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: 101 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 5
Set Bookmark
Catdaddy in Columbia SC
Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 2:49am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S4: Final Mission

This episode has numerous problems, but the worst is the fact that nobody on 1701-D has any idea how orbital mechanics works. SLOWLY accelerate the stupid garbage scow thing and park it in a higher orbit to buy some time, then go rescue Picard and Whil Whheaton, then come back and get the garbage scow out of orbit using the same technique and send it into the local sun.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 10:01am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S2: Perpetual Infinity

Call me crazy, but this place looks different lately..
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 3:40pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S2: If Memory Serves

And here it is, Jammer's first four-star review for a Star Trek episode since ENT's "Damage", fifteen years ago next month.
Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 8, 2019, 4:58pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S2: Blood of Patriots

"Other than inserting overt pop culture references, it's not clear where else The Orville writers are drawing inspiration from."

Set Bookmark
Fri, Mar 8, 2019, 4:50pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S2: Blood of Patriots

If explodiblood is yellow, why were Orrin's "daughter's" needle marks red?

Is the implication that the two of them knew about the ceasefire all along - otherwise what would have been the point of the her continuing to pretend to be his daughter after their rescue?
Set Bookmark
Mon, Mar 4, 2019, 10:19am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S2: Light and Shadows

As a total aside, what if Airiam being taken over by the squidbot leads to a complete ban on cybernetic life forms serving in Starfleet? That'd explain why we don't see any until Data shows up later, even though they seem to be somewhat commonplace (or at least not a visible oddity) here.

I think that's probably giving the Discovery writers too much credit, but it'd be neat.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Feb 11, 2019, 12:06pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S2: An Obol for Charon


Finally! I was waiting for someone to point that out! Saru has lost his fear before, and made it quite clear that he wasn't under any insidious mind control, that's just how he was when he wasn't being constantly burdened by his biology screaming at him. If anything, the crew should be wary of this turn of events.

Guy went from "huh, I'm finally not afraid" to throwing people around like ragdolls in the space of an episode.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Dec 8, 2018, 1:05pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

@ Rahul

You jail a changeling with force fields, they do it multiple times throughout the series
Set Bookmark
Sat, Dec 8, 2018, 12:53pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

Sisko isn't really gone, if anyone wants to see him they could just communicate with an orb. Technically he could contact anyone he wishes through visions even without orbs
Set Bookmark
Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 2:11pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S5: The Outcast

24th century version:
Soren: Tell me about your sexual organs.
Riker: That's not usually a topic of casual conversation.

21st century version:
Soren: Tell me about your sexual organs.
Riker: I have a dick the size of an elephant's trunk. Want to see it?
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 4:11pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: The Darkness and the Light

Oh, one final though: it's disappointing that we didn't get a final reaction to Kira's foolish attempt to seek vengeance from Chief O'Brien. It would have been nice for him to say something to her, or even just give her a disapproving head shake, to let her know that she had let him and his family down through her recklessness. He should have been given the chance to tell Kira that it would take a lot of time for him to come to terms with her actions, and the fact that she nearly got his unborn baby killed, and that he might have a hard time trusting her again in the future. Instead we get a useless, though pretty, belly-angle shot of the Defiant flying away from the planet.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 4:02pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: The Darkness and the Light

I just watched this episode, and I read the review and most of the comments below. I don't want to address any specific people who have posted, but instead discuss why I didn't like the episode. I will surely get flack from certain people for being "misogynistic" or "sexist," but I don't care what any of you think of me, haha.

The episode was all in all pretty good, in my opinion, up until the final act. I enjoyed the mystery aspect of it, and the idea of Kira's violent past coming back to haunt her. She was a terrorist afterall, and as such, she and her fellow terrorists probably deserves some comeuppance. That being said, I love Kira as a character! I usually enjoy her hot-headed, fire-brand attitude. She's tough and she takes no crap from anyone! Nana Visitor plays the part very well.

However, this episode was a terrible place to showcase her rebellious nature. The fact that she deliberately and remorselessly endangers the life of an innocent unborn child, that isn't even her own child, makes her come off as ridiculously irrational and thoughtless. For her to go charging off after a "villain," while nearly at term in a pregnancy, is completely unrealistic and is an example of a poorly written script.

If anything, Kira should have been most concerned with protecting the child within her, as per her natural motherly instincts, as well as guided by the fact that she would be letting down her good friends, the O'Briens,' if the child was harmed. Earlier in the episode, Miles says to her, "You're caring for someone else now." To which she responds, "Yes, you're right." So the character specifically admits that caring for the baby is her top priority, not some half-cocked chance for revenge.

Someone posting above said to give Kira a break. No! She cannot be let off the hook for endangering the O'Briens' baby! It's completely unconscionable and stupid! This has nothing to do with sexism. If the character was male, and he was in charge of caring for a baby, and suddenly carried the baby off into battle for dubious reasons, I would be just as hard on that character, too!

Am I the only one who feels that Prin is the real victim in this whole thing, too? Okay, sure, he assassinated a bunch of people, but those people deserved it based on the lives they had led, and the choices they had made, during the occupation. As Prin discusses, Kira (and likely the others too) showed no remorse for their terrorist murders of various Cardassians.

When Prin explains that 26 Cardassians were killed in the explosion, including innocent civilians like himself, Kira is remorseless and believes that a laundryman is just as guilty as a soldier. Ridiculous! While Prin actually cares about innocent civilians, and goes out of his way to protect others not involved in the Shakaar resistance cell attacks when he assassinates them, Kira is the opposite. She's basically repeating the old, racist saying: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," or "the only good German is a dead German." Instead of "Indian," or "German," though, she replaces those with "Cardassian."

We have no way to know who those 26 Cardassians were, except that Prin tells us that most were innocent members of the Gul's family. Does that include children? Probably, and that makes Kira and her cohorts even more the true villains of this episode. As one poster above stated, Kira deserved to die for what she had done. Yes, she does! Killing innocents, especially children, despite it being a time of war, is still a crime against humanity. While the episode tries to make Prin out to be the villain, he comes off as pitiable, and is really but a psychologically damaged and misunderstood victim of the Bajoran terrorists' crimes against "humanity."
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Tue, Feb 13, 2018, 10:31pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Will You Take My Hand?

A few interesting Jammer Review stats:

The last chronological season finale that Jammer recommended was "The Expanse" from ENT season two.

Enterprise's "Damage" from 2004 is the most recent entry in the Star Trek canon to earn four stars.

Only season of Trek to have only one stand-out (3.5 stars or higher) entry. The two reviewed Andromeda seasons share that record.

This season of Discovery is tied with the first season of DS9 to have the lowest amount of losers in a single season: 2 two-star episodes and none below two-stars.
Set Bookmark
Jeffrey Combs
Thu, Jan 4, 2018, 6:15am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S1: Battle Lines

@Drewmina - We don't talk about Babylon 5 here. Jammer doesn't like it. Too much competition for DS9, I guess.
Set Bookmark
Tom Chambers
Fri, Dec 1, 2017, 5:23pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: New Dimensions

Norvo, my apologies, I should have refrained from commenting. McFarlane's 'Admiral Halsey' shout-out is ultimately just a matter of trivia. I suppose the more relevant question is, not whether you knew, but did Seth McFarlane know? It doesn't matter at all to anybody except naval history buffs.
Set Bookmark
Tom Chambers
Fri, Dec 1, 2017, 2:25pm (UTC -6)
Re: ORV S1: New Dimensions

Norvo, you may be right about 'Admiral Halsey' being a Mcfarlane shout-out to a McCartney/Wings song. But (just checking) you do realize that Admiral Halsey was a real person, yes?
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Sun, Nov 12, 2017, 9:17am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

I love how a brief chaste exposition-free scene between two men is considered "ham-handed"
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Sat, Nov 11, 2017, 10:20pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

I find myself pretty depressed by some recent comments.

As a gay man, yes, it *does* matter to me that I see LGBT representation and diversity in Star Trek. I'm not going to pretend otherwise or say I'm satisfied that in the fifty-year history of the franchise how not one character reflected my own sexuality until now.

Skupper, being gay matters to me, and it matters that I see a gay couple on Star Trek Discovery.
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Fri, Nov 10, 2017, 8:38pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Jammer, I believe you have the episode credits for this week's "The Orville" listed at the top of your review. This episode was written by Kirsten Beyer and directed by John S. Scott.
Set Bookmark
Ian Whitcombe
Sun, Nov 5, 2017, 9:57pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Troy, to try to shed some light into your questions as to at which point the series deviated from Fuller's plans. Here are a few things to consider:

Akiva Goldsman was hired as a producer after Fuller's departure. The writing credits for "The Vulcan Hello" indicate that he re-wrote Fuller's teleplay.

Bryan Fuller mentioned in an interview that the then unnamed second episode was written by Fuller and Nicholas Meyer. This didn't turn out to be the case.

Given all this, as with Fuller's previous contributions to Voyager, it's extremely difficult to ascertain how much credit Fuller deserves and what is being carried through.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Nov 4, 2017, 2:43am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S3: Blood Fever

I find it extremely funny how everyone is saying that Paris having sex with Torres would have been the same as HIM raping HER, when it was clearly the exact opposite. Maybe it's because our so called enlightened culture doesn't normally think that women can rape men, but that is obviously what was happening here.

Torres was the one forcing the issue, demanding sex. Paris was repeatedly saying no to her, yet she kept pressing sex upon him. Isn't that rape? Or at least the beginnings of it? How is that any different than when Vorik demanded sex from Torres? It isn't. Yet people seem to think Vorik was sexually assaulting Torres, but she, doing the exact same thing, was just acting like a drunk woman or something, and Paris agreeing would have been rape.

It's very telling how noone else seemed to see that side of it but me apparently. Hmmmm....

And yes, they made a big steaming pile of mess out of the Pon Farr. I used to have sort of an idea of what it was and what it meant before this episode, but now I have no clue. I won't even get into all the stupid things they did. Most of it was already mentioned already.

Onto more mudane things.

There is a kiloton of gallacite to get, which would be enough to refit their warp coils, and they send down 3 people with backpacks to bring it up? That is 1000 tons. So that would only take them about 18 years or so. Silly.

I also find it hard to believe that 400 years from now there isn't a better way to climb down a cliff than using pitons and ropes. But that has been done several times in Star Trek now, so I don't blame Voyager, but I do blame them for saying this after they fell...

PARIS: Calm down. This wasn't Neelix's fault. I saw him drive the piton and it was solid. It must've malfunctioned.

Because a spike driven into a rock can 'malfunction'. I think the Voyager writers are in love with technobabble so much that they use it when they don't even need to. 'My rope broke! It must have been a subspace anomaly that decreased the density of the atoms causing an invariant breakdown of the particle field!'

All the aliens just vanish with Chakotay and the others. How? They have transporters I guess? Or are just really really sneaky? Either way, silly.

Vorick was just faking being all better when the Doc met him in the holodeck? How did he manage that? And why did he even bother telling the Doc? Why not just leave? He could somehow disable Voyager's transporters, communications, and shuttles, and then get to the planet without using them, or maybe he did it miraculously after he left? IDK. All nonsense.

And Tuvok telling Paris to allow himself to be raped by Torres (see above) was one of the most horrible things I've ever seen on Star Trek.

Tuvok allowing the Kal-if-fee to happen was also horrible. He knew Vorick had another way to deal with pon farr, namely meditation, and that Torres was not a Vulcan and was dealing with pon farr against her will, and that it was (supposedly) a fight to the death. He should have had Vorick sent back to the ship to meditate, and had Torres and Paris mate like he originally intended, which is less horrible(?).

All of this is just awful to me, this whole episode. Voyager really screwed up this time. I'm not sure what the point was. Rape is bad? Or good sometimes? Were they trying to increase our knowledge of Vulcan sexuality? If that's the case, it didn't work. It only muddled things up beyond all hope.

What a mess. I'm sort of at a loss what to think.

1/2 star.
Set Bookmark
Thu, Nov 2, 2017, 4:04am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S3: Alter Ego

I also found it a bit strange that neither Kim nor Tuvok noticed that Marayna wasn't a normal holodeck character after just a few minutes. I certainly did.

Why do the aliens need to have someone sitting in the middle of this nebula all by themselves to preserve it? That was wierd. And why would a nebula controlling machine be able to tap into an alien computer and completely take over the holodeck and all of Voyager's systems?

