Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Any other Star Trek fans on here??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Big Daddy Dave Skywalker
    Moisture Farmer

  • Big Daddy Dave Skywalker
    replied
    Originally posted by Space Cop View Post


    Happy 90th to Shatner!

    + YouTube Video
    ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
    Happy birthday to the big guy! I actually had that as a reminder in my phone's calendar lol.

    Leave a comment:

  • Space Cop
    The Dandy

  • Space Cop
    replied
    Here's a maybe fun question. How many parts can Data be safely divided into?



    I believe from Nemesis we know that B4 (and hence Data's) arms, legs, torso, and head (seen in various episodes also) are easily separated and put back together (like a Lego), but I thought his hands come off too. Is that right? Anything else?

    EDIT: this (Lore's first episode?) might answer it. If so, his feet are separable too.

    Space Cop
    The Dandy
    Last edited by Space Cop; 03-25-2021, 09:43 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Space Cop
    The Dandy

  • Space Cop
    replied


    Happy 90th to Shatner!

    + YouTube Video
    ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
    Space Cop
    The Dandy
    Last edited by Space Cop; 03-23-2021, 01:29 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    I can understand where you're coming from, Ed, one of my brothers feels very much the same way. Being unable to share Picard with his children like our father shared TNG/DS9/Voyager with us has diminished much of his interest in it at all. He's also not one for R rated material in general, so he's not sure if he even wants to watch it on his own. So yeah, I can definitely understand the content issues on the face of content itself. I just don't agree with the people who say it doesn't make in world sense.
    Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai
    Last edited by Parrylakks; 05-22-2020, 08:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mister Ed
    Horse of a Different Color

  • Mister Ed
    replied
    Originally posted by Parrylakks View Post
    We see that B4 has been dismantled, so I would assume any synthetics that weren't destroyed on Mars during the attack were similarly dismantled, which means they could be rebuilt and turned back on after the ban was lifted once the existence and actions of the secret romulan sect was discovered. That's a thing, too, by the by. Both spies are removed from Starfleet and the ban is lifted by the end of the season. That state of affairs is known to us for a whopping 10 episodes! And you want a hopeful future? There's a huge subplot about a reclamation project on a Borg cube, involving the de-assimilation of the Borg.

    Basically what I'm saying is that none of this makes it feel unlike Star Trek. The occasional F-bomb can be jarring, sure, but that's really the only thing that feels off, and even that's barely problematic at all (as it makes sense given the people who drop them).
    Personally I'm not a fan of profanity even when it "makes sense" for who uses it, and I would find it very jarring in Star Trek (Data swearing in Generations was one of THE stupidest moments in all of Trek, IMHO.) I prefer not to watch things where excessive profanity "makes sense" (and that is not Trek IMHO). But that in itself wouldn't keep me from watching it unless it was far more pervasive than I have heard.

    What concerns me more is the level of graphic violence. Because from what I have heard and read, there are definitely some scenes in there that I would find unacceptable on that score. Obviously you do not. Diff'rent Stokes and all that. The descriptions of those scenes, even if there are only a few of them, tells me that I'm not watching this show with the kids, and at this point, I have no interest in a Star Trek that I can't share with the whole family, which has always been true of Trek in the past.

    When you ADD that to the unnecessary profanity, and the arguably darker tone (and I will grant that you've made enough of a case there that I would be willing to give it a go if that were the only issue I had), I just don't think it is something I'm inclined to seek out. I'm certainly not going to subscribe to a streaming service to watch it (and I'm not inclined to avail myself of free trials of things I know I will never buy), but I'm also not enthused about getting it from the library if it eventually comes to DVD.

    Frankly, I've come to the point where I may just have to accept that Star Trek has left me behind. Discovery has never sounded like something that would interest me. Picard seems to be going a direction I find questionable. The new movies are OK, but don't feel like real Star Trek. (And the fact that they are even considering letting Tarantino make an R-Rated Tarantino-Trek tells me a lot about how much the owners of Trek care about the audience I represent. Which is perfectly fair if people like me no longer make up enough of the audience, but still leaves me out.)

    And I just recently discovered that the Trek novels, that have carried on the story from TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, and which I have been enjoying, are likely done after the next Voyager novel (which has been delayed massively as it is). After that, their novel slate looks to be solely NuTrek movie stuff, Discovery stuff, Picard stuff (and possibly novels for whatever other things CBS All Access adds to their lineup), with occasional TOS novels which may head the route of including stuff to fold it into Discovery's universe.

    In that climate, even if I found Picard acceptable, it seems highly unlikely I would find it enough to my liking to justify bothering to cling to the Trek universe going forward. Probably best to just accept that Trek isn't being made for me any more, and just make do with the hours upon hours of shows and movies, and hundreds of books, that I already have.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    We see that B4 has been dismantled, so I would assume any synthetics that weren't destroyed on Mars during the attack were similarly dismantled, which means they could be rebuilt and turned back on after the ban was lifted once the existence and actions of the secret romulan sect was discovered. That's a thing, too, by the by. Both spies are removed from Starfleet and the ban is lifted by the end of the season. That state of affairs is known to us for a whopping 10 episodes! And you want a hopeful future? There's a huge subplot about a reclamation project on a Borg cube, involving the de-assimilation of the Borg.

    Basically what I'm saying is that none of this makes it feel unlike Star Trek. The occasional F-bomb can be jarring, sure, but that's really the only thing that feels off, and even that's barely problematic at all (as it makes sense given the people who drop them).

