Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek topic
- Thread starter 2Fast
- Start date
[quote name='ITDEFX']btw if anyone hasn't gotten a chance to play ST: Legacy for the PC, co-op Skermish is damn cool. The AI can really put up a fight and space battles can be awesome.[/quote]
Yeah I enjoy playing 2 on 2 team battles with the maximum fleet size and maximum number of respawns. If you warp to the other person on your team and the other 2 people attack you it really feels like an epic Trek battle. I just wish the Dominion were in the game so I could have Dominion War battles.
Yeah I enjoy playing 2 on 2 team battles with the maximum fleet size and maximum number of respawns. If you warp to the other person on your team and the other 2 people attack you it really feels like an epic Trek battle. I just wish the Dominion were in the game so I could have Dominion War battles.
[quote name='Kaijufan']Yeah I enjoy playing 2 on 2 team battles with the maximum fleet size and maximum number of respawns. If you warp to the other person on your team and the other 2 people attack you it really feels like an epic Trek battle. I just wish the Dominion were in the game so I could have Dominion War battles.[/QUOTE]
wait for the mods...they are working on it!
I wish we would have true ship collisions but then some idiot would always crash into you just to grief you.
wait for the mods...they are working on it!
I wish we would have true ship collisions but then some idiot would always crash into you just to grief you.
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='lordwow']I agree. TNG's first season is some of the worst sci-fi I've ever watched, but it's eons beyond DS9/VOY/ENT's first seasons. I think the biggest problem with Trek is this character development/acting. Audiences are just tuning out shows that don't click from the start, sci-fi or not.[/quote]
Well, show after show, they do exactly the same thing. They assemble casts and then have absolutely no idea what to do with them. It's like they fling a bunch of people into space together and assume the stories will tell themselves. I think viewers have caught on to this and tired of it.
There's only the vaguest hint of a plan that any of these characters have interesting futures ahead of them. Why bother creating characters if they're not going to do anything, or become anything, or grow?
Every character should have a purpose and I don't mean a position. "Navigation" is not a purpose. "First Officer" is not a purpose. If all your character ever does is read tricorders and push computer console buttons, that's a waste. Every character should have life, should have a life, and should go somewhere interesting. At the end of the series, the character's journey should be compelling and surprising, but feel completely and totally logical.
It should not be "stood around the bridge for seven years and spouted technobabble". It should not be "hooked up with other character for no discernable reason." It should not be "here's this part of my past that I never mentioned before and never will again."
Deep Space 9 is (again) the exception, and that's mainly due to Peter Allen Fields and Ron Moore. Every character had a purpose, a character arc. But this series had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of its first and second seasons, where they assumed a bunch of disparate characters hanging around a station would magically make good TV.
From there, DS9 decided to tell longer stories and not be quite so self-contained per-episode as TNG or Voyager. This was (and still is) a departure for Trek and not everyone liked it at the time. Voyager was a reaction against this in DS9. Enterprise continued the Voyager model for at least its first two seasons.
But TV has changed. TV is now filled with serialized dramas and viewers seem to like it. It says something when "Ugly Betty" has more continuing storyline and character development than "Star Trek".
Star Trek doesn't have to become a densely-plotted soap opera. In fact, it's probably better that it doesn't all at once since their track record at that sort of thing isn't so hot. But it does have to decide what kind of show it wants to be. If it wants to be a planet/anomaly-of-the-week show, then it has to be as rock solidly-plotted and intelligent as something like CSI or House. If it wants to be grand space opera, then it has to have a plan. They can't make it all up as they go along, or have a bunch of characters wandering around aimlessly doing nothing. It can't be a half-hearted attempt to please everyone that ends up pleasing no one.
Also, I hate to say it, but I think Trek fatigue has set in. We like Klingons and Borg and Vulcans and AI, but how many times can you do variations on a theme? They've pretty much plumbed the depths of all of them so they're in a bit of a fix: they need something new, but it has to be familiar enough and Trek-y enough that people won't bolt.
Well, show after show, they do exactly the same thing. They assemble casts and then have absolutely no idea what to do with them. It's like they fling a bunch of people into space together and assume the stories will tell themselves. I think viewers have caught on to this and tired of it.
There's only the vaguest hint of a plan that any of these characters have interesting futures ahead of them. Why bother creating characters if they're not going to do anything, or become anything, or grow?
Every character should have a purpose and I don't mean a position. "Navigation" is not a purpose. "First Officer" is not a purpose. If all your character ever does is read tricorders and push computer console buttons, that's a waste. Every character should have life, should have a life, and should go somewhere interesting. At the end of the series, the character's journey should be compelling and surprising, but feel completely and totally logical.
It should not be "stood around the bridge for seven years and spouted technobabble". It should not be "hooked up with other character for no discernable reason." It should not be "here's this part of my past that I never mentioned before and never will again."
Deep Space 9 is (again) the exception, and that's mainly due to Peter Allen Fields and Ron Moore. Every character had a purpose, a character arc. But this series had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of its first and second seasons, where they assumed a bunch of disparate characters hanging around a station would magically make good TV.
