|
|
Post by captainbasil on Jul 13, 2013 13:38:31 GMT -5
They had to throw TOS in with TNG together. :::Ahem:::
Over at Blastr: Trek beats out BSG, Twilight Zone for 'best sci-fi show ever'By Trent Moore Tue, 07/09/2013 - 4:34pm  The folks at TV Guide are working up a list of the 60 greatest sci-fi shows in history — and their rankings might surprise you. Okay, so you know my first question is "Where the Hell is Babylon 5 ? " Why are Trek TOS and TNG combined ? Plus all the stuff that isn't science fiction. Lost ? , Game of Thrones ? The Prisoner ? It's one of my favorite series of all time but it's an espionage show, it's not really SF. They just left out a few MINOR entries like: Outer Limits, Lost In Space (at least season one), Space 1999, and Farscape. I'm of Italian descent and we tend to get emotional so I'm trying to accept their listing of Doctor Who at # 6 ? Really ? It's older than Trek ! All I want to know is what is this dude smoking and the next time he makes a list like this he should bring enough to share with all the poor bastards who read it. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Jul 13, 2013 18:34:38 GMT -5
Well, the list is kind of laughable, Basil. For starters, as you noted, and as I also did previously, they throw TOS and TNG together in first place. That right there tells you how seriously it should be considered. And clearly they meant a list of the best sci-fi and fantasy shows, but I've seen the whole list, and "Babylon 5" is on it, except everything they include beyond the top ten is in alphabetical order, so again, how seriously do you think these guys were when they put that list together? Not very apparently.
And I've seen "The Prisoner" get thrown in with sci-fi numerous times in the past, undoubtedly because of the show's bizarre Kafkaesque ambiguity, and its supposedly more advanced futuristic technologies. I remember seeing cordless phones early in the first episode in that show.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Jul 20, 2013 11:15:10 GMT -5
I came across this by chance late last night when researching the phaser rifle that was only seen in this episode. I figured some of you might be interested in reading it, although his citing the VHS cover for this episode is certainly outdated at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbasil on Jul 21, 2013 8:48:29 GMT -5
I came across this by chance late last night when researching the phaser rifle that was only seen in this episode. I figured some of you might be interested in reading it, although his citing the VHS cover for this episode is certainly outdated at this point. I need to watch this episode again. I have not seen it in a long time. I think Into Darkness might have interested me more if the character had been Gary Mitchell. |
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on Aug 12, 2013 16:38:14 GMT -5
Last night's premiere of Breaking Bad contained a funny scene of Badger and Skinny Pete discussing Trek.
It begins with an argument about how the transporter works. Skinny Pete says that because it breaks you apart completely on the molecular level, it essentially kills you, thus the guy who beams down isn't you but just a color copy of you. Badger counters that this means there are like at least 156 Kirks over the run of the series.
The dialog then shifts to Badger pitching his own Star Trek story. Thankfully, someone on the internet has animated it and you can see it below. My only qualms about it are that tulaberries is mispronounced (it's a long U oo sound), and Skinny Pete saying it's Voyager, when it's really DS9. But hey, they're high at this point. Oh, and the mention of replicators, but the original Enterprise did have "food slots" so whatever.
Anyway, enjoy!
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Aug 13, 2013 18:16:15 GMT -5
Apparently Aaron Paul from "Breaking Bad" visited reddit a couple of hours ago for a while and I missed it.
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on Aug 13, 2013 19:10:41 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that. Aaron Paul is the coolest.
I'm amused by the fact that his dad is a retired pastor, and my dad is too. I made him a big fan of the show.
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Aug 13, 2013 20:40:30 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that. Aaron Paul is the coolest. I'm amused by the fact that his dad is a retired pastor, and my dad is too. I made him a big fan of the show. -TK He added a third edit to his initial post which wasn't there when I first posted the link to that Page a few hours ago. Apparently he actually spoke to one of the reddit people over the phone, which is pretty wild. Giancarlo Esposito did the same thing and appeared on reddit for a similar kind of session two years ago. I wonder if Vince Gilligan and/or the "Breaking Bad" producers asked these guys to do this. Whether they did or not, it's nice that they've given fans of the show and of their work direct access to them in that manner. I can't believe I just missed Paul's session by a matter of a few minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Aug 13, 2013 20:43:53 GMT -5
Last night's premiere of Breaking Bad contained a funny scene of Badger and Skinny Pete discussing Trek. I still have yet to check out how they animated this, but I can't believe someone made it a point to get that up on the web within less than a day. Unbelievable. |
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Aug 14, 2013 12:09:42 GMT -5
I got here too late. The links don't work. But I did a search and saw a video about a Trek pie eating contest ... Was that the gist of it? Oh, maybe not. The one linked is an argument about the transporter.
|
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on Aug 14, 2013 12:24:14 GMT -5
The link above doesn't work, but I saw it by typing Star Trek Breaking Bad. It's about 2 minutes or so, give or take.
