The Star Trek III (Back from the Dead) Thread
- Thread starter CocheseUGA
- Start date
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='Clak']I never liked Babylon 5, it always felt like some B-quality show to me. Couldn't get into Farscape either.[/QUOTE]
I felt the same way on both counts.
I felt the same way on both counts.
[quote name='Clak']I never liked Babylon 5, it always felt like some B-quality show to me. Couldn't get into Farscape either.[/QUOTE]
B5 is top notch, everything they did was groundbreaking at the time (in the early 90s). If your judging it as if it came out today and comparing the visuals to something like BSG, then yeah, its going to seem that way.
But compared to TNG, DS9, or anything before HD, it stands out. The colorful, theatrical style sets instead of flat grey backgrounds, the A story/B story format, the depth of the characters and the narrative, more detailed and better thought out aliens instead of TNG style "forehead aliens", and some of the actors are phenomenal from day one.
Its as if your watching a book, it knows where its going and what it wants to do and isn't making it up day by day like Galactica. The closest comparison would be the later seasons of DS9 with the Dominion arc, but the arc is the entire run of the show (or at least the first four seasons) and done much better.
I never got into Farscape either, though. And as for Riker, his character was so boring that they wanted to kill him off and replace him with Thomas Riker.
B5 is top notch, everything they did was groundbreaking at the time (in the early 90s). If your judging it as if it came out today and comparing the visuals to something like BSG, then yeah, its going to seem that way.
But compared to TNG, DS9, or anything before HD, it stands out. The colorful, theatrical style sets instead of flat grey backgrounds, the A story/B story format, the depth of the characters and the narrative, more detailed and better thought out aliens instead of TNG style "forehead aliens", and some of the actors are phenomenal from day one.
Its as if your watching a book, it knows where its going and what it wants to do and isn't making it up day by day like Galactica. The closest comparison would be the later seasons of DS9 with the Dominion arc, but the arc is the entire run of the show (or at least the first four seasons) and done much better.
I never got into Farscape either, though. And as for Riker, his character was so boring that they wanted to kill him off and replace him with Thomas Riker.
[quote name='dafoomie']B5 is top notch, everything they did was groundbreaking at the time (in the early 90s). If your judging it as if it came out today and comparing the visuals to something like BSG, then yeah, its going to seem that way.
But compared to TNG, DS9, or anything before HD, it stands out. The colorful, theatrical style sets instead of flat grey backgrounds, the A story/B story format, the depth of the characters and the narrative, more detailed and better thought out aliens instead of TNG style "forehead aliens", and some of the actors are phenomenal from day one.
Its as if your watching a book, it knows where its going and what it wants to do and isn't making it up day by day like Galactica. The closest comparison would be the later seasons of DS9 with the Dominion arc, but the arc is the entire run of the show and done much better.
I never got into Farscape either, though. And as for Riker, his character was so boring that they wanted to kill him off and replace him with Thomas Riker.[/QUOTE]It was so much better than Star Trek that they hired Walter Koeing to be on the show...
But compared to TNG, DS9, or anything before HD, it stands out. The colorful, theatrical style sets instead of flat grey backgrounds, the A story/B story format, the depth of the characters and the narrative, more detailed and better thought out aliens instead of TNG style "forehead aliens", and some of the actors are phenomenal from day one.
Its as if your watching a book, it knows where its going and what it wants to do and isn't making it up day by day like Galactica. The closest comparison would be the later seasons of DS9 with the Dominion arc, but the arc is the entire run of the show and done much better.
I never got into Farscape either, though. And as for Riker, his character was so boring that they wanted to kill him off and replace him with Thomas Riker.[/QUOTE]It was so much better than Star Trek that they hired Walter Koeing to be on the show...
[quote name='Clak']It was so much better than Star Trek that they hired Walter Koeing to be on the show...[/QUOTE]
Yeah, as a recurring bad guy. He was very good on B5, best acting of his career.
And it wasn't a TNT show until season 5. They were first run syndication on broadcast TV, just like TNG and DS9.
[/QUOTE]Yeah, as a recurring bad guy. He was very good on B5, best acting of his career.
And it wasn't a TNT show until season 5. They were first run syndication on broadcast TV, just like TNG and DS9.
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='BattleChicken']Data copied her brain to his own so her experiences didn't die with Lahl; Data regarded her as his child, which showed a heck of a lot of attachment to me. He was willing to end his career to prevent Lahl from being taken away from him - he was willing to give up everything for her well being.
Also, Data's mom asks him about Lahl in a much later episode, so it DID come up again in the series and I believe he says something to the effect of "I may try to make another android again some day".
That episode had a lot more depth than you two saw in it.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. The episode's big problem is that it's a single episode. Like "Lessons" (aka Picard gets a girlfriend), it suffers because this big experience is shoved into a tiny episode and then mostly unreferenced. I think it would have been devastating had Lahl hung around for, say, six episodes or a season.
