Star trek

Necromance old blog posts, talk about Shamus' books or videos, or discuss allied projects like Errant Signal
Forum rules
This forum is not for swiping blog threads. Avoid talking about blog posts less than a month old.
User avatar
Wide And Nerdy

Re: Star trek

Postby Wide And Nerdy » Fri Oct 07, 2016 5:50 pm

Maybe its just me but I'm a sucker for buddy pairings. Maybe its my perpetual bachelor status. My most meaningful relationships have been with buddies.

So Harry and Tom worked for me (EDIT: Though Bashir and O'Brien worked better). That is what makes Harry a little bit better than Mayweather. And Tom was a good fun character once they started letting him indulge his geekiness. I liked that he had these hobbies, this love for early to mid 20th century hot rods and movies. I mean why not? Picard likes Shakespeare and horses. Cars and SciFi serials are kind of just as old. So having Harry tag along made him part of the fun.

It also led to a funny payoff when they time traveled back to the 1990s and Tom tried to blend in using his knowledge of the 40's and 50's.

The writers report that they didn't like the character and didn't know what to do with him until the episode when those hunter aliens took over the ship. The funny thing is, they'd written Harry out of that episode entirely but they came up short on time. So, realizing that Harry was the only one on the outside, they gave him a bunch of stuff to do.

Harry was working maintenance for the aliens while secretly subverting them. He had a hard edge to him, playing the role of someone who was doing his duty but pissed off the new management. I can't imagine where Garrett Wang got the inspiration for that. ;)

SFDebris also had a good suggestion. He recommended that in the Year of Hell episode, have Harry working on one of the time proof force-fields when time is returned back to normal, having him come out as the only one who remembers the events of that year. That allows them to retool the character as someone who is more hardened and resourceful and since he remembers that year, he can tell people about themselves or he see's them differently based on what they did during that year that they haven't done in the restored timeline. And it would allow the events of Year of Hell to count for something while still reverting the ship to normal per editorial mandate.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:43 pm

Ive survived another lwaxana troi episode.Ughh...How many more will I have to endure?Another 4?!Damn it!

Huh...Apparently,Ive seen her 3 times in ds9.Strange,I dont remember any of those.Must have blocked it completely from my memory.
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:18 am

Daemian Lucifer wrote:Ive survived another lwaxana troi episode.Ughh...How many more will I have to endure?Another 4?!Damn it!

Huh...Apparently,Ive seen her 3 times in ds9.Strange,I dont remember any of those.Must have blocked it completely from my memory.

That's because her DS9 episode is surprisingly good. For one thing, it isn't about her but about Odo. She's just a supporting character and she's used judiciously rather than flung at the viewer's face at every opportunity. For another, she's surprisingly sympathetic. Go figure.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Tue Oct 25, 2016 4:42 pm

Wow,season 3 of tng has a rare gem in it:An actually good post tos prime directive episode.Astonishing.And it doesnt event start out like a good one,what with picards "So what if we cause him harm?Let him die!".But he does redeem himself later on.

One small thing that really impresses me in this episode is continuity.Not only do they not dismiss a thing that was used in a similar situation previously,they explain why it doesnt work this time.Even though its very brief,Im glad that its in here.

John wrote: For another, she's surprisingly sympathetic. Go figure.


Yeah,ds9 was very good at picking junk from tng and turning it into gold.
User avatar
Lachlan the Mad
Location: I come from the land down under, where women blow and men chunder

Re: Star trek

Postby Lachlan the Mad » Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:14 am

Talking of DS9 and TNG, I'm slowly working my way through DS9 and just got up to the episode with Riker's evil twin. Blaaaaarg, evil twins are lame. Surely Evil Riker should have been beardless, since we all know that Beard Riker is Best Riker.

Have to say that Dax episodes are usually by far my favourite episodes. She isn't really the best character on the show -- she doesn't develop that much and pretty much everything she says is delivered with the same level of light snark. But the whole thing where she is the merger between a very young and a very old entity leads to so, so many hard sci-fi plots full of questions about identity -- I love it. Writing-wise, I'm a big fan of Sisko (especially when he gets mad) and Odo. Kind of wishing that the plot would dedicate a bit more time to the Marquis at this point? They seem very important (and a human faction who are not in direct agreement with the Federation is something pretty cool) but we aren't getting to see that much of them.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:05 am

The maquis were invented for voyager,and their use in ds9 was more guest star like.But no worries,all the lack of their meaningful development on ds9 just means that they will get fleshed out in voyager.Right?
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:06 pm

There's some good Maquis stuff in DS9 but the Maquis are, at best, sort of a minor recurring antagonist. The show as a whole is much more about the Gamma Quadrant than the Alpha. The episodes in which the Maquis appear are mostly Sisko-centric . . . though they are sometimes also the kinds of episodes that give the "DS9 isn't real Star Trek" crowd fits.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Wed Oct 26, 2016 1:23 pm

John wrote: though they are sometimes also the kinds of episodes that give the "DS9 isn't real Star Trek" crowd fits.


