Star Trek: *hits blunt* The higher, the fewerrrrrr

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > Star Trek: *hits blunt* The higher, the fewerrrrrr

«‹›4 »

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Big Mean Jerk posted:

They all look so young and full of hope.

Aaaaand now BBCA is showing Nemesis. :negative:

# ¿ Sep 13, 2016 01:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 16:33

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Again, that writer's bible thing linked above is a great read, and quite on point for this.

"How do we treat females on the Enterprise? Like equals when on duty; like females otherwise."

# ¿ Sep 13, 2016 21:14

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

King Hong Kong posted:

"The Alternative Factor"

Good lord the episode titles in TOS were stupid.

# ¿ Sep 15, 2016 13:57

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

cenotaph posted:

Good article

I agree, but the author kind of overreaches right at the end:

quote:

Nimoy died last year, age 82: A long life, and prosperous. Spock will live forever, of course � and The Voyage Home is his magnum opus. Quickly, listen to the theme music for Voyage Home by Leonard Rosenman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct5-__9VTAY

Can you hear the festive melody? Aren�t those bells ringing vaguely yuletidal? There�s no obvious comparison in movie history for Star Trek: the Voyage Home, not many time travel message movies about family and friends and the fear that we�re all doomed because of sins in the past, and how that fear will always crash like waves against the shore of the eternal human hope that it�s not too late, that we can change.

Yeah no, sorry man, that theme was Rosenman recycling his failed and overblown score for the Ralph Bakshi Lord of the Rings movie several years earlier. It was a poor fit for LotR and not much better for Star Trek. And there's certainly nothing thematic to be read in its "exuberance".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0DvOMdQFBE

# ¿ Sep 17, 2016 23:36

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Cat Hatter posted:

Only if you want to go in circles, which is what happens when your center of mass is not in line with your center of thrust.

*Yes, I am aware that most Trek ships aren't balanced...probably. I have no idea how much mass certain areas have relative to each-other or how center of thrust applies to a warp field.

I mean if you want to care about it, the whole idea of the nacelles�according to that TOS writer's bible document�was that one contained matter and the other had antimatter, and they're supposed to create a reaction in the empty space between them that generates the warp field. That document even said "We want there to eventually be a cool visual effect to make this clear, but we can't do that right now because budget and 60s".

So any single-nacelle design (or really any design that puts things like the ship's hull between the nacelles) is operating without a knowledge of this bit of attempted original worldbuilding, or they've consciously decided to ignore it because too much time has passed without it being explained on-screen.

# ¿ Sep 21, 2016 14:46

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

CharlieWhiskey posted:

Warp factors were never consistent across TOS to Berman Trek. Different equations at different times, even different upper limits.

Most of the time they were ignoring distances between places anyways and just stating numbers for dramatic effect.

Something I love about that writer's bible though is that it literally says "Stardates are bullshit, just make up a number".

So then you get generations of nerds trying to construct elaborate systems of interpretation where they make sense

# ¿ Sep 21, 2016 15:31

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Big Mean Jerk posted:

I wish they'd do away with stardates altogether. They're utter nonsense, they make it impossible to tell how long events in a given episode take place, and, as you mentioned, the loving writers can't even figure them out. Just tell me what loving day and month it is. JJTrek has the right idea (stardate 2263.0123 etc) but they still use "stardate" when referring to something that's literally just the calendar date. Get rid of it!

That's a feature, though, not a bug. The source doc says the entire point of the randomized stardate system was to prevent the audience from being able to figure out when anything is happening or peg it down and find stupid timeline inconsistencies. They thought long and hard about how to solve the problem of using actual dates, and stardates is what they came up with.

Then in TNG they "fixed" it by making them map back to actual dates again.

# ¿ Sep 21, 2016 17:53

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

I thought I had heard that the extra digit was so they could map it back via a number of days to the real world calendar.

