Stop Microsoft

Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: Paladin9 on 16 July 2004, 05:25

Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 on 16 July 2004, 05:25
A current thread about the word "nacelle" has made me think of something I would like to bring up for disscussion here.  What do you think of star trek now?  I am talking about Star Trek: Enterprise.  Have many of you even heard of this show?  I want to talk about how star trek use to be an awesome show but has turned to shit.  TOS(original show) and TNG are what I am talking about when I say awesome.  DS9, VOY(voyager), and ENT(enterprise) are what I am talking about when I say SHIT!  

TOS was great SciFi for its time.  TNG was I think by far the best star trek show.  DS9 was just plain booring.  It was also sort of like a soap opera in space.  I think VOY is the worst.  Terrible characters and bad writing, not to mention a shit load of inconsistancies.  ENT is not quite as bad but the whole "sexyness" thing they tried last season was just wrong.  Why is it that B&B(Braga and Berman, people who have been doing star trek since Roddenberry died) have to have a "hot" female character in some sort of cat suit that is not really a starfleet member?  VOY and ENT both have a character like this!  

ENT ratings were tanking during the second season.   So those asshats B&B decided to spice the show up by doing some "sexy stuff" with the character T'pol.  That "sexy stuff" is why ENT and VOY suck in the first place!!! (well there are other problems with those shows too).  B&B are totally headed in the wrong direction, I think.  I think they should bring Gene Roddenberry back from the dead and let him run star trek again.

Any thoughts?
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 17 July 2004, 00:34
Enterprise is not Star Trek. they broke the timeline.

Based on Mike Okuda's own timeline... in the 2150s, we use fusion-powered ships that look like cylinders, have lasers and fusion rockets, and there is no Starfleet.

There are instead, two organizations, the Unied Earth Space Probe Agency, and the United Earth Space Navy.

I was able to ignore all the problems when the show was good. But through 3rd season, the writing got absolutely horrible. Brannon Braga is a washed up tit who needs to fuck off. The jury's still out on Rick Berman, who never had any respect for the "history" of Trek. I honestly think he's the one responsible for "front-loading" all the TNG tech into the show.

Oh, also the absolute unbelievability of alien technology. Here's humans flying around in their mediocre ship, and Vulcans have 24th century tech. So... we're supposed to believe that from this time on, the rest of the galaxy just kinda sat around and waited for us to catch up? That even after the almighty UFP was founded, that the other races just kinda hid their better tech away and gladly embraced inferior earth tech?

TOS is the chronologically oldest Star Trek.

Enterprise never happened.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Refalm on 17 July 2004, 00:41
I think of Enterprise as a parellel universe  (http://tongue.gif)

I disagree on DS9 though, it's my favourite of all Star Trek series. It was the most "badass" of all. And what made you think it was a "soap opera in space"? I see no reason to.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: pofnlice on 17 July 2004, 01:41
oh yeah...what really happened to the Klingons anyway...they touched on it in NG...but I kinda losat track of it after Worf said "We don't like to talk about it." Now the part that makes this congruent...TOS and NG were my favorites and even though I think all of the spin offs were good in thier own right...It's all about the Enterprise and her crew to me, the rest is just filler.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Commander on 17 July 2004, 02:47
quote:
Originally posted by Refalm:
I disagree on DS9 though, it's my favourite of all Star Trek series. It was the most "badass" of all. And what made you think it was a "soap opera in space"? I see no reason to.
agreed.  ds9, although has some crappy actors, has good stories.  voy on the other hand sucks.  i watched a few episods of the newest series, also called enterprise, but didnt like it too much.  funny how noone else mentioned their adventure in saving the earth in any of the shows that came later in the timeline.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Refalm on 17 July 2004, 03:29
The little Borg adventure that Captain Archer etc. had wasn't very correct. Q invited the Borg to humanity, not the Borg themselves  (http://graemlins/displeased.gif)
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 17 July 2004, 05:00
I think the "Temporal Cold War" is going to explain why Enterprise is so different.

I've heard rumors that Enterprise is actually the Mirror Universe.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 on 17 July 2004, 05:19
First of all, who is Mike Okuda?

 
quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
But through 3rd season, the writing got absolutely horrible. Brannon Braga is a washed up tit who needs to fuck off. The jury's still out on Rick Berman, who never had any respect for the "history" of Trek. I honestly think he's the one responsible for "front-loading" all the TNG tech into the show.

Oh, also the absolute unbelievability of alien technology. Here's humans flying around in their mediocre ship, and Vulcans have 24th century tech. So... we're supposed to believe that from this time on, the rest of the galaxy just kinda sat around and waited for us to catch up? That even after the almighty UFP was founded, that the other races just kinda hid their better tech away and gladly embraced inferior earth tech?



I agree 110%.  B&B have totally fucked thing up.

 
quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
I think the "Temporal Cold War" is going to explain why Enterprise is so different.

I've heard rumors that Enterprise is actually the Mirror Universe.



I hope this is true.  It is possible that B&B have something up their sleeve that will smooth everything out.

So what do y'all think of the end of the enterprise season finally?
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 17 July 2004, 05:48
it won't be B&B.

Brannon Braga has left to pursue his own thing, and Berman is pretty much with him. Distinguished Sci-fi writer and producer Manny Coto will take the helm for Season 4 and beyond.

[ July 17, 2004: Message edited by: JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder ]

Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 on 17 July 2004, 07:26
well, i hope it gets better... a lot better.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 18 July 2004, 08:44
btw... as for bringing back Roddenberry?

NO

That man fractured Trek. He trashed many of his best creations (TAS for instance) and threw a hissy fit about Harve Bennett's movies.

If they need anybody back, it's Harve. His Trek flicks were free from crappy technobabble and other such bullshit.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 on 18 July 2004, 12:58
quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
btw... as for bringing back Roddenberry?

NO

That man fractured Trek. He trashed many of his best creations (TAS for instance) and threw a hissy fit about Harve Bennett's movies.



Are you sure?  Roddenberry created star trek!!! If it wernt for him, there would be no star trek.  Besides, Hard Bennett had nothing to do with TNG anyway.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 18 July 2004, 14:22
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
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Refalm on 18 July 2004, 23:37
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?  (http://smile.gif)

I always hated that BS in Star Trek.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 19 July 2004, 03:35
it's a cliche. Star Trek operates on them.

they think having death there is "dramatic"... but you can't actually put these main chars in any real danger. so, you kill off these "namless" people.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: cahult 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?   (http://smile.gif)  

I always hated that BS in Star Trek.



Hmm, Bones was killed in one episode, but brought back to life....
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 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?   (http://smile.gif)  

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???
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock 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
Title: Star Trek
Post by: mobrien_12 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 ]

Title: Star Trek
Post by: mobrien_12 on 19 July 2004, 11:37
The ST people want to get Shatner guest starring in Enterprise.

ARGH.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Orethrius 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:
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 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.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: mobrien_12 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?
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock 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.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Refalm 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...
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 22 July 2004, 03:52
1,2,5,6 rule them all.
Title: Star Trek
Post by: mobrien_12 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?
Title: Star Trek
Post by: hm_murdock on 22 July 2004, 06:11
yes. a very well-done film, were it not for budget problems and special FX deficiencies
Title: Star Trek
Post by: Paladin9 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.