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: 1,202 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 49
Set Bookmark
Jonah Falcon
Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 10:57pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: In the Flesh

"Anyhow, the weakness of the episode is the lack of credibility of the 8472's plan to impersonate Star Fleet to such a degree from like 60,000 light years away."

The Dominion Changelings wave hello.
Set Bookmark
Jonah Falcon
Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 10:56pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: In the Flesh

I loved this episode because of Ray Walston. Oh, and because of Ray Walston. Could have used more Ray Walston.
Set Bookmark
Jonah Falcon
Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 10:49pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S5: Course: Oblivion

"Does it? To whom? What's to say the "how we lived" bears any consequence on the "grand scheme of things"? Who says there IS a "grand scheme of things"?!? "

But they did affect the lives of others. They helped other people in need that the real Voyager didn't. Regardless of their fate, their help and charity lived beyond them.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 9:12am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S1: Fight or Flight

Hi Chess,

I really like ENT although it's definitely a step (or two!) below reaching the heights TOS, TNG, DS9 reached. I like the idea of a prequel series and what it meant to achieve. I've gone through the series probably 4-5 times with the latter viewings mainly focusing on episodes I liked particularly.

As for how dark the show is, it gets grim/dark/pragmatic in Season 3 which is its best season and one of the best seasons of any Trek franchise. The 1st 2 seasons are hit and miss (mostly miss) but do have a handful of pretty good episodes, but nothing really jumps out to me as being dark. The crew is pretty green, naive in these seasons.

As for this "Fight or Flight" the scene with the dead bodies on hooks was, as I recall, fairly brief and although it is quite gruesome to think further about it, ENT maintains a standard of decency about blood/gore that typifies what Star Trek should be -- so this scene is a bit of an outlier but I didn't think it was unacceptable. I think a few episodes of DSC violated this blood/gore depiction "ethos" (if you will) as did TNG's "Conspiracy" which is better suited for "The X-FIles".
Set Bookmark
Mon, Aug 5, 2019, 9:40pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Explorers

@Lew Stone

I guess I'd say the "bi-polar writing" for the Janeway character has to do with her controversial and inconsistent decisions. For example, in "Caretaker" she destroys the array that could get Voyager home and violates the PD in siding with the Ocampa vs. the Kazon. Her character is one that is meant to deeply respect Star Fleet rules, but it doesn't always play out that way.

In "Prey" she's prepared to sacrifice her ship/crew to try to save a wounded 8472 from several Hirogen hunters -- this was a head-scratcher of a decision that was cleverly sorted out for her by 7 of 9.

Janeway wants to respect and observe alien laws, but sometimes she glibly disregards them like in "The Swarm" where she violates their space because she doesn't like bullies. The writing could have been better here making her elaborate on her decision.

Contrast this with the Sisko character and his realpolitik ("In the Pale Moonlight" and "For the Uniform") and I'd say the writing in DS9 is more thoughtful albeit much darker -- though Brooks' acting is much worse overall than Mulgrew's as Janeway. But I also prefer DS9 to VOY.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 10:40am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Explorers

@ Lew Stone,

I've said many times on this forum that I'm not a fan of Avery Brooks' acting -- so I pretty much agree with what you're saying about him. One episode where he actually shines is "In the Pale Moonlight" but generally his huffing/puffing style rubs me the wrong way, his over-acting or under-acting is awkward. Even in "Far Beyond the Stars" his nervous breakdown felt forced although this isn't a huge criticism.

But I must completely disagree with you that he's a better actor than Mulgrew. No way. Brooks had far better writing to work with than Mulgrew did but she did a pretty solid job with the bi-polar writing she was given to work with. I've never really noticed what Mulgrew does with her hands as being a weakness to her acting and sometimes hand mannerisms convey a lot (like in "Chain of Command" with Ronny Cox as Capt. Jellico). So many more positives than negatives about Mulgrew's acting compared to Brooks.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Jul 1, 2019, 12:36pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: The Gamesters of Triskelion


Totally agree with your comment.

That final moment when Shahna looks up at the sky in tears and says those words to Kirk are truly touching -- it's really the only part of this episode worth watching. It is also accompanied by George Duning's mournful/romantic music (the same for when the Companion/Hedford looks at Cochrane through the multi-colored dress in "Metamorphosis").