Ah

quote:

A stardate is a five-digit number followed by a decimal point and one more digit. Example: "41254.7." The first two digits of the stardate are always "41." The 4 stands for 24th century, the 1 indicates first season. The additional three leading digits will progress unevenly during the course of the season from 000 to 999. The digit following the decimal point is generally regarded as a day counter.

# ¿ Sep 21, 2016 18:57

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Big Mean Jerk posted:

That will always be my favorite aborted storyline from any tv show.

At least Chuck Tingle comes by it honestly

# ¿ Sep 28, 2016 01:05

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Baronjutter posted:

Kylo was probably the best thing in the new starwars. They could have easily made a cool badass villain, someone attractive and charismatic. But we get this emotionally crippled hosed up whiney little brat played by a good actor who manages to repulse the viewer. He's not cool, he's not a misunderstood anti-hero, he's pathetic and dangerous at the same time but he's not cool or badass, which is great.

Matt the Radar Technician is somehow the thing that makes me smile the most from the movie and everything surrounding it.

# ¿ Sep 28, 2016 22:45

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

In the future we will be challenged to foosball by orcs

TO THE DEATH

# ¿ Sep 29, 2016 14:24

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

MrL_JaKiri posted:

Nothing was intended by nature.

And, more fundamentally, you're missing the point. It wasn't to draw an equivalence between having a disability and being a women (explicitly not, in fact). The point is that having a disabled character, a gay character, a female character, a black character on a programme (or as an option in an RPG, say) is very powerful, symbolically; it tells people that "Yes, it's ok to be like you are!" (and there's been a lot of writing on this topic, unsurprisingly).

Having a character who would be just like you but actually he's been fixed to be "normal" which is why he can go on adventures does pretty much the opposite. Yes, there's a discussion to be had about normalising things like hearing aids but this is a complex issue with no one-size-fits-all solution.

Aren't there literally some episodes dealing with this exact thing? Particularly the "How dare you suggest so-and-so be fixed? He's fine the way he is!" thing, if not the "Maybe people would actually choose to be disabled in such-and-such way" thing.

# ¿ Oct 5, 2016 21:50

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

nerdman42 posted:

I've been trying to get through it and the cheese factor is a little too strong. Which is weird to me since I understand DS9 was going on around the same time and those premises are pretty similar.

I've made it to near the end of S3 and it's really reached some heights. The thing about early on is that it feels like a stage play, all scenery-chewing villains and googly eye-rolling facial expressions and low-budget cardboard sets. But fairly quickly the stuff that they realized just doesn't work gets trimmed out (like the praying mantis puppet), and the writing and the execution of the writing tightens up nicely, to the point where most of the dialogue makes me think "drat I wish they could talk like this in Star Trek".

I gotta love a Trek-mode captain who yells "up yours" at a dude

# ¿ Oct 7, 2016 06:41

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Duckbag posted:

Yeah, JMS's writing is extremely stiff, especially the dialog. I just watched the pilot because I wasn't sure I was being fair to the show and at least half of the words coming out of people's mouths were unvarnished exposition. It's a pilot, so I understand the need for setup and I'm sure it gets better, but it's really hard to relate to characters that only occasionally do anything besides announce plot points and recite backstory at each other (a problem Trek can also have). The episode also had a really pat ending with the most contrived "the B plot turned out to be key to the A plot" convergence imaginable.

That said, there are some good things going on thematically and a couple of the speeches were pretty decent. I may keep watching.

I had this exact problem with the first episode, right from the start. Smack in the cold open you get hit with "Tell them we're under attack! Tell them it's the��[DEEP BREATH]" [CUT AWAY AS THEY GET BLOWN UP] [CUT TO PLOT BASED AROUND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO IT WAS WHO ATTACKED]

which is one of my worst pet peeves about bad writers. But within half a season that kind of thing has gone completely away and everyone talks much more fluidly and naturally, interrupts each other in a realistic way, sounds like real humans talking, etc.

Also once you're past that first conversation between Garibaldi and Londo where they're basically looking into the camera and saying "OKAY LET ME TELL YOU THE VIEWER ABOUT OUR HUNDRED YEAR HISTORY TOGETHER", that kind of poo poo never happens again either. An awful lot of unforgivable crappiness gets out of the way real early on.