From there, DS9 decided to tell longer stories and not be quite so self-contained per-episode as TNG or Voyager. This was (and still is) a departure for Trek and not everyone liked it at the time. Voyager was a reaction against this in DS9. Enterprise continued the Voyager model for at least its first two seasons.
But TV has changed. TV is now filled with serialized dramas and viewers seem to like it. It says something when "Ugly Betty" has more continuing storyline and character development than "Star Trek".
Star Trek doesn't have to become a densely-plotted soap opera. In fact, it's probably better that it doesn't all at once since their track record at that sort of thing isn't so hot. But it does have to decide what kind of show it wants to be. If it wants to be a planet/anomaly-of-the-week show, then it has to be as rock solidly-plotted and intelligent as something like CSI or House. If it wants to be grand space opera, then it has to have a plan. They can't make it all up as they go along, or have a bunch of characters wandering around aimlessly doing nothing. It can't be a half-hearted attempt to please everyone that ends up pleasing no one.
Also, I hate to say it, but I think Trek fatigue has set in. We like Klingons and Borg and Vulcans and AI, but how many times can you do variations on a theme? They've pretty much plumbed the depths of all of them so they're in a bit of a fix: they need something new, but it has to be familiar enough and Trek-y enough that people won't bolt.
[quote name='blandstalker']Well, show after show, they do exactly the same thing. They assemble casts and then have absolutely no idea what to do with them. It's like they fling a bunch of people into space together and assume the stories will tell themselves. I think viewers have caught on to this and tired of it.
There's only the vaguest hint of a plan that any of these characters have interesting futures ahead of them. Why bother creating characters if they're not going to do anything, or become anything, or grow?
Every character should have a purpose and I don't mean a position. "Navigation" is not a purpose. "First Officer" is not a purpose. If all your character ever does is read tricorders and push computer console buttons, that's a waste. Every character should have life, should have a life, and should go somewhere interesting. At the end of the series, the character's journey should be compelling and surprising, but feel completely and totally logical.
It should not be "stood around the bridge for seven years and spouted technobabble". It should not be "hooked up with other character for no discernable reason." It should not be "here's this part of my past that I never mentioned before and never will again."
Deep Space 9 is (again) the exception, and that's mainly due to Peter Allen Fields and Ron Moore. Every character had a purpose, a character arc. But this series had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of its first and second seasons, where they assumed a bunch of disparate characters hanging around a station would magically make good TV.
From there, DS9 decided to tell longer stories and not be quite so self-contained per-episode as TNG or Voyager. This was (and still is) a departure for Trek and not everyone liked it at the time. Voyager was a reaction against this in DS9. Enterprise continued the Voyager model for at least its first two seasons.
But TV has changed. TV is now filled with serialized dramas and viewers seem to like it. It says something when "Ugly Betty" has more continuing storyline and character development than "Star Trek".
Star Trek doesn't have to become a densely-plotted soap opera. In fact, it's probably better that it doesn't all at once since their track record at that sort of thing isn't so hot. But it does have to decide what kind of show it wants to be. If it wants to be a planet/anomaly-of-the-week show, then it has to be as rock solidly-plotted and intelligent as something like CSI or House. If it wants to be grand space opera, then it has to have a plan. They can't make it all up as they go along, or have a bunch of characters wandering around aimlessly doing nothing. It can't be a half-hearted attempt to please everyone that ends up pleasing no one.
Also, I hate to say it, but I think Trek fatigue has set in. We like Klingons and Borg and Vulcans and AI, but how many times can you do variations on a theme? They've pretty much plumbed the depths of all of them so they're in a bit of a fix: they need something new, but it has to be familiar enough and Trek-y enough that people won't bolt.[/QUOTE]
I agree with a lot of what you've said.
I think you need people to hold positions, as it's expected in Trek. You need the first officer, the OPS guy, the Chief Engineer. But you're right, this isn't really what or who their character is.
Being a tv/film major (production, but basic screenwriting training), the first thing you learn is that characters must have a desire. The struggle to achieve this desire is what drama is. Trying to win over the girl you love, to get off the deserted island, or even smaller things can be sources of drama (trying to be accepted, etc). Trek is devoid of this in most series: Voyager and Enterprise definately, and even the early seasons of TNG.
DS9 and the late seasons of TNG just clicked because the characters all had purpose. The biggest problem, and consequently, the biggest strength in some regards, is the struggle over "being human" by Spock, Data, Odo, The Doctor/Seven of Nine, etc. In some cases (Data) it work masterfully, but in others (Seven of Nine) it blew up in their faces. You can have common themes between all Treks (and in fact there should be, the idea that humanity can strive even through it's not perfect and the ideals of the "human" race/Federation), but you can't have the same damn song and dance every week for 40 years.
I don't want to knock TOS, it was from a different era, and it was new, fresh, and exciting at the time. But TOS would not work today because of the simplified characters and storylines. The Producers of Trek now have kept these same ideals (in the spirit of Roddenbery, who was apparently very strict about the characters) except in DS9, which is what made that show thrive. DS9 was character-driven while TNG was story-driven. They both worked, but for different reasons.