    Leave a comment:

  • Mister Ed
    Horse of a Different Color

  • Mister Ed
    replied
    Originally posted by Parrylakks View Post
    All they did, all they ever wanted to do, was prevent synthetic technology from moving forward. They acted out of fear, pushing everyone, including the federation, to stand against synthetic development. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a "bad" direction -- a limiting one, for sure, as we see how it caused some otherwise preventable things due to some medical procedure limitations, but still. It's not like the federation was fooled into committing some heinous crimes or anything. And arguably, given what one of the synthetics does of its own free will by the end of the season, the fears that made those Romulans act may have actually been legitimate. There's something out there that wants to kill everyone, and those Romulans really just want to protect us.
    What did the Federation do to synthetics that already existed when the ban was enacted? The ban itself seems problematic, since the shows have previously established that synthetic intelligences are legally people, too. I'd say the ban and its aftermath ARE rather dark chapters in Federation history. (That's not even considering that before the ban it sure looks like they created these synthetics as disposable people to use in dangerous situations, exactly the kind of thing being argued against in Data's trial.) It also led to the Federation deciding to abandon any humanitarian aid for Romulus. That seems like a pretty dark direction as well.

    And I have to say, an argument that says that the dark, questionable actions of a group might have been justified because something even more dark and deadly is out there...doesn't do a lot to convince me that the show ISN'T taking Star Trek in a much darker direction than I prefer.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    All they did, all they ever wanted to do, was prevent synthetic technology from moving forward. They acted out of fear, pushing everyone, including the federation, to stand against synthetic development. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a "bad" direction -- a limiting one, for sure, as we see how it caused some otherwise preventable things due to some medical procedure limitations, but still. It's not like the federation was fooled into committing some heinous crimes or anything. And arguably, given what one of the synthetics does of its own free will by the end of the season, the fears that made those Romulans act may have actually been legitimate. There's something out there that wants to kill everyone, and those Romulans really just want to protect us.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mister Ed
    Horse of a Different Color

  • Mister Ed
    replied
    Originally posted by Parrylakks View Post
    There were only two corrupt Starfleet officers in Picard, and only one of them was high ranking. They were Romulan moles that had been there for a very long time. True, they were part of a secret order of Romulans who had manipulated the federation several years prior to the main events of the series, leading to the plot centric ban on synthetic life, but the whole order had done that together, not just them. They were (more or less) simply spies.
    But they had, successfully, influenced Starfleet and the Federation in a bad direction for years before being exposed. That's what seems darker to me. The forces of good had failed to notice or oppose them (at least successfully) until long after significant damage was done.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    There were only two corrupt Starfleet officers in Picard, and only one of them was high ranking. They were Romulan moles that had been there for a very long time. True, they were part of a secret order of Romulans who had manipulated the federation several years prior to the main events of the series, leading to the plot centric ban on synthetic life, but the whole order had done that together, not just them. They were (more or less) simply spies.

    Leave a comment:

  • Trey Strain
    Guardian of the Universe

  • Trey Strain
    replied
    Re Ed's complaint about language, I'm not a prude about that, and as a fan of Westerns, I wanted to watch Deadwood. But when no character can speak one sentence without "fuck" in it, I'm turning off the television.

    That's what people who can't write dialogue resort to. Similarly, making something about corruption in the ranks or among the brass is something that people who can't think of stories resort to.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mister Ed
    Horse of a Different Color

  • Mister Ed
    replied
    Originally posted by Parrylakks View Post
    Corruption within the ranks of Starfleet is so common, it might as well be the norm.
    Now THAT'S an exaggeration, and you know it. (Or else just poorly phrased, because the way you phrased it here it sound like it is saying a Starfleet officer is more likely to be corrupt than not.)

    I haven't actually watched Picard, so maybe you can let me know if this perception is accurate. It seems like the corruption here is much more...effective, let's say...than in previous instances. It has a much larger effect on the actions of Starfleet as a whole, and on the ethics of various Federation actions over a period of years. Previously it has felt like (with the notable exception of Section 31's existence) a corrupt Starfleet or Federation official is revealed, and dealt with by our heroes, in fairly short order, with their plans being foiled before they have much of a lasting effect.

    It seems to me to be a notably darker take to allow the corruption to have such a large effect on the course of Federation history. The Admiral in Insurrection was thwarted in short order. The assassins in Star Trek 6, while they did kill Gorkon, were stopped from killing the Federation President, and their aim of disrupting the peace talks failed. The Admiral who tried to stage something of a military coup because he thought the fight against the Dominion warranted it was also thwarted before any serious damage was done.

    Section 31 was a different case, of course, (though largely because their early operations were simply retconned in) but from the time they were first revealed the heroes were opposing them, and in the end things didn't really go according to their plans.

    In Picard, I get the impression that the corruption went undetected for a long while, and had a large, adverse effect on the Federation, even if it ended up being exposed years after the fact, and thwarted in its current goal, during the Picard series. That, to me, paints a much darker vision than any of the previous instances of corruption I can recall.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    Corrupt Starfleet officials date back to Roddenberry's own oversight of the franchise. If you think he's a goose in the forum, or let such in to call fowl, maybe you need to get your head checked. Corruption within the ranks of Starfleet is so common, it might as well be the norm.

    Leave a comment:

  • Trey Strain
    Guardian of the Universe

  • Trey Strain
    replied
    Originally posted by Parrylakks View Post
    Who made Starfleet evil? A few corrupt officials doesn't make something evil.
    Why would anyone do that? It's bullshit, like the evil Guardians and all the bad Corps that Geoff created.

    Star Trek is about a starship that's seeking out new life and new civilizations. If you can't write about that, then you're a goose in the forum and you need to get out.

    Leave a comment:

  • Parrylakks
    Neko Samurai

  • Parrylakks
    replied
    Who made Starfleet evil? A few corrupt officials doesn't make something evil.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X