Let's talk about Star Trek

1356737

Posts

  • Target PracticeTarget Practice Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    SpeedySwaf wrote: »
    Ok I hate to say it but fuck Q. Overly powerful deus ex machina types annoy the hell out of me, because there's never a question as to whether or not you can beat them, you just can't. It's not like say, the Borg where they show up and kick everyone's asses because damn, they're committed motherfuckers and as a result they've a huge range of advantages, it's more like "you can't beat us because you just can't".

    It cheapens the narrative, because they've essentially said "all your problems are our entertainment". It's like how at the end of Lost it turns out the entire island is a dream sequence and the plane lands safely in the US.
    If it means anything, I heard Sisko kicked Q's ass in a boxing match when he made himself mortal.
    Not quite. Q was just playing around. He wasn't mortal.

    It was still a great scene.

    "You hit me! Picard never hit me!"
    'I'm - not - Picard."

    And I can't believe nobody's mentioned "Darmok" (TNG) as one of their favorite episodes. That one's pretty cool.

    Target Practice on
    sig.gif
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    [ENT rant]Even though I'm an avid trekkie, I can hardly stomach Enterprise. I know I sound like a fanboy when I said this but, I hate hate hate hate hate hate the stinking intro music! But aside from that the rest of the episodes don't improve much. I had to literally turn off the TV during the borg episode of ENT! ARGH! Borg in antartica! WTF? And the borg were so cheesey in that episode... And if archer defeated them? why the heck were we not better prepared or at least informed during later encounters![/ENT rant]

    gumrucker on
  • Target PracticeTarget Practice Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    [ENT rant]Even though I'm an avid trekkie, I can hardly stomach Enterprise. I know I sound like a fanboy when I said this but, I hate hate hate hate hate hate the stinking intro music! But aside from that the rest of the episodes don't improve much. I had to literally turn off the TV during the borg episode of ENT! ARGH! Borg in antartica! WTF? And the borg were so cheesey in that episode... And if archer defeated them? why the heck were we not better prepared or at least informed during later encounters![/ENT rant]

    Er. There are very few "Trekkies" who did like Enterprise, from all I can tell.

    Target Practice on
    sig.gif
  • darksteeldarksteel Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    [ENT rant]Even though I'm an avid trekkie, I can hardly stomach Enterprise. I know I sound like a fanboy when I said this but, I hate hate hate hate hate hate the stinking intro music! [/ENT rant]

    Actually, the intro music was one of the few things I liked about Enterprise. Every time I listen to it, I get a tingle in me reminding me that there is hope for humanity and that we can be better; the promise of science, progress, and understanding. Cheesy, I know, but really, it does give me that feel-good feeling.

    darksteel on
    shikisig6-1.jpg
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    Re-booting things like Battlestar Galactica, Batman Begins and Casino Royale did for their respective franchises would do wonders for Star Trek. Go back to basics, drop the techno babble and tell some good stories and the fans will come.

    Argh! No! I did not like what those 'reboots' did for their franchises! (Except Batman Begins)

    (I know I'm about to be lynched!) The new Battlestar blows! It's like All My Children on spaceships!
    "Am I a Psylon? I don't know, I don't feel like a psylon, but maybe I was programmed to feel human?"
    vomit.

    (I know I'm about to be lynched again!) Casino Royale also blew! It took all the goodness of Bond, turned it upsidedown and butt-raped it! Yeah it was a good movie, but not a good BOND-movie. (Although the ball-smashing scene was funny, now we know why he doesn't have hundreds of illegetimate chidren)

    gumrucker on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    darksteel wrote: »
    gumrucker wrote: »
    [ENT rant]Even though I'm an avid trekkie, I can hardly stomach Enterprise. I know I sound like a fanboy when I said this but, I hate hate hate hate hate hate the stinking intro music! [/ENT rant]

    Actually, the intro music was one of the few things I liked about Enterprise. Every time I listen to it, I get a tingle in me reminding me that there is hope for humanity and that we can be better; the promise of science, progress, and understanding. Cheesy, I know, but really, it does give me that feel-good feeling.

    I felt lke a was starting to watch a WB drama every time I heard that music.

    gumrucker on
  • RocketSauceRocketSauce Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I wasn't old enough to have grown up with the OS, but I practically watch all things Trek from the first episode of TNG, till the end of Enterprise. I can pretty much say I enjoyed the most from Enterprise in just about every area. I love the theme music, the characters, the look of the show, the humor was more on target than any other "Trek" humor, and especially during Season 3 the action was great. I own all shows except Voyager on DVD and Enterprise just has it all in my opinion. Bakula made a great captain, too. Shit, I love pretty much anything Trek. Even Star Trek V.

