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: 35 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 2
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Sat, Apr 14, 2018, 9:24am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Yesterday's Enterprise

@Markus: I’ve pointed that same thing out before. It’s an incredible coincidence that the Enterprise-D is at the rift in both timelines when the Enterprise-C comes through. But that is a concept of television. It would make less sense to the viewer/or take up to much time to explain why “our” Enterprise-D suddenly shifts realities to the alternate timeline while it’s light years away from the right when the Enterprise-C comes through.

@Sean Hagins: Yes, as many others have commented in the past, Ent-D is rather passive in this battle compared to what we know it is capable of. We can explain that away if we can imagine that a lot of it’s torpedoes have been depleted from previous battles and there phaser reserves are also lower; and that too many torpedo blasts would further destabilize the rift. In reality, I’m sure it was a budget thing. This was already an expensive episode and it has a lot of FX shots. And even this space battle, as passive as the Enterprise-D is, is still very exciting and well handled.

To those complaining about the use of Guinan in this episode and how her mysticism wasn’t necessary, it’s a sci-fi show! It broadens her character and makes her even more intriguing to learn that she has powers to intuit changes in space-time. It is entirely possible that if she wasn’t used on the show then the writers could have retooled it so that Picard and crew would independently come to the conclusion that the Enterprise-C should return to its own time and make a noble sacrifice. But having Guinan there is great because it makes that character more interesting and alien, she gets to have dramatic conflict off of Picard, we see the bond of their relationship if he truly trusts her intuition, and Whoopi Goldberg was a major A-list star at the time and a great actress so it makes it more of an event episode. And I have no problem with a bartender being on this warship. Again, it’s Guinan! Haha.

Regarding people’s issues with Tasha Yar/Denise Crosby being back/hurting this episode, I thought her return here was brilliant and exciting! What a great way to bring her “back to life” and highlight a major difference between the regular timeline and this alternate one. Crosby wasn’t the greatest actress in general on the series but this episode is probably her best work and in no way does she damage it. Plus, the love story is great because I totally buy into it despite how fast it happens. I see and feel the chemistry between Yar and Castillo and also, Christopher McDonald is an excellent actor and makes Castillo so charming and fleshed-out.

There is a big debate on here about the whole “meaningless death” thing and I get both sides of it. A meaningless death is a very real thing that happens a lot in real life and to see it depicted in “Skin of Evil” is rather bold. But for TV viewers that can be underwhelming and depressing and considered a poor way to send off a character whether said character is beloved or not. But people can have their cake and eat it too: our Tasha Yar still died the meaningless death in “Skin of Evil” while the alternate Tasha got the heroic death in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” (although she didn’t end up dying directly from those events after all lol).

Anyway, this is still my absolute favorite episode of Star Trek ever and I can watch it infinitum forever. Everything is on point here: the acting, writing, direction, special effects, set design/lighting, incredible score, intriguing storyline, the action, the dread, the mystery, the love story, the guest stars, the brief bit of humor in the beginning, the filling in on the history of the Federation with the Enterprise-C. Just great stuff all around!
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 9:05pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: Lower Decks

@Trent:

How do you know Sito is “accepting a covert mission (of the kind she never entered Starfleet to pursue).” It could be regular Starfleet business for officers from time to time having to go on such covert missions. We saw an example of this is in the “Chain of Command” two-parter. Sito should feel lucky that Picard allowed her to have the chance to redeem herself on the Enterprise - a most prestigious post on the flagship of the Federation. And you make Picard sound nefarious when he would have no way to predict that after allowing her to serve on his ship, that events would transpire that her talents and the fact she’s Bajoran were ably suited for the sensitive mission at hand. No one ever said Starfleet was safe.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 6:56pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: Lower Decks

This is my favorite episode of season 7. I love AGT too but that was also a non-sensical technobabble story. This hour holds together tightly. Just a lot of sweet character moments for the senior crew, the junior crew, and their interactions. The end is so bittersweet and touching.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 6:44pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: Genesis

Rediculous but a lot of fun to watch. Great to have Barclay back, our beloved characters acting erratically, the tension, and great direction by McFadden. Call it a guilty pleasure and I think we should all take it given the lack of them in the 7th season.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Mon, Apr 9, 2018, 10:15pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S7: All Good Things...

Such a fun, sentimental, and moving episode and perfect end to a beloved series. I’ll pretend this is how TNG properly ended, (with the promise of Data still alive 25 years hence and a professor at Cambridge University with dozens of cats), versus what we actually got with “Nemesis”.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 2:18am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S4: The Mind's Eye

@CRUFP: This isn't Troi's third time counseling someone. You mentioned "The Nth Degree" in which she counseled Barclay but she also originally counseled Barclay in "Hollow Pursuits" even if it was rather briefly.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Tue, Dec 19, 2017, 12:59am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Hollow Pursuits

Correction: Dennis McCarthy did the wonderful score.
Set Bookmark
SpaceCadet
Mon, Dec 18, 2017, 12:49am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S3: Hollow Pursuits

@Borusa: Starfleet is akin to the military, not a private company workplace. Therefore, it is not out of place for Riker to forcibly grab Barclay's arm and reprimand him. And Riker has every reason to express displeasure at Barclay's level of performance.

@PeteTongLaw: you're right, it is unfortunate that the engineering staff is depicted as all men and wouldn't be cast that way nowadays but interestingly this was already a step back for TNG because the first season depicted a female chief engineer in only the second episode, and the second season featured Ensign Sonya Gomez prominently in a couple of episodes as part of Geordi's staff and she was intended to be a reoccurring character. At least by 1995 we had a main cast chief engineer with B'Elanna Torres on Voyager.

Yes, it was dickish of Wesley to also be a bully to Barclay when his character is the type that in the real world would also be made fun of for being a know it all child prodigy but it also makes sense in a way because it's not uncommon for those that want to fit in and be accepted to follow group think even if it's something negative like bullying another person. Wesley probably just wanted to be part of the group and be in on the joke though it was nasty. That rang true to me.

Anyway, this was a good, entertaining episode that is also thoughtful for one, addressing the issues of holodeck use privacy and the recreating of actual people to use however you want, and two) portraying a less than standard heroic Starfleet officer type who is socially awkward and struggling to fit in. That struggle and the efforts of his shipmates to reach out in various methods was really fascinating to watch. The Ron Jones conducted orchestration was excellent work. Same with the costuming. The humor was so good and you can tell the actors are just having so much fun playing their holodeck counterparts. Barclay is also an interesting complex character and Dwight Schultz really brought him to life. I also enjoyed the misdirection at the end of the episode that you think the character is leaving the episode for good and I remember the first time watching as a kid thinking how disappointing after really enjoying this unique character and then being delighted that it was just another holodeck re-creation. The save the ship dilemma did feel forced but I did at least like the reasoning and deduction used to figure out the solution. The one thing that I've never liked at all and I've never seen pointed out by anyone else is the lame end of Act One/cut to commercial when the officer's drinking glass has a leak in it and the officers in Ten Forward make this huge dramatic deal over it and the music swells ominously. I mean c'mon, your glass springs a leak and then the mood of the episode is supposed to become grim and dangerous and the audience is supposed to go "Oh no!" It was a bit over the top. I guess the writers couldn't figure out a smoother way for an act break. But still overall, very good episode. Also, reading these comments was the first I've ever heard of Schultz being some kind of nutjob which would be shocking if true. In fact, the guy wanted to do Star Trek and got connected with the role on the show because he worked with Whoopi Goldberg on the movie "A Long Walk Home" and asked her if he could get on the series. Fun fact!
Set Bookmark
cade
Wed, Feb 26, 2014, 5:22pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S5: For the Uniform

I'm ashamed to admit that as a kid I was so morally oblivious that I actually liked this episode. Rewatching it many years later, I was shocked and disgusted by Sisko's bioterrorism and the writing staff's tacit endorsement of it. An utter disgrace to the Star Trek franchise, and probably the most immoral, unethical episode of any tv show I've ever seen.
Set Bookmark
cade
Wed, Feb 26, 2014, 4:43pm (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S1: Progress

I strongly agree with Ken Egervari's moral objections to this episode. DS9 used to be my favorite ST series, but that was when I was a kid who didn't think much about the messages being sent. Revisiting the series, I'm finding a number of episodes deeply troubling and antithetical to what Star Trek once stood for. Conversely, as an adult I've come to appreciate TNG and its ethics a lot more.
Set Bookmark
EageryounspaceCadet
Sat, Sep 21, 2013, 5:27pm (UTC -6)
Re: ENT S1: Dear Doctor

I really love archers speach.

I think they could have reached some accomadation, or negotiated a deal with the valakians to give the Menk more autotonamy.


Maybe The evolutionary leap Phlox predicts NEEDS The winnowing out of people who are likely to die after the valakinas are gone, in order to happen.

Having a Cure, DEFINITELY gives you a sizable bargaining chip.

Should be able to negotiate for anything up to a continent.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Sat, Jul 27, 2013, 12:29am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

We can simultaneously consider his potential review good and bad, until presented with evidence that indicates either possibility.

"Schrodinger's Review" :)
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 25, 2013, 12:16pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Nicholas Meyer said in the commentary to Wrath Of Khan that Montalban, even back in 67, suffered from a battle injury or something to one of his legs, and had a permanent limp that (according to Mr. Meyer) he worked very hard to conceal, and did so brilliantly. However, it's worth noting that a stunt double would have been required for any scenes of all-out combat.

WOK has only one such scene, and Khan is not the one Kirk beats up. There was a fight planned for Kirk and Khan, but this was never filmed as the budget would not allow it.

For these reasons, up until now, we have more or less had to depend largely on simple, singular shows of strength to understand what a dangerous person Khan is.

I find that the combat scenes in STID really drive home the point of how incredibly powerful and scary a genetically engineered super warrior would be.

You realize that selective breeding is a thing? I'm not certain, but I believe it is unlawful in some parts of the world, if not at least frowned upon?

Khan is the work of people who don't realize that humans have been given limitations because they need them in order to possess the incredibly vital character trait called compassion. If you construct a killing machine with the heart of a proud, greedy, selfish, emotional human being, you are unleashing a monster. It's not like they could selectively breed out emotions.

The point I'm making is, somebody on the crew said "I don't want them to laugh at the villain." That was a decision someone made, and I feel it adds a verisimilitude to the idea behind the character.

Ben Cumberbatch is attempting to fill a role that NOBODY is ever going to forget that Montalban played. The world knows Montalban as Khan, for as long as history gets recorded. There simply HAD to be a completely "from scratch" take on the character, or it wouldn't have been possible to do it.

I'll close now, by saying that I remember exactly what I was thinking when Spock Prime gave this film what are destined to be its Arc Words. I was thinking that Spock Prime's human side was thinking:

"I remember him. Sonofabitch killed me, for god's sake watch your back!!!"
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 25, 2013, 3:55am (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S2: Death Wish

There was a missed opportunity in this episode, unless I'm wrong...

When Q (DeLancie) appeared on the Enterprise for the first time, one of the first things he does is deep freeze one Lt. Torres, whose skin tone and hair color match B'ellana's.

It's not a big jump to think that this man (who was also a Goldshirt) is B'ellana's father. A line, or better yet a scene referencing this would have been very welcome, especially in light of the gimmicky first act we got.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Sun, Jul 21, 2013, 10:20am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

"I agree with you that in ST 2009 they did a good job of exploring this alternate universe angle but in Into Darkness I just got the feeling that they were ripping off TWOK."

I find it to be unnecessarily cynical how quickly and easily people accuse writers of plagiarism when their intent is often homage. This may or may not be the process occurring here and now, but you've got to admit, if they were going to make some kind of heavily referential picture, they pick the right things to refer to.

"You also said that... "Personally, I don't feel any of the story threads put forth in STID go against the established characters or framework of the setting." Ok, you made a good point about Spock being messed up in the head due to the destruction of Vulcan but don't you feel that this Spock is a little too emotional? It took Spock Prime years to come to grips with his emotions. He is extremely reserved. It doesn't make sense for him to completely lose control of himself when he has spent so many years fighting to hide his emotions."

There are many scenes in the movie devoted to showing Spock maintaining his cool Vulcan exterior. I'm afraid the fact is, and I'm sure Mr. Quintillion will agree, he's just not quite as cool as Leonard Nimoy. I really can't fault him for it, because frankly I don't know who is.

"I also think that they got the character of Khan completely wrong. The biggest sin was when they showed him crying in front of Kirk and Spock. Khan had a very aggressive and dominant personality. He would never show a sign of weakness in front of another Alpha male, in this case Kirk. I know that he was trying to manipulate him but this was not Khan's style."

Cumberbatch as Khan turns away from Kirk and Spock before the year falls, so technically you are correct, he would not do this *in front of them* per se. The scene ends before he moves a muscle, IIRC.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Sat, Jul 20, 2013, 8:34pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Someday they do need to make Star Trek II: Chekhov Screams Again.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 1:31pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Too true, too true. As I said, this E2 feller is kinda out there.

I just thought it was a rather compelling argument that if they're going to spend money making a film (190 million+, if I'm not mistaken), the lion's share of the budget is naturally going to be devoted to the Spectacle aspect of it, or what you might call "showmanship."

Personally, I don't feel any of the story threads put forth in STID go against the established characters or framework of the setting. The technobabble is getting unbelievably ludicrous, but that's just never been a sticking point for me. The technological aspects of the story need to be wholly secondary to the characters and their ideas for the story to move at an acceptable pace.

Stephen King says in his book "On Writing" that if he tells you there's a cage on a table with a Rabbit that has the number 8 on its back, to tell you the dimensions of the table or the style of cage or its shape isn't storytelling, but an instruction manual.

And frankly, after watching "Threshold" (VOY), I gave up on trying to understand the technical aspects of the Star Trek universe, except as it relates to getting the story moving, and have, I feel, found much more enjoyment than I used to get out of it.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 11:34am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Found this:

"E2 - Thu, May 30, 2013 - 12:03pm (USA Central)
I saw "Star Trek Into Darkness". It was fun. I enjoyed it.

I can totally see why people who don't know or just don't like TOS or TNG, DS9, or the earlier films would like it.

Those older versions of trek were often slow and talky. They occasionally tried to act as though they were actual science fiction and acknowledge some of the laws of physics. They frequently tried to ram ideals or morals down our throats, or make us think about things from a different perspective. Once in a while they even portrayed complex issues in shades of gray, rather than absolutes. (Sometimes the assumed villain going in actually turned out to not even be bad!) They spent years building up relationships between characters. And on top of all that, they kept trying to sneak in this "if we work together, despite differences in gender, race, religion, even species, we CAN learn, and make things better" subtext- all that Roddenberry clap-trap.

It is safe to say that JJ has avoided all of those pitfalls, and crafted a action packed, highly entertaining film free from any of that old baggage. In fact, he's done it twice, now. Face it - we need "Blow stuff up" films for people who don't love overbuilt cars, giant transforming robots or super spies.

So, for those nay-sayers who suggest that what they loved about Star Trek, what made it stand apart from all those other fantasy adventures set in space, is absent- well, suck it up. If you really claim you want entertainment that requires you to think, you're barking up the wrong franchise. Go read a book."

I would agree except for the part about racial integration being clap-trap. Certainly, much of what Roddenberry had to say was in retrospect complete self-serving garbage, but racial integration is not, and I'll hear no dismissive viewpoints toward it.

But he is right: Star Trek is what it is: cheap entertainment. Wrath of Khan cost $11 million, and yet it's the crown jewel of the franchise.

And you should read books! "Songs of Distant Earth" for one.

But don't take my word for it.

(Musical Cue)
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 11:08am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Macca, upon reflection, what are your impressions of the film?

I feel it necessary to point out that if you don't begin, follow through with, and end on a definite statement about the film, you really call into question, in my mind, the assertion that you have even seen the film in question. You saw it, right?

What did you think of the film? How does it compare to Star Trek: The Motion Picture?
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 9:52am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

I could also say this.

Something we tend to forget in the fandom is that Spock doesn't have a whole lot of friends. His very nature as a Vulcan prohibits expressions of personal affection, and while he is half human, he went to school entirely with Vulcans.

Now add into that his entire race being reduced to ~10,000 people.

This is a guy with serious issues.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 8:52am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Like the man said:

"I will not allow posturing and bigotry to destroy this meeting!"

It was said, by Genre-Buster:

"So let's conduct an experiment. As I said before, I haven't seen STID and don't plan to - this is the absolute truth. Pitch the movie to me - honestly tell me and your fellow forum readers why you personally liked it, and why you think we should see it. It's not enough to say it was fun - I want to know WHY it was fun. No need to quote box office returns or critical responses. I have access to Rotten Tomatoes and can look that stuff up for myself."

To which I replied:

"Star Trek Into Darkness gives the Star Trek fan a glimpse into the possibilities of the Star Trek mythos.

In a universe where parallel dimensions are known to exist, can there still be such a thing as fate? Our our fates ultimately tied to our identities? Do the choices we make result only from the environment we live in, or is there some immutable quality to our consciousness that spans the breadth of all quantum realities?

Will two people who are destined to be lovers ultimately find each other no matter what is done to change the course of history? Conversely, will two people who are destined to be enemies ultimately find a way to get knives at each other's throats, regardless of what temporal discrepancies shred the fabric of history around them?

It's a look at the romance inherent, but up until now unacknowledged, in the story of the brave crew of the Starship Enterprise, no bloody A, B, C, or D."

This doesn't constitute a loss of "face" for anyone, and if I may say so, we are not Feudal Lords, we're just Trek fans.

Now enough with the rancor, that belongs in another franchise anyhow. ;)
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 8:07pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 1:25pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

It's almost as though our violent human emotions are encroaching on the proceedings very much against our will.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 11:50am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

Star Trek Into Darkness gives the Star Trek fan a glimpse into the possibilities of the Star Trek mythos.

In a universe where parallel dimensions are known to exist, can there still be such a thing as fate? Our our fates ultimately tied to our identities? Do the choices we make result only from the environment we live in, or is there some immutable quality to our consciousness that spans the breadth of all quantum realities?

Will two people who are destined to be lovers ultimately find each other no matter what is done to change the course of history? Conversely, will two people who are destined to be enemies ultimately find a way to get knives at each other's throats, regardless of what temporal discrepancies shred the fabric of history around them?

It's a look at the romance inherent, but up until now unacknowledged, in the story of the brave crew of the Starship Enterprise, no bloody A, B, C, or D.
Set Bookmark
CadetNorris
Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 12:29am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

The problem seems to lie in cultural barriers that exist between us. We're less conscious of it when we're all posting in the same language, typeface, and text color.

It's worth noting that the major impetus for learning manners is often some form of positive punishment, more typically verbal these days, though physical discipline isn't completely out of vogue, sad as it may be.

When the condition of a tangible punishment that we can easily understand and anticipate is removed, we human beings tend toward the most intensely charged defense of our viewpoint we feel we can get away with.

Granting all that, I will close by saying that I thought Star Trek Into Darkness was cute. The next one will either have to address the concerns of those who want there to be more of a focus on ideas, or risk creating an unneccessary schism in a fandom that has seen quite a few schisms formed and healed already.

If JJ makes another action-fest he's going to lose my attention.

Even so, I'll give it to him; Into Darkness entertained me.
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.