As you say, it is a "4 star moment, in a 1.5 star ep".

Definitely would be cool to see how Triskelion evolves decades/centuries after Kirk's visit...but I would be skeptical of the Providers keeping their word. They are gamblers after all.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 30, 2019, 3:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S7: All Good Things...

Asher0208’s post touched on some long-held feelings about TNG I’ve had. If I had to describe TNG in 1 word it would be “inconsistent”.

While TNG produced some of the worst Trek ever (Seasons 1&2 in aggregate), it also reached the highest of Trek highs (something VOY, ENT, DSC could not reach). I think what makes TNG their favorite among a lot of fans is episodes like BoBW, “The Inner Light” and “All Good Things…” — that and growing up watching it as their first intro to Trek. But it also did some world-building and told wonderful stories like the Klingon arc that starts with “Sins of the Father”. Of course, introducing the Borg was brilliant — simply the best villains Trek ever came up with. But on the other hand, its inconsistency came out in spades in Season 7.

Asher0208’s discussion on atheism is pretty much spot on. But I do believe Trek mostly tried to be agnostic about faith in the divine/atheism overall. While TNG leaned toward atheism, DS9 (being sort of the antithesis of TNG) went the other way by presenting a more balanced argument. It wasn’t flawless but it was an attempt at balance.

But as Asher0208 rightly says, faith in God is a driving force for good in our society while atheism mostly isn’t. I’d say it totally isn’t. Ultimately when humans don’t believe in God, they believe they should have dominion over other humans — and that is wrong. When humans don’t believe in God, they have no reason to have good morals. So we often see advanced cultures on Trek but their development is an after-thought. TNG was particularly poor in this area because it’s main thing is being science fiction — another way DS9 did a 180 from it. DS9 wasn’t great for science fiction but instead focused on world building. Ultimately, it wound up being more consistently compelling.

And finally about Crusher and Troi — again this is TNG’s hallmark of inconsistency — inconsistency in the main cast. With a giant like Stewart and capable actors like Frakes and Spiner, TNG also had bottom-of-the-barrel McFadden and Sirtis. Admittedly the writing wasn’t great for either of these 2, but neither was the acting. I much prefer Muldaur/Pulaski over McFadden/Crusher. I like Asher0208’s idea for improving Troi.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 16, 2019, 4:38pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: Friday's Child

@ Sarjenka's Brother

I also liked the portrayal of the Capellans -- a fearsome tribe with strict customs. Didn't think their costumes were goofy though.

But the Capellans are not inherently villains. Only because the Klingon was interfering was there dissension in the tribe and toward the Federation. But, presumably if there are different tribes of Capellans, maybe their analogues in the 24th century could be the Kazon.

On the topic of TOS S2 villains, I think what would be more interesting and plausible (since the Capellans are a tribe and are probably between 1 and 2 millenia of being a space-faring race) is if the modern-day Romans from "Bread and Circuses" or the Nazis from "Patterns of Force" (in a few centuries) developed into space-faring races -- basically bringing fascism into the 23rd and 24th centuries. But then again, this has already largely been done with the Romulans/Klingons/Cardassians.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 4:09pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

One thing I marvel at is how much Jake (Cirroc Lofton) grew (physically) from 1993 (age 14) to 1999. In Season 1, he was a skinny kid much shorter (obviously) than Ben Sisko. At the end of the show, he's taller (over 6 ft.) and a basically a fully developed man. Must have grown an inch per season!
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 8:29pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S3: Turnabout Intruder

@ Peter G.

Yes, we once had a discussion where I said something to the effect that the TOS cast and guest actors absolutely blew away their counterparts on subsequent Treks. Shatner is fantastic and I still shake my head at those who criticize his acting. Nimoy is outstanding as well and I'd say, that from the other Treks, only Stewart is in the same league.