    RocketSauce on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I actually liked the ENT theme music too. That is, the original one from seasons 1 & 2, not the drummed-up version of seasons 3 & 4. That ruined the only thing I liked in the entire show.

    I'm still trying to understand how B&B ever figured that the only thing wrong with ENT was that there wasn't enough drum beat in the theme song.

    @gumrucker: You're a fucking moron. You clearly don't know what you're talking about, if you can't tell the MoO Psylons from the BSG Cylons, or don't realise that Bond is a spy franchise. Now go away before I do the ball-smashing scene on you.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • VoodooVVoodooV Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    VoodooV wrote: »
    Fuck Berman and Braga...

    People forget how much good both of them have done for the series at other times in their respective careers.

    "You mutilated and murdered this guy, then ass-raped his corpse."

    "Yes, but don't forget how good I was to him when we were kids."

    I just picked up First Contact. I was watching all the bonus materials with big B's, and it was a little hard to resent them, all things considered.

    It's also entirely possible I have no emotional attachment to TV/Film writing/producing combos.

    But yeah...they kinda fucked up. A few times.

    I won't lie, First Contact is quite possibly, the best Star Trek movie ever made, second only to Khan. But man, everything since then has been technobabble, horny-Q, sex-crazed T'Pol, Time Traveling insanity.

    VoodooV on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    @gumrucker: You're a fucking moron. You clearly don't know what you're talking about, if you can't tell the MoO Psylons from the BSG Cylons, or don't realise that Bond is a spy franchise. Now go away before I do the ball-smashing scene on you.

    [sarcasm]
    Oh. Dear.
    I mispelled something. That imediatly invalidates my opinons.
    Whatever shall I do?
    You have a different opinion than I.
    These different opinons obviously lead to insults, and threats of physical violence.
    *tremble*
    [/sarcasm]

    Obviously, I am not a
    Richy wrote: »
    fucking moron
    because I can tell the differnce between the Master of Orion "Psilons" and the Battlestar "Cylons". I just misspelled it. And I do realize Bond is a spy franchise, oh it just used to a good spy franchise.

    That is, unless your definition of a
    Richy wrote: »
    fucking moron
    is someone of a different opinion.

    And, what's the deal with the threats? I don't tell you to go away because you like the ENT theme song, and I don't, and then threaten you with phaser burns...:|

    gumrucker on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    Re-booting things like Battlestar Galactica, Batman Begins and Casino Royale did for their respective franchises would do wonders for Star Trek. Go back to basics, drop the techno babble and tell some good stories and the fans will come.

    Argh! No! I did not like what those 'reboots' did for their franchises! (Except Batman Begins)

    (I know I'm about to be lynched!) The new Battlestar blows! It's like All My Children on spaceships!
    "Am I a Psylon? I don't know, I don't feel like a psylon, but maybe I was programmed to feel human?"
    vomit.

    (I know I'm about to be lynched again!) Casino Royale also blew! It took all the goodness of Bond, turned it upsidedown and butt-raped it! Yeah it was a good movie, but not a good BOND-movie. (Although the ball-smashing scene was funny, now we know why he doesn't have hundreds of illegetimate chidren)

    I Cast Thee Out!!!!!!!

    shryke on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    shryke wrote: »
    I Cast Thee Out!!!!!!!

    Good thing I have on my Holy-Waterproof Raincoat on today! :P


    Anyways back to Star Trek, and more particularly, the matter of Q.
    I loved Q in TNG and DS9, but in VOY he seems to be a point of debate.

    I liked the exploration of the details of the Q-Continum, actually going there, Q-Civil War, and Q-morality. But the almost needy aspect of Q in VOY is what I didn't like.

    And oh boy, is Q-Squared an awesomely sweet book! I consider it a must-read for all trekkies! If you're going to read one Star Trek novel, this is it!

    gumrucker on
  • EndomaticEndomatic Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Don't worry, I thought Casino Royale was a shit fest too.

    Endomatic on
  • chamberlainchamberlain Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I second Darmok as being one of the best Star Trek episodes of any series.

    I do recall there being a TNG episode that almost brought me to tears, but I cannot remember the name. The Enterprise comes across a probe from a plant that had been destroyed by its sun. Picard it zapped by the probe and ends up living an entire life through the memories of the person who created the probe in the first place. In the end he wakes up and find the flute he played in his 'previous life.' The final scene is looking in through the window of Picard's cabin while he plays the flute. I wish I could remember the name of the episode...