# ¿ Oct 7, 2016 11:54

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

It's Wallace Shawn, you can take your pick of things to laugh about

"My Dinner with Moogie"
"Not pursuing profit? Inconceivable!"

# ¿ Oct 9, 2016 18:20

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Pwnstar posted:

I'm up to Season 3 of TNG and Data keeps telling people that he doesn't have feelings or emotions but he totally does. Is this supposed to be a dramatic irony thing or just conflicting writing?

They couldn't decide whether he was Spock 2.0 or Pinocchio.

# ¿ Oct 12, 2016 04:23

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

You can't just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry! :argh:

# ¿ Oct 13, 2016 02:28

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

He is programmed in multiple techniques, including rape

# ¿ Oct 16, 2016 04:53

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De2SuYAjrdY

Also why can nobody spell MacGyver

The internet is right there

# ¿ Oct 17, 2016 14:31

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

UnquietDream posted:

Pogo has a new thing out, it may be of some interest Data & Picard

Another proud graduate of the Lambert Wilson School of Weird Mouths, I hear he roomed with Cumberbatch

# ¿ Oct 18, 2016 16:09

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

skasion posted:

A Geordie is a person from the environs of Newcastle. They have silly accents (think the fox in Plague Dogs if you ever read that) and a reputation for being drunks. I can't say this has ever occurred to me in the context of Trek, it's probably a joke on someone's part but Geordi is about as far from being a Geordie as it is possible to be.

Heh, Plague Dogs is the only reason I know about Geordies. To my shame.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2016 13:36

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

I wanna know how you give someone the name "Crusher" and still retain the ability to look at yourself in the mirror.

# ¿ Nov 4, 2016 04:24

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

In a universe where a wacky and super-specific virus affects the whole crew in a certain biological way and also manages to infect and happens to produce strikingly similar effects in the simulated personality of a computer robot,

# ¿ Nov 7, 2016 20:54

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

I've seen more awareness of Tom Lehrer crop up in the last two days than in like my entire SA career to date.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:23

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

And you know what's really frightening? If you drink enough of it, you begin to like it.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 23:28

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Cojawfee posted:

Because if you read the article you'd see it's the other way around.

quote:

It has been suggested that the distinct pyramidal shape of the bar lent its name to the Toblerone line, a series of anti-tank emplacements prevalent in Switzerland's border areas.[15] However, the Toblerone brand was trademarked in 1909, at the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in Bern.[7]

... Well. That sure cleared that up

# ¿ Nov 11, 2016 21:20

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Some of it is appreciation of performers who are LGBT-friendly (cf. Bea Arthur); some of it is just a cultural bandwagon deal, like it was always a "thing" for gay guys to like Judy Garland, which I imagine was largely "I love her because all my friends love her" which becomes self-perpetuating.

# ¿ Nov 21, 2016 16:16

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Drone posted:

Yeah, this, though it's much more than an affectation, which some could interpret your point as meaning. Especially in that era, being gay also meant that you had to accept a specific cultural lexicon (to a certain degree) in order to communicate your sexual orientation on the sly. Being a "friend of Dorothy" was a subtle (for the time) indicator to someone else that you were gay and interested in finding other gay people, in an era where you couldn't just come out and say it without facing gigantic repercussions. The necessity of remaining subtle like that has thankfully faded to basically nil in most of the Western world, but the cultural cornerstone remains to a large degree (though it is fading rapidly with the mainstreaming of public homosexuality).

But I'm not sure this is the place to talk about gay cultural cornerstones and the fading institutions of gay culture.

Let me tell you about how I carefully studied and memorized the hanky code, in the late 90s

At least it helped me get over my fear of being pointed and laughed at by guys I thought were my friends

# ¿ Nov 21, 2016 17:57

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Star Trek: I miss my old, concise nipple.