But your comment about lighting/shots/direction got me thinking about something else that made the demands on the TOS cast far greater than other Treks. Obviously back in the 60s, Trek didn't have great special effects and I don't think the intention ever was to wow even the 60s audience with what special effects they had. Subsequent Treks, I believe, did try (especially DSC) to impress their viewers with VFX, CGI such that part of their audience came to depend on this aspect of entertainment and may not be able to recognize/appreciate classic, excellent acting to carry a show. Thus the demands on the cast/guest actors wasn't as high and, as a result, you got weaker actors. I'm generalizing a bit but I think this is essentially the development of a certain aspect of Trek and sci-fi overall.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Jun 9, 2019, 3:09pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S3: The Way to Eden


That's one of the "virtues" of TOS is that you get these period pieces -- the sci-fi analogies of real world issues (counterculture, cold war, Vietnam, etc.), which became a hallmark of Trek. And some of them are different for TOS than for the later Treks.

And yes, this episode is plenty cheesy but I actually think it fails to really engage in a sensible discussion of the counterculture movement or the aspect of a group following an insane cult leader. It gets lost in plenty of goofiness and the takeover/regaining control of the ship is just a mechanical exercise -- not particularly riveting. And with the Eden planet popping up right at the very end, there isn't much chance to reflect on the deaths of Adam & Sevrin. But I suppose you could also argue that it's left for the viewer to come to his/her own conclusions.

Interesting comparison with "Up the Long Ladder" -- I also see that as a 1* episode but overall I rate that a tad higher due to the presentation of cloning and rights of the individual. It has a modicum of more intelligence to it. But the Irish group were worse than the space hippies!
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jun 8, 2019, 6:40pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S3: The Way to Eden


No way does this episode deserve zero stars -- the music of the hippies alone is almost worth 0.5 star on its own. Seriously, Charles Napier is a good singer and I these are cool lyrics:

"No more trouble in my body or my mind
Going to live like a king on whatever I find
Eat all the fruit and throw away the rind
Yeah brother ... yeah"

Granted -- listening to "pop" music is not what Trek is supposed to be about but this episode deserves props for coming up with some good tunes that many people love to this day.

TOS music was just fantastic. The little sorrowful music at the end as they find Adam dead -- actually quite a touching moment.

And I actually liked Chekov's part here -- granted he was unprofessional and later regretted his actions, but his character got a bit of development in that we learn he's uber-dedicated to Star Fleet and could not understand why Irina would go off pursuing Eden.

But objectively and critically speaking, to me it's a 1* episode -- it has a ton of flaws and is a weak premise that is poorly executed. But I have a soft spot for it!
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 10:11pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: The Dogs of War

The structure of this episode bothered me quite a bit -- just too much going on. Just too many loose ends to try and set up or tie up in the penultimate episode. Did we really need the Bashir/Ezri nonsense? I think that could just be dealt with in the finale. Kasidy's pregnancy just pops up out of nowhere to remind of the uncertainty of Sisko going against the Prophets' wishes.

Of course one of the major subplots to sort out is Quark wanting to Make Ferenginar Great Again but even if it is prophetic for back then, it is obviously greatly exaggerated. As a Ferengi plot with all the dumb characters (Rom, Leeta, Zek, Ishka, etc.) it is one of the better Ferengi ones -- 2* stuff on its own merit. But man, does DS9 ever try to make capitalism look bad.

One scene kind of fell flat in Mila's basement -- when Kira urges Damar/Garak to keep up the fight, the 2 Cardies just sit there glum. And while I did think the scene where they blow up the Jem'Hadar barracks is critical for assuring the Cardies that Damar is alive and well, it felt somewhat artificial being on a soundstage as opposed to an on-location shoot.

2.5 stars for "The Dogs of War" -- was a bit too generous for my own liking in my initial analysis. As part of the 10-part finale arc, it's on the same level as "Penumbra" and a tad worse than "'Til Death Do Us Part". The amount of riveting moments were minimal here -- the opening with Damar/Kira/Garak getting stranded and their ship getting destroyed set up a lot of potential, but I do now feel the Quark sub-plot, while needing resolution, is a poor fit for this episode.
Set Bookmark
Capt. Ahab of Moby Dick
Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 3:09pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S5: Silicon Avatar

Bears & wolves are supposed to be "intelligent" beings. Yet, if one of them strays into a human dwelling & kills people (because of sheer hunger, not malice), it is promptly hunted down. Is there a moral dilemma about the "right of predators to eat people"?

Well, anyway... got to go hunt down that White Whale... ;-p
Set Bookmark
Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 9:33am (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: Metamorphosis

@Wes B.

Thanks so much for sharing Senensky's blog site. I thoroughly enjoyed reading how he (and Jerry Finnerman) came up with the look for the planetoid Cochrane was on. So many good little details in there. Definitely will check out what he had to say about some of the other TOS episodes he directed.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 8:40pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: Q Who


I think you still need considerable propulsion forces to accelerate the ship and then create the warp subspace field which then shifts space/time around it. My thinking is the inertial dampers might not or should not work if hull integrity is relying on force fields during the propulsion.

So I guess I should correct myself and say that the acceleration/propulsion should be iffy with force fields holding the hull together. But I get what you're saying about hull integrity not being affected by being at warp -- it's just getting to warp [or full impulse] that I'd take issue with.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 5:28pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: Q Who

Man, the Borg were cool at this point in the Trek canon. The foreboding from Q and at the end between Picard/Guinan (did Q do them a service?) bring that genuine feeling of dread -- even after seeing everything that VOY would do with the Borg. "Q Who" stands the test of time.

The naivety of Picard & co. upon seeing the first Borg drone examining their systems in engineering is shocking in retrospect knowing what we know of the Borg now. But it is entirely in keeping with the innocent, green, and somewhat smug nature the crew had at this point in their adventures. It takes forever for Worf to use deadly force with his phaser on the 1st Borg drone invader.

A couple of nitpicks jumped out at me though: Just prior to the first Borg beaming aboard the Enterprise into engineering where Geordi first spots him, Riker had ordered the shields to be raised. So are the Borg able to transport thru shields?

Also, the ship reaches warp 9.65 even with force fields holding its hull integrity after the Borg cut out a section of the saucer. Technically, I don't think this should be possible but we can suspend disbelief. The story would have still worked if the ship could only reach full impulse, for example. They're still totally overmatched and would have to beg Q to save them.

I still feel the "Selena" Gomez parts are a bit of a drawback on the episode but as has been discussed before -- she is a microcosm (innocence, curiosity, eagerness, complacency) of the Enterprise. I think it's been said by some others that she should have been 1 of the 18 to die -- I agree that that would be more impactful. Now we just kind of wonder what becomes of her.

The first two acts of this episode are ordinary at best, but once it gets going it's riveting. A top-10 TNG episode.
Set Bookmark
Sat, May 25, 2019, 10:12am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S3: The Best of Both Worlds, Part I

Just want to second Peter H's comments regarding the musical score. BOBW I is one of the few episodes in all of post-TOS Trek that actually has a score that really resonates and adds to the visceral nature of the episode. This has long been my biggest complaint about post-TOS Trek -- such bland musical scores.

Given the powerful soundtrack to BOBW I, I really think it is one of the 2 hours of perfect Trek ever made (the other being "The Doomsday Machine" which is similar in certain ways as the Enterprise deals with a threat to its own existence).
Set Bookmark
Sat, May 25, 2019, 5:47am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Suspicions

Well, I thoroughly enjoyed this episode and I thought it was very nicely done. Sure, there are some glaring plotholes, but that's par for the course for Star Trek. And there's so much to like in it.

1) The opening, just before the credits, is extremely short yet very effective. Loved seeing Crusher in a bad mood.

2) Guinan and Crusher's dialogue, especially the part where she made Crusher angry by seemingly not caring at all about what Crusher was telling her. Also loved Guinan's outfit, glorious green.

3) The whole idea of Crusher calling a conference of scientists to give a new theory a chance to prove itself. Normally it's the sort of thing Picard would do, and it's nice to see that other characters on the Enterprise besides the show's star have both the interest in science and the power to do it. I also thought the bit about scientific research needing to be reviewed by peers was realistic and a good peep at how science works.

4) The Ferengi scientist. It's the first (and only, so far as I can tell) time in TNG we get a real Ferengi character instead of a painful-to-watch caricature. He breaks most Ferengi stererotypes but not all of them (he still has no notion of personal space, see him talking to Crusher in the corridors), which I thought was a nice touch because it made him much more believable.

5) The other scientists. We get a mixed couple where the woman is the more important one and the husband kind of accompanies her, which is a nice reversion from the usual. The Klingon scientist woman was another unusual character for a Klingon (scientist, female, not sexual and kind of defensive), and then we get a new race that turns out to be a lot less humanoid than most. All in all, a great show for diversity.

6) The scene between Crusher and Picard was a good one: I liked how she came clean to him about what she had done and how he pointed out all the ways in which it was wrong. But I also liked how before chewing her up, he first asked if she had found anything. It showed he still cared about her. Of course, it could also be interpreted another way: Crusher was forgiven in the end because she was right in her suspicions, so in Starfleet they don't punish you for disobeying but for being wrong (which would explain why in so many other episodes the main characters get away with flouting rules, and to an extent it also works that way in real life). In that context, it's only logical that when she says to Picard she's disobeyed an order, the first thing he'd want to know to decide if he must punish her was if her action was useful. With that interpretation, Picard's question would be cynical, but still a nice bit of foreshadowing.

7) The scene between Crusher and Riker. It shows how well they understand each other and they care for each other.

8) The scene between Crusher and Data. She asked the right questions to get the technobabble answers she needed. A nice bit of investigating and of getting crucial information in a field outside your area of expertise.

9) The scene between Crusher and Alyssa. Alyssa's answer and her smile are glorious. "You're not my boss so you can't keep me from helping you."

10) A physical reckoning between two women (Crusher and Kurak) that wasn't ridiculous or petty or over some love interest.

11) The fight between Crusher and Jo'Bril. In Qpid, it burned to see Crusher and Troi attacking their enemies with plant pots when their actresses were the only ones with fencing experience. Here, Crusher genuinely kicks ass and it's cathartic. I particularly liked that martial arts leg kick.

12) The twist at the ending. I tought T'Pan would turn out to be the one who did it, so it was very nice to be surprised.

13) Oh, and another one I forgot. I loved the bit where Picard and Guinan explain the difference between losing a patient and losing someone on an away mission. Nicely done.

I also would like to mention my favourite nitpicks because I don't think they have been pointed out here.
1) I have no problem with them needing to test the device on a manned shuttle, but I can't wrap my head around the fact they didn't do a thorough medical check of the guy first. I mean, how did they expect to notice any effects on his health if his anatomy was completely unknown and they didn't even know what it looked like under normal conditions?

2) The moment when Crusher says "I admired Reyga's determination because he wasn't going to give up after a single failure", or words to that effect. This one made me laugh. I mean, trial and error is probably about the most fundamental trait of scientific research. Anyone who gave up after one failure would find it hard to even be a scientist, never mind make a breakthrough discovery like the one we are talking about here!

In a nutshell: there were a lot of little gems in this episode, many of them unique in the whole of TNG's run. And even the plot holes were hilarious. So there, haters of this episode! I love it.
Set Bookmark
Fri, May 24, 2019, 3:24pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2

I too could not believe the new Picard Trek would actually be called "Star Trek: Picard" -- similarly, I think DSC could be called "Star Trek: Michael Burnham"

It's fine to have plenty of focus on the Picard character as we all know and love him but I think the new series should be a bit broader in scope like "Star Trek: The Golden Years" or whatever.

No point commenting on the trailer, just like there's no point commenting on a preview. They're bound to be excessively emotional and dramatic.
Set Bookmark
Mistah Datah
Sat, May 18, 2019, 10:03pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2

“Can you give a single example from TNG that "stepped on TOS"?“

Just off the top of my head:

- The Warp system is completely rescaled and transwarp is forgotten.
- The years of the Eugenics Wars are changed.
- Data is supposed to be the first of his kind, but androids exist in TOS such as Mudd’s androids and the Sargon androids.
- Despite supposedly being offshoots of Vulcans, Romulans are given protruding foreheads in TNG.
- The first Enterprise is depicted as the movie version (“The Naked Now”).
- The Klingons measure in kilometers instead of kellicams like they do in other Treks.

The link above also gIves examples of Roddenberry disregarding TOS canon. You can see from the sources on that page that Roddenberry preferred a fluid canon that changed for a good story over following some strict rulebook. That Trek did as well as did canonically despite Roddenberry can likely be attributed to the studio keeping things in line. One advantage that TNG - ENT had were that the same rightsholders were in place and could keep things consistent (although there were still notable retcons like with the Trill and Borg).

“I also maintain that TNG and TOS are far closer in spirit than you're claiming. Sure, the style is somewhat different, but the themes are the same: Both shows are about a better future for humanity. Both shows are about exploring the unknown. Both shows have inspired many young people to become engineers or scientists.”

The latter half of your description is true with all the Treks, so I don’t want get into the weeds with you when we largely agree. My point was that TOS employed more of a conflict-style show than TNG. Famously, McCoy always had a bone to pick with Spock and called him racial epithets when they didn’t agree, which was often. The tone of the two shows is much different as well, with Kirk playing fast and loose with regulations and getting the Federation in hot water with other races (i.e The Klingons) whereas Picard paid close attention to Starfleet policies and formalities, preaching to others just how important it was not to break them.

“Comparing the TNG situation in 1987 to what's going on with Discovery today, doesn't make much sense.”

There’s enough similarities between the Trek reboots to make the discussion worthwhile. Like Discovery, TNG had the major backing of a studio that wanted Trek to do well in the long haul unlike the tenuous relationship TOS had with NBC. The span of time is similar albeit TNG took longer because Phase II got aborted. Also both the shows follow relative movie fame with TNG airing during the TOS movie peak and Discovery running after some modesty successful Trek movies.

I mentioned the TNG criticisms above, and today former cast members like Marina Sirtis criticize also Discovery. Although, it’s notable that Discovery actually has more support from the rank-and-file like Frakes than TNG did.

“Welcome to the forum and a great post. The hatred for TNG was not pedestrian and the anti-TNG discourse was led by prominent fan groups. Anti-DS9 discourse was even worse from what I remember (like I said, what the actors read - and they read numerous letters) was only half of the story.”

Yes, it’s easy to ignore these things nowadays because for a long Star Trek was “solved” with fans and writers more or less coming up with explanations that made all the retcons gel. I don’t mean to say Discovery doesn’t have serious continuity errors, because that’s disingenuous. I do think time will correct much of these errors, but In the meantime it’s great that fans point them out and keep the Disco team on their toes.
Set Bookmark
Mistah Datah
Fri, May 17, 2019, 12:41pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2

"And while I agree that the first season of TNG/DS9 weren't exactly masterpieces, I think they were terrible."

I liked TNG okay, especially EAF, "Datalore" and "Conspiracy". DS9 season one wasn't terrible, it's maybe the only Trek series post-TOS to have a good first season.

"At any rate, even those who think that the first season of TNG stunk, cannot deny that this show respected the source material from the start."

Maybe, although Roddenberry has gone on the record saying TOS is non-canon versus TNG. He was trying to do the show he wanted to do, and didn't mind stepping on TOS when it suited him. --

"It didn't start by trampling all over previous continuity. It didn't put up a huge sign that says in red letters "LOOK! We are doing everything differently just because we can!".
The TNG team also didn't spent nearly two years mocking their target audience and running a huge campaign to discredit anyone who values consistent worldbuilding and intelligent story-telling."

I'm confused, is this hyperbole? I've watched Discovery and don't feel mocked. Do you feel like something is mocking you if you don't like it?

Let me give you an example of Star Trek product I think is dumb: the new animated show set to air on Nickelodeon. Despite me thinking the show is geared towards a different audience than myself, I don't think it's mocking me. Maybe teenagers will like it and grow up to watch TNG along with me. So it doesn't appeal to me, but I'm not the end-all be-all of Star Trek fans.

For the sake of a balanced discussion, it's worth noting that product dilution is always possible, but just because dilution is possible doesn't mean studios should stop trying. Batman: The Animated Series was very experimental for its time; it hired a Japanese animation Studio and differed much from the films and live action Batman show. Yet, it succeeded on another level by showing young adults a Batman universe they could relate to. I think it's worth trying to make a product like that even if it's not for me.

"So really, comparing the Trekkie backlash to TNG with the Trekkie backlash to Discovery is nothing short of ridiculous."