    That same flute comes back later when Picard falls for a woman who was transfered onto the Enterprise. He plays it for her, she swoons, and Picard gets some in an access tunnel. Awsome.

    chamberlain on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    "The Inner Light" is the name of the episode.

    Ressikan Flutes do it every time for the ladies.

    gumrucker on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The best one was the TNG where Picard gets zapped by a probe and lives out the entire life of a guy on a doomed planet in a few minutes.

    that one bought a tear or two to my eyes

    nexuscrawler on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    "The Inner Light" is the name of the episode.

    gumrucker on
  • HewnHewn Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    The best one was the TNG where Picard gets zapped by a probe and lives out the entire life of a guy on a doomed planet in a few minutes.

    that one bought a tear or two to my eyes

    Oh, totally. I loved that one. And then he kept that flute around for the rest of the series, which was a great touch and showed how significant the experience was for him.

    Hewn on
    Steam: hewn
    Warframe: TheBaconDwarf
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    @gumrucker: You're a fucking moron. You clearly don't know what you're talking about, if you can't tell the MoO Psylons from the BSG Cylons, or don't realise that Bond is a spy franchise. Now go away before I do the ball-smashing scene on you.

    [sarcasm]
    Oh. Dear.
    I mispelled something. That imediatly invalidates my opinons.
    Whatever shall I do?
    You have a different opinion than I.
    These different opinons obviously lead to insults, and threats of physical violence.
    *tremble*
    [/sarcasm]

    Obviously, I am not a
    Richy wrote: »
    fucking moron
    because I can tell the differnce between the Master of Orion "Psilons" and the Battlestar "Cylons". I just misspelled it. And I do realize Bond is a spy franchise, oh it just used to a good spy franchise.

    That is, unless your definition of a
    Richy wrote: »
    fucking moron
    is someone of a different opinion.

    And, what's the deal with the threats? I don't tell you to go away because you like the ENT theme song, and I don't, and then threaten you with phaser burns...:|
    My definition of a fucking moron is someone who makes painfully obvious mistakes while trying to get people to take his opinions seriously. So, you fit the bill perfectly. Congratulations :^: :^:

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    My definition of a fucking moron is someone who makes painfully obvious mistakes while trying to get people to take his opinions seriously. So, you fit the bill perfectly. Congratulations :^: :^:

    painfully obvious mistakes = typos? O_o
    Richy wrote: »
    ...MoO Psylons from the BSG Cylons...
    In Master of Orion they are "Psilons".

    I guess makes us both "fucking morons".:|

    Still, a painfully obvious mistake in spelling doesn't invalidate someone's point.

    gumrucker on
  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    One great thing about Q in TNG was his constant insults towards Worf.

    "Ah, the redoubtable Commander Riker...and Microbrain!
    Growl for me...let me know you still care."

    or

    Worf: "Be quiet! Or disappear back where you came from."
    Q: "I can't disappear...anymore than you could win a beauty
    contest."

    and even

    Q: What must I do to convince you people?"
    Worf: "Die."
    Q: "Oh, very clever, Worf. Eat any good books lately?"

    DanHibiki on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    Q: What must I do to convince you people?"
    Worf: "Die."
    Q: "Oh, very clever, Worf. Eat any good books lately?"

    Cutting out the context there (Q trying to convince the crew of the enterprise that he had been made mortal) betrays WOrf of his own wit.

    Evander on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Still, a painfully obvious mistake in spelling doesn't invalidate someone's point.
    So what was your point exactly? That the 70s BSG was better than the remake because it didn't have a plot? That the new Bond movie sucks because it's a spy movie that focuses on spies instead of sci-fi gadgets and action scenes?

    No, your typos do not invalidate your point. Your point is self-invalidating. It would be like hating TNG because it has a coherent backstory that was lacking from TOS. Or hating the new Transformers movie because it's CGI instead of a cartoon like the original. Or hating Terminator 2 because the T800 is given more backstory than in The Terminator.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • HewnHewn Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    So Spike just ran a two part Voyager episode I hadn't caught entirely before. It was where they get thrown back to Earth in 1996. It wasn't all that great. But what was hilarious was seeing Sarah Silverman. Except, she wasn't funny like comedian funny, it was just so bad it's good funny.

    But at least I finally saw how the Doctor got his mobile holo-emitter.

    Hewn on
    Steam: hewn
    Warframe: TheBaconDwarf
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I'm watching "These are the Voyages..." right now.