# ¿ Nov 22, 2016 22:50

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

WhiteHowler posted:

Does B5 still hold up, or does it feel dated now?

I just finished marathoning it for the first time. The things I didn't like about it were the occasional dumb or cartoonish episode, but there aren't many of those and most are clumped toward the beginning.

In terms of character writing and acting and worldbuilding and overall arc management, it makes me bite the back of my hand to think how good it is, and how much better Trek could have been if it had followed some of the same guidelines. Even DS9.

I don't care about the 90s CGI. It's derpy but we all put up with worse in all those video games we loved so much.

# ¿ Nov 26, 2016 02:10

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

"Production issues" meaning essentially that throughout the series, but especially the last two seasons, there were constant problems with a) actors having to/choosing to leave the show and JMS having to write his way around their departure and replacement as though he intended it all along; and b) never really having a good idea which season was going to be the final one until the last goddamn minute because the rinky-dink cable network that funded it couldn't make up its mind about whether there would be a Season 5 until he'd already written/shot a series finale and stuck it at the end of Season 4, leaving him to have to write a whole Season 5 of filler with some important characters missing and then stick his S4 finale at the end of S5 like he meant that to happen all along.

And that's to say nothing of his original leading man having to leave after Season 1 because he literally went crazy. JMS had to write his way out of that too.

It's legit incredible that it ended up being as good as it did with all those cards stacked against it. In 99 out of 100 alternate universes B5 fizzled out unfinished and is remembered only as a bitter joke.

E: Londo and G'Kar made it all the way to the end, and that's the backbone of the show really.

Data Graham fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Nov 26, 2016

# ¿ Nov 26, 2016 04:33

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Cat Hatter posted:

I'm kind of on the fence about that. It can feel like how nerds like to always tell writers to write women like Ripley from Alien, who is a good character; but not every female character needs to be written as a man and then played by a woman (this is partially why Ripley is better in Aliens.

Haha wait. Is this really what happened?

If true this would be a great thing for me to keep in my back pocket for the next time this guy I know pulls out Ripley as his go-to example of why "it's possible to write good leading women characters without shoving feminism in your face" or whatever.

# ¿ Nov 30, 2016 20:27

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

And ability to recite numbers to way too many decimal places.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2016 16:54

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Not seeing Landerig either

# ¿ Dec 9, 2016 06:05

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

In the future we have evolved beyond the need for legible fonts.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2016 20:32

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

How was it that the "bodily functions x holodeck" discussion ended up a thread or two ago? Something about Riker taking a holo-dump and Barclay having to clean it up

# ¿ Dec 13, 2016 05:14

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Robot amnesia works just like human amnesia, which is always depicted in a medically realistic manner

# ¿ Dec 14, 2016 19:14

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

twistedmentat posted:

I love how is how they react when they realize they are becoming attracted to each other. In the Ship, I was always confused about why the Jem'Hadar fighter didn't look anything like we've seen, all blocky, then when I saw it recently I heard dialog I must have missed before, where they say the ship had crashed upside down.

Okay, can I just say how much I love Horner's score for Wrath of Khan?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoit0OdKt-I

That little snare drum heartbeat that starts at around 0:35 comes up again in the Titanic score. It's a great way to convey a sense of breath-holding tension.

# ¿ Dec 19, 2016 04:44

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Pwnstar posted:

There was a cool Doctor moment in the infamous Threshold episode. Paris came back unconscious after the shuttle trip and the Doctor realises that he's not in a space coma, he's just asleep. Janeway asks if its possible to wake him up. The Doctor gets a serious look on his face, says he thinks so and yells "WAKE UP" as loud as possible right in Paris's face.

Hahaha I remember that now. That was funny as gently caress when I saw it first-run, largely because you're not expecting voyager to be funny at all.

# ¿ Dec 19, 2016 13:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 16:33

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Not unlike

Borg assimilation

# ¿ Dec 20, 2016 20:47

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > Star Trek: *hits blunt* The higher, the fewerrrrrr

«‹›4 »