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: 375 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 15
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Tue, Mar 5, 2019, 8:47am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Sound of Thunder

@Rahul-First off, sorry it took me so long to get back to you.

"I don't mean to sound rude or something but I totally disagree with pretty much everything you said. And honestly whenever I see your comments, I just scroll past them. I thought about whether I should respond to you or not."

That's your choice. No big deal. But for the record, I think you failed.

""Trek is also about execution" -- no it isn't. Different series made various "execution" mistakes and that makes some of their episodes unable to realize potential, but to say Trek is about execution is just bizarre. Trek is not about a technical exercise in producing an episode well."

Yeah, I strongly, strongly disagree. You said TOS is the best in part because of its ideas. Great ideas don't make a great television series. Trek is about execution in the way that all storytelling is-if you can't convey your ideas in a compelling fashion, said idea gets buried under it.


"Discovery has plenty of great ideas" -- like what? The spore drive? A mini-arc in the Mirror Universe? Have you actually seen the series? DSC lacks great ideas. But I agree that what few good ideas it has, it hasn't executed them well."

I think this season has had some great ideas-for example, the universal translator malfunctioning. Then it wastes them/doesn't utilize them properly.

"I don't think you really understand acting. Consistently across the main cast and guest actors TOS absolutely had the best acting. I'd say DS9 is the next most well-acted series, but Brooks/Farrell aren't good enough."

What problems do you have with Brooks? The most common complaint is that he overacts everything-which is a big problem with Shatner in TOS (he was great in the movies). Leonard Nimoy gave a great performance, though. It's just Shatner who I have a big problem with. Compared to him, Brooks is practically subtle. Farell is a problem, but I think she improves a bit, and isn't the main focus of many DS9 episodes, unlike Shatner.

"And where do you get that I don't respect Jammer's opinion? I always look forward to reading his reviews whether I agree with them or not. He writes well and intelligently. If he likes DS9 most, good for him. I think it's a terrific series too. I know you're not supposed to compare his ratings across series, but just as an exercise in a series achieving it's objectives, I don't agree with him that DS9 does this so much better than any other series (judging by series average ratings). If my thinking that offends you then too bad.

And don't tell me to respect somebody's opinions -- I'll judge for myself what to respect and what not to. I respect Jammer's opinions but I can't respect yours."

Well since you used the word 'bias'-which has a negative connotation. It doesn't offend me at all that you disagree with him, or that you don't respect my opinions/scroll past my comments. You can like what you like and read what you want to read. Again, no big deal. But for the record, I wasn't telling you what to do-just found it odd that you call a brilliant reviewer like Jammer biased (yes, that word has a negative connotation, whatever your claims to the contrary).
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 4:16pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Seventh Season Recap

@William B-Good points. I usually skip "Melora" and "Chrysalis" whenever I watch the series, so I usually forget they exist. Nonetheless, they have to be taken into account. I can forgive "Melora" a bit though-they didn't really figure out his character until Season 4-"Distant Voices" and "Life Support" certainly didn't help his case. They were even considering writing him off the show at one point. But by "Chrysalis", the show's writers should have known better. Especially Rene Echevarria, who wrote some of the show's strongest character pieces ("Children of Time", "Behind the Lines", "Chimera", "Crossfire"-yes I'm standing by this).


By the end of Season 1, Kira had gone a long way toward accepting the Federation and even lessening (seemingly justified, to the degree that prejudice ever is, which is one of the main points of "Duet" really) prejudice towards Cardassians. It comes up again in "Rapture", but it wasn't really sufficiently explored between the two episodes. And it seems that she has to re-learn the lesson of "Duet" a few times as well. I do love how they bring her full circle in "When It Rains..." though. It really ties into the cyclical nature of Cardassia's story throughout the series exceptionally well. Cardassia goes from the oppressor to a world lying in ruins; Kira goes from a freedom fighter rebelling against the Cardassians to a freedom fighter teaching the Cardassians the methods that she learned in the Shakaar resistance cell.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 9:50am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Seventh Season Recap

@William B-

I think Season 4 was the best year for Bashir. He got "Hippocratic Oath", "Our Man Bashir", and "The Quickening". All 3 of which are very good episodes that do a superb job of defining who just Bashir is on DS9. At their best, the writers used Bashir to balance the optimism of TNG with the cynicism that DS9 sometimes had. He can save the Jem´Hadar, but he can try. He *can* save everyone in his James Bond scenario, regardless of what Garak says. He can not find a cure instantly, but he can save the next generation. That is what Bashir brings to the show and why I like his character so much, even if the crew really struggled with him from time to time.

I am in complete agreement with you on Odo-one of the best actors in the franchise playing a very well written character on all fronts-conception and execution. Making him a Founder was also a stroke of brilliance that made complete sense with his character and enhanced it going forward. He is certainly my favorite of the regulars.

Same with Kira-terrific concept and mostly good acting. Unfortunately, they did not always know what to do with her. Her arc was mostly completed by the end of the first season. By In the Hands of the Prophets, she has come a long way since Emissary. But where to next? There was not really an answer.

Armin Shimerman did his absolute best, but the Ferengi episodes had serious, serious problems. Episodes that focused on Quark usually turned out okay though (specifically thinking of episodes such as Business as Usual, Body Parts, and Bar Association), and occasionally very well (Magnificent Ferengi).
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Wed, Feb 27, 2019, 5:29pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

@William B-I see what you're saying, but the only thing I really judge a TNG season on is episode quality. There isn't really a good way to distinguish the seasons from a plot/character perspective, imo. And far too many episodes can be classified as bad-to-mediocre (or at the very least they don't really work): "The Child", "The Outrageous Okona", "Loud as a Whisper", "Schizoid Man", "Unnatural Selection", "The Dauphin", "The Royale", "The Icarus Factor", "Samaritan Snare", "Up the Long Ladder", "Manhunt", and of course "Shades of Grey" (hard to muster up much emotion toward that episode one way or the other, but it is catastrophically awful). That's over half the season. And of the 10 episodes that remain, none of them particularly impress me. This may be blasphemy, but I'm not particularly impressed by "Measure of a Man" or "Q Who". There is some good stuff there-it's just vastly outweighed by the number of very low points, and not particularly balanced out by the high points. I'd put "Necessary Evil", "Whispers", "Blood Oath", "The Wire", and "Crossover" above every TNG Season 2 episode.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Wed, Feb 27, 2019, 5:20pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

Sorry, @Yanks, I will bash Enterprise til the cows come home ;).
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 8:31am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Seventh Season Recap

@Springy-

Thanks for your comments. Always nice to get a first timer's perspective. Also, nice top ten. Glad to see I am not the only one to have "Paper Moon" in the top ten.


"Secondary character (portrayal and development) significantly better than primary"

Heh. I'm sure Elliott is smiling right now. I still don't really agree (I think the portrayals of Odo, Quark, Bashir, O'Brien, and Kira were excellent and they had some nice development too), but I will certainly not argue with the notion that the secondary cast was one of DS9's strongest assets.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Mon, Feb 25, 2019, 6:59pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

@William B-"@Iceman, I would put AGT and WYLB as #1 and #2, too. I actually never finished Enterprise - - I lost interest in early s2 when it aired, and never really prioritized picking it back up. "

In my opinion, the first two seasons of Enterprise are the worst seasons of Trek ever to air. Even worse than TNG's first two or TOS' third. Just bland, uninspired drivel. Voyager's worst aspects dialed to 11. Voyager did have some genuinely memorable characters-the same can't be said for Enterprise. The third season I found to be a distinct improvement. Though it still didn't reach the heights of the first three Treks (it started off rather terribly and those characters always held it back), it took sizable risks (well, relative speaking-in 2003 it finally caught up to what DS9 was doing in 1997, and TNG in 1991, but whatever) and some of them paid off. I found the fourth season to be somewhat overrated. It was ok-some solid episodes, but nothing truly special. And of course, that finale.....