    I can see how Blalock was "appalled" with the episode. It keeps feeling like the writers and producers are going "SEE SEE, IT'S THE NEXT GENERATION, YOU LIKED TNG RIGHT? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE US AGAIN!!!!"

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Still, a painfully obvious mistake in spelling doesn't invalidate someone's point.
    So what was your point exactly? That the 70s BSG was better than the remake because it didn't have a plot? That the new Bond movie sucks because it's a spy movie that focuses on spies instead of sci-fi gadgets and action scenes?

    No, your typos do not invalidate your point. Your point is self-invalidating. It would be like hating TNG because it has a coherent backstory that was lacking from TOS. Or hating the new Transformers movie because it's CGI instead of a cartoon like the original. Or hating Terminator 2 because the T800 is given more backstory than in The Terminator.

    My point was that I hope that Star Trek doesn't get a similar reboot as the othe franchises. I don't like the direction that the other franchises went in.

    Maybe I do 70s BSG alot better! Maube I hate the new bond! Thats my opinion. What's self invalidadting about that? It's an opinon. Who are you to decide if it's valid or not?

    gumrucker on
  • strakha_7strakha_7 Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Still, a painfully obvious mistake in spelling doesn't invalidate someone's point.
    So what was your point exactly? That the 70s BSG was better than the remake because it didn't have a plot? That the new Bond movie sucks because it's a spy movie that focuses on spies instead of sci-fi gadgets and action scenes?

    No, your typos do not invalidate your point. Your point is self-invalidating. It would be like hating TNG because it has a coherent backstory that was lacking from TOS. Or hating the new Transformers movie because it's CGI instead of a cartoon like the original. Or hating Terminator 2 because the T800 is given more backstory than in The Terminator.

    My point was that I hope that Star Trek doesn't get a similar reboot as the othe franchises. I don't like the direction that the other franchises went in.

    Maybe I do 70s BSG alot better! Maube I hate the new bond! Thats my opinion. What's self invalidadting about that? It's an opinon. Who are you to decide if it's valid or not?

    You don't provide very convincing proof of your opinions. Popular wisdom of mainstream entertainment suggests that those reboots you claim to be garbage have in fact been some sort of uranium, possibly plutonium. As in, very valuable.

    I think you are trying to be contrarian, yes?

    Star Trek with a BSG kind of treatment would be fantastic. It has to be an arc that is completely new though, so that people can't wonder "what about Sisko/Picard?" Romulan front, something. Section 31 would be awesome too.

    strakha_7 on
    Want a signature? Find a post by ElJeffe and quote a random sentence!
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Zero tolerance policies are almost invariably terrible.

    One might say I have zero tolerance for them.
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    strakha_7 wrote: »
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    gumrucker wrote: »
    Still, a painfully obvious mistake in spelling doesn't invalidate someone's point.
    So what was your point exactly? That the 70s BSG was better than the remake because it didn't have a plot? That the new Bond movie sucks because it's a spy movie that focuses on spies instead of sci-fi gadgets and action scenes?

    No, your typos do not invalidate your point. Your point is self-invalidating. It would be like hating TNG because it has a coherent backstory that was lacking from TOS. Or hating the new Transformers movie because it's CGI instead of a cartoon like the original. Or hating Terminator 2 because the T800 is given more backstory than in The Terminator.

    My point was that I hope that Star Trek doesn't get a similar reboot as the othe franchises. I don't like the direction that the other franchises went in.

    Maybe I do 70s BSG alot better! Maube I hate the new bond! Thats my opinion. What's self invalidadting about that? It's an opinon. Who are you to decide if it's valid or not?

    You don't provide very convincing proof of your opinions. Popular wisdom of mainstream entertainment suggests that those reboots you claim to be garbage have in fact been some sort of uranium, possibly plutonium. As in, very valuable.

    I think you are trying to be contrarian, yes?

    Star Trek with a BSG kind of treatment would be fantastic. It has to be an arc that is completely new though, so that people can't wonder "what about Sisko/Picard?" Romulan front, something. Section 31 would be awesome too.

    I'm not claiming that they didn't work well monetarily, cause they did.
    I'm not even claiming they are garbage.
    I'm not even asserting my opinion is a fact.

    I'm saying I don't LIKE them. Why the hell do I need proof of an opinion?

    I don't like bananas. But 'popular wisdom' says bananas sell well and mostly everyone thinks they taste good. Does that mean I'm wrong to not like them? No. I don't like them. It's a preference.

    You or anyone else is fully free to like something I don't like. Fine. Great. Wonderful.
    But you can't tell my opinion is wrong, becuase most or even 99% of the world has a differnet opinion.