I recall discussing this, I think on DVDTalk, but if I was given the option to produce a Trek series, I would probably go with a larger ensemble cast on a smaller ship during the TNG/DS9 era (pre-Dominion War, probably around Worf 359, possibly earlier though). I think people associate with, and want to see more of the TNG/DS9-era than to go forward or way back. And people want familarity. I had huge problems identifying with any of the Delta Quadrant aliens because they were unfamilar. Setting it back in the Alpha Quadrant would probably be the best bet. I personally would like to see a near-Earth fleet or something. Either way, I think that the reality of Trek is that these characters should be expendiable (a la Lost) since the reality probably is that there are a lot of casualities in Trek, and dealing with Loss could be a potentially strong area Trek has skirited around generally.
Anyways, that's a lot of rambling. I enjoy hearing more thoughts on the matter though.
There's only the vaguest hint of a plan that any of these characters have interesting futures ahead of them. Why bother creating characters if they're not going to do anything, or become anything, or grow?
Every character should have a purpose and I don't mean a position. "Navigation" is not a purpose. "First Officer" is not a purpose. If all your character ever does is read tricorders and push computer console buttons, that's a waste. Every character should have life, should have a life, and should go somewhere interesting. At the end of the series, the character's journey should be compelling and surprising, but feel completely and totally logical.
It should not be "stood around the bridge for seven years and spouted technobabble". It should not be "hooked up with other character for no discernable reason." It should not be "here's this part of my past that I never mentioned before and never will again."
Deep Space 9 is (again) the exception, and that's mainly due to Peter Allen Fields and Ron Moore. Every character had a purpose, a character arc. But this series had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of its first and second seasons, where they assumed a bunch of disparate characters hanging around a station would magically make good TV.
From there, DS9 decided to tell longer stories and not be quite so self-contained per-episode as TNG or Voyager. This was (and still is) a departure for Trek and not everyone liked it at the time. Voyager was a reaction against this in DS9. Enterprise continued the Voyager model for at least its first two seasons.
But TV has changed. TV is now filled with serialized dramas and viewers seem to like it. It says something when "Ugly Betty" has more continuing storyline and character development than "Star Trek".
Star Trek doesn't have to become a densely-plotted soap opera. In fact, it's probably better that it doesn't all at once since their track record at that sort of thing isn't so hot. But it does have to decide what kind of show it wants to be. If it wants to be a planet/anomaly-of-the-week show, then it has to be as rock solidly-plotted and intelligent as something like CSI or House. If it wants to be grand space opera, then it has to have a plan. They can't make it all up as they go along, or have a bunch of characters wandering around aimlessly doing nothing. It can't be a half-hearted attempt to please everyone that ends up pleasing no one.
Also, I hate to say it, but I think Trek fatigue has set in. We like Klingons and Borg and Vulcans and AI, but how many times can you do variations on a theme? They've pretty much plumbed the depths of all of them so they're in a bit of a fix: they need something new, but it has to be familiar enough and Trek-y enough that people won't bolt.[/QUOTE]
I agree with a lot of what you've said.
I think you need people to hold positions, as it's expected in Trek. You need the first officer, the OPS guy, the Chief Engineer. But you're right, this isn't really what or who their character is.
Being a tv/film major (production, but basic screenwriting training), the first thing you learn is that characters must have a desire. The struggle to achieve this desire is what drama is. Trying to win over the girl you love, to get off the deserted island, or even smaller things can be sources of drama (trying to be accepted, etc). Trek is devoid of this in most series: Voyager and Enterprise definately, and even the early seasons of TNG.
DS9 and the late seasons of TNG just clicked because the characters all had purpose. The biggest problem, and consequently, the biggest strength in some regards, is the struggle over "being human" by Spock, Data, Odo, The Doctor/Seven of Nine, etc. In some cases (Data) it work masterfully, but in others (Seven of Nine) it blew up in their faces. You can have common themes between all Treks (and in fact there should be, the idea that humanity can strive even through it's not perfect and the ideals of the "human" race/Federation), but you can't have the same damn song and dance every week for 40 years.
I don't want to knock TOS, it was from a different era, and it was new, fresh, and exciting at the time. But TOS would not work today because of the simplified characters and storylines. The Producers of Trek now have kept these same ideals (in the spirit of Roddenbery, who was apparently very strict about the characters) except in DS9, which is what made that show thrive. DS9 was character-driven while TNG was story-driven. They both worked, but for different reasons.
I recall discussing this, I think on DVDTalk, but if I was given the option to produce a Trek series, I would probably go with a larger ensemble cast on a smaller ship during the TNG/DS9 era (pre-Dominion War, probably around Worf 359, possibly earlier though). I think people associate with, and want to see more of the TNG/DS9-era than to go forward or way back. And people want familarity. I had huge problems identifying with any of the Delta Quadrant aliens because they were unfamilar. Setting it back in the Alpha Quadrant would probably be the best bet. I personally would like to see a near-Earth fleet or something. Either way, I think that the reality of Trek is that these characters should be expendiable (a la Lost) since the reality probably is that there are a lot of casualities in Trek, and dealing with Loss could be a potentially strong area Trek has skirited around generally.
Anyways, that's a lot of rambling. I enjoy hearing more thoughts on the matter though.
HeadRusch
CAGiversary!
[quote name='lordwow']I don't want to knock TOS, it was from a different era, and it was new, fresh, and exciting at the time. But TOS would not work today because of the simplified characters and storylines.
[/QUOTE]
I dont think anyone would suggest that TOS be made today....lets face it, Green Hornet, Batman, The Munsters...none of these shows would "work" today because they are too simplistic. The drama in TOS works because you realize you are watching an older show, your expectation level adjusts itself accordingly.
Sure, everyone loves DS9..why? Because there was a WAR ON. Because the stories changed from "Dr. Bashir/Crusher/Holodoctor on their own this week" or "First Officer Must Assume Command for first time" stories or "Vulcan/Android/Hologram wants to be really human" stories to "WAR!" stories.
Huge ship battles....great "will the fleet survive" stories, will the Romulans be our allies? Will they betray us? What could the dominion throw at us that we haven't seen yet...etc, etc, etc.
Star Trek became a miniseries...where you had to watch each episode to follow the greater story arc. It was, by far, the best thing that ever happened to Trek...continuity in the storylines. Thats why DS9 is probably the best trek of all, even better than TNG because its scope was so much larger, it was like watching an epic movie unfold in front of you...one that took months to tell.
Voyager could have been a MASTERFUL show....but it wasn't, it was just more of the same. The ship was always repaired, it was always full of food, nobody ever went AWOL...there were none of the "Survivalist" storylines that one might expect when you are trapped a billion miles away from home. Its like, didn't anyone think this thing through?
Know why? Because if Voyager had become that awesome great show...it wouldn't be voyager anymore..it would be Battlestar Galactica.....leading a ragtag fleet toward the shining planet...known as Earth SEriously, the voyager storyline is almost the BG storyline....survivalism, finding fuel, finding food...all of these were sort of "touched upon" in the series but never with any great real drama.
Instead it was all "will Chaoktay sleep with the captain"..."Will the doctor crack another joke" and so on and just stuff we'd seen a dozen times before.
Enterprise was more of the same only cheezier, and now we were seeing those stories for TWO dozen times before.....it was doomed from conception.
[/QUOTE]
I dont think anyone would suggest that TOS be made today....lets face it, Green Hornet, Batman, The Munsters...none of these shows would "work" today because they are too simplistic. The drama in TOS works because you realize you are watching an older show, your expectation level adjusts itself accordingly.
Sure, everyone loves DS9..why? Because there was a WAR ON. Because the stories changed from "Dr. Bashir/Crusher/Holodoctor on their own this week" or "First Officer Must Assume Command for first time" stories or "Vulcan/Android/Hologram wants to be really human" stories to "WAR!" stories.
Huge ship battles....great "will the fleet survive" stories, will the Romulans be our allies? Will they betray us? What could the dominion throw at us that we haven't seen yet...etc, etc, etc.
Star Trek became a miniseries...where you had to watch each episode to follow the greater story arc. It was, by far, the best thing that ever happened to Trek...continuity in the storylines. Thats why DS9 is probably the best trek of all, even better than TNG because its scope was so much larger, it was like watching an epic movie unfold in front of you...one that took months to tell.
Voyager could have been a MASTERFUL show....but it wasn't, it was just more of the same. The ship was always repaired, it was always full of food, nobody ever went AWOL...there were none of the "Survivalist" storylines that one might expect when you are trapped a billion miles away from home. Its like, didn't anyone think this thing through?
Know why? Because if Voyager had become that awesome great show...it wouldn't be voyager anymore..it would be Battlestar Galactica.....leading a ragtag fleet toward the shining planet...known as Earth
SEriously, the voyager storyline is almost the BG storyline....survivalism, finding fuel, finding food...all of these were sort of "touched upon" in the series but never with any great real drama.Instead it was all "will Chaoktay sleep with the captain"..."Will the doctor crack another joke" and so on and just stuff we'd seen a dozen times before.
Enterprise was more of the same only cheezier, and now we were seeing those stories for TWO dozen times before.....it was doomed from conception.
[quote name='HeadRusch']I dont think anyone would suggest that TOS be made today....lets face it, Green Hornet, Batman, The Munsters...none of these shows would "work" today because they are too simplistic. The drama in TOS works because you realize you are watching an older show, your expectation level adjusts itself accordingly.
Sure, everyone loves DS9..why? Because there was a WAR ON. Because the stories changed from "Dr. Bashir/Crusher/Holodoctor on their own this week" or "First Officer Must Assume Command for first time" stories or "Vulcan/Android/Hologram wants to be really human" stories to "WAR!" stories.
Huge ship battles....great "will the fleet survive" stories, will the Romulans be our allies? Will they betray us? What could the dominion throw at us that we haven't seen yet...etc, etc, etc.
Star Trek became a miniseries...where you had to watch each episode to follow the greater story arc. It was, by far, the best thing that ever happened to Trek...continuity in the storylines. Thats why DS9 is probably the best trek of all, even better than TNG because its scope was so much larger, it was like watching an epic movie unfold in front of you...one that took months to tell.
Voyager could have been a MASTERFUL show....but it wasn't, it was just more of the same. The ship was always repaired, it was always full of food, nobody ever went AWOL...there were none of the "Survivalist" storylines that one might expect when you are trapped a billion miles away from home. Its like, didn't anyone think this thing through?
Know why? Because if Voyager had become that awesome great show...it wouldn't be voyager anymore..it would be Battlestar Galactica.....leading a ragtag fleet toward the shining planet...known as Earth SEriously, the voyager storyline is almost the BG storyline....survivalism, finding fuel, finding food...all of these were sort of "touched upon" in the series but never with any great real drama.
Instead it was all "will Chaoktay sleep with the captain"..."Will the doctor crack another joke" and so on and just stuff we'd seen a dozen times before.
Enterprise was more of the same only cheezier, and now we were seeing those stories for TWO dozen times before.....it was doomed from conception.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you 100% about Voyager. I took was looking forward to the ship becoming a living hell by the time they got back (things falling apart, people dying, etc).
I read an interview with Braga maybe who was saying that they tried to do storyarcs in Season 2 of VOY and no one liked it. Well, I rewatched most of Season 2, and I didn't see anything worthwile (Seksa was the only one I picked up on).
I'm not sure that a full out war is necessary for the series to be sucessful. I don't know if I'd want to see the Dominion War again from another point of view, namely because as Sisko said, the most important location was DS9. I wouldn't mind seeing a re-done Worf 359 and the aftermath (namely the building cold wars of the Romulans and the Cardassians, which IMO were some of the best storylines of the later seasons of TNG). Additionally, I think there could be potential for a series taking place just after the Dominon War between then and Nemesis on what the hell happened with the Romulans.
And a complete change-of-topic: Does Jazdia Dax (or maybe it's just Farrell's acting) annoy the hell out of anyone else? I've been watching DS9 on Spike, and when she took command of the Defiant for an episode, I wanted to smack her. She's just so over-the-top IMO.
Sure, everyone loves DS9..why? Because there was a WAR ON. Because the stories changed from "Dr. Bashir/Crusher/Holodoctor on their own this week" or "First Officer Must Assume Command for first time" stories or "Vulcan/Android/Hologram wants to be really human" stories to "WAR!" stories.
Huge ship battles....great "will the fleet survive" stories, will the Romulans be our allies? Will they betray us? What could the dominion throw at us that we haven't seen yet...etc, etc, etc.
Star Trek became a miniseries...where you had to watch each episode to follow the greater story arc. It was, by far, the best thing that ever happened to Trek...continuity in the storylines. Thats why DS9 is probably the best trek of all, even better than TNG because its scope was so much larger, it was like watching an epic movie unfold in front of you...one that took months to tell.
Voyager could have been a MASTERFUL show....but it wasn't, it was just more of the same. The ship was always repaired, it was always full of food, nobody ever went AWOL...there were none of the "Survivalist" storylines that one might expect when you are trapped a billion miles away from home. Its like, didn't anyone think this thing through?
Know why? Because if Voyager had become that awesome great show...it wouldn't be voyager anymore..it would be Battlestar Galactica.....leading a ragtag fleet toward the shining planet...known as Earth
SEriously, the voyager storyline is almost the BG storyline....survivalism, finding fuel, finding food...all of these were sort of "touched upon" in the series but never with any great real drama.Instead it was all "will Chaoktay sleep with the captain"..."Will the doctor crack another joke" and so on and just stuff we'd seen a dozen times before.
Enterprise was more of the same only cheezier, and now we were seeing those stories for TWO dozen times before.....it was doomed from conception.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you 100% about Voyager. I took was looking forward to the ship becoming a living hell by the time they got back (things falling apart, people dying, etc).
I read an interview with Braga maybe who was saying that they tried to do storyarcs in Season 2 of VOY and no one liked it. Well, I rewatched most of Season 2, and I didn't see anything worthwile (Seksa was the only one I picked up on).
I'm not sure that a full out war is necessary for the series to be sucessful. I don't know if I'd want to see the Dominion War again from another point of view, namely because as Sisko said, the most important location was DS9. I wouldn't mind seeing a re-done Worf 359 and the aftermath (namely the building cold wars of the Romulans and the Cardassians, which IMO were some of the best storylines of the later seasons of TNG). Additionally, I think there could be potential for a series taking place just after the Dominon War between then and Nemesis on what the hell happened with the Romulans.
And a complete change-of-topic: Does Jazdia Dax (or maybe it's just Farrell's acting) annoy the hell out of anyone else? I've been watching DS9 on Spike, and when she took command of the Defiant for an episode, I wanted to smack her. She's just so over-the-top IMO.