The reason I dont ascribe to purism like that is that while I like the original series,some of Genes ideas were frankly bonkers.This can best be seen by comparing the bonding to its only a paper moon,the episode that the bonding was supposed to be before it got Roddenberrized.
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Wed Oct 26, 2016 3:04 pm

Daemian Lucifer wrote:
John wrote: though they are sometimes also the kinds of episodes that give the "DS9 isn't real Star Trek" crowd fits.


The reason I dont ascribe to purism like that is that while I like the original series,some of Genes ideas were frankly bonkers.This can best be seen by comparing the bonding to its only a paper moon,the episode that the bonding was supposed to be before it got Roddenberrized.

I am convinced that in order to be a die-hard Rodenberrist--by which I mean a person who believes that the humans of the in the Federation of the future no longer exhibit the destructive or petty traits exhibited by the real humans of the present and past--you have to actively ignore large portions of both TOS and TNG, which feature any number of obnoxious bureaucrats, obsessive scientists, captains gone mad, and admirals who are ineffectual, obstructive and in certain cases actually corrupt--not to mention the Federation xeno-anthropologist who deliberately became Space Hitler (fascist!), Harry Mudd (con artist!), Cyrano Jones (seller of stuff! Tribbles, even!) and Janice Lester (driven mad by institutional sexism!). I am willing to believe that the society of the Federation is nicer and even more just than that of present-day Earth. I am especially willing to believe that the children of the Federation are taught in school that the Federation is nicer and more just. I am not willing to believe that human nature has fundamentally changed when there is so much evidence to the contrary.

So, yes, Sisko sometimes does things that are or seem questionable, and that upsets a certain subset of Trekkies. But there is absolutely nothing inconsistent with Star Trek about that.
User avatar
JadedDM

Re: Star trek

Postby JadedDM » Thu Oct 27, 2016 11:51 pm

So, in Discovery, Fuller is out. Which by itself doesn't bother me so much now that I know he was the one behind "Retrospect" one of the most offensive episodes of Voyager ever made. But the news that they haven't even cast the main character yet when the show is due to be released in May (originally January!) is disquieting.
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:27 am

JadedDM wrote:So, in Discovery, Fuller is out.

Huh. I'm not familiar with Fuller's complete body of work, but I liked Wonderfalls and Pushing Daisies a whole heck of a lot. I am now trying and failing to imagine Star Trek done in that style.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sat Oct 29, 2016 6:25 pm

Kirk was married to the enterprise,and geordi wants to fuck the enterprise.I dont remember anyone with such...unconventional preferences on ds9,but defiant was definitely the extension of siskos penis.So,were there any...shall we say navisexuals,in voyager and enterprise?
User avatar
4th Dimension

Re: Star trek

Postby 4th Dimension » Sat Oct 29, 2016 9:38 pm

Well considering that joke!Janeway treats her crew as her own personal fiefdom, you could say the Voyager is her lady boner that she wants to use to plow the entire quadrant all the way back to the Alpha Quadrant.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sun Nov 20, 2016 9:20 pm

This doesnt happen often,but I disagree with Chuck.Ive just watched the most toys,and SFDebris's review of it,and I disagree with him about the lying part.While yes,I did expect data to say "I had no other choice",him lying coupled with the last conversation he has with fajo does humanize him more.And while he may not be human,he still strives to mimic one as much as possible.Whether it was him hiding his shame,or him not wanting the crew to think less of him,I still like how it turned out.
Steve C

Re: Star trek

Postby Steve C » Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:39 pm

Data doesn't lie. Data didn't lie there either. Data does the same sorts of things Spock does with lying- he skirts the issue. Data says, "Perhaps something occurred during transport." The perhaps means the answer avoids the question. And I agree, it does humanize him more.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:04 pm

So,on a ship with a klingon raised by humans,the only* sapient android in existence who is trying to be human,with a telepathic psychiatrist,these "enlightened" humans cannot see that a boy,no matter his biological making,wants to go back to his adopted father?At least the ending finally shows them learning the simple lesson of "children love their parents even when they arent biologically related".Though I must admit,I liked trois reaction to picard saying how he is uncomfortable with kids.

