Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Sci-Fi/Fantasy » Star Trek » Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394247 is a reply to message #394242] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 28-6-2017 om 19:53 schreef anim8rfsk:
> In article <5953eb74$0$819$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 28-6-2017 om 04:07 schreef Obveeus:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/2017 4:09 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>> Obveeus sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 06:58 AM:
>>>
>>>> > For whatever reason, the plot point never made it into the film.
>>>>
>>>> Weird. If I had to guess, I'd guess that there was a problem with the
>>>> admiral actor or the admiral actress or both. I mean, if it was a time
>>>> issue, it's not as if they couldn't have shaved a bit of the pretty
>>>> CGI overkill
>>>
>>> Are you talking about the universe's largest lice infestation? (the
>>> bazillion glowing white 'dots')
>>>
>>>> All I know is that I was very disappointed with that first effort.
>>>> Very disappointed. Lots of things and people to point fingers at,
>>>> including a rusty cast that was years removed from working together as
>>>> actors. And it showed. In the end, it's why I've always been such a
>>>> fan of Nicholas Meyer for his work as director and uncredited
>>>> screenwriter on II. For my money, and despite II's own flaws, he saved
>>>> Trek.
>>>
>>> I agree that WRATH OF KHAN was a much better film...and, for that
>>> matter, the best TREK film made.
>>>
>>
>> I'm partial to Star Trek III myself. :-)
>
> Only because they kill David, but not nearly slowly or horribly enough.
>


Not only that, but because of the story and the nods to TOS continuity.
A lot closer to the feel of the series.
Bringing Spock back.
Kirk beating the Klingons.
The horror of losing the ship. BTW, they destroyed Enterprises several
times after that, but the punch we got in Star Trek III... No other
movie with the ship destroyed ever matched that one!

The words McCoy spoke to Kirk:
https://youtu.be/CzJRx3vaApA?t=49

I know that in general the uneven numbered movies are seen as... not as
good as the even numbered. I hold them in higher regard. :-)


--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394248 is a reply to message #394241] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 28-6-2017 om 19:52 schreef anim8rfsk:
> In article <5953e9cf$0$721$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>>> Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> > anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >
>>>> > Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> > my head.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Nope. It's really like that.
>>>
>>> So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>>> alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>>> any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>>> Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>>
>>
>> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
>> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.
>
> Flag on Rayna, as she's just a sex doll, and her builder has plenty of
> spares!
>

Yeah, but otoh hand Spock thought it was necessary that Kirk 'forgot'
about that.

--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394251 is a reply to message #394244] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
No Message Body
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394252 is a reply to message #394246] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 28-6-2017 om 19:56 schreef Dimensional Traveler:
> On 6/28/2017 10:51 AM, Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Op 27-6-2017 om 23:46 schreef Dimensional Traveler:
>>> On 6/27/2017 12:51 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
>>>> For your reference, records indicate that
>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Using a phaser that looks closer to STAR TREK (The Original Series)
>>>> > The complaints about the Klingon looks or the look of the transporters
>>>> > or the look of the phasers is right on par with the complaints about
>>>> > SUPERMAN's outfit being the wrong shade of blue or WONDER WOMAN's
>>>> > outfit
>>>> > not being flaggy enough.
>>>>
>>>> I would disagree a bit with that, and even then only from a continuity
>>>> perspective. It *would* be fair comment if a *single* representation
>>>> of S or WW had their costume change without explanation. And it would
>>>> be *very* wrong to suddenly replace the person themselves with a
>>>> blonde (or give them head ridges :-). Unless it’s a reboot, you do
>>>> *not* get to exercise your “creativity” in those sorts of aspects of
>>>> the universe.
>>>>
>>>> > Were you guys sitting around the water cooler back in the 80s griping
>>>> > about how much the new BUCK ROGERS TV series sucked because the
>>>> > ships no
>>>> > longer swung back and forth on pieces of fishing line like they were
>>>> > supposed too? ...and they failed to have cigarette smoke wafting
>>>> > randomly out of the back like was coda?
>>>>
>>>> Well we’re sure as hell not going to complain about Wilma Deering’s
>>>> outfits! :-) But seriously, you have to make a distinction between
>>>> what is a surface difference and what is being changed in an
>>>> established story line for the wrong reasons. If they didn’t want to
>>>> do “Prime” Trek, they should have created yet another timeline, or not
>>>> made it a Trek property at all. Simple as that.
>>>>
>>> The problem is they DID start a new timeline. And in the process said
>>> "this is the only Trek now, we have destroyed the timeline of the prior
>>> serieses and movies."
>>>
>>
>> That was basically what JJ wanted. He was not amused that the CBS half
>> of the franchise refused to give up their goodies in favor of 'only
>> Kelvin timeline stuff'.
>>
> Which just shows how over-inflated Abrams' ego is.
>
>> And as far as I'm concerned Discovery is yet /another/ timeline.
>>
> I think that's official.
>

Than they really should call it that. Be honest about it.

--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394253 is a reply to message #394160] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ubiquitous is currently offline  Ubiquitous
Messages: 64
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
> For your reference, records indicate that
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>> J J Abrams basically stood over the dying body of 'Star Trek' telling
>> fans "Hey, look at me, I'm so popular that I can do whatever I want to
>> your beloved show!" while he gave fans the finger with one hand and
>> masturbated with the other.
>
> I'm not so sure that was the message to the fans, or just to Paramount
> (or whoever it is that owns Trek these days). It *was* a dying
> franchise, by my measure due in large part to them cranking out crap
> after TNG went off the air. They *did* need a change of pace, and
> unfortunately they did it by chasing after the “action movie” audience.
> My hope is always that a new TV series would be able to have the depth
> needed to really re-establish the franchise with the types of fans
> older Trek attracted, but Discovery seems to be along the same lines as
> the other newer Trek series, being terrible and thinking they can get
> away with it just because it’s *said* to be set in the Trek universe.

That reminds me of the puchline of a joke that includes "slapping `'Trek` on
it's title".

--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394254 is a reply to message #394172] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ubiquitous is currently offline  Ubiquitous
Messages: 64
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:

>>>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>
>>> They explained that.
>>
>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>
> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .

Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces a
holographic message when reassembled.

I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!

--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394255 is a reply to message #394230] Wed, 28 June 2017 14:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance Corporal Hammer is currently offline  Lance Corporal Hammer
Messages: 35
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:

> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
> his body.

You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
isn't normal?

--
Hammer
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394256 is a reply to message #394243] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <oj0q87$uqb$2@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

> On 6/27/2017 8:34 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> In article <oiv55p$h8v$7@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/27/2017 4:46 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> In article <oiujtl$7gb$5@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 6/27/2017 1:07 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>> >> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 11:29 PM:
>>>> >>> In article <oisj1o$q0a$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >>> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >>>>> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >>>>> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >>>>> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >>>>> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >>>>> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >>>>> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing
>>>> >>>> with
>>>> >>>> my head.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> LOL, no, seriously. It's all in the book. They cast Lori*, she's
>>>> >>> credited, they built the sets, AFAIK they never cast Nogura (which
>>>> >>> makes
>>>> >>> no sense as his scenes are supposed to have been decimated literally
>>>> >>> the
>>>> >>> night before). Basically it goes like this:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Kirk and Sonak on the escalator, Kirk says he's headed for a meeting
>>>> >>> with Nogura
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Kirk meets Nogura, stands up to him, gets the Enterprise back (cut)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Lori tries to waylay Kirk outside Nogura's office, brings up the year
>>>> >>> they spent together, Kirk calls her Nogura's staff whore (cut)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Kirk beams to the space office complex. The next time we see Lori
>>>> >>> she's in the transporter, beaming aboard the Enterprise for reasons
>>>> >>> unknown.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> *Susan O'Sullivan ... Woman (as Susan J. Sullivan)
>>>> >>> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0642817
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> (No, it's not the Susan Sullivan from Falcon Crest or Castle, but
>>>> >>> she'd
>>>> >>> have been excellent)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Susan O'Sullivan is an actress, known for Star Trek: The Motion
>>>> >>> Picture
>>>> >>> (1979), Our Man Flint: Dead on Target (1976) and Desperate Rescue: The
>>>> >>> Cathy Mahone Story (1993).
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I've never been able to find a good face photo that's supposed to be
>>>> >>> her
>>>> >>> that's absolutely certainly her.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Maybe I'll see if can't pull up COVER UP or something and do a screen
>>>> >>> grab.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Interesting stuff. And, as someone who's read none of the books, all
>>>> >> new
>>>> >> to me. Thanks!
>>>> >>
>>>> > Star Trek novelizations have a history of authors adding shit from
>>>> > nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> Well, um, this is from the script, and by Roddenberry.
>>>>
>>> You sure it wasn't by Freddy? :P
>>
>> He was busy writing the bad episode of Dukes of Hazzard that year.
>>
> You're going to need to narrow that down more....

Speaking of which, there was a Matlock this morning that credited both
Anne Collins and Gerry Conway. Jesus wept.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394257 is a reply to message #394248] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <5953f104$0$703$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:

> Op 28-6-2017 om 19:52 schreef anim8rfsk:
>> In article <5953e9cf$0$721$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
>> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>>
>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>>> > Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> >> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >>> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >>> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >>> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >>> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >>> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >>> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> >> my head.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > Nope. It's really like that.
>>>>
>>>> So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>>>> alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>>>> any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>>>> Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
>>> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.
>>
>> Flag on Rayna, as she's just a sex doll, and her builder has plenty of
>> spares!
>>
>
> Yeah, but otoh hand Spock thought it was necessary that Kirk 'forgot'
> about that.

Mind rape!

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394258 is a reply to message #394251] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
No Message Body
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394259 is a reply to message #394252] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <5953f218$0$703$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:

> Op 28-6-2017 om 19:56 schreef Dimensional Traveler:
>> On 6/28/2017 10:51 AM, Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 23:46 schreef Dimensional Traveler:
>>>> On 6/27/2017 12:51 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
>>>> > For your reference, records indicate that
>>>> > Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Using a phaser that looks closer to STAR TREK (The Original Series)
>>>> >> The complaints about the Klingon looks or the look of the transporters
>>>> >> or the look of the phasers is right on par with the complaints about
>>>> >> SUPERMAN's outfit being the wrong shade of blue or WONDER WOMAN's
>>>> >> outfit
>>>> >> not being flaggy enough.
>>>> >
>>>> > I would disagree a bit with that, and even then only from a continuity
>>>> > perspective. It *would* be fair comment if a *single* representation
>>>> > of S or WW had their costume change without explanation. And it would
>>>> > be *very* wrong to suddenly replace the person themselves with a
>>>> > blonde (or give them head ridges :-). Unless it’s a reboot, you do
>>>> > *not* get to exercise your “creativity” in those sorts of aspects of
>>>> > the universe.
>>>> >
>>>> >> Were you guys sitting around the water cooler back in the 80s griping
>>>> >> about how much the new BUCK ROGERS TV series sucked because the
>>>> >> ships no
>>>> >> longer swung back and forth on pieces of fishing line like they were
>>>> >> supposed too? ...and they failed to have cigarette smoke wafting
>>>> >> randomly out of the back like was coda?
>>>> >
>>>> > Well we’re sure as hell not going to complain about Wilma Deering’s
>>>> > outfits! :-) But seriously, you have to make a distinction between
>>>> > what is a surface difference and what is being changed in an
>>>> > established story line for the wrong reasons. If they didn’t want to
>>>> > do “Prime” Trek, they should have created yet another timeline, or not
>>>> > made it a Trek property at all. Simple as that.
>>>> >
>>>> The problem is they DID start a new timeline. And in the process said
>>>> "this is the only Trek now, we have destroyed the timeline of the prior
>>>> serieses and movies."
>>>>
>>>
>>> That was basically what JJ wanted. He was not amused that the CBS half
>>> of the franchise refused to give up their goodies in favor of 'only
>>> Kelvin timeline stuff'.
>>>
>> Which just shows how over-inflated Abrams' ego is.
>>
>>> And as far as I'm concerned Discovery is yet /another/ timeline.
>>>
>> I think that's official.
>>
>
> Than they really should call it that. Be honest about it.

They're too busy getting it wrong.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394260 is a reply to message #394254] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> > If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> > the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> > original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>>
>>>> They explained that.
>>>
>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>
>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>
> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces a
> holographic message when reassembled.
>
> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!

Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?

You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
wouldn't work.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394262 is a reply to message #394246] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Doc O'Leary

For your reference, records indicate that
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

> On 6/28/2017 10:51 AM, Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> And as far as I'm concerned Discovery is yet /another/ timeline.
>>
> I think that's official.

No, it was officially announced as being part of the Prime timeline.
That’s the heart of the problem, as far as I’m concerned. That’s why I
think the best solution at this point really is to sit down and retcon
the *entire* Trek omniverse down to something that makes sense as an
ongoing framework for telling good stories. Not just resolving these
newly fabricated timelines, but the Mirror Universe and all the other
references to fantastical events that we done in a throw-away fashion
at the time, but became canon when Trek became a franchise. Until they
sweat out those details, it’s ultimately pointless to call anything else
Trek.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394263 is a reply to message #394253] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 11:15 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>> For your reference, records indicate that
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>> J J Abrams basically stood over the dying body of 'Star Trek' telling
>>> fans "Hey, look at me, I'm so popular that I can do whatever I want to
>>> your beloved show!" while he gave fans the finger with one hand and
>>> masturbated with the other.
>>
>> I'm not so sure that was the message to the fans, or just to Paramount
>> (or whoever it is that owns Trek these days). It *was* a dying
>> franchise, by my measure due in large part to them cranking out crap
>> after TNG went off the air. They *did* need a change of pace, and
>> unfortunately they did it by chasing after the “action movie” audience.
>> My hope is always that a new TV series would be able to have the depth
>> needed to really re-establish the franchise with the types of fans
>> older Trek attracted, but Discovery seems to be along the same lines as
>> the other newer Trek series, being terrible and thinking they can get
>> away with it just because it’s *said* to be set in the Trek universe.
>
> That reminds me of the puchline of a joke that includes "slapping `'Trek` on
> it's title".
>
That would seem to imply that Abrams _isn't_ the punchline to that joke.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394264 is a reply to message #394254] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 11:19 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> > If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> > the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> > original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>>
>>>> They explained that.
>>>
>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>
>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>
> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces a
> holographic message when reassembled.
>
> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>
Magic DNA from only about 4 billion years ago IIRC.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394265 is a reply to message #394260] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Obveeus is currently offline  Obveeus
Messages: 31
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>
>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> > Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> >> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> >> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> >> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >
>>>> > They explained that.
>>>>
>>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>
>>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>
>> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
>> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces a
>> holographic message when reassembled.
>>
>> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>
> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?

I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
evolving independently rather than being seeded.

> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
> wouldn't work.

Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394266 is a reply to message #394257] Wed, 28 June 2017 15:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 12:11 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> In article <5953f104$0$703$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 28-6-2017 om 19:52 schreef anim8rfsk:
>>> In article <5953e9cf$0$721$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
>>> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> > Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>>> >> Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> >>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >>>> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >>>> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >>>> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >>>> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >>>> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >>>> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> >>> my head.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Nope. It's really like that.
>>>> >
>>>> > So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>>>> > alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>>>> > any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>>>> > Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
>>>> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.
>>>
>>> Flag on Rayna, as she's just a sex doll, and her builder has plenty of
>>> spares!
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, but otoh hand Spock thought it was necessary that Kirk 'forgot'
>> about that.
>
> Mind rape!
>
"Vulcan Roofie".

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394267 is a reply to message #394179] Wed, 28 June 2017 16:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Doc O'Leary

For your reference, records indicate that
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

> He didn't dare aim any of that at Paramount, they were the ones paying
> him and would have canned his ass so fast the Earth would have rotated
> backwards.

Why do you think they have any investment in the Trek universe greater
than that of making a profit? The pitch was to make a successful Trek
movie, not simply to do as he pleased. There was just enough overlap
to suck the soul out of the franchise, to whatever extent the soul of
Trek still exists post-TNG.

Likewise, I doubt Paramount really cares that much about the
anachronistic token diversity that is being pushed in Discovery.
Someone was simply able to sell them on the notion that they’ll get a
larger audience (and thus larger profits) if they hype that angle. And,
in the short term, that will probably be true. But short term planning
is *not* a wise thing to do when you have a brand that you want to build
a lasting value.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394268 is a reply to message #394263] Wed, 28 June 2017 16:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ubiquitous is currently offline  Ubiquitous
Messages: 64
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
In article <oj10m3$l5j$2@dont-email.me>, dtravel@sonic.net wrote:
> On 6/28/2017 11:15 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>> For your reference, records indicate that
>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>>>> J J Abrams basically stood over the dying body of 'Star Trek' telling
>>>> fans "Hey, look at me, I'm so popular that I can do whatever I want to
>>>> your beloved show!" while he gave fans the finger with one hand and
>>>> masturbated with the other.
>>>
>>> I'm not so sure that was the message to the fans, or just to Paramount
>>> (or whoever it is that owns Trek these days). It *was* a dying
>>> franchise, by my measure due in large part to them cranking out crap
>>> after TNG went off the air. They *did* need a change of pace, and
>>> unfortunately they did it by chasing after the "action movie" audience.
>>> My hope is always that a new TV series would be able to have the depth
>>> needed to really re-establish the franchise with the types of fans
>>> older Trek attracted, but Discovery seems to be along the same lines as
>>> the other newer Trek series, being terrible and thinking they can get
>>> away with it just because it's *said* to be set in the Trek universe.
>>
>> That reminds me of the puchline of a joke that includes "slapping `'Trek`
>> on it's title".
>>
> That would seem to imply that Abrams _isn't_ the punchline to that joke.

Oh, this predates Abrams by a decade or two.

--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Re: Trek Fashion (Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics) [message #394269 is a reply to message #394171] Wed, 28 June 2017 16:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Doc O'Leary

For your reference, records indicate that
A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:

> In article <oiuf5l$5t2$4@dont-email.me>, Doc O'Leary
> <droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com> wrote:
>
>> The issue I would take with that is that, despite there being a *lot*
>> of wardrobe changes over the years (and even just in TOS if you look
>> at how Shatner’s vanity had him in at least half a dozen different
>> shirts), I have never heard of any reasonable in-universe explanation
>> why Star Fleet keeps deciding to re-tailor their standard uniforms so
>> often. If there were ever a topic in the Star Trek universe to bring
>> in . . . . stereotypical token “diversity”, that would be it. Tell
>> *that* story; it’d be a fun watch!
>
>
> My own handwaving about that revolves around some psychologist at
> Starfleet believing that changing the outfits as often as they did kept
> morale up on long voyages. Since Trek people can produce whatever they
> want in any quantity, coming up with new uniforms every so often
> wouldn't be much of a problem. Maybe they even had Uniform of the
> Month contests.

Heh. That would be a hilarious show! Star Trek meets The Office meets
Project Runway. I would definitely watch something like that.

And even if it *is* easy in-universe to just have the replicator kick out
the new designs, it would be maddening from a human perspective to have
to constantly adjust to new rank designations and other details. I mean,
really, what’s the protocol for using that side flap for the version that
started with Khan? Just when you figure it all out, they decide to
change it all again! Yet another military pork project. :-)

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394270 is a reply to message #394255] Wed, 28 June 2017 17:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: A Friend

In article <1alxvejdr2b4z.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni>, Lance Corporal
Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:
>
>> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
>> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
>> his body.
>
> You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
> isn't normal?

Only on Thanksgiving.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394271 is a reply to message #394260] Wed, 28 June 2017 17:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ubiquitous is currently offline  Ubiquitous
Messages: 64
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Member
anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> > Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:

>>>> >> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> >> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> >> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >
>>>> > They explained that.
>>>>
>>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>
>>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>
>> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
>> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces
>> a holographic message when reassembled.
>>
>> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>
> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?

Nope, it was all the humanoids (and a way to explain why all the aliens looked
humanoid).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)

> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
> wouldn't work.

--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394276 is a reply to message #394265] Wed, 28 June 2017 17:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <oj10v6$n7c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
wrote:

> On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>
>>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> > On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> >>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> >>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> They explained that.
>>>> >
>>>> > Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> > the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> > look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>>
>>>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>>
>>> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
>>> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces
>>> a
>>> holographic message when reassembled.
>>>
>>> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>>
>> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?
>
> I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
> evolving independently rather than being seeded.

Wiki says humans, Kardashians, Klingons and Romulans are involved. It
makes sense for Kardashians to be non human.

>
>> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
>> wouldn't work.
>
> Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.

Oh, Hell, I'll pull it up on the Netflix. First time for TNG.

"The Chase" - TNG always did have uninspired titles.

How does Will sneak this guy into the observation lounge without Picard
knowing?

Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.

oh, God, no, guest star Tara King, the woman that destroyed The Avengers!

Troy is real. Not Troi, Troy.

How do you possibly know that finding an unknown treasure will take 3
months to less than a year? Wouldn't the time frame be zero to infinity?

Why is Picard talking to an Irish setter in a blue uniform?

The incompetent ship's doctor can't save Picard's old friend. Imagine
my surprise.

Troi is annoying.

Why would the Professor's diary say where to go after this, if he's
following a trail? Why are they going back to a planet the professor
had already been to?

If the Klingons can just effortlessly destroy the biosphere of a planet,
why haven't they killed everybody everywhere yet?

How can you not take a biosample from a planet with the transporter?

Why does Picard assign the incompetent doctor to design a computer
program to find the missing fragment?

Why does a lifeless planet having once had an ocean mean it once
supported life?

How did the Kardashians go to the wrong planet, figure out it was the
wrong planet, through some mysterious mechanism figure out what the
right planet is, and get there 30 seconds after the Enterprise?

How come the ancient alien is one of Odo's people?

Okay, the final answer is - there's a bunch of fragments from a bunch of
worlds, and it's totally unclear how many, much less who is included and
who is not. But apparently Kardashians, Romulans, and Earthers are
related, and presumably all humanoids in 'this part of the galaxy' are,
which doesn't explain all the humanoids over there in the Delta quadrant.

God this is a lousy show.

Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394277 is a reply to message #394267] Wed, 28 June 2017 17:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <oj120l$den$3@dont-email.me>,
Doc O'Leary <droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com> wrote:

> For your reference, records indicate that
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> He didn't dare aim any of that at Paramount, they were the ones paying
>> him and would have canned his ass so fast the Earth would have rotated
>> backwards.
>
> Why do you think they have any investment in the Trek universe greater
> than that of making a profit? The pitch was to make a successful Trek
> movie, not simply to do as he pleased. There was just enough overlap
> to suck the soul out of the franchise, to whatever extent the soul of
> Trek still exists post-TNG.
>
> Likewise, I doubt Paramount really cares that much about the
> anachronistic token diversity that is being pushed in Discovery.
> Someone was simply able to sell them on the notion that they’ll get a
> larger audience (and thus larger profits) if they hype that angle. And,
> in the short term, that will probably be true. But short term planning
> is *not* a wise thing to do when you have a brand that you want to build
> a lasting value.

Does Paramount have anything to do with STD? I thought they had the
movies, and CBASS has the TV shows.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394278 is a reply to message #394270] Wed, 28 June 2017 17:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <280620171703295315%nope@noway.com>,
A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:

> In article <1alxvejdr2b4z.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni>, Lance Corporal
> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>
>>> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
>>> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
>>> his body.
>>
>> You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
>> isn't normal?
>
> Only on Thanksgiving.

He was synthetic meatloaf made to look like Scotty's nephew ...

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394279 is a reply to message #394278] Wed, 28 June 2017 18:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: A Friend

In article <anim8rfsk-F3CA04.14255328062017@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

> In article <280620171703295315%nope@noway.com>,
> A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1alxvejdr2b4z.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni>, Lance Corporal
>> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>
>>>> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
>>>> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
>>>> his body.
>>>
>>> You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
>>> isn't normal?
>>
>> Only on Thanksgiving.
>
> He was synthetic meatloaf made to look like Scotty's nephew ...


Reminds me. Gene Roddenberry's only appearance on STAR TREK is in that
episode, "Charlie X." He supplied the voice of the cook who calls Kirk
on the bridge to say that all the synthie stuff has been replaced with
real turkeys.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394280 is a reply to message #394267] Wed, 28 June 2017 19:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 1:02 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
> For your reference, records indicate that
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> He didn't dare aim any of that at Paramount, they were the ones paying
>> him and would have canned his ass so fast the Earth would have rotated
>> backwards.
>
> Why do you think they have any investment in the Trek universe greater
> than that of making a profit? The pitch was to make a successful Trek
> movie, not simply to do as he pleased. There was just enough overlap
> to suck the soul out of the franchise, to whatever extent the soul of
> Trek still exists post-TNG.
>
> Likewise, I doubt Paramount really cares that much about the
> anachronistic token diversity that is being pushed in Discovery.
> Someone was simply able to sell them on the notion that they’ll get a
> larger audience (and thus larger profits) if they hype that angle. And,
> in the short term, that will probably be true. But short term planning
> is *not* a wise thing to do when you have a brand that you want to build
> a lasting value.
>
Let me expand a sentence in my original post. "He didn't dare aim any
of that _disrespect_ at Paramount...". The fact that Paramount was just
as willing to urinate on the fan base doesn't make what Abrams did any
better, it just helps explain _why_ he was given so much money to do so
with. And Paramount being merely indifferent means he or some other
film maker could have tried to retain the spirit of the original.

But the publicity and Abrams comments about making Trek and the
decisions that were made BY Abrams make it clear that he was the driving
force behind the yellow rain.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394281 is a reply to message #394270] Wed, 28 June 2017 20:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 2:03 PM, A Friend wrote:
> In article <1alxvejdr2b4z.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni>, Lance Corporal
> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>
>>> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
>>> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
>>> his body.
>>
>> You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
>> isn't normal?
>
> Only on Thanksgiving.
>
I am not coming to your house for the holidays.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394282 is a reply to message #394277] Wed, 28 June 2017 20:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 2:17 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> In article <oj120l$den$3@dont-email.me>,
> Doc O'Leary <droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com> wrote:
>
>> For your reference, records indicate that
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> He didn't dare aim any of that at Paramount, they were the ones paying
>>> him and would have canned his ass so fast the Earth would have rotated
>>> backwards.
>>
>> Why do you think they have any investment in the Trek universe greater
>> than that of making a profit? The pitch was to make a successful Trek
>> movie, not simply to do as he pleased. There was just enough overlap
>> to suck the soul out of the franchise, to whatever extent the soul of
>> Trek still exists post-TNG.
>>
>> Likewise, I doubt Paramount really cares that much about the
>> anachronistic token diversity that is being pushed in Discovery.
>> Someone was simply able to sell them on the notion that they’ll get a
>> larger audience (and thus larger profits) if they hype that angle. And,
>> in the short term, that will probably be true. But short term planning
>> is *not* a wise thing to do when you have a brand that you want to build
>> a lasting value.
>
> Does Paramount have anything to do with STD? I thought they had the
> movies, and CBASS has the TV shows.
>
This is all followup to my review of the first movie.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394283 is a reply to message #394278] Wed, 28 June 2017 20:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 6/28/2017 2:25 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> In article <280620171703295315%nope@noway.com>,
> A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1alxvejdr2b4z.dlg@starfist.thorsfinni>, Lance Corporal
>> Hammer Schultz <starfist@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:57:18 -0700, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>
>>>> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
>>>> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
>>>> his body.
>>>
>>> You mean bringing a dead crew member up from engineering to the bridge
>>> isn't normal?
>>
>> Only on Thanksgiving.
>
> He was synthetic meatloaf made to look like Scotty's nephew ...
>
I'm not coming to your house for the holidays either.

--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394284 is a reply to message #394277] Wed, 28 June 2017 20:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam H. Kerman is currently offline  Adam H. Kerman
Messages: 17
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com> wrote:
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>>> He didn't dare aim any of that at Paramount, they were the ones paying
>>> him and would have canned his ass so fast the Earth would have rotated
>>> backwards.

>> Why do you think they have any investment in the Trek universe greater
>> than that of making a profit? The pitch was to make a successful Trek
>> movie, not simply to do as he pleased. There was just enough overlap
>> to suck the soul out of the franchise, to whatever extent the soul of
>> Trek still exists post-TNG.

>> Likewise, I doubt Paramount really cares that much about the
>> anachronistic token diversity that is being pushed in Discovery.
>> Someone was simply able to sell them on the notion that they’ll get a
>> larger audience (and thus larger profits) if they hype that angle. And,
>> in the short term, that will probably be true. But short term planning
>> is *not* a wise thing to do when you have a brand that you want to build
>> a lasting value.

> Does Paramount have anything to do with STD? I thought they had the
> movies, and CBASS has the TV shows.

That's interesting. Paramount Television was re-instated in 2013.
The old Paramount Television (ex-DesiLu) was merged with CBS Productions
to become CBS Television Studions in 2006. All they've done that you've
heard of was production partner on Minority Report television series.
They have nothing to do with Star Trek.
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394285 is a reply to message #394257] Thu, 29 June 2017 13:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 28-6-2017 om 21:11 schreef anim8rfsk:
> In article <5953f104$0$703$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 28-6-2017 om 19:52 schreef anim8rfsk:
>>> In article <5953e9cf$0$721$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
>>> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> > Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>>> >> Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> >>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >>>> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >>>> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >>>> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >>>> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >>>> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >>>> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> >>> my head.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Nope. It's really like that.
>>>> >
>>>> > So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>>>> > alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>>>> > any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>>>> > Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
>>>> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.
>>>
>>> Flag on Rayna, as she's just a sex doll, and her builder has plenty of
>>> spares!
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, but otoh hand Spock thought it was necessary that Kirk 'forgot'
>> about that.
>
> Mind rape!
>

Basically, yeah.

--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394289 is a reply to message #394276] Thu, 29 June 2017 13:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 28-6-2017 om 23:16 schreef anim8rfsk:
> In article <oj10v6$n7c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
>>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>>> > Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for changing
>>>> >>>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within the
>>>> >>>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> They explained that.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> >> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> >> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>> >
>>>> > And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>>> > be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>>> > hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of the
>>>> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that produces
>>>> a
>>>> holographic message when reassembled.
>>>>
>>>> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>>>
>>> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?
>>
>> I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
>> evolving independently rather than being seeded.
>
> Wiki says humans, Kardashians, Klingons and Romulans are involved. It
> makes sense for Kardashians to be non human.
>
>>
>>> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
>>> wouldn't work.
>>
>> Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.
>
> Oh, Hell, I'll pull it up on the Netflix. First time for TNG.
>
> "The Chase" - TNG always did have uninspired titles.
>
> How does Will sneak this guy into the observation lounge without Picard
> knowing?
>
> Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.
>
> oh, God, no, guest star Tara King, the woman that destroyed The Avengers!
>
> Troy is real. Not Troi, Troy.
>
> How do you possibly know that finding an unknown treasure will take 3
> months to less than a year? Wouldn't the time frame be zero to infinity?

Optimism?

>
> Why is Picard talking to an Irish setter in a blue uniform?
>
> The incompetent ship's doctor can't save Picard's old friend. Imagine
> my surprise.

And ironically the old friend once WAS a doctor. :-)

>
> Troi is annoying.
>
> Why would the Professor's diary say where to go after this, if he's
> following a trail? Why are they going back to a planet the professor
> had already been to?
>
> If the Klingons can just effortlessly destroy the biosphere of a planet,
> why haven't they killed everybody everywhere yet?

Deals with the UFP?

>
> How can you not take a biosample from a planet with the transporter?
>
> Why does Picard assign the incompetent doctor to design a computer
> program to find the missing fragment?
>
> Why does a lifeless planet having once had an ocean mean it once
> supported life?
>
> How did the Kardashians go to the wrong planet, figure out it was the
> wrong planet, through some mysterious mechanism figure out what the
> right planet is, and get there 30 seconds after the Enterprise?
>
> How come the ancient alien is one of Odo's people?

Bad luck?

>
> Okay, the final answer is - there's a bunch of fragments from a bunch of
> worlds, and it's totally unclear how many, much less who is included and
> who is not. But apparently Kardashians, Romulans, and Earthers are
> related, and presumably all humanoids in 'this part of the galaxy' are,
> which doesn't explain all the humanoids over there in the Delta quadrant.
>
> God this is a lousy show.

Extremely bad science. That's not how it works.

The Preservers as an explanation was much cooler for human types across
the galaxy. Parallel evolution would be slightly more plausible.





--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394290 is a reply to message #394230] Thu, 29 June 2017 15:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jim G. is currently offline  Jim G.
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2011
Karma: 0
Member
anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/28/2017 at 11:57 AM:
> In article <ndn7lctf8t1983hieecmpsrsr3adinfpf1@jwbrown.co.uk>,
> Jerry Brown <jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:58:57 -0400, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/26/2017 11:26 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Seriously? I never knew that, and I've seen the movie many times.
>>>
>>> For whatever reason, the plot point never made it into the film.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I knew that the young Vulcan destined to never take Spock's place was
>>>> one of the victims (since Decker had to pull double-duty until Spock
>>>> showed up), but when did they tell us that the other victim was the love
>>>> of Kirk's life? And why didn't he react more strongly if that was the
>>>> case?
>>>
>>> The extended scene of Kirk walking around the ship in a daze after the
>>> transporter accident was supposed to be all about him processing the
>>> loss of his love. Maybe the director decided that it still had that
>>> dramatic effect (showing that Kirk felt intense loss at the death of a
>>> crew member) without identifying the loss as something personal to Kirk
>>> (which could diminish the idea that he feels for every member of the
>>> crew or could make him look callous for recovering in just a few minutes
>>> and getting back to work after the loss of his significant other)?
>>
>> Similarly STWoK removed references to Ensign Preston being Scotty's
>> nephew, possibly for the same reason. IIRC these scenes are available
>> as extras on recent releases.
>
> And that was just stupid. They saved about 10 seconds of screen time,
> and made you wonder why the Hell Scotty was wandering around carrying
> his body.

EXACTLY! If you're gonna cut the family ties reference, then don't make
Scotty look like an idiot. Well, frankly, he would have looked like an
idiot either way, but it would have been somewhat understandable if we'd
known about the family ties all along.

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394291 is a reply to message #394235] Thu, 29 June 2017 15:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jim G. is currently offline  Jim G.
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2011
Karma: 0
Member
Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/28/2017 at 12:39 PM:
> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>> Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> > In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> > "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >
>>>> > https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >
>>>> > Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> > *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> > Director's Edition.
>>>> >
>>>> > The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> > Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> > contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> my head.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope. It's really like that.
>>
>> So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>> alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>> any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>> Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>
> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.

The concept of "love of Kirk's life" was clearly a fluid thing. :)

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394292 is a reply to message #394242] Thu, 29 June 2017 15:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jim G. is currently offline  Jim G.
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2011
Karma: 0
Member
anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/28/2017 at 12:53 PM:
> In article <5953eb74$0$819$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 28-6-2017 om 04:07 schreef Obveeus:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/2017 4:09 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>> Obveeus sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 06:58 AM:
>>>
>>>> > For whatever reason, the plot point never made it into the film.
>>>>
>>>> Weird. If I had to guess, I'd guess that there was a problem with the
>>>> admiral actor or the admiral actress or both. I mean, if it was a time
>>>> issue, it's not as if they couldn't have shaved a bit of the pretty
>>>> CGI overkill
>>>
>>> Are you talking about the universe's largest lice infestation? (the
>>> bazillion glowing white 'dots')
>>>
>>>> All I know is that I was very disappointed with that first effort.
>>>> Very disappointed. Lots of things and people to point fingers at,
>>>> including a rusty cast that was years removed from working together as
>>>> actors. And it showed. In the end, it's why I've always been such a
>>>> fan of Nicholas Meyer for his work as director and uncredited
>>>> screenwriter on II. For my money, and despite II's own flaws, he saved
>>>> Trek.
>>>
>>> I agree that WRATH OF KHAN was a much better film...and, for that
>>> matter, the best TREK film made.
>>>
>>
>> I'm partial to Star Trek III myself. :-)
>
> Only because they kill David, but not nearly slowly or horribly enough.

:)

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394293 is a reply to message #394289] Thu, 29 June 2017 16:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <59553a8b$0$767$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:

> Op 28-6-2017 om 23:16 schreef anim8rfsk:
>> In article <oj10v6$n7c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>>> >> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>>>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for
>>>> >>>>> changing
>>>> >>>>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within
>>>> >>>>> the
>>>> >>>>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> They explained that.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> >>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> >>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>>> >> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>>> >> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>>> >
>>>> > Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of
>>>> > the
>>>> > humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that
>>>> > produces
>>>> > a
>>>> > holographic message when reassembled.
>>>> >
>>>> > I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?
>>>
>>> I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
>>> evolving independently rather than being seeded.
>>
>> Wiki says humans, Kardashians, Klingons and Romulans are involved. It
>> makes sense for Kardashians to be non human.
>>
>>>
>>>> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
>>>> wouldn't work.
>>>
>>> Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.
>>
>> Oh, Hell, I'll pull it up on the Netflix. First time for TNG.
>>
>> "The Chase" - TNG always did have uninspired titles.
>>
>> How does Will sneak this guy into the observation lounge without Picard
>> knowing?
>>
>> Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.
>>
>> oh, God, no, guest star Tara King, the woman that destroyed The Avengers!
>>
>> Troy is real. Not Troi, Troy.
>>
>> How do you possibly know that finding an unknown treasure will take 3
>> months to less than a year? Wouldn't the time frame be zero to infinity?
>
> Optimism?
>
>>
>> Why is Picard talking to an Irish setter in a blue uniform?
>>
>> The incompetent ship's doctor can't save Picard's old friend. Imagine
>> my surprise.
>
> And ironically the old friend once WAS a doctor. :-)
>
>>
>> Troi is annoying.
>>
>> Why would the Professor's diary say where to go after this, if he's
>> following a trail? Why are they going back to a planet the professor
>> had already been to?
>>
>> If the Klingons can just effortlessly destroy the biosphere of a planet,
>> why haven't they killed everybody everywhere yet?
>
> Deals with the UFP?
>
>>
>> How can you not take a biosample from a planet with the transporter?
>>
>> Why does Picard assign the incompetent doctor to design a computer
>> program to find the missing fragment?
>>
>> Why does a lifeless planet having once had an ocean mean it once
>> supported life?
>>
>> How did the Kardashians go to the wrong planet, figure out it was the
>> wrong planet, through some mysterious mechanism figure out what the
>> right planet is, and get there 30 seconds after the Enterprise?
>>
>> How come the ancient alien is one of Odo's people?
>
> Bad luck?
>
>>
>> Okay, the final answer is - there's a bunch of fragments from a bunch of
>> worlds, and it's totally unclear how many, much less who is included and
>> who is not. But apparently Kardashians, Romulans, and Earthers are
>> related, and presumably all humanoids in 'this part of the galaxy' are,
>> which doesn't explain all the humanoids over there in the Delta quadrant.
>>
>> God this is a lousy show.
>
> Extremely bad science. That's not how it works.
>
> The Preservers as an explanation was much cooler for human types across
> the galaxy. Parallel evolution would be slightly more plausible.

Yep. We already had the Preservers and Sargon's people. And whoever
the Hell built Miri's planet, which looks just like Earth, but is
*older* There was no reason for this stupid crap episode at all.

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394294 is a reply to message #394291] Fri, 30 June 2017 07:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 29-6-2017 om 21:56 schreef Jim G.:
> Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/28/2017 at 12:39 PM:
>> Op 27-6-2017 om 22:10 schreef Jim G.:
>>> Wouter Valentijn sent the following on 06/27/2017 at 12:48 PM:
>>>> Op 27-6-2017 om 05:26 schreef Jim G.:
>>>> > anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/26/2017 at 09:55 PM:
>>>> >> In article <oisgh3$k9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >> "Jim G." <jimgysin@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I'm still not getting the girlfriend/THE FLY reference...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> https://youtu.be/Ro_QpDJX-Sk
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Anybody who thinks Robert Wise was a good director should listen to
>>>> >> *any* line read in this. I got them to drop 'oh my God' from the
>>>> >> Director's Edition.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The woman in the transporter is Vicd Admiral Lori Ciana, Admiral
>>>> >> Nogura's staff whore, that he had enter a standard one year marriage
>>>> >> contract with Kirk to distract him from regaining the Enterprise.
>>>> >
>>>> > Okay, now I'm thinking that you and Obveeus are both just messing with
>>>> > my head.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Nope. It's really like that.
>>>
>>> So I've learned. Frankly, it's probably a good thing since the
>>> alternative would have been a bit much on the Kirk-as-Romeo front. In
>>> any case, I now know that Ruth wasn't the love of Kirk's life after all.
>>> Unless the love of his life changed from year to year. :)
>>>
>> Or Areel Shaw, or Janet Wallace also from the past and during TOS Edith
>> Keeler, Miramanee, Rayna Kapec.
>
> The concept of "love of Kirk's life" was clearly a fluid thing. :)
>

And there were fluids involved. Specially with Miramanee.


--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394295 is a reply to message #394293] Fri, 30 June 2017 07:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wouter Valentijn is currently offline  Wouter Valentijn
Messages: 207
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Op 29-6-2017 om 22:01 schreef anim8rfsk:
> In article <59553a8b$0$767$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>
>> Op 28-6-2017 om 23:16 schreef anim8rfsk:
>>> In article <oj10v6$n7c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> > In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
>>>> > Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>>> >>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>>>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for
>>>> >>>>>> changing
>>>> >>>>>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within
>>>> >>>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> They explained that.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality that
>>>> >>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> >>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed to
>>>> >>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>>> >>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of
>>>> >> the
>>>> >> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that
>>>> >> produces
>>>> >> a
>>>> >> holographic message when reassembled.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>>>> >
>>>> > Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?
>>>>
>>>> I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
>>>> evolving independently rather than being seeded.
>>>
>>> Wiki says humans, Kardashians, Klingons and Romulans are involved. It
>>> makes sense for Kardashians to be non human.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their portion
>>>> > wouldn't work.
>>>>
>>>> Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.
>>>
>>> Oh, Hell, I'll pull it up on the Netflix. First time for TNG.
>>>
>>> "The Chase" - TNG always did have uninspired titles.
>>>
>>> How does Will sneak this guy into the observation lounge without Picard
>>> knowing?
>>>
>>> Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.
>>>
>>> oh, God, no, guest star Tara King, the woman that destroyed The Avengers!
>>>
>>> Troy is real. Not Troi, Troy.
>>>
>>> How do you possibly know that finding an unknown treasure will take 3
>>> months to less than a year? Wouldn't the time frame be zero to infinity?
>>
>> Optimism?
>>
>>>
>>> Why is Picard talking to an Irish setter in a blue uniform?
>>>
>>> The incompetent ship's doctor can't save Picard's old friend. Imagine
>>> my surprise.
>>
>> And ironically the old friend once WAS a doctor. :-)
>>
>>>
>>> Troi is annoying.
>>>
>>> Why would the Professor's diary say where to go after this, if he's
>>> following a trail? Why are they going back to a planet the professor
>>> had already been to?
>>>
>>> If the Klingons can just effortlessly destroy the biosphere of a planet,
>>> why haven't they killed everybody everywhere yet?
>>
>> Deals with the UFP?
>>
>>>
>>> How can you not take a biosample from a planet with the transporter?
>>>
>>> Why does Picard assign the incompetent doctor to design a computer
>>> program to find the missing fragment?
>>>
>>> Why does a lifeless planet having once had an ocean mean it once
>>> supported life?
>>>
>>> How did the Kardashians go to the wrong planet, figure out it was the
>>> wrong planet, through some mysterious mechanism figure out what the
>>> right planet is, and get there 30 seconds after the Enterprise?
>>>
>>> How come the ancient alien is one of Odo's people?
>>
>> Bad luck?
>>
>>>
>>> Okay, the final answer is - there's a bunch of fragments from a bunch of
>>> worlds, and it's totally unclear how many, much less who is included and
>>> who is not. But apparently Kardashians, Romulans, and Earthers are
>>> related, and presumably all humanoids in 'this part of the galaxy' are,
>>> which doesn't explain all the humanoids over there in the Delta quadrant.
>>>
>>> God this is a lousy show.
>>
>> Extremely bad science. That's not how it works.
>>
>> The Preservers as an explanation was much cooler for human types across
>> the galaxy. Parallel evolution would be slightly more plausible.
>
> Yep. We already had the Preservers and Sargon's people. And whoever
> the Hell built Miri's planet, which looks just like Earth, but is
> *older* There was no reason for this stupid crap episode at all.
>

One of my reference books (forgot which one, maybe 'Worlds of the
Federation'?), speculated that Earth's solar system went through some
gigantic cosmic replicator (or something like that), resulting in that
Earth duplicate in 'Miri'.


--
Wouter Valentijn www.j3v.net

"Be yourself no matter what they say"

Sting ("Englishman in New York")

liam=mail
Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to show's racist critics [message #394296 is a reply to message #394295] Fri, 30 June 2017 08:27 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <59563c98$0$774$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:

> Op 29-6-2017 om 22:01 schreef anim8rfsk:
>> In article <59553a8b$0$767$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
>> Wouter Valentijn <liam@valentijn.nu> wrote:
>>
>>> Op 28-6-2017 om 23:16 schreef anim8rfsk:
>>>> In article <oj10v6$n7c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 6/28/2017 3:13 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >> In article <oj0ro2$2jg$4@dont-email.me>,
>>>> >> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> droleary@2017usenet1.subsume.com wrote:
>>>> >>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>> On 6/26/2017 3:30 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>> >>>>>> Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>>>> If you are going to rag on the show as being incompetent for
>>>> >>>>>>> changing
>>>> >>>>>>> the look of 'known things', how do you resolve the changes within
>>>> >>>>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>>> original cast era (such as the Klingon's face/head)?
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> They explained that.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Yep...with hand-wavium silliness that negated the simple reality
>>>> >>>>> that
>>>> >>>>> the Trek film modified the look of the Klingons because the original
>>>> >>>>> look was too simplistic and lame for a film.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> And yet the Vulcans got a pass. Aren't all of us humanoids supposed
>>>> >>>> to
>>>> >>>> be closely related in Trek anyway? Seems kind of racist that there
>>>> >>>> hasn't been a lot more interbreeding . . .
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Yeah, there was an ep of TNG in which it was established that most of
>>>> >>> the
>>>> >>> humanoids in this galaxy have something encoded in their DNA that
>>>> >>> produces
>>>> >>> a
>>>> >>> holographic message when reassembled.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I _HATE_ "magic DNA" eps!
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yeah, wasn't it humans, Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans?
>>>> >
>>>> > I think it was just Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons...with Humans
>>>> > evolving independently rather than being seeded.
>>>>
>>>> Wiki says humans, Kardashians, Klingons and Romulans are involved. It
>>>> makes sense for Kardashians to be non human.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >> You'd think the Klingonese DNA would be so screwed up that their
>>>> >> portion
>>>> >> wouldn't work.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well, it is now...ever since the bumpy head event.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, Hell, I'll pull it up on the Netflix. First time for TNG.
>>>>
>>>> "The Chase" - TNG always did have uninspired titles.
>>>>
>>>> How does Will sneak this guy into the observation lounge without Picard
>>>> knowing?
>>>>
>>>> Best part of TNG - the TMP theme song.
>>>>
>>>> oh, God, no, guest star Tara King, the woman that destroyed The Avengers!
>>>>
>>>> Troy is real. Not Troi, Troy.
>>>>
>>>> How do you possibly know that finding an unknown treasure will take 3
>>>> months to less than a year? Wouldn't the time frame be zero to infinity?
>>>
>>> Optimism?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why is Picard talking to an Irish setter in a blue uniform?
>>>>
>>>> The incompetent ship's doctor can't save Picard's old friend. Imagine
>>>> my surprise.
>>>
>>> And ironically the old friend once WAS a doctor. :-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Troi is annoying.
>>>>
>>>> Why would the Professor's diary say where to go after this, if he's
>>>> following a trail? Why are they going back to a planet the professor
>>>> had already been to?
>>>>
>>>> If the Klingons can just effortlessly destroy the biosphere of a planet,
>>>> why haven't they killed everybody everywhere yet?
>>>
>>> Deals with the UFP?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> How can you not take a biosample from a planet with the transporter?
>>>>
>>>> Why does Picard assign the incompetent doctor to design a computer
>>>> program to find the missing fragment?
>>>>
>>>> Why does a lifeless planet having once had an ocean mean it once
>>>> supported life?
>>>>
>>>> How did the Kardashians go to the wrong planet, figure out it was the
>>>> wrong planet, through some mysterious mechanism figure out what the
>>>> right planet is, and get there 30 seconds after the Enterprise?
>>>>
>>>> How come the ancient alien is one of Odo's people?
>>>
>>> Bad luck?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, the final answer is - there's a bunch of fragments from a bunch of
>>>> worlds, and it's totally unclear how many, much less who is included and
>>>> who is not. But apparently Kardashians, Romulans, and Earthers are
>>>> related, and presumably all humanoids in 'this part of the galaxy' are,
>>>> which doesn't explain all the humanoids over there in the Delta quadrant.
>>>>
>>>> God this is a lousy show.
>>>
>>> Extremely bad science. That's not how it works.
>>>
>>> The Preservers as an explanation was much cooler for human types across
>>> the galaxy. Parallel evolution would be slightly more plausible.
>>
>> Yep. We already had the Preservers and Sargon's people. And whoever
>> the Hell built Miri's planet, which looks just like Earth, but is
>> *older* There was no reason for this stupid crap episode at all.
>>
>
> One of my reference books (forgot which one, maybe 'Worlds of the
> Federation'?), speculated that Earth's solar system went through some
> gigantic cosmic replicator (or something like that), resulting in that
> Earth duplicate in 'Miri'.

THE SHAT got into it a little bit in his Trek books. The big problem
and inescapable conclusion is that given that the Miri world is like 100
years older than Earth, there's just no way that Earth is the original!

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Pages (8): [ «    1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8    »]  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: wevs cest o kdlr ubolhmlpc ztmtlfphk pblfez emffp
Next Topic: الدورة التدريبية العلاقات الخارجية والتعاون الدولى القاهرة – تونس للفترة من 13 الى 17 اغسطس 2017 م
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Tue Jul 14 06:39:19 EDT 2020

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01612 seconds