[quote name='lordwow']And a complete change-of-topic: Does Jazdia Dax (or maybe it's just Farrell's acting) annoy the hell out of anyone else? I've been watching DS9 on Spike, and when she took command of the Defiant for an episode, I wanted to smack her. She's just so over-the-top IMO.[/quote]
Sorta, yeah. She's the girl that's fun to look at, but too annoying to be around for periods of time.
Another off-topic: what is the consensus on DS9's best season? I've been looking to start picking up the sets, although I don't care to pick them up in order since seasons one and two are abysmal. And then I can't decide between buying a season of DS9 or the first season of Battlestar Galactica.
Sorta, yeah. She's the girl that's fun to look at, but too annoying to be around for periods of time.
Another off-topic: what is the consensus on DS9's best season? I've been looking to start picking up the sets, although I don't care to pick them up in order since seasons one and two are abysmal. And then I can't decide between buying a season of DS9 or the first season of Battlestar Galactica.
David85
Banned
[quote name='lordwow']
I read an interview with Braga maybe who was saying that they tried to do storyarcs in Season 2 of VOY and no one liked it. Well, I rewatched most of Season 2, and I didn't see anything worthwile (Seksa was the only one I picked up on).
[/QUOTE]
That's what I was talknig about before. Braga, Berman, and Moore wanted to do darker stories, but everytime they tried they were told no. All the network wanted was TNG2, if they wanted that they should have made the show that to begin with. Moore got sick of the shit and left, B&B knew they couldn't do any better and stayed.
I read an interview with Braga maybe who was saying that they tried to do storyarcs in Season 2 of VOY and no one liked it. Well, I rewatched most of Season 2, and I didn't see anything worthwile (Seksa was the only one I picked up on).
[/QUOTE]
That's what I was talknig about before. Braga, Berman, and Moore wanted to do darker stories, but everytime they tried they were told no. All the network wanted was TNG2, if they wanted that they should have made the show that to begin with. Moore got sick of the shit and left, B&B knew they couldn't do any better and stayed.
GuilewasNK
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 110 (100%)
Brian9842 just got the deal of the year so far! Check near the bottom.
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123304&page=6
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123304&page=6
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Brian9842 just got the deal of the year so far! Check near the bottom.
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123304&page=6[/quote]
:shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:
I really wish I would have seen that.
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123304&page=6[/quote]
:shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:
I really wish I would have seen that.
GuilewasNK
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 110 (100%)
[quote name='2Fast']:shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:
I really wish I would have seen that.[/quote]
You and me both brother, you and me both.
I really wish I would have seen that.[/quote]
You and me both brother, you and me both.
GuilewasNK
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 110 (100%)
[quote name='ITDEFX']
holy
....how the hell did that happen[/quote]
Methinks Q was screwin' with Sam Walton's bottom line. :lol:
holy
....how the hell did that happen[/quote]Methinks Q was screwin' with Sam Walton's bottom line. :lol:
GuilewasNK
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 110 (100%)
I'd get it and keep it for that price. I can make up the $200 I'd get for flipping by working at my job.
[quote name='rickonker']Yeah, it's a good deal if you want Enterprise, but there's no way I would get that except to flip it on ebay or something. I just saw a first season episode of Voyager and even that was better than Enterprise.[/quote]
Maybe the first 2 seasons on Enterprise, but not 3 or (especially) 4.
Maybe the first 2 seasons on Enterprise, but not 3 or (especially) 4.
lets move on to special effects of the series... as with each series, the special effects get better and better.
Enterprise had that movie like quality when it come to showing off the ship.
Voyager kept on reusing the damn scenes over and over again. Espically when the ship passed the camera from the left side flying over and you saw the ship's back side and at the last few frames it would start turning to the left but the scene stopped there. Ok, where is it turning to?
Enterprise had that movie like quality when it come to showing off the ship.
Voyager kept on reusing the damn scenes over and over again. Espically when the ship passed the camera from the left side flying over and you saw the ship's back side and at the last few frames it would start turning to the left but the scene stopped there. Ok, where is it turning to?
Reusing special effects shots in Sci-Fi tv shows isn't anything new.
Usually I don't mind, because that means more money for the action special effects shots, but sometimes in drives me crazy. In the new Battlestar Galactica they have a special effects shot of Vipers landing in the Galactica's launch bay, but one of them skid and bounce off the deck a little bit before they land every single time. I wish they would go back and make a new shot without a skid.
Usually I don't mind, because that means more money for the action special effects shots, but sometimes in drives me crazy. In the new Battlestar Galactica they have a special effects shot of Vipers landing in the Galactica's launch bay, but one of them skid and bounce off the deck a little bit before they land every single time. I wish they would go back and make a new shot without a skid.
David85
Banned
Has anyone seen the redone CGI Star Trek? They started to update TOS and want to release them on DVD. My guess is to get more money and it's easier than making a new show. It looked pretty good, the ship was rather plain through. I wish they would do it for some of TNG episodes because they are really bad.