@Elliott-Even worse because "Demons"/"Terra Prime" would have made a satisfying conclusion to the show. And then, nope.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Mon, Feb 25, 2019, 6:50pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Sound of Thunder

@Steven-No, I'm not at all. In fact, that's my entire point-Jammer should absolutely not be criticized for having a favorite. It's entirely normal for a Star Trek critic to have a favorite Star Trek show, and to rate episodes of that show higher than others. I'm pretty sure most, if not all, Star Trek critics on the web do the same.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Mon, Feb 25, 2019, 11:58am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

@William B-As far as Trek television finales go, it's a respectable #2 for me. "All Good Things" is fantastic and obviously the best Trek finale (though if you ask me, it's better as a finale than it is an episode-as an episode, it's solid, as a finale, transcendent), but this comes in *firmly* ahead of "Turnabout Intruder" (sexism yay), "Endgame" (I despised this finale in particular because it squandered so much potential and represents all the failures of Voyager wrapped up into one horrid little package), and "These Are the Voyages" (a bitter, unfitting, and thoroughly unpleasant viewing experience). Though it has its flaws, it also has some truly wonderful stuff in there. And its flaws are not fatal in my opinion-they're more problems with the final two seasons (Evil! Dukat and pah wraith nonsense) as a whole than any specific failing of this episode. More than anything though, this is the last finale that felt as if it had any real passion behind it. Voyager and Enterprise really lacked souls in my opinion, and that only made their finales even worse.

@Springy-You're welcome to your opinion, but I think "What You Leave Behind" is a qualified success, while "Endgame" is a catastrophic failure. Just my two cents.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Mon, Feb 25, 2019, 11:47am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Sound of Thunder

@Steven-I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm just saying that those ratings are the result of when he wrote them, not because of some prejudice he has. That's just odd.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 7:34pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: The Sound of Thunder

@Rahul-

We may disagree here, but in my opinion, but Trek is also about execution. Discovery has plenty of great ideas, it just can't execute them properly. And the execution of many, many TOS episodes leave something to be desired.

You calling Jammer prejudiced in favor of DS9 is just odd. It is possible that he simply enjoys the series more than you. By the same logic, I could call you biased in favor of TOS (Best acting? Seriously?), but it wouldn't really accomplish anything. I respect your opinion-you should respect Jammer's.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 9:46am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges

@Springy-

The first time I watched this episode, I agreed with your take on it. On re-watch, I found it much easier to understand, and I absolutely loved it. I'm in total agreement with Jammer's review and rating. The plotting was the main issue I originally had with it. Once I understood that, it allowed the other elements-mainly the thrilling espionage-to shine.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 11:40am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: It's Only a Paper Moon

@William B-

I'm going to defend "Hard Time" here-it was all about the consequences. It was basically "It's Only a Paper Moon", with the events of "Siege" told in flashback. Plus, as you mentioned in "The Inner Light" comments, a random outside event is not a good catalyst for character development. They spent an entire episode of O'Brien coming to terms with his trauma! That's how episodic television works-it's not inherently inferior to serialized television.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 11:36am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Prodigal Daughter

@William B-"This ep is a sequel to Honor Among Thieves and inherits and builds on its discordant characterization and setting, and is not as well acted. "

Exactly. "Honor Among Thieves" was an episode that had no good reason to exist, but was lifted into passable territory for me by its acting. Sometimes DS9 just doesn't know when to quit and let an element go.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 10:32am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: In the Pale Moonlight

"Death certificates (of people close to power), for instance. "

If they don't have the exact identity of his contacts, they can't prove anything. Simple as that.

