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: 9 (Showing 1-9)

Page 1 of 1
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 9:00pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S7: Friendship One

"[The urge to explore] can't justify the loss of lives.... whether it's millions, or just one."

@Tim Smith

I would like to understand your reasoning, as you've reached a conclusion about what Janeway meant, that is different than the one Jammer and I seem to have reached.
She is holding the nacelle of the model ship Lt. Carey had almost completed when she says "or just one." In that context it seems clear to me she is referring to Carey - and not some hypothetical member of the public who inadvertently gets in harm's way inadvertently dies as a result. The entire dialog exchange between Janeway and Chakotay was about Carey. It seems to me that she is saying exploration is not worth it, if that exploration kills millions, or only kills Carey (just one).

Who would the other "just one" be? I don't believe any innocent civilians were killed in this episode. Alien lives had been lost due to the presumed mishandling or misreading of the probe's schematics, but that was long before Voyager visited the planet. Those aliens arguably were "innocent civilians," but the final scene did not seem to characterize what their ancestors did as "space exploration." (In any event, more than one alien died in the accident).
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 7:16pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S7: Friendship One

Ten years later I have revisited my comment and have one more observation:
Voyager had a number of episodes that ended with characters practically speaking in whispers to each other in darkly-lit rooms ("Prototype" is another that comes to mind). You know you're in for some bad writing when these scenes start to play
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Sun, Feb 28, 2016, 5:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S3: The Vengeance Factor

Not a great episode, but does have that classic Worf line: "Your ambushes would be more successful if you bathed more often!" Funniest Worf line in the whole series
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Tue, Jan 26, 2016, 5:57pm (UTC -5)
Re: Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Great review, Jammer!
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Sat, Nov 9, 2013, 6:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S3: The Savage Curtain

So, what did the rock creature learn about good and evil by episode's end? Nothing - zero-which also describes the amount of watchable content this offers.
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Sat, Dec 15, 2012, 5:38pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S7: Masks

Hi Jammer,

"Masks" wasn't so bad it was good. "Masks" wasn't so bad it was bad. It provided not a shred of entertainment value, was mind-numbingly vacuous, and committed the cardinal sin of being unforgivably boring. No other episode of any "Trek" series has managed to hit this trifecta so well - or so poorly.
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Mon, Sep 3, 2012, 11:15am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Suspicions

Jeremy Short-in coming up with your (possible explanation) for why the guest characters were shalow, why the regulars were a bit off, etc., you obviously have showed much more thought than the writer did in concocting this episode.

In my opinion, the writing was just tired. You have the lame flashback plot, the tired introduction of characters about whom we could care less, and a lacklustre mystery that in the end underwhelms because we are given no clues that would give us some kind of investment in the story's resolution.

Also, re: Guinan - this wsan't just a sad swan song for the character. This was the first time where there was absolutely ZERO point to having Guinan on the show. Guinan was there for one reason: so Beverly could relate information about what brought her up to the point at which we saw her at the beginning of the episode. a "Medical Log" series of entries could have done the same thing...

Dull, dull, dull
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Fri, Jun 5, 2009, 11:28am (UTC -5)
Re: Star Trek (2009)

Maureen,

Very nice story. I am 31 and my mother and father are 58 and 59, respectively. My parents both watched every episode of TOS when the show aired, they watched (a year after they got married) the Animated Series, and all of the episodes of the remaining Star Trek shows. All 3 of us saw all 725 Star Trek TV episodes, multiple times, and have now seen every movie at least 3 times. We saw Star Trek "XI" the night it was sneaked, May 7th, and when it was over, we all barely said a word to each other. Instead, we all (as if we were reading each other's thoughts) got right back in line to see the movie again, even though we all had to get up very early for work the next morning. When the second viewing was over, we reached the consensus that we had seen a great movie. "Man, that movie was fun," we all said. I commented to my parents, "I'm sure some fans will be less than enthused after seeing the film when they realize the movie was made for everyone and not for the flyspeckers." My father said, "And that fact is why, for the first time in history, no matter how loudly these fans scream about how the movie wasn't "REAL TREK," "canon," or so forth, Paramount can finally listen to the complaints while having the luxury of putting their earmuffs on if the noise gets too loud." It was a joy to hear and literally see how many people have now become interested in Star Trek because the filmmakers took the time to make a movie that was for everyone, not for a club of winking insiders that sees Star Trek movies but complains no matter what is put on screen even if the filmmakers attempt to cater to them. If so much as one person, by becoming a fan after watching this movie, nurtures/furthers an interest in science or math, in an efffort to know more than he did the day before, that conversion is worth more, and is more important, than a million cries of, "Wait - Spock's sideburns weren't the same height as they were in Season 1."

It was director Ernst Lubitsch (generally regarded as one of the best directors every) who said: 'As soon as someone tackles a big theme with a message we take him seriously and call it art. We appreciate a painting of the crucifixion . . . whereas a simple Cezanne depiction of a vase and an apple may be far more enduring as art. I believe -- and I am not comparing myself to Cezanne -- in taking a lesser theme and then treating it without
compromise.' -- Ernst Lubitsch

I believe Abrams and company would have done Mr. Lubitsch proud.
Set Bookmark
Dan L.
Thu, Jan 29, 2009, 12:45am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S4: These Are the Voyages...

The reboot definitely worked for the Batman franchise (Academy Award snubs notwithstanding); seems to have worked with James Bond (Casino Royale was one of the best action films of the decade, and Quantum of Solace has its defenders, although I am not one of them); and may have worked with Superman (Superman Returns was a decent movie that had the misfortune of only making $200 million in North America and $200 million in the rest of the world. Its costs were rumored to be as high as $270 million, though, so in Hollywood terms, it was considered a financial flop, and there may be no sequel).

No one would argue with respect to any of these three series, though, that the reboot effort was a resounding failure. As the concept of "reboots" is gaining hold (and favor) in our moviegoing consciousness, it would look all the more disappointing were the Star Trek reboot to fail. Star Trek has been unofficially rebooted more times than Billy Martin was fired by George Steinbrenner - most successfully in 1982 and 1987, and kind of in 1992 when DSN launched. Ub But since then, it's been more booted around than successfully "rebooted," as the Next Generation films failed to improve creatively and as Enterprise failed to stanch the decline in the quality of Star Trek television that started with Voyager. This is one of those moments - there were really only three others - 1979, 1982, and 1987, where it is do or die, and if this latest effort falls down, Star Trek may not be able to get up again. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. In earnest.
Page 1 of 1
▲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.