[quote name='David85']Has anyone seen the redone CGI Star Trek? They started to update TOS and want to release them on DVD. My guess is to get more money and it's easier than making a new show. It looked pretty good, the ship was rather plain through. I wish they would do it for some of TNG episodes because they are really bad.[/QUOTE]
My Wish with TNG is that they'd standardize some of the effects between seasons. At least in the first season the tractor beam looks completely different than the one for the rest of the Seasons. I'm sure they could peg it as an upgrade though.
Speaking of which, have been watching the first season on DVD with the girl, she's never watched Trek before, and these episodes are a lot better than I remember. My only qualm is the acting is pretty stiff. She's enjoying it though, and I've informed her that she'll be in for a treat when we get to the good seasons.
My Wish with TNG is that they'd standardize some of the effects between seasons. At least in the first season the tractor beam looks completely different than the one for the rest of the Seasons. I'm sure they could peg it as an upgrade though.
Speaking of which, have been watching the first season on DVD with the girl, she's never watched Trek before, and these episodes are a lot better than I remember. My only qualm is the acting is pretty stiff. She's enjoying it though, and I've informed her that she'll be in for a treat when we get to the good seasons.
[quote name='David85']The first season is still really bad Of TNG, but it's watchable. They started showing season 2 this week on Spike.[/QUOTE]
Ya, I think TV.com has it nailed down pretty well with user ratings. The "Great" episodes from Season 1/2 are the "average" episodes of Season 3-7. But "average" for Seasons 3-7 were "Superb" anyway.
My honest-to-goodness problem with Season 1 are the glaring inconsistencies with other seasons (Worf's apperance, Geordi/Worf as Red Shirts, Geordi's promotion from Lt Jg -> Lt Cmd in two seasons, and just some bad plot lines that got discarded later on).
But so many of the integral Trek stuff begins in Season 1 (the return of the Romulans, the Ferengi, Picard and the Stargazer, Troi's mother, and the Q episodes) that I would feel remiss skipping them with someone's first watch through. I promised my gf that we just have to get to Best of Both Worlds Part I, and if she doesn't want to watch after that, there's no hope.
Ya, I think TV.com has it nailed down pretty well with user ratings. The "Great" episodes from Season 1/2 are the "average" episodes of Season 3-7. But "average" for Seasons 3-7 were "Superb" anyway.
My honest-to-goodness problem with Season 1 are the glaring inconsistencies with other seasons (Worf's apperance, Geordi/Worf as Red Shirts, Geordi's promotion from Lt Jg -> Lt Cmd in two seasons, and just some bad plot lines that got discarded later on).
But so many of the integral Trek stuff begins in Season 1 (the return of the Romulans, the Ferengi, Picard and the Stargazer, Troi's mother, and the Q episodes) that I would feel remiss skipping them with someone's first watch through. I promised my gf that we just have to get to Best of Both Worlds Part I, and if she doesn't want to watch after that, there's no hope.
LaForge's instant promotion in the start of Season 2 has always bothered me. But it seemed season 1, either no one was in charge down there, or they kept on getting killed off.
Season 1, he didn't seem like an engineering type, but then season 2, bam he's chief engineer. Same with O'brien... first he's the "Con", then he gets promoted to transported chief in season 2, then BAM, chief of operations of DS9!
Of course he marries Kako the first episode she's on. Boy starfleet must be a great place to work for, as promotions come very fast , no questions asked. Yet Harry and Travis get the shaft for 7/4 years.
Season 1, he didn't seem like an engineering type, but then season 2, bam he's chief engineer. Same with O'brien... first he's the "Con", then he gets promoted to transported chief in season 2, then BAM, chief of operations of DS9!
Of course he marries Kako the first episode she's on. Boy starfleet must be a great place to work for, as promotions come very fast , no questions asked. Yet Harry and Travis get the shaft for 7/4 years.
David85
Banned
LaForge promotion was very odd but no one was in command down there so why not? I think it would have been better if they had season 2 start a year or so after season 1. That way they can explain the docotor leaving and LaForge getting promoted along with the uniforms.
And went a little slower, he did take four years to get an upgrade, that never bothered me too much.
Wolf was really thrown around. He is pointless in season 1 of TNG, then is the guy who shoots. On DS9 I don't even know his job, he gets promoted to some Klingon something. His wife dies. He is worknig for the Klingons until TNG movies then he's magically on the ship and doesn't care that his wife is dead?
And went a little slower, he did take four years to get an upgrade, that never bothered me too much.
Wolf was really thrown around. He is pointless in season 1 of TNG, then is the guy who shoots. On DS9 I don't even know his job, he gets promoted to some Klingon something. His wife dies. He is worknig for the Klingons until TNG movies then he's magically on the ship and doesn't care that his wife is dead?
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='ITDEFX']i was really expecting Harry's character to grow a backbone by the end of the Series.[/quote]
When I checked out of Voyager -- season 2 -- I knew that Harry Kim would be doing exactly the same thing (i.e. nothing) when the series ended.
It only took me 10 episodes of Enterprise to predict the same fate for Travis.
I really wish I'd been wrong. Lack of character growth is probably the biggest problem Trek has, and that's saying something. But without interesting characters that do, well, anything, what's the point?
When I checked out of Voyager -- season 2 -- I knew that Harry Kim would be doing exactly the same thing (i.e. nothing) when the series ended.
It only took me 10 episodes of Enterprise to predict the same fate for Travis.
I really wish I'd been wrong. Lack of character growth is probably the biggest problem Trek has, and that's saying something. But without interesting characters that do, well, anything, what's the point?
[quote name='David85']Has anyone seen the redone CGI Star Trek? They started to update TOS and want to release them on DVD. My guess is to get more money and it's easier than making a new show. It looked pretty good, the ship was rather plain through. I wish they would do it for some of TNG episodes because they are really bad.[/quote] I've seen a few episodes, though only in SD. The effects really blend perfectly with the episodes, unlike most of the SFX in the special editions of the original Star Wars trilogy that scream "Bad CGI that doesn't belong in this movie".
[quote name='2Fast'] I always wondered why the hell Harry never got a field promotion.[/quote]I always thought it was stupid that Harry was an ensign and was a member of the senior staff.
[quote name='2Fast']
I always wondered why the hell Harry never got a field promotion.[/quote]I always thought it was stupid that Harry was an ensign and was a member of the senior staff.There are quite a few sites out there that have side-by-sides of the TOS new special effects. I think the best word to describe them are "Classy." They really fit in with the episodes, and are mostly getting rid of things like wires holding up models and stuff. Nothing ridiculous.
[quote name='2Fast']No one ever said he was cool or even a good character, but shit, give the guy a damn promotion after seven years![/QUOTE]
yea, did anyone ever get a promotion on Voyager??? I don't think Paris' demotion then promotion back to his rank counts. the EMH to ECH program doesn't count either since that lasted 1 or 2 episodes??
With all the contact starfleet had with Voyager after season 4, you would have think someone would have sent them the new uniform dress codes so they could be up to date
yea, did anyone ever get a promotion on Voyager??? I don't think Paris' demotion then promotion back to his rank counts. the EMH to ECH program doesn't count either since that lasted 1 or 2 episodes??
With all the contact starfleet had with Voyager after season 4, you would have think someone would have sent them the new uniform dress codes so they could be up to date
[quote name='ITDEFX']yea, did anyone ever get a promotion on Voyager??? I don't think Paris' demotion then promotion back to his rank counts. the EMH to ECH program doesn't count either since that lasted 1 or 2 episodes??
With all the contact starfleet had with Voyager after season 4, you would have think someone would have sent them the new uniform dress codes so they could be up to date[/quote]
I think Tuvok gets demoted and then re-promoted.
Definitely, I always hated the uniforms that they started using with DS9, Generations, and Voyager's entirety. I can't believe they lasted as long as they did.
With all the contact starfleet had with Voyager after season 4, you would have think someone would have sent them the new uniform dress codes so they could be up to date
[/quote]I think Tuvok gets demoted and then re-promoted.
Definitely, I always hated the uniforms that they started using with DS9, Generations, and Voyager's entirety. I can't believe they lasted as long as they did.
[quote name='ITDEFX']you sure Tuvok got demoted?? I know Paris did when he did something with that water planet.[/quote]
Yeah, he goes behind Janeway's back and tries to get some kind of device that can get them home sooner (he explains this action logically, of course). I think it was a first season episode.
Yeah, he goes behind Janeway's back and tries to get some kind of device that can get them home sooner (he explains this action logically, of course). I think it was a first season episode.
[quote name='2Fast']Yeah, he goes behind Janeway's back and tries to get some kind of device that can get them home sooner (he explains this action logically, of course). I think it was a first season episode.[/QUOTE]
Yea I remembered it was on this week, however he did NOT get demoted.
Yea I remembered it was on this week, however he did NOT get demoted.
[quote name='ITDEFX']Yea I remembered it was on this week, however he did NOT get demoted.[/quote]
I think you're right actually, he was just reprimanded. I know there was a uniform gaffe where he wore the rank of lieutenant commander for a while before he actually was promoted, I think I may have gotten those things intertwined.
I think you're right actually, he was just reprimanded. I know there was a uniform gaffe where he wore the rank of lieutenant commander for a while before he actually was promoted, I think I may have gotten those things intertwined.
Tuvok: He wore Lt. Cmdr. for part of season 1, and he went behind Janeway. The very next episode he wore the Lt. rank. It's speculated, but not canon, that Tuvok was demoted because of this. Later on in the show he is promoted to Lt. Cmdr.
Paris: Paris got demoted to ensign right before being tossed in the brig for 30 Days (which was also the title of the episode I believe). Late in the series he was re-promoted by Janeway to Lt.
Kim: When Paris was re-promoted, Janeway left a box with the pip in it on the conn, Kim remarked something to the effect, "I never find any little presents at my station."
Paris: Paris got demoted to ensign right before being tossed in the brig for 30 Days (which was also the title of the episode I believe). Late in the series he was re-promoted by Janeway to Lt.
Kim: When Paris was re-promoted, Janeway left a box with the pip in it on the conn, Kim remarked something to the effect, "I never find any little presents at my station."
bread's done