Star Trek

He did ONE I thought was decent, the one with Kahn fighting Spock, and Spock is about to kill him but his DNA can save the captain who had radiation or something. But the incorrigible JJerk couldn't even stick to the Kahn plan, he had the guy didn't have to breathe air all the time and all kinds of things.

So to wash the taste of that out of our mouths let's go back. Back to the episode I cannot stand. Tribbles. But it makes a point, I think, in the topic... Remember the topic ? Cooking ?

In the Tribbles one, Kirk orders a chicken sandwich and coffee and it comes out covered in tribbles. Scotty I think said they got in through the air vents and then they noted that there were such vents on that precious grain.

Now in TNG the only way would be for them to be right in the little thing dispenser for that, or be somehow encoded into the data that makes whatever it is.

(HA, unless it is like that movie The Fly, rated Z-- but remember how you liked it)

But by TNG there is no food storage, with minor exception probably by some people on there.

But best hope the thing never loses its brain. How would you program it to make broccoli ? "Eight carbons, twelve hydrogens and eleven oxygens" ? Not likely.

Remember when Seska sold the parts for a repliactor to the Kazon or someone ? It blew up in their faces. it is only compatible with OUR technology. (sounds like a new car huh)

T
 
medtran49 said:
Okay, I watched the clip of that scene. Just so you know, the "capitalist" chick is head of a criminal organization that has committed atrocities and later attacks and decimates the Star Fleet base, killing lots of innocent people in the process. He actually says it tastes "pretty good for shit." Just cause an organization has a "green" name, that being emerald in this case, doesn't mean they are good.
Click to expand...

The "criminal organization" is a species with its own federation of planets in direct competition with The Federation. The writers were pretty transparent that this new group represents America and the capitalist, it's repeated over and over again. The other versions of ST did critiques of modern day problems but this past season was not that. This was an agenda.

In an interview, the show runner said they projected the show 1000 years in the future "in order to" take apart the show and infuse their values. Season three was just awful. There's been a push in this direction for a while as Gene Rodenbury was specific that WWIII couldn't be directly talked about in specifics and that the show was to be an ideal future.

I enjoy popcorn TV and movies -- mindless entertainment -- for it's own sake, but the trope of on itty bitty human being being able to destroy the planet has always irritated me. In ST Discovery one man-baby with mommy issues destroys an entire galaxy. The show is made up from the same material in their food replicators which does not speak of an ideal future but a despotic one.
 
Termyn8or said:
If you don't like the whole show, and believe me there are things not to like, there are two very well written episodes both two parters. One is Future's End in which a guy from the 20th century gets ahold of 29th century stuff, like a time ship and uses it to advance his technology to have the biggest computer company in the world. e almost blew up the solar system.

And the best, among the finest of the Star Trek writing was Endgame. It breaks time travel rules but stays pretty much in canon.

The main guy who wrecked the place was J.J. Abrams.

T
Click to expand...

Just so we're on the same page, I HATE season three of Discovery. I loved Voyager (and Deep Space Nine and The New Generation), maybe largely for nostalgia at this point.

One of the best (and worst) things about Voyager was The Borg. Worse because what made them terrifying was that we knew so little about them, but I did love me some Borg Queen. I especially loved the movie in which she interacts with Data. Terrible movie, but I loved her character.
 
madebyyouandi said:
The "criminal organization" is a species with its own federation of planets in direct competition with The Federation. The writers were pretty transparent that this new group represents America and the capitalist, it's repeated over and over again. The other versions of ST did critiques of modern day problems but this past season was not that. This was an agenda.

In an interview, the show runner said they projected the show 1000 years in the future "in order to" take apart the show and infuse their values. Season three was just awful. There's been a push in this direction for a while as Gene Rodenbury was specific that WWIII couldn't be directly talked about in specifics and that the show was to be an ideal future.

I enjoy popcorn TV and movies -- mindless entertainment -- for it's own sake, but the trope of on itty bitty human being being able to destroy the planet has always irritated me. In ST Discovery one man-baby with mommy issues destroys an entire galaxy. The show is made up from the same material in their food replicators which does not speak of an ideal future but a despotic one.
Click to expand...
Your opinion. I have my own.
 
madebyyouandi said:
If you can't defend it or back it up, that opinion isn't worth much.
Click to expand...
I don't try and politicize or try to assign conspiracy theories to TV shows. I watch them for what they are, entertainment... if a show entertains me, I like it. If it doesn't, I don't, and I don't watch it.

I happen to think it's ridiculous when people try to politicize and/or make conspiracies out of everything, even something like a fictional TV show. To me, those people's opinions are worth absolutely nothing.
 
Last edited:
medtran49 said:
I happen to think it's ridiculous when people try to politicize and/or make conspiracies out of everything, even something like a fictional TV show. To me, those people's opinions are worth absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking a conspiracy theory. This is what the show runner decided. You'll have to go to the bookstore to read the actual article (which is what I did) but this will give you the flavor to explain why they made the choices they did. In short, to "upend" and "discuss" "current controversies" about "how we understand the past". This is a radical departure for how Star Trek was conceived by its creator.

Star Trek: Discovery boss discusses why they decided to do a 1,000-year time-jump for season 3
 
madebyyouandi said:
I'm not talking a conspiracy theory. This is what the show runner decided. You'll have to go to the bookstore to read the actual article (which is what I did) but this will give you the flavor to explain why they made the choices they did. In short, to "upend" and "discuss" "current controversies" about "how we understand the past". This is a radical departure for how Star Trek was conceived by its creator.

Star Trek: Discovery boss discusses why they decided to do a 1,000-year time-jump for season 3
Click to expand...
Uh huh, sure, but don't really care. Once again, it's entertainment. Not looking for anything deeper.
 
Last edited:
Mod.comment: I'm drawing a line under the discussion about the politics or otherwise of Star Wars. Everyone is entitled to their own views about this and I think those views have now been made clear. Nothing is to be gained from continuing this discussion.
 
Actually this other stuff about Star Trek is not really bad, but I would've known this would happen I would have put it in the Cafe.

Maybe there just isn't much to say, after all I can't think of anything tight now. I was hoping for some other input.

T
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom