Author Topic: Star Trek (Read 1171 times)

cahult · « **Reply #15 on:** 19 July 2004, 05:16 »

quote:
Originally posted by Refalm:
One thing I didn't like about every Star Trek was the "extra syndrome". You can see clear examples of this in season 1 of Voyager (in other seasons, they casted an extra in a few episodes first, before he/she got killed).
For example, the captain and the staff and someone you've never seen before go on an away mission. They encounter a hostile species. Now guess who's going to be killed first?

I always hated that BS in Star Trek.

Hmm, Bones was killed in one episode, but brought back to life....

Paladin9 · « **Reply #16 on:** 19 July 2004, 10:37 »

quote:
Originally posted by Refalm:
One thing I didn't like about every Star Trek was the "extra syndrome". You can see clear examples of this in season 1 of Voyager (in other seasons, they casted an extra in a few episodes first, before he/she got killed).
For example, the captain and the staff and someone you've never seen before go on an away mission. They encounter a hostile species. Now guess who's going to be killed first?

I always hated that BS in Star Trek.

Ha! So true.

quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames:
uh... you're right. Harve Bennett produced ST 2, 3, 4, 5. they were the best ever. Trek was never better. no stupid ass technobabble, no contrivances... no cliches. just a dramatic story. the equipment didn't matter.

blame it on the royal fucktards (Roddenberry and Berman) to create the crappy, cliche, technobabble-filled crapfest that was TNG

as for Roddenberry... he created it, but he didn't give a shit about it. he was lazy. he didn't even want to say what year "Star Trek" happened in.

weak

That is what you think. 1 just totally sucked ass. All those people who liked it have a bad taste for movies. I do not understand why people liked 2 so much. It was not that great. 3 sucked except for that fact that it had Christopher Lloyd as a klingon. That was cool. 4 was awesome. 5 was nothing but masturbation. What was the point of 5? Since when does the Enterprise-A have 78 decks? Unless you like seeing mccoy eat "marshmellons" and kirk and spock hug in front of klingons, this movies sucked. 6 was good. 7 was good. 8 WAS BY FAR THE BEST FUCKING STAR TREK MOVIE!!!! 9 was ok. 10 was ok.

Jimmy, how come you mention 5 as one of the "best", but not 6? Dont tell me you like 5 more then 6???

hm_murdock · « **Reply #17 on:** 19 July 2004, 11:15 »

the 78-deck thing is a known duff.

did you also notice that the decks counted up from the bottom?

also, the brig is on like deck 7, near the base of the saucer... not at the bottom of the ship

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #18 on:** 19 July 2004, 11:33 »

quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
the 78-deck thing is a known duff.

did you also notice that the decks counted up from the bottom?

Also, there is no way to climb up a single vertical shaft from the bottom of the ship to the top of it.

[ July 19, 2004: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ]

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #19 on:** 19 July 2004, 11:37 »

The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise.

ARGH.

Orethrius · « **Reply #20 on:** 19 July 2004, 11:42 »

quote:
Originally posted by M. O'Brien:
The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise.

ARGH.

When I arrive at my destination, I am gonna kill Bill. :cool:

Paladin9 · « **Reply #21 on:** 20 July 2004, 08:43 »

quote:
Originally posted by M. O'Brien:
The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise.

And now it has been confirmed that Brent Spiner will have a guest apperance in a 3 episode mini arc. I think he is going to play a ancestor of doctor Dr. Noonien Soong.

quote:
Originally posted by M. O'Brien:
ARGH.

Why do you say that? I think this is a good thing. It will finally make the show feel like it is related to the other star trek shows at all.

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #22 on:** 22 July 2004, 00:39 »

Well, Enterprise is pretty much dead. Several weeks ago, Paramount decided to reduce the number of episodes for the next season. I just read in USA today that they are also going to move it to a 9 pm slot on Friday night.

Wasn't this exactly the time slot that killed TOS?

hm_murdock · « **Reply #23 on:** 22 July 2004, 01:20 »

quote:
Why do you say that? I think this is a good thing. It will finally make the show feel like it is related to the other star trek shows at all.

that's NOT GOOD.

Enterprise seems to me to be a re-invention of Star Trek. It's as much an "alternate reality" as it is anything. There are things that they have and have happened in the show that cannot be reconciled. Their level of technology is stupid when compared with TOS (did you know that they used LASERS up until a decade before TOS because phasers didn't put out enough damage?).

Enterprise is fun to watch, and IMHO, still a great show. I will never accept that it is in any way historically accurate. It spits in the face of Mike Okuda's Trek history.

Refalm · « **Reply #24 on:** 22 July 2004, 02:53 »

quote:
Paladin: 7 was good. 8 WAS BY FAR THE BEST FUCKING STAR TREK MOVIE!!!! 9 was ok. 10 was ok.

4 and 8 remain my favourites, but I haven't seen 10 yet...

hm_murdock · « **Reply #25 on:** 22 July 2004, 03:52 »

1,2,5,6 rule them all.

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #26 on:** 22 July 2004, 05:31 »

quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
1,2,5,6 rule them all.

5? As in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier AKA Shatner's Folly?

hm_murdock · « **Reply #27 on:** 22 July 2004, 06:11 »

yes. a very well-done film, were it not for budget problems and special FX deficiencies

Paladin9 · « **Reply #28 on:** 24 July 2004, 05:51 »

quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
1,2,5,6 rule them all.

Holy fuck... are you serious? 1 and 5???? Not only is it stange that you like those two movies at all, but you actually say that they are better than 4 or 8??? Wow.

Refalm is right. 4 and 8 do rule.

« previous next » Print Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Author Topic: Star Trek (Read 1171 times) cahult VIP Posts: 1,186 Kudos: 182 Star Trek « Reply #15 on: 19 July 2004, 05:16 » quote: Originally posted by Refalm: One thing I didn't like about every Star Trek was the "extra syndrome". You can see clear examples of this in season 1 of Voyager (in other seasons, they casted an extra in a few episodes first, before he/she got killed). For example, the captain and the staff and someone you've never seen before go on an away mission. They encounter a hostile species. Now guess who's going to be killed first? I always hated that BS in Star Trek. Hmm, Bones was killed in one episode, but brought back to life.... Logged "The gentleman is dead, the feminists killed him" Anonymous Paladin9 VIP Posts: 696 Kudos: 263 Star Trek « Reply #16 on: 19 July 2004, 10:37 » quote: Originally posted by Refalm: One thing I didn't like about every Star Trek was the "extra syndrome". You can see clear examples of this in season 1 of Voyager (in other seasons, they casted an extra in a few episodes first, before he/she got killed). For example, the captain and the staff and someone you've never seen before go on an away mission. They encounter a hostile species. Now guess who's going to be killed first? I always hated that BS in Star Trek. Ha! So true. quote: Originally posted by JimmyJames: uh... you're right. Harve Bennett produced ST 2, 3, 4, 5. they were the best ever. Trek was never better. no stupid ass technobabble, no contrivances... no cliches. just a dramatic story. the equipment didn't matter. blame it on the royal fucktards (Roddenberry and Berman) to create the crappy, cliche, technobabble-filled crapfest that was TNG as for Roddenberry... he created it, but he didn't give a shit about it. he was lazy. he didn't even want to say what year "Star Trek" happened in. weak That is what you think. 1 just totally sucked ass. All those people who liked it have a bad taste for movies. I do not understand why people liked 2 so much. It was not that great. 3 sucked except for that fact that it had Christopher Lloyd as a klingon. That was cool. 4 was awesome. 5 was nothing but masturbation. What was the point of 5? Since when does the Enterprise-A have 78 decks? Unless you like seeing mccoy eat "marshmellons" and kirk and spock hug in front of klingons, this movies sucked. 6 was good. 7 was good. 8 WAS BY FAR THE BEST FUCKING STAR TREK MOVIE!!!! 9 was ok. 10 was ok. Jimmy, how come you mention 5 as one of the "best", but not 6? Dont tell me you like 5 more then 6??? Logged _________________________________________________ To create a new standard, it takes something that's not just a little bit different; it takes something that's really new and really captures people's imagination hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,627 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Star Trek « Reply #17 on: 19 July 2004, 11:15 » the 78-deck thing is a known duff. did you also notice that the decks counted up from the bottom? also, the brig is on like deck 7, near the base of the saucer... not at the bottom of the ship Logged Go the fuck ~ mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Star Trek « Reply #18 on: 19 July 2004, 11:33 » quote: Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder: the 78-deck thing is a known duff. did you also notice that the decks counted up from the bottom? Also, there is no way to climb up a single vertical shaft from the bottom of the ship to the top of it. [ July 19, 2004: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ] Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Star Trek « Reply #19 on: 19 July 2004, 11:37 » The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise. ARGH. Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... Orethrius Member Posts: 1,783 Kudos: 982 Star Trek « Reply #20 on: 19 July 2004, 11:42 » quote: Originally posted by M. O'Brien: The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise. ARGH. When I arrive at my destination, I am gonna kill Bill. :cool: Logged Proudly posted from a Gentoo Linux system. Quote from: Calum even if you're renting you've got more rights than if you're using windows. System Vitals Paladin9 VIP Posts: 696 Kudos: 263 Star Trek « Reply #21 on: 20 July 2004, 08:43 » quote: Originally posted by M. O'Brien: The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise. And now it has been confirmed that Brent Spiner will have a guest apperance in a 3 episode mini arc. I think he is going to play a ancestor of doctor Dr. Noonien Soong. quote: Originally posted by M. O'Brien: ARGH. Why do you say that? I think this is a good thing. It will finally make the show feel like it is related to the other star trek shows at all. Logged _________________________________________________ To create a new standard, it takes something that's not just a little bit different; it takes something that's really new and really captures people's imagination mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Star Trek « Reply #22 on: 22 July 2004, 00:39 » Well, Enterprise is pretty much dead. Several weeks ago, Paramount decided to reduce the number of episodes for the next season. I just read in USA today that they are also going to move it to a 9 pm slot on Friday night. Wasn't this exactly the time slot that killed TOS? Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,627 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Star Trek « Reply #23 on: 22 July 2004, 01:20 » quote: Why do you say that? I think this is a good thing. It will finally make the show feel like it is related to the other star trek shows at all. that's NOT GOOD. Enterprise seems to me to be a re-invention of Star Trek. It's as much an "alternate reality" as it is anything. There are things that they have and have happened in the show that cannot be reconciled. Their level of technology is stupid when compared with TOS (did you know that they used LASERS up until a decade before TOS because phasers didn't put out enough damage?). Enterprise is fun to watch, and IMHO, still a great show. I will never accept that it is in any way historically accurate. It spits in the face of Mike Okuda's Trek history. Logged Go the fuck ~ Refalm Administrator Posts: 5,159 Kudos: 704 Sjembek! Star Trek « Reply #24 on: 22 July 2004, 02:53 » quote: Paladin: 7 was good. 8 WAS BY FAR THE BEST FUCKING STAR TREK MOVIE!!!! 9 was ok. 10 was ok. 4 and 8 remain my favourites, but I haven't seen 10 yet... Logged Radio Knop . hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,627 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Star Trek « Reply #25 on: 22 July 2004, 03:52 » 1,2,5,6 rule them all. Logged Go the fuck ~ mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Star Trek « Reply #26 on: 22 July 2004, 05:31 » quote: Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder: 1,2,5,6 rule them all. 5? As in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier AKA Shatner's Folly? Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,627 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Star Trek « Reply #27 on: 22 July 2004, 06:11 » yes. a very well-done film, were it not for budget problems and special FX deficiencies Logged Go the fuck ~ Paladin9 VIP Posts: 696 Kudos: 263 Star Trek « Reply #28 on: 24 July 2004, 05:51 » quote: Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder: 1,2,5,6 rule them all. Holy fuck... are you serious? 1 and 5???? Not only is it stange that you like those two movies at all, but you actually say that they are better than 4 or 8??? Wow. Refalm is right. 4 and 8 do rule. Logged _________________________________________________ To create a new standard, it takes something that's not just a little bit different; it takes something that's really new and really captures people's imagination Print Pages: 1 [2] Go Up « previous next » Stop Microsoft » Forum » Miscellaneous » The Lounge » Star Trek
Share or donate

Author Topic: Star Trek (Read 1171 times)

Share or donate