    Hell, we're all geeks here, our subculture is based on liking things 90% of the world doesn't like. Does that make our opinions wrong?

    gumrucker on
  • THAC0THAC0 Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Now he is having a go at the bananas!


    I kid, I kid.

    THAC0 on
  • darksteeldarksteel Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Okay, I'm a pretty huge Trek fan, and I know more Trek trivia than any normal person should know. But I'm going to ask all of you one simple question that somehow slipped by me in my 13+ years of watching Star Trek and researching on the setting. And before you ask, yes, I looked in Memory Alpha.

    In starship registry numbers, what the dickens does the acronym "NCC" mean?

    darksteel on
    shikisig6-1.jpg
  • LibrarianThorneLibrarianThorne Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    To get away from fucking arguing about the validity of someone's goddamn opinion, cockgobblers, let's talk about a more valid point.

    Trek tried to "reboot" with Enterprise, a much darker take on the mythos of the Trek world. The consensus seems to be that it was a fantastic failure. I don't think a reboot is in order, just another decent Trek series. Want to know what I want to see?

    The Enterprise, NCC1701-K, 100 years after the events of Insurrection. New ship, new crew, new problems. What happened to the Borg Collective after the death of its Queen in Voyager? Has the Federation spread into the Gamma Quadrant? What happens when the Federation faces a truly non-humanoid species from outside of the galaxy itself?

    Another era is what the series needs, in my opinion, not a reboot. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy have already been done, and done so well that they set the bar for Trek for 40 years now. There's seven seasons, dozens of books and 6 movies and if you really want to see them, you could entertain yourself for some time with that. Let's see some new Trek.

    LibrarianThorne on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    darksteel wrote: »
    In starship registry numbers, what the dickens does the acronym "NCC" mean?

    You know, I realized I never even thought about that.

    Nothing?

    NCC on Wiki
    Another era is what the series needs, in my opinion, not a reboot. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy have already been done, and done so well that they set the bar for Trek for 40 years now. There's seven seasons, dozens of books and 6 movies and if you really want to see them, you could entertain yourself for some time with that. Let's see some new Trek.

    I agree totally! I always thought it would be interesting to see Star Trek way on down the road, where the Federation is huge, but the a story of a Civil War within the federation. Or if you want to go for a darker take, you can have the federation pretty much abolished by some new riduculous power and have a show about the underground, or rebels fighting for a new Federation.

    gumrucker on
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Darmok was the one with the metaphor-speaking aliens, right? God that was a good episode. It's been years and years since I've seen The Inner Light though, and I don't remember if I actually saw the whole thing.

    When TNG was good it was absolutely fantastic, but when it was bad, it was so bad. That seems to be the Star Trek rule. Remember the de-volution episode? Man that was bad. Not to mention the dozens of "technobabble problem? technobabble solution!" episodes.

    Evil Multifarious on
  • LibrarianThorneLibrarianThorne Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    A Federation Civil War could be interesting. What if Starfleet stops following the Federation Council? Sounds like a great plot for a second season finale for a Trek show, then have a one or two season Federation Civil War with the Enterprise trying to keep everything together...

    Also could make room for great social commentary, as well.

    LibrarianThorne on
  • gumruckergumrucker regular
    edited June 2007
    A Federation Civil War could be interesting. What if Starfleet stops following the Federation Council? Sounds like a great plot for a second season finale for a Trek show, then have a one or two season Federation Civil War with the Enterprise trying to keep everything together...

    Also could make room for great social commentary, as well.


    That would be good. You could have a split form between the Federation Council and Starfleet Command a very government vs millitary senario. Almost like the "Homefront" episodes of DS9.

    gumrucker on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Why is everyone trying to turn Trek into Babylon 5? :|

    Glal on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    Why is everyone trying to turn Trek into Babylon 5? :|

    Wasn't DS9 like Babylon 5 lite anyways?

    nexuscrawler on
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    Why is everyone trying to turn Trek into Babylon 5? :|
    Because B5 was good.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • Original RufusOriginal Rufus Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    Why is everyone trying to turn Trek into Babylon 5? :|

    Wasn't DS9 like Babylon 5 lite anyways?

    This is rarely a good line of discussion.

    Original Rufus on
  • ZalbinionZalbinion Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Richy wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    Why is everyone trying to turn Trek into Babylon 5? :|
    Because B5 was good.
    For very small values of "good"? Ehh, it's all subjective.

    Plus, factoid: DS9 preceded B5 by a full year. FWIW.

    Zalbinion on
Sign In or Register to comment.