Nothing to be sorry about. DS9 doesn't suck.Sorry, I was a Deep Space 9 fan.
--Patrick
Nothing to be sorry about. DS9 doesn't suck.Sorry, I was a Deep Space 9 fan.
Voyager was garbage, but Enterprise was halfway watchable sometimes.I liked both DS9 and B5. As long as you won't claim Voyager was the best Star Trek, we can be friends.
As if that's a reason to back away. Stay and fend for your conviction, you worm! RARE OR MEDIUM RARE! FOR THE HORDE!-starts to get "steak discussion" vibes-
-backs away slowly from thread-
No, no, I like my steaks bloody, but I prefer my space-station operas to be well done.As if that's a reason to back away. Stay and fend for your conviction, you worm! RARE OR MEDIUM RARE! FOR THE HORDE!
No, no, I like my steaks bloody, but I prefer my space-station operas to be well done.
Oi, I recently went through all the Star Trek on DVD. My opinions:Nothing to be sorry about. DS9 doesn't suck.
--Patrick
See, I did the same thing...Oi, I recently went through all the Star Trek on DVD. My opinions:
DS9 was nowhere near as enjoyable as I had remembered.
Voyager was better (though Kes was as irritating as ever).
TNG was still mostly good.
Enterprise's theme was just as catchy and non Star Trekky
TOS was still corny but good.
And the Search for Spock outgoods any of the TNG movies. Who'd've thunk?
One night in sickbay and your show gets cancelled. The fans are trekkies but their praise ain't free. There's fan service in every other teaser. And if you're lucky it's Tucker-free. I can see a vulcan sliding up to me.Enterprise picks up in the last few seasons. It could have been great but it suffered the same problems as Voyager in the early seasons and paid for it later.
It felt preachy to me back then. Especially near the end. It also seemed far too Troi/Worf heavy at that point, but my re-watch showed that to be only a couple episodes. Huh.TNG... doesn't hold up as well as it used to. It feels a lot more preachy than it did in the 90's and is still somewhat backwards at times.
Oh yes. The out-of-left-field 1984 reference. Well, maybe if I think of it as a parody?
I feel the Worf bits are actually really strong once the Klingons join the Alliance, as it lets us explore Klingon culture in a way we really hadn't yet... and it's not until this stuff happens and Worf is forced into Klingon politics (which, to be fair, started in TNG) that we really begin to understand that Worf is both nothing like his own kind and embodies the virtues that make the Empire worth saving. It's really some of the best stuff, if watched as a whole.It felt preachy to me back then. Especially near the end. It also seemed far too Troi/Worf heavy at that point, but my re-watch showed that to be only a couple episodes. Huh.
I also wonder if DS9 getting so Worf heavy turned me off this second time.?
Six, if you check the slo-mo HD screencaps.Five, if one of them is the inner light.
--Patrick
Halforums!How did we go from Kim Davis to Captain Picard?
From the lowest reaches of mankind to its highest pinnacle.How did we go from Kim Davis to Captain Picard?
....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh.From the lowest reaches of mankind to its highest pinnacle.
....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh.
View attachment 19276
....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh.
This guy has a serious misremembering of TOS. TOS was fun, but at what point did Kirk have "command presence". I also agree that Archer was poorly written, but not that he was poorly cast. Even he can't really badmouth Bakula who has shown he could play serious in other works.One night in sickbay and your show gets cancelled. The fans are trekkies but their praise ain't free. There's fan service in every other teaser. And if you're lucky it's Tucker-free. I can see a vulcan sliding up to me.
But Hammy Shatner is the best Shatner. I doubt he would have left as big an impression if he played it straight.For all the crap Shatner gets, he could play serious too. It was just very hard to do with the budget and such that DesiLu gave Roddenberry and company.
That's what the director of Wrath of Khan said in the commentary, yeah.Didn't a director once have to physically exhaust Shatner with take after take, to stop him from hamming it up?
She can play a Romulan who refuses to let two Remans marry.All we need now is for Kim Davis to play a part in the newest Star Trek movie and we'll bring this thread full circle.
I think, if you get down to the nitpicks, the violation is similar.Terrik and I were talking last night (and boring Dei) and an interesting point came up... Kim Davis is refusing to enforce federal law, despite it being part of her job to do so. The local government officials of the so-called "sanctuary cities" such as San Francisco are doing the same thing when it comes to immigration. Should not the same charges of contempt be applied to them?
I'd say Kim Steinle's liberty was violated in the most complete way possible as a direct result of San Francisco's sanctuary city policy.I think, if you get down to the nitpicks, the violation is similar.
However, I think that denying people something that the government has held out as a right (such as, say, free speech) is a totally different animal than allowing something that the government has held out as a violation.
While both may be contrary to federal law, the first example is far more repressive to liberty.
To spin it another way, it seems a lot more repressive for a cop to ticket you for doing 45 in a 55 than for a cop to clock you going 65 in a 55 and not pull you over--though they both seemingly involve a misapplication of the same law (but not necessarily in Texas, because of the "unsafe and imprudent speed" clause in the law)
I'd like to point out that I actually pointed out how pot legalizing states were also defying federal law during this conversation, and it was at least three tangents after this that I started getting really bored.Terrik and I were talking last night (and boring Dei) and an interesting point came up... Kim Davis is refusing to enforce federal law, despite it being part of her job to do so. The local government officials of the so-called "sanctuary cities" such as San Francisco are doing the same thing when it comes to immigration. Should not the same charges of contempt be applied to them?