05.12.2009, 04:15 PM | #41 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,805
|
Haha whatever. It's not a show you can sit down and just watch an episode of...which is one of it's flaws.
But it's been a fun ride since I got high and watched the pilot right after I graduated high school...it's the only tv show I watch anymore. |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.12.2009, 04:30 PM | #42 |
the end of the ugly
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 992
|
well, I dislike most tv. Only thing I watch are my old favorites like Simpsons. I really wish they'd start showing SNL reruns again
|
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.12.2009, 04:50 PM | #43 | ||
100%
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 725
|
EyeBallGrowth I think you have gotten confused with a Deep Space 9 episode where what you described happened to Sisko.
Quote:
too busy with Michael Bay camera and editing for plot and story, but such as it is what little plot there is goes and destroys all Star Trek history (well Enterprise is spared from the metafictional holocaust) Quote:
Actually you can do that which is one of its flaws. One of the problems of TNG and Voyager had - another flaw Voyager had was that it was shit - due to being syndicated was that everything would reboot at the end of each episode. There was nothing ongoing, no development, no changes, no growth. You can watch at any point in those series and it doesn't matter. Same too for the original series due to the nature of television writing back then. The one exception is Deep Space 9, since they had a whole war going on from about season 3 or 4 right to the finale. And ripping off Babylon 5 probably helped in that regard. my review in the movie thread: Star Trek, last night I'm not an obsessive fan - I've never dressed up, never gone to a convention, never been part of a fanclub, never learnt Hamlet in the original Klingon, never written a fanfic, read a couple paperbacks when I was a kid (dreck), etc. An ordinary viewer. I'm realistic enough to agree with people like Philip K. Dick that it by and large was old scifi pulp militarism reheated and Nicholas Meyers that whatever pretensions it claimed to aspire to it was often just gunboat diplomacy in space. The whole thing about being about something bigger was Roddenberrys vague flailing around at an idea without any actual work being put into it. But on occasions in the original series and Next Generation and in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 8th film they actually managed to get near or reach these high ideals of being about something more-or if not that then done some decent characterization and stories. And of course there was Deep Space 9 (back to realistic: lets not beat around the bush, someone at Paramount ripped off Babylon 5 big time). What is this new film? A dumbfounding 'reboot' (lol guis I accidentaly continuity-wat nao /b/?)*, a few minutes for some juvenile emotions, the rest hot air couched in enough screwing around with the sound design and frenetic editing and busy directing - shakeycam close-ups, dutch angles, whip pans, sweeping dollys, lense flare etc. - to make Michael Bay blush, and action action action. But nothing is there. *Starting over from scratch is one thing- J. Michael Straczynski counter-proposed that very idea when he turned down joining the writing staff on Enterprise, Battlestar Galactica would be another example. But that's not what this does. It actually has to go and destroy its (future) history. Wipe it out of existence. Thats a little odd. (ironically the only thing spared since it occured in the films past is Enterprise)
__________________
This is how it will all end: not with floods, earthquakes, falling comets or gigantic crabs roaming the Earth. No, doomsday will start simply out of indifference. |
||
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.12.2009, 05:05 PM | #44 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In the land of the Instigator
Posts: 27,959
|
the last 3 years of DS9 were fantastic.
__________________
RXTT's Intellectual Journey - my new blog where I talk about all the books I read. |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.12.2009, 07:12 PM | #45 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,805
|
^^Actually you quoted me talking about LOST not Star Trek.
Sorry but you.... Fail. |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.12.2009, 09:30 PM | #46 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 21,165
|
once, my wife became addicted to star trek: voyager.
she made up pet names for the entire cast and was a real fascist about taping it (came on at 1:00 am). I've seen every single one. |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.17.2009, 11:16 PM | #47 |
the end of the ugly
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 992
|
Just saw the new Star Trek. MAN was I wrong. It was damn decent. Kirk was spot on, nearly perfect. There were times where you'd really think it was Shatner. The rest of the crew was great. The action was excellent, the scene in the bar with Uhura was excellent, as soon as I saw that scene I knew they'd nailed Kirk. Plus there was all kinds of genuinely funny humor thrown in that I totally wasn't expecting.
I have only a few minor complaints. 1, There were no Klingons. 2, I could have completely lost the entire chase scene with young kirk. Really didn't care for that whole scene. 3. Sulu was a dissappointment Also, it really seems like they tried hard with Spock. Spock was pretty decent ( the young spock ), but I dunno, something about him. He just didn't quite feel like Spock. I give Spock a B |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.17.2009, 11:58 PM | #48 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,805
|
I felt the same way about spock. But maybe things will change a bit. Don't forget he probably has to do the most growing out of all the characters to become what we knew.
Kirk's always been that way. |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.17.2009, 11:58 PM | #49 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,805
|
I really thought the doctor, bones, was the best.
|
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.18.2009, 12:18 AM | #50 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SoKo
Posts: 10,621
|
^ ditto
|
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.18.2009, 12:25 AM | #51 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SoKo
Posts: 10,621
|
I've always been preferential to The Next Generation since my dad and I would watched it almost every night. I look back on it now and it all seems pretty naive and overreaching but it was still pretty intelligent. Besides, Patrick Stewart is a great actor. I resound the praise for the new movie. Kind of cruel to say, but it helps that Gene Roddenberry isn't there putting in some half-baked metaphor about the cold war within the plot which is pretty much all of the original series.
|
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.18.2009, 12:33 AM | #52 |
the end of the ugly
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 992
|
I thought Kirk and Chekov were the best in the new movie. Bones wasn't bad either.
My parents used to make us watch both the 60's series and the Next Generation during dinner. There was an episode of the Next Generation called " Genesis " where the crew is slowing evolving into Reptiles that scared me stupid as a kid. Also for Next Generation nuts. Does anyone know the name of the episode where the ship goes through some type of anomally or unsafe orbit or something right in the beginning, and afterwards members of the crew have died from being merged into the floor and walls? |
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |
05.18.2009, 12:40 AM | #53 |
invito al cielo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,805
|
So weird, I used to always watch next gen/voyager with my parents either at dinner or I used to watch voyager so I could stay up later, when I was a kid. I liked it alittle then but as I got older got out of it. I was always more into Star Wars but I will def. keep watching these new movies if they keep making them.
|
|QUOTE AND REPLY| |