*Ignoring lore for convenience.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:40 am

Watched the drumhead.Man,if thats what they made back then when things were so good,I wonder what kind of story they wouldve made today,when the world is....well,lets just say less ideal.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:05 pm

Started half a life.That was one damn funny opening.While I dread that this will be a lwxana episode,I appreciate that they knew their character was damn annoying and that everyone treated them as such.Doesnt change the fact that she is annoying,but at least it softens the blow.

EDIT:Huh...A good lwxana troi episode.That is also a prime directive episode.And an episode about a culture that is rather alien to humans being presented in a sensible manner,without condemnation by the show itself.I mean making just one of those elements into a workable episode would be a feat,but all three?Heck,even deanna manages to say some smart things and actually act like a competent counselor.
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:11 am

Sonequa Martin-Green has been cast the lead actress on Star Trek Discovery. For those of you who watch The Walking Dead you will better know her as dead-pan Sasha.

It will be interesting to see her in a role that is world's apart from one like TWD.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Mon Jan 09, 2017 2:17 pm

And for us who dont watch the show,is she black janeway or female sisko?
User avatar
Wide And Nerdy

Re: Star trek

Postby Wide And Nerdy » Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:31 pm

Daemian Lucifer wrote:And for us who dont watch the show,is she black janeway or female sisko?


There's some mix of Janeway and Sisko that would make a great character. But then they were both good characters (I always maintain that there's a version of Janeway I like if I get to pick the episodes). I like the Janeway who's a little grumpy when she hasn't had her coffee and is driven by her guilt over what she did to her crew. She goes back and forth between being a Federation hardliner and saying "To hell with the Prime Directive" and it makes me wonder if this reflects the conflict in her head.

I guess the big question is, will this really be Star Trek or will this be a stock sci fi action adventure series with federation outfits, sets, and races? Can you even ask that question if you consider DS9 as much Star Trek as any other series? Is Star Trek just any Starfleet based show that takes place in the setting?
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:11 pm

Wide And Nerdy wrote:Is Star Trek just any Starfleet based show that takes place in the setting?


Yes. Of course it is. New Star Trek--no matter how bad it might be, no matter how it might seem to violate the spirit of old Star Trek--is still Star Trek. But that's okay. I mean, I don't care much for Voyager, Enterprise, or the remake movies. (Especially the remake movies. Grr.) But I'm not going to tell people who like them that the thing they like that says Star Trek on it isn't real Star Trek. What would be the point?

Unfortunately, I watch so little TV these days that I probably won't watch the new show even if it turns out to be good. What network is it going to be on, anyway?
User avatar
Lachlan the Mad
Location: I come from the land down under, where women blow and men chunder

Re: Star trek

Postby Lachlan the Mad » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:52 pm

If I was writing a new Star Trek series, I'd want something a little bit more... below stairs, I guess? I mean, I'd still have a captain and senior staff in the show, but the main characters would be junior officers and support staff. Maybe someone who's fresh out of Starfleet Academy as a mature-age student? Some of those non-Starfleet people who are supposed to be all over the ships but that we never see?

Maybe it's just because I've been reading Redshirts...
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:32 am

Daemian Lucifer wrote:And for us who dont watch the show,is she black janeway or female sisko?

Ha.

If she plays it like her WD character then she's neither.

She'd be more of a mix between Lt Torres and Ensign Sato. Sato for the blank, introspective, stares and Torres for the occasional emotional outburst and general sullenness when things don't go her way.
User avatar
Wide And Nerdy

Re: Star trek

Postby Wide And Nerdy » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:38 am

Andrew wrote:
Daemian Lucifer wrote:And for us who dont watch the show,is she black janeway or female sisko?

Ha.

If she plays it like her WD character then she's neither.

She'd be more of a mix between Lt Torres and Ensign Sato. Sato for the blank, introspective, stares and Torres for the occasional emotional outburst and general sullenness when things don't go her way.



I hope not. That doesn't sound like a good Captain. Reboot Kirk was bad enough.

Return to “Twenty Sided Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest