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: 33 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 2
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Thu, Jul 11, 2019, 4:09pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: The Adversary

"I think what annoyed me most is that this is, to my memory at least, the third outing where the Defiant gets sabotaged mid voyage. It's become quite a tedious trope"

I'm pretty sure it's only the second time, and the other was Eddington doing it in very different circumstances to obey orders. What was the third?
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Thu, Jul 11, 2019, 12:23am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Facets

I found the scenes where you actually see the memories of past lives transferred to the senior staff absurdly hokey. The man says a few words in Trill like he's reading a spell, while standing around an apparently superfluous fire pit. Then we see a big blue soul just move physically from Jadzia to the trill guy to envelop the head of Kira or Odo or whoever. Isn't this meant to be sci fi not Harry Potter?
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 12:56pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Facets

"When Quark refuses to take part she gives him the Ferengi equivalent of a hand-job and plays on her knowledge of his romantic feelings toward her in order to get something she wants out of him. If that isn't manipulative and highly egotistical I don't know what is."

I think we're supposed to be relaxed because it's Quark. It's arguably a weakness of DS9 generally that its senior staff treat Quark the way they do - most often it's just unprovoked rudeness. The idea of professionalism being not necessarily liking everyone you work with but at least being reasonably pleasant is a lesson Sisko's team (usually highly professional people) have yet to learn.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Thu, May 2, 2019, 6:46am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2

No, it's not trolling - I stand by my summary. It was actually you who was unwilling to engage. People made reasonable points in response to your accusations, and rather than respond you simply defined every single counter-argument they made as some kind of bad faith manoeuvre that further implicated them in their guilt. There is all the difference in the world between asking you to substantiate strong claims rather than just take them on faith on the one hand, and saying "If I don’t see the problem, it must not exist."

After reading the above, I don't understand how anyone could even disagree with your view that critics of Burnham are motivated by racism, misogyny and so on without you taking it as further proof that critics of Burnham are motivated by racism and misogyny.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Wed, May 1, 2019, 2:41am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2

If anyone doesn't have time to read all 200 comments, here's a short version.

Axiom: I can't believe all the reactionary misogyny around here - no one would criticise a white male character the way they attack Burnham.
Kinematic: Well, these critics tend to love DS9 with its black captain, but I'll bite... Wesley Crusher?
Axiom: OMG! What a bad faith gaslighting intellectual sin! Deeply problematic. I can't continue this discussion unless you are willing to respond in good faith.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Fri, Apr 26, 2019, 8:46am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: The Road Not Taken

I found this one really boring. Just a long wait for the ending we all knew was coming as soon as Kelly appeared at the beginning. I'm glad others got something out of it as I didn't.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Tue, Apr 23, 2019, 8:16am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

@SlackerInc, given it already happened thousands of years before you were born why would it change anything? As I say, you seem to imagine there is some kind of conscious time line who reacts angrily to interfering time travellers by splitting in two. I'm fact, the timeline would be blissfully unaware and any time travel in the past would not change the time line because it already happened that way.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 2:55pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

Gerontius, yes, I agree!

Perhaps I may regret this when my younger self starts dating my (currently hypothetical) ex-wife, but I can't see why I have any ownership over my exes OR my time travelling younger selves if the two want to hook up. I can see how the power might be convenient for me, but I can't see why it would be ethical for me to have it in the first place.

Again, sorry if I just missed the class in school where we are all told why this is wrong, but I am still oblivious.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 8:03am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

By the way, there was a pretty good time travel detective drama, Crime Traveller, which explored time travel in a way that made logical sense. Each episode the main characters went back in time to solve a crime. But nothing they did changed the "present" as whatever they did had already happened previously in the present that they left.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 7:56am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

@Trashbarg, I must have missed the lesson in class/church where the code of ethics for dating a time travelling younger version of a past lover is laid out because I don't find your conclusions nearly as obvious as you do. In particular, I can't see why Kelly-1's views on who Kelly-2 dates should trump Kelly-2's views (either directly or indirectly through making Mercer feel guilty about it)?

@Slacker I agree with Boomer that the theory sounds like "absolute nonsense". I also don't think it does anything to make sense of time travel - unless by make sense you mean solve basic plot errors that the creators may or may not have made? Creators who we have no reason to think are writing the show with this near infinite alternative universes theory in mind.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 1:57am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

@Gerontius, yes, I totally agree. How many times did Star Trek rehash the same shuttle crash, trapped in a holding cell or holodeck gone wrong scenario, to name just three tropes off the top of my head? Anyone comparing the Orville to Star Trek on the basis that the latter only used original concepts and plots hasn't watched much Star Trek, and isn't being fair to the Orville.

"I thought Ed was going to ask Kelly her opinion of him dating her younger self, not give her a "if not you, then it'll be her" statement (paraphrase). That felt weird."

Yes, I think this was an attempt to be woke and feminist by McFarlane, but very unrealistic. I have yet to meet a man who would give first dibs to a 35 year old who cheated on him over a 28 year old who didn't, all other things being equal (which of course they are in this case!). Maybe the idea is he knew what the answer would be so could use her refusal to justify pursuing the better option.

"the first face-off of Kelly and Kelly and them circling around each other (with what is supposedly an eerie score) falls flat"

Yes, very badly done. I can get a sense of wariness, but I struggle to believe someone's response in that kind of scenario is to walk like a crab in a perfect enlarged semi-circle and then end up facing 180 degrees from where they started. The way the cameras showed their feet doing it made it much more noticeable.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 1:41am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow

@SlackerInc "What a twist at the end. I guess she was wrong and she's actually creating divergent timelines (which is the only way time travel makes sense IMO)."

So there are now two parallel timelines? Triggered by what? Does 'the time line' somehow consciously knows it has been interfered with by time travellers and reacts by splitting in two?? Or are you saying every time alternative outcomes come into play there are new universes? In which case there was already a divergent time line in which Kelly and Ed only went on a single date, and time travel did not change this. Either way, I am not clear on how this makes sense of time travel.

I think the only way it can make sense is if any actions we see time travellers take in the past already happened, and therefore can change nothing in the present. Obvs that would make for boring Sci Fi though, so there are efforts to present a paradox that isn't really there. I am happy to suspend disbelief for the sake of enjoying fiction but I don't think there is a paradox in reality.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 6:05am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Sanctuary

I really liked how they tied this in to Mercer's prophetic comment about how Moclan society is so different that he wonders how much they can really get along. At the time I thought "Hmm well as long as they keep their strange laws to their own planet it shouldn't become a diplomatic issue". This episode answered that.

On Sirtis, she was heavily billed on social media - and then barely got a line this episode. Disappointing, really. Why bother promoting that? I hope she is back again.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 3:12pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Identity, Part I

Not just the best Orville episode but one of the best episodes of any Trek (it's so similar to Star Trek I am happy to group it in that way).

What a shower of shit Discovery is by comparison.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 8:09am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: All the World Is Birthday Cake

Slacker, it's not a misunderstanding. Other atheists came up with a term that is deliberately offensive to anyone who disagrees with them and you apparently use it without even realising that. Obviously people can call themselves whatever they like - but it's obviously incredibly closed minded to say everyone who thinks freely could reach only your own conclusions about big questions. Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying that plenty of devout Christians, Jews etc can also be free thinkers?
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 6:43am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: All the World Is Birthday Cake

"This [implying that only atheists can be free thinkers] is common usage in my circles"

That says so much more about your circles than it does about religious people. Absurd.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Jan 28, 2019, 2:53pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: All the World Is Birthday Cake

Is there any purpose to claiming only atheists are freethinkers other than to detail the thread? I am agnostic myself but I find sentences like that absurd.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Sun, Jan 27, 2019, 9:47am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: All the World Is Birthday Cake

I don't mind plots that don't make total sense if the jokes are good. But there was hardly any humour this week either.

The birth scene was interminable. Do they think there is something inherently moving about watching a birth? Boring.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 7:12pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: First Contact

"it's really surprising that any Star Trek fan is so pro-capitalist since the Federation in Star Trek is a nearly pure socialist entity"

I see this argument made a fair bit and if you are making this point in good faith - rather than as some kind of "Ha! Gotcha!" - it deserves a response. Why would a keen conservative also be a keen Star Trek fan?

1. You can enjoy fiction without enjoying every specific bit of it. At least until Discovery, while Star Trek's political and moral messages have always been heavy handed and extremely unsubtle, they are reasonably rare and often confined to the closing minutes of an episode. I don't feel like I am watching a political campaign ad when watching Star Trek.

2. Similarly, it's not a contradiction to like someone's fiction while disagreeing with their politics. For all I know, Ronald Reagan would have written some awful Star Trek episodes (although he talked about sci fi themes a surprising amount for a leading politician), but that wouldn't actually alter my view of his Presidency. Ditto I can think a Star Trek writer's politics are something I would never vote for while enjoying his scripts.

3. I think there is a fair bit of liberals seeing 20th/21st century conservatives in Star Trek villains in a way that no conservative would.

Anyone can caricature ideas they disagree with, but there is this helpful notion - the ideological Turing test - that requires one to describe what your political opponents believe in a way that they would agree describes their own belief. You don't have to agree with that description yourself - you just need to be able to describe what someone else thinks so accurately that they would endorse it.

I don't think many Star Trek writers are even trying to caricature conservatives, but insofar as they do, they would usually fail the ideological Turing test. I don't feel in any way obliged to side with the evil caricatures when they don't remotely reflect my view of the ends and means in the first place! (Or, to separate ends and means, you could even happily agree with a character's verbal argument about tradition or whatever, but when they do something evil you could disagree with that bit.)

4. Perhaps above all, the notion of Star Trek as this post-economics, post-scarcity utopia has always seemed the weakest part of the franchise. Almost every time it is touched upon - which is rare - it comes up against problems like:

"Why is everyone cheering that round of drinks Picard bought everyone if it's free anyway?"
"What do humans do when meeting a society that doesn't practice post-currency economics and actually wants to be paid?" [Jake Sisko's answer was to whine at Rom for his latinum so he could bid in an auction.]
"Who exactly is allocating tables in Ben Sisko's dad's restaurant for free? Who is working in 'turbolift control' on a starship?"

This is before you even consider deeper, but rather obvious, questions like "If 4 million people all want an apartment next to the Royal Opera House, who gets to live there?".

So no, I don't look at Star Trek and think it provides any kind of example of why socialism works.

By the way, nothing I have written above is in any way meant to imply that Star Trek fans should be conservatives, either - it's just a response to the notion it would be in any way surprising that someone could be a card-carrying conservative and a Trekkie.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 2:28am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: The Outrageous Okona

"In fact, seeing so many complaining so much about the minor faults and lesser details of what are, essentially, wonderful stories about a better future is what has made me all but stop commenting here on Jammer's."

Weird. I don't comment much but I really like getting very different takes on these episodes, and look forward to reading the review and comments here the minute an episode is done. I can't imagine anything more dull to read than people purely being positive about things they liked, and so worried about appearing to "complain" that they turn off their critical faculties. No thanks.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 7:26am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: In Theory

Every so often you hear about some eccentric woman somewhere in the world falling in love with her chandelier or candlestick or hairdryer and going through a faux marriage ceremony. Not clear how any of this is different - unless you also believe a chandelier programmed to talk back would also be a suitable romantic partner.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Sun, Jul 1, 2018, 6:35am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Timescape

When we first see the Enterprise bridge, it looks like Romulan attack because Romulans are present, Riker is on the floor and the semi circle behind Picard's seat had a massive disrupter or phaser blast. The first two are explained but was the damage to the bridge ever explained?
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Jan 1, 2018, 1:15am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S2: The Jem'Hadar

Fault look above should read "default look".
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Mon, Jan 1, 2018, 1:14am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S2: The Jem'Hadar

A number of people above ask why neither Eris nor the Jem Hadar appear to recognise Odo as a founder.

But they show no special ability to realise someone is a changeling in any other episodes. Even Odo can't seem to tell who other founders are just to look at them and talk to them.

The humanoid appearance the female changeling and others take on does look like him, but the Search Part II says that is then matching up to him. Other episodes establish that his look is the best job he can do of looking like a humanoid, not some kind of fault look for his species. So why didn't they acknowledge him as a founder in any way? Because no founder they had ever encountered looked like that.
Set Bookmark
Tomalak
Thu, Dec 28, 2017, 9:34pm (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S6: Who Mourns for Morn?

It would have been a great in joke if Morn had spoken a lot in the Mirror Universe episodes. Maybe in our universe he "never shuts up" but the viewer never heard from him while in the Mirror Universe he's known to be quiet but he gets loads of on screen lines.
Next ►Page 1 of 2
▲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.