"That’s my point. In “real life” this method would have had little chance of success. "

Two things. One, this isn't "real life". Two, I don't see your point. Gaging someone's reaction is a fine way to figure out the truth. If the rod was real, Sisko would be calm.

"You could argue that Garak lied in order to put Sisko in a time pressure, giving him no time to think things over. But that would not necessitate saying that the contacts were dead."

Again-Garak tells Sisko later in the episode "Make up a story. Tell him many brave men died to obtain this rod". It makes Sisko more likely to go along with Garak's plan.

"@Iceman, I’d like to know which Star Trek episodes (except of TOS) has plot holes in them. "

Look at @Quarkissnyder's comments for every DS9 episode-about 5 plot holes are pointed out per episode on average. Or at the comments of most Trek episodes on this website.

-"All Good Things"
-"The Inner Light"
-"The Visitor"
-The entire Dominion War arc
-"Call to Arms"
-""Treachery, Faith, and the Great River"
-"Force of Nature"

And countless others that can be found if you really want to look for them.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Sat, Feb 16, 2019, 4:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: In the Pale Moonlight

"Regarding the other objections, they say in principle that there are other episodes with bigger holes. But one must differentiate between buying into the premise of the series (i.e., few hundred years into the future, faster than light travel is possible, time travel etc.) and assuming that people don’t react as they would have in “real life”. When you incorporate time travel into the story, you are almost bound to run into the grandfather paradox, so you can’t blame the creators for not dealing with it well, as it is a paradox. But you can’t expect people to do unexplained things, such as ignoring the complete unreasonableness of an evidence or not acting on one’s race’s best interest (by immediately contacting the gov)."

Yeah, my point was that you have to have a high suspension of disbelief to watch Star Trek in the first place. It doesn't excuse plot holes, but I don't think most of yours actually are in this case.


" One of them is Vreenak’s fake outrage. It does goes well with him telling the bodyguard to leave the room before announcing it, and also with Garak’s not admitting at the end that the forgery was substandard, just that ‘any imperfections will be attributed to the explosion’. Yet, this possibility doesn’t sink my criticism, as there are much better ways to induce truth telling than simply announcing it and expecting the liar to conform. Just ask Garak, haha."

Just because there are other ways to induce truth doesn't preclude the possibility of Vreenak using the one he did-it was effective and got the job done. In my opinion, you're reaching.

"The other one is that this was Garak’s plan from the beginning and that he lied that his contacts were dead. But this lie would be simple enough to detect; and it doesn’t serve a purpose because following the true plan from the beginning would save time. "

Since no one else knows who Garak's contacts on Cardassia are, so it's not really verifiable at all. It does serve a purpose because he avoids risking his only connections to his beloved homeland. Following Sisko's plan would mean risking that.

I stand by my original statement and respectfully disagree with your original post-most of these "plot holes" are nitpicks at best, as opposed to gaping logic flaws.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 8:40am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: It's Only a Paper Moon

@Springy-

"--This is a nicely done ep about the consequences of Nog's injury, but I didn't see it (the part about showing some consequences) as unique in the Trekverse. And unless we see a lot more consequences for Nog, this will be right there with all of Trek, in giving us a pretty quick fix, when the consequences of trauma are occasionally addressed."

-It's a quick fix in terms of the show, not in the universe itself. Nog is in there for quite some time.

-Has there been another example of this? I can't remember off the top of my head. "Lessons" acknowledges "The Inner Light", but this is far more direct (I love "Lessons", for the record).
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Tue, Feb 12, 2019, 9:43am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: In the Pale Moonlight

"2. It would not make sense for Vreenak to inform Sisko that he knows it's a fake."

There are multiple possibilities. First of all, why not? If it's a fake, he's not going to enter into an alliance with the Federation. Simple as that. Sisko will know if Vreenak knows anyway. Second of all, it's possible that Vreenak doesn't know whether it's a fake or not, and he's doing it to gage Sisko's reaction. This fits with what we know about Garak's considerable talents in forgery and the Romulans' deception.

