not doing this on purpose! I'm not stupid. I know the difference between the fictional character of Jean Luc Picard (who is still a role model for me) and the person who plays him.

I just can't help but feel the actor's own contempt to the role that he is playing, every time I see him onscreen. It takes me straight out of the story. It's silly, I know, but you can't control these things.
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2020 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.