I liked it.
|
|
|
|
Post by TK on Aug 14, 2013 13:59:48 GMT -5
I got here too late. The links don't work. But I did a search and saw a video about a Trek pie eating contest ... Was that the gist of it? Oh, maybe not. The one linked is an argument about the transporter. Yeah, that was it. There was discussion of the transporter in the episode, but that part wasn't animated. Sorry the link died after I posted it. I can update it later. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Sept 8, 2013 12:27:29 GMT -5
Forty-seven years today . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on Sept 8, 2013 13:49:28 GMT -5
47. A most appropriate birthday for Trek.
-TK
|
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Sept 8, 2013 17:14:51 GMT -5
Starring WILLIAM SHATNER as Capt. James T. Kirk (Earthman).
I don't recall seeing that ad, but I like the use of Earthman. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Sept 13, 2013 10:38:43 GMT -5
Dunno where to put this, Cram, but I like the new pictures. Very nice.
I don't recognize the woman with the red hat. I'll make a guess. Was she on Dr. Who?
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on Sept 13, 2013 13:53:24 GMT -5
Dunno where to put this, Cram, but I like the new pictures. Very nice.
I don't recognize the woman with the red hat. I'll make a guess. Was she on Dr. Who? That's Red from Once Upon a Time. I like the one with Spock and Carol Burnett. -TK |
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on Sept 13, 2013 21:50:22 GMT -5
I figured it was time to change. Red is one of my OUAT favorites.
I have no idea the circumstances behind Spock and Carol Burnett, but I saw that picture and had to put it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Sept 13, 2013 22:25:32 GMT -5
I have no idea the circumstances behind Spock and Carol Burnett, but I saw that picture and had to put it up.
And I can't determine which show it would've have been if it's authentic. |
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on Sept 14, 2013 8:18:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Sept 14, 2013 21:54:18 GMT -5
What fun. Something new to learn about Trek after all this time.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Sept 15, 2013 10:45:42 GMT -5
Funny thing is I was going to say her show, but I went to her IMDB Page, and there wasn't a show listed for her during that period in her credits. It's listed under 1977 when that show ended, but I didn't bother or even think to look that far up. And it didn't occur to me to Google their names together either. Whatever --and yes, I didn't know about that scene/skit either until you posted that picture here of it. |
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Sept 15, 2013 10:49:31 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that. Aaron Paul is the coolest. -TK We never even spoke about the "Babylon 5" blatant name-dropping on the show a couple of episodes back. I wonder if they were looking to appeal to sci-to fans, or because Cranston had been a guest star in one of its episodes. Perhaps it was because of both. |
|
|
|
Post by CRAMBAM on Sept 16, 2013 11:41:58 GMT -5
Too bad I couldn't find the actual skit on youtube.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Sept 28, 2013 19:47:29 GMT -5
Links to Parts 1 and 2 are available at the bottom of the article Page, should you wish to read them first.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Oct 1, 2013 13:49:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Feb 25, 2014 21:16:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by TrekBeatTK on Feb 25, 2014 22:33:13 GMT -5
In the immortal words of Smokey Robinson, "I second that emotion." Let's go through it point by point. 1. Kirk -- I agree about his exemplary Academy record (we can't forget the "walking stack of books" to which Gary Mitchell referred). New Kirk is written too far into the snarky rebel territory though that also isn't without canonical support. It's certainly how General Chang categorized him. The trouble is that new Kirk has very little of the other qualities that tempered the insubordinate Kirk. Sure, his upbringing is somewhat different since the timeline change, but he hasn't seemed to have learned anything come the second movie either. But worse than this characterization of Kirk (because there are still great Kirk moments in JJTrek, particularly during the attack on Pike in Into Darkness), the whole notion that he should be captain now MAKES NO SENSE. Kirk Prime's history gave him believable steps to command. Starfleet hierarchy is complete nonsense in JJTrek. 