"1. In the holo meeting, it would not make sense for the Dominion-Cardassia to attack the Romulans while still in fighting with the Federation and Klingons. Furthermore, it would not make sense for the Romulans not to wait 3 weeks to find out if this info was correct, because at that time the Federation and Klingons would still be in the fighting. And It would not make sense that Sisko didn't realize that."

The entire point of the episode is that the rod, combined with the supposed assassination of Vreenak is what pushes the Romulans over the edge. Regardless of whether the attack plan makes sense, the fact that this senator who was holding a rod was killed in this manner looks extremely suspicious.

"8. It would not make sense that the Dominion was aware of Garak's contacting his old friends on Cardassia, and not use it to (try to) prove what happened. "

Big assumption: Garak actually contacted people on Cardassia. A major theory regarding this episode is that Garak lied about his contacts dying to Sisko. The evidence? Twofold. Firstly, Garak tells Sisko to give a speech to Vreenak with the whole 'many good men died to get this rod' schtick. Which is exactly what Garak would be doing if he were lying to Sisko about his contacts. Secondly, Garak's entire character. Lying is what he does, as established in "Improbable Cause"/"The Die is Cast". And I seriously doubt he'd risk getting everyone he knows on Cardassia killed.

"10. It doesn't make sense that the Dominion-Cardassians would have recorded such a sensitive meeting. "

They didn't, because it was a fake lie. Again, the main reason this pushed the Romulans into the war was the rod combined with Vreenak's assassination. It actually does make sense that the Romulans would rush into the war were one of their citizens killed-that's what great powers do. It all may seem too convenient that they buy into this-the Romulans are schemers, after all. And yet we've seen time and time again in the TNG era the Romulans being outwitted by the Federation. Since they can't ever actually succeed, they pretty much fail at everything they try to accomplish. Perhaps they're not as smart as they think they are.

"9. It doesn't make sense that the rod was readable after the explosion, and that this fact did not rose suspicion. "

This is applying real-world logic to a highly fictionalized setting. Sure, the episode asks us to believe a rod can survive an explosion, but it also asks us to believe a ship can fly faster than the speed of light. This is hardly the worst thing in a Trek episode. The episode asks us to believe it, and I can.

"4. It would not make sense that Sisko would allow Garak to risk being captured inside Vreenak's shuttle just to get some info, when he believes that it's absolutely vital to be in Vreenak's favor. "

No, but considering Sisko knows Garak was a member of the Obsidian Order, one of the most formidable intelligence agencies in the galaxy, I think he trusts him not to get caught.

"11. It would not make sense that Dax wouldn't have figured what happened anyway, as she knows what the original plan was. "

She doesn't believe Sisko is possible of such a thing (before this episode, he didn't either, unless you bring up "For the Uniform", which is a whole other can of worms), and she doesn't know about Garak's involvement.

I could go on, but I'll just say that most of these are iffy, and less gaping than the holes you could poke in other Trek episodes, which have never been known for their tremendous logical coherence (as @Quarkissnyder aptly put it). Add that to the fact that plot holes/nitpicks really don't matter all that much unless they're gaping, and I really don't have a problem with anything about this episode (But your mileage may vary. I have a high suspension of disbelief in general, but particularly for Star Trek-people have poked holes in every classic Trek episode, from "The Inner Light" to "The Visitor" to "Yesterday's Enterprise". A the end of the day, the entire franchise requires a high suspension of disbelief. That's my reasoning). In fact, my opinion is the opposite of yours-I think this story has fewer plot holes than the vast majority of Trek episodes. But I respect your opinion nonetheless.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Tue, Feb 12, 2019, 8:12am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S7: Afterimage

@Springy-You're fine. It's a moderately dull episode that sets out to make Ezri interesting, and basically fails. Even Garak doesn't save it. I don't hate it, but it's definitely below average DS9 for me. Season 7 doesn't start off as well as Season 6, but it doesn't fizzle out like Season 6 does either.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Fri, Feb 8, 2019, 8:37am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Startrekwatcher-

"And just my personal preference but if aTrek series is going to do serialized storytelling I would much prefer it go all in. I don’t like shows that try to be a hybrid by either mixing standalone and arc elements within a single episode or that tell a few standalone here then go to arc material. That was one of the frustrating things about DS9. Its arc stuff was much more interesting and entertaining than its filler that I’d have rather it just been only serialized the way a lot of older prime time dramas used to be. "

I don't think it really matters how many standalones there are. That's just the structure. It's a matter of whether a show can pull it off. I thought DS9 was a mixed bag on this front. Some of its singular one-offs were wonderful, but too many of them told inconsequential stories that didn't add anything of value to the series as a whole. (This differed from season-to-season. Season 4 had lots of good one-offs. Season 6, not as much). But it could be forgiven because DS9 wasn't envisioned as a serialized show, which were quite rare back in the 90s. Discovery can't do serialization well, regardless of how serialized it is.

I would disagree about Ron Moore though. I don't think he should be brought back, but he was a great writer on DS9. He wrote a whole lot of great episodes, from an uncredited re-write of "In the Pale Moonlight" to "Rocks and Shoals" to "The Die is Cast".
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Thu, Feb 7, 2019, 6:48pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Far Beyond the Stars

@William B-

I thought the Pabst/Odo connection was subtle but brilliant. They're both more concerned with maintaining the status quo than bringing about positive change that would disrupt their ordered world. With Odo, this manifests with his Founder nature-he's naturally controlling and casually infringes upon civil liberties as seen in "The Wire". He didn't join up with the Bajoran Resistance during the Occupation because he was more comfortable presenting himself as the reasonable outsider above it all, the one who doesn't take sides and wishes that everyone would just get along. That same character trait shows up in Pabst. He too, acts like he's above it all. He's not a crusader, and he almost implies both Benny and his boss are being too extreme. Overall, it's a small part of the episode, but like the rest of it, it works on multiple levels.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Wed, Feb 6, 2019, 5:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Valiant

@springy-

I thought that this episode is about the toxicity of hubris. I suppose this lesson could be applied to the military, it's a more general life lesson. The reason I agree with @wolfstar and really dig this episode is because it drives this point home by obliterating Star Trek conventions. There's no real reason why Red Squad should fail here, narratively speaking-The Enterprise D's defeat of the Borg was probably more incredible, statistically-except for the fact that they're arrogant sods. I think it's a great episode.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Fri, Feb 1, 2019, 7:32am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Waltz

@Springy-

You should be very worried. "Waltz" is basically the last time Gul Dukat works as a character. For that reason, I can understand why this 'ruins' the episode in the eyes of some. For me personally though, it doesn't decrease the quality of it that much at all. Said quality is just too high.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 8:52am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Statistical Probabilities

@Springy-

"--My objection to the portrayals is that they were boring and annoying."

Right, but you said they were stereotypes. Peter's point was that, no they're not. I myself wrote that they were cliche, but I do think I'd excise that from my criticism. The guest actors are just overplaying it by about 200%. It doesn't sink the episode for me, but I can see why they would for you. It's kind of like "..Nor the Battle to the Strong"-I can see through the iffy execution to see the compelling story underneath.
Set Bookmark
Iceman
Wed, Jan 30, 2019, 8:04pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Sacrifice of Angels

@Chrome-

I don't know if the problem is that it rings false to me-I'd say the bigger problem is how vague it is. The show never takes the time to develop it the way it does Cardassians or Klingons, so it never really says anything meaningful about religion (with some exceptions like "Rapture", etc.). I think that's why the religious stuff is so boring for me (and for other DS9 viewers).
Next ►Page 1 of 15
▲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.