I don't think you're addressing the discussion in honest terms. Have you not read about the fan and TOS cast backlash TNG received? From the TNG Wikipedia article alone:

"Several stars of The Original Series and the film franchise stated that they did not like the premise of a new series [TNG] set in the same universe that did not feature them. DeForest Kelley, who appeared in the pilot as Admiral Leonard McCoy, said that while he understood that the studio wanted to keep the franchise going beyond them, he felt that "there's only one Star Trek, and that's ours". James Doohan, who played Montgomery "Scotty" Scott, said that Star Trek was about the characters and with a new cast the studio was "trying to fool the public, and that's bad business." William Shatner, who portrayed James T. Kirk, was concerned with the overexposure of the franchise and how a new television series could affect future films.[9]"

So real criticism perhaps worse than Discovery's existed in the TNG era. Or, do you not agree that TOS and TNG were trying to do very different things? If your answer is they weren't then I think Roddenberry would be dissatisfied because he spent considerable effort trying to distance TNG from TOS. (If you haven't, read the link I posted above about TOS canon). After McCoy, no reference to TOS characters were allowed. Sarek was finally mentioned in season 3, and Spock made an appearance (after Roddenberry died) in Season 5 as part of a promotion for the final TOS movie. That sounds like deliberate effort to get away from TOS, not to try to keep TNG in check with it.

Otherwise, TNG was its own show. The closest shows to it are really the ones it spawned like DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. But for Roddenberry, TNG's success meant giving up the TOS model and try a more diplomatic, conflict-free future.

To summarize, (TL:DR for those of you playing the mobile version of JammerReviews), the TOS vs TNG and TNG vs DISC comparison is not only a valid one, it's an interesting opportunity to see how vast the Star Trek fanbase is and how it's changed if you sit down and do the research.
Set Bookmark
Mon, May 13, 2019, 5:40pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S2: The Deadly Years

@Baron Samedi and @Jason R.

Have to completely disagree with your thinking this is one of the worst TOS episodes of all time -- it's not even close and I don't think I've ever seen it mentioned as such. As I said in my initial comment, I think Jammer's rating is harsh at 2 stars and I see it as a 3-star (7/10) episode.

While it has its flaws, TOS shows that it can do a good job of focusing on a human condition like aging / Alzheimer's. That much is done effectively in showing how Kirk struggles with being duty-bound as a starship captain yet losing his faculties and bearing the embarrassment, seeing younger officers concerned about him etc. Kirk put on one of his better performances in showing his stubborn nature. The episode does evoke a feeling of sympathy for Kirk.

The slow pacing is a drag on the episode but I think that also is an experience in dealing with the elderly. But I would say TNG's "Sarek" is a better episode for shining a light on the human condition of aging and losing one's sense of usefulness.

As for the miracle Trek medical cure, we've seen this on numerous episodes across all the series. That's part of the suspension of disbelief of Trek -- almost as accepted as warp speed and transporters.

Some of the earlier comments also point to what makes this a pretty good episode.
Set Bookmark
Thu, May 9, 2019, 7:23pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Inquisition

Some terrific writing / lines in this episode at the end between Sloan/Bashir after the holodeck simulation ends and then with Sisko/Kira/Odo/Bashir about the grey areas Section 31 operates in, how it is like the Obsidian Order to the Cardassians, etc.

Have to give credit for how this episode picks up on the various dubious decisions Bashir has made, none the least of which is his hiding his genetic engineering. And yes it makes perfect sense for Section 31 to recruit him.

Definitely adds a nice wrinkle to DS9 which already has a ton of moving parts providing intriguing interactions. Introducing a Section 31 to Star Trek on DS9 absolutely makes sense and especially just before "In the Pale Moonlight" when Sisko feels he has to cross the line.

Upgrading my rating to 3 stars for "Inquisition" -- the fact that most of the episode is a simulation for Bashir is a drawback but for the end-product of unwrapping Section 31, it's worth it. This episode also feels more significant in light of DSC Season 2 -- the last act had more intelligence about motivations/operations for Section 31 than did the entire 2nd season of DSC.
Next ►Page 1 of 49
▲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.