2. Spock -- He definitely wears his emotions too close to the surface. Spock Prime certainly had moments where he was goaded into emoting or some alian thing affected him, but he prided himself on control. In the first movie, Kirk taunting him about his mother's death worked in that tradition, but on the whole I agree he's not written correctly. The stuff with Uhura is a prime example. It's very hard to know how much is Quinto and how much is the script. 3. Bones -- The author feels EXACTLY the way I do. Urban does a great job, but he's given nothing to play beyond a caricature. 4. Rest of the crew -- I disagree a little regarding Scotty. Yes, he loves relaxing with a technical journal, but he could also drink you under the table. No reason he might not also stop into a bar. Uhura, particularly in Into Darkness, was just a nagging girlfriend stereotype with none of the composure Nichelle Nichols had. 5. Physics -- I'll allow for some wiggle room with silly physics because it is a movie and all, but yes, at least make it consistent. Yes, classic Trek at least TRIED to explain away the phony physics with inertial dampers and Heisenberg compensators. I cannot watch the Enterprise tumbling action sequence in Into Darkness because the physics MAKE NO SENSE. Either the gravity is working or it isn't; nobody should be running on the walls. And I hate that warp drive is treated too much like it's hyperspace from Star Wars. Particularly in Into Darkness where it was pictured like a literal tunnel that you could be rear-ended out of! 6. Uniforms -- The dress uniforms in Into Darkness bothered me too with how military it made them look, especially when complete with hats. It just wasn't very Roddenberry to me. I do love the George Kirk-era uniforms though that recall the ones from The Cage though updated. 7. Khan -- nothing more needs be said, as this has been discussed to death. 8. Emphasis on action -- Nothing much to say about this 9. Earth -- now this we can't just blame JJ for, as 3 of the other Trek films were also Earth-centric. Indeed, The Motion Picture was the first time the big threat was to Earth. I'll agree it's getting to be overkill, but I wouldn't say it's unique to the new Treks. TNG did it with little pink bugs and the Borg (twice), DS9 with shape shifters, and ENT did an entire season about a threat to Earth. 10. "Damon Lindelof shouldn’t be allowed near a pack of crayons never mind a film script." Agreed. -TK |
|
|
|
Post by captainbasil on Feb 26, 2014 7:44:35 GMT -5
I saw this article on Reddit and all the Abrams Fanboys were crying, but I thought the writer was pretty much right on all their observations.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Feb 26, 2014 8:38:41 GMT -5
I agree that most of his observations are pretty much on target, but where I found most disagreement with him was about Spock --mainly the Spock of the original series as opposed to Quinto's depiction of the character. I felt he understated the extent to which Spock became very depressed after believing he had killed Kirk in the arena in "Amok Time". He turned himself in for immediate arrest once back to the ship and had resigned himself to the fact that his life, as he knew it, was over and would never be the same. He was prepared to go to prison, if not worse, for having killed Kirk.
The author of that piece likewise understated the extent to which Spock was affected by the deaths of over 400 Vulcans in "The Immunity Syndrome". The character nearly had a damn stroke in that scene at the beginning of that story, and it reverberated with him throughout much of the episode.
We also knew from the original series that he had a very vulnerable, dare I say, **human** weakness when it came to his mother. This is why Orci, Kurtzman, and perhaps that dick Lindelof, were emphasizing that aspect of the Spock 2.0 character in these last two films.
And if you look at Spock's reaction to the loss of the Intrepid crew in the television series, would it really be a leap to say that Nimoy's Spock would have been more deeply and profoundly affected if he had seen his homeworld blown to smithereens? No, of course not.
Let's not also forget that we see Spock shed very real tears in TMP, and that he cries like a baby in the series as the Enterprise gets pulled in toward Psi 2000 in "The Naked Time", even though he was affected by a disease there.
Having said all that, I do believe the author's observations about Quinto's Spock as a whiny, sniveling, all-too emotional wreck are not entirely offbase. Nimoy did portray the character with a very restrained approach when it came to his emotional side most of the time. So to say that Quinto's Spock is Bizarro-Spock in contrast is not without merit either.
|
|