Also I'm getting sick of the inertial dampers failing, since that is supposedly what keeps them from dying every time they move the ship basically, but apparently they don't need them at all, because nothing every happens when they fail anyway.

I didn't like Kim's part in the whole thing, I think that was completely unnecessary. It could just as easily have been only about Tuvok, which would have made it a better episode, I think.

2 1/2 stars.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 2:28am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S3: Warlord

As far as other people saying that the dream sequence where Kes and Tieran fight, that they are in the throneroom at the beginning and that it switches to Voyager to indicate that Kes is winning the psychic battle; that isn't true at all. In the whole sequence, Kes' side shows a bed and things, her room on Voyager, and Tieran's side shows the throneroom. It never switches from solely one to solely the other. It always shows both. It would have been good if they actually did what the other posters thought, because that would have been good direction, but unfortunately it's all in your imagination. I watched it three times to make sure. :)

And there is a massive plothole in this episode, namely the transporter.

They could have, and would have, beamed Kes back to Voyager immediately. They knew where she was, and they could have just done that, and figured out how to fix her and then stuck the synaptic stimulator in her neck and show over. But, you know, plot.

Tuvok beams down with the synaptic stimulator and gets into what must be the highest security place on the planet, somehow, by pretending to be a waiter with a curtain over his face. Whatever.

And then Tuvok is in trouble. They could have beamed him and Kes out then, but no they didn't. Why? Because plot. Tuvok had beamed down with the synaptic stimulator. It takes physical contact to use it. Tuvok is within a few inches of Kes for a long time, so why not stick it on her?

I think Kes is the best character on the show. And she is a powerful being to boot. But they never really explored that in any detail, and that's a shame.

2 stars. Mostly for Kes.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 3:40pm (UTC -6)
Re: ENT S4: Bound

While not a great episode, I liked it ok. There was some decent humor in it for one thing.

I don't see it as sexist at all. They are Orion slave girls. That's what they do, act sexy. May as well say the show is dog-ist(?) because Porthos acts like a dog.

And I didn't see anyone throwing the term sexist around every time Trip or Mayweather or Archer took off their shirt. How about the Ferengi episode where Trip was in his underwear for about 1/2 of it? Not one mention of sexism in those comments. I never understood why showing a woman half naked is supposedly sexist, but showing a man half naked isn't. And people like looking at attractive people, so what's the big deal? Also they were, you know...aliens, with an alien culture, and if they run around in bikinis all the time, who am I to judge?

@Just another fan

'...I find it interesting that folks on this board cannot agree on whether the episode is sexist or not. Here's a thought. It's pretty easy to tell whether something is racist. So try this test on this episode: Imagine all the female characters are black and all the male characters are white. Do you have the same reaction?'

Like I said, I didn't think it was sexist. BTW, are they still supposed to be aliens in your scenario? Anyway, why would it be racist for black people to act all sexy and have some sort of pheromones that make white people swoon over them? How about if all the women were Mexican and all the men were Japanese? Is that still racist to you? Or, say...the women were green and the men were white (except one)? Does that make it racist?

And what if the Orions had been men and all the women (and yes, there are more than just Hoshi on board) went weak in the knees, and the men all got headaches and whatever? Is that still sexist?

Any time one person or small group of people is depicted in a certain way, doesn't automatically make it '-ist'. Racist, sexist, religionist, ageist, blah blah blah. In this episode, there were three alien women acting sexy. That doesn't suddenly imply that anyone thinks all women act that way. Or with the 'what if they were black people and white people' the same thing applies. That doesn't suddenly imply that anyone thinks all black people would act that way.

Assuming a single person or small group of people represents an entire race, or sex, or religion, etc. is wrong. So saying this episode is sexist, because a few women act sexy, is no different than watching an episode of 'Law and Order' or 'CSI' and saying it's racist because the criminal in it happened to be black in that episode. Anytime any character that is black or gay or a woman or whatever they happen to be, is allegedly portrayed in a negative way, it's not suddenly racist or homophobic or sexist. People who think it is, are the ones who perpetuate all the bad stereotypes.

Say I'm watching the episode of 'Law and Order' I mentioned above where the criminal turns out to be black. I think to myself that guy is a bad guy. It doesn't matter if he's black or white or green. He killed that other dude, so he's a bad guy. But then the person I'm watching it with says 'I knew they would do that! They think all blacks are criminals! That's racist!'. Well guess who is actually the racist? Me, who thought he was a bad guy because he murdered someone? Or the person who brings up the fact that he was black and equates that with criminal behaviour? They probably aren't even aware of what they did, and their intention might be good, but they are the ones thinking racist thoughts, not me. At least not until they brought it up. So who actually perpetuates all this racism, sexism, etc.? Hmmmmm....

Where was I? Oh yeah. 2 stars.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Oct 10, 2017, 12:59pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Butcher's Knife Cares Not for the Lamb's Cry


Whatever ideological axe you have grind, don't take it out on other people, thank you. And spare us the race lectures. People who quote Morgan Freeman and Chief Justice Roberts about "stop racism by not talking about race" have a valid opinion, but theirs isn't the only one. I think I mentioned the word "racism" in my comment above once (I think you mentioned it six times). Perhaps the irony is not understood, but someone who accuses others of "Constant talk of racism, and accusations of racism" at length is not, by your standards, "not talking about race."

Bigotry (as opposed to American racism) found new forms of expression in the Enterprise area as man could now travel to new worlds. Take, for example, the Enterprise two-parter, "Demons" and "Terra Prime," as well as the Enterprise episode "Home." These showed that xenophobia had hardly disappeared by the 22nd century, so it is a matter of debate as to who became enlightened, when, where and how.

Anyhow, what I was actually talking about in my post was that vengeance and war-like thinking did not, in the Star Trek world, leave us overnight, and were not replaced overnight by optimis and enlightened thinking.

The facts of the Star Trek timeline - not what I think or want or assume humanity should be or become - govern this conclusion:

1. 2050s: World War III, in the Star Trek Universe, ended in the 2050s.
2. 2063: The voyage of Zefram Cochrane's Phoenix. Earth, at this point, was still ravaged by war and ruled by "factions," i.e., tribes/
2. 2151-2155: These traits I just mentioned - vengeance and war-like thinking - were still present - in Enterprise (witness Trip's thirst for revenge upon the Xindi for murdering his sister). In Enterprise, even the supposedly enlightened Vulcans were spying on Andorians through a secret listening post at P'Jem, and Romulans were manipulating Aenar Andorians' telepathic abilities to attack other words. "Babel" and "United" showed that tribalism was not only not dead, but was not even past.
3. 2160: The Earth-Romulan war in 2160, which resulted in almost two hundred years of cold war.
4. 2161: The United Federation of Planets is founded.
5. 2255: Discovery takes place.

Based on the above, If there was a great enlightenment that occurred in the Trek universe between 2161 and 2255, it occurred off-camera, and "off-book," as it were.

You stated that we were reasonably enlightened by 2255, and the process of englightenment took "hundreds of years." There are less than one hundred years between 2161 and 2255. There are not even two and one half centuries between our own time and 2255.

In any event, it is unremarkable as a sociological observation to note that an entire society does generally (and indeed did not, in Trek) rid itself of aggressive and tribal impulses in the span of 94 years, based on nothing more than the mere passage of time.

As Kirk said to Anan 7 in "A Taste of Armageddon," "You said it yourself. I'm a barbarian." The notion that man was "enlightened" even by Kirk's time is refuted by this dialogue and other dialogue.

If you actually watch what Star Trek is up there on the movie screen and TV screen, you'll see how easy to conclude that human pettiness and vengeance was not limited to a few isolated incidents by the 22nd century.

What exactly happened to eliminate this behavior? Religion, in the Star Trek Universe, stopped being a motivating force on Earth by the 22nd century. The human brain did not become more complex between now and then. The advent of advanced technology is what separates our 21st century from the centuries ahead in the Star Trek universe, and it wasn't warp drive that brought about our newfound pacifism.

I am not denying we have come a long way since the '60s(we have come a long way), or that as centuries go by in our real world, progress will continue to be made.

Your point was that in the Star Trek universe, we (as a factual matter) went from being warlike to some different kind of plane of thinking by the year 2151 (or 2255 or whichever). The actual facts on the screen (as opposed to what we want to believe) tell a different story.

If you think otherwise, you should be able to present facts from the Star Trek timeline to rebut my argument.
Next ►Page 1 of 5
▲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.