It's one of the artifacts of TNG's struggle between self-contained episodes and longer-term storytelling. Trek has never been comfortable with it, and DS9 got a lot of grief for it. I think it's one of the things that held Trek back. Apart from not having really big storylines, it inhibited character growth and change.
TNG eventually overcame it and created ongoing storylines, character arcs for even minor characters and unlikely ones (like Ensign Ro or Troi's pursuit of command), and episodes whose sole purpose was to deal with previous threads.
Tying some of the conversations here together, Babylon 5's strength was its narrative, which helped all the characters develop and change. Like TNG, the first season seemed to founder because it seemed like mostly self-contained shows (some of which were dogs) and the bigger picture wasn't able to be seen. Once B5 hit its second season, it rapidly became amazing.
I still remember seeing "The Coming of Shadows" the first time. It brought plotlines, themes, and characters together in a way that Trek has never been able to do. Shows often make a big deal about episodes that "change everything" or are somehow "shocking". That episode really did it, but you could see all the details and elements that went into it because they were there all along. And they continued to build.
If you at all liked DS9, you owe it to yourself to get over whatever reservations you have about the SFX or the hairstyles (which were intentionally ridiculous) and treat yourself to what is probably the best filmed episodic science fiction.
The only other show that comes close in my mind is BSG, and it's well known that they made a good deal of it up as they went along. B5 was planned from start to end and it shows. It shows in the stories and the characters. It shows in the way that the characters all have somewhere to go and how their choices have consequences.
I shall always have a fondness for TNG and DS9. But I would have loved for them to have been able to have the same persistence of vision and long-term planning that made B5 grow from a schlocky-looking Trek wannabe into a jewel of surprising depth.
Also, Data's mom asks him about Lahl in a much later episode, so it DID come up again in the series and I believe he says something to the effect of "I may try to make another android again some day".
That episode had a lot more depth than you two saw in it.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. The episode's big problem is that it's a single episode. Like "Lessons" (aka Picard gets a girlfriend), it suffers because this big experience is shoved into a tiny episode and then mostly unreferenced. I think it would have been devastating had Lahl hung around for, say, six episodes or a season.
It's one of the artifacts of TNG's struggle between self-contained episodes and longer-term storytelling. Trek has never been comfortable with it, and DS9 got a lot of grief for it. I think it's one of the things that held Trek back. Apart from not having really big storylines, it inhibited character growth and change.
TNG eventually overcame it and created ongoing storylines, character arcs for even minor characters and unlikely ones (like Ensign Ro or Troi's pursuit of command), and episodes whose sole purpose was to deal with previous threads.
Tying some of the conversations here together, Babylon 5's strength was its narrative, which helped all the characters develop and change. Like TNG, the first season seemed to founder because it seemed like mostly self-contained shows (some of which were dogs) and the bigger picture wasn't able to be seen. Once B5 hit its second season, it rapidly became amazing.
I still remember seeing "The Coming of Shadows" the first time. It brought plotlines, themes, and characters together in a way that Trek has never been able to do. Shows often make a big deal about episodes that "change everything" or are somehow "shocking". That episode really did it, but you could see all the details and elements that went into it because they were there all along. And they continued to build.
If you at all liked DS9, you owe it to yourself to get over whatever reservations you have about the SFX or the hairstyles (which were intentionally ridiculous) and treat yourself to what is probably the best filmed episodic science fiction.
The only other show that comes close in my mind is BSG, and it's well known that they made a good deal of it up as they went along. B5 was planned from start to end and it shows. It shows in the stories and the characters. It shows in the way that the characters all have somewhere to go and how their choices have consequences.
I shall always have a fondness for TNG and DS9. But I would have loved for them to have been able to have the same persistence of vision and long-term planning that made B5 grow from a schlocky-looking Trek wannabe into a jewel of surprising depth.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
I never got into B5 either.
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='blandstalker']I agree with you. The episode's big problem is that it's a single episode. Like "Lessons" (aka Picard gets a girlfriend), it suffers because this big experience is shoved into a tiny episode and then mostly unreferenced. I think it would have been devastating had Lahl hung around for, say, six episodes or a season.
It's one of the artifacts of TNG's struggle between self-contained episodes and longer-term storytelling. Trek has never been comfortable with it, and DS9 got a lot of grief for it. I think it's one of the things that held Trek back. Apart from not having really big storylines, it inhibited character growth and change.
TNG eventually overcame it and created ongoing storylines, character arcs for even minor characters and unlikely ones (like Ensign Ro or Troi's pursuit of command), and episodes whose sole purpose was to deal with previous threads.
Tying some of the conversations here together, Babylon 5's strength was its narrative, which helped all the characters develop and change. Like TNG, the first season seemed to founder because it seemed like mostly self-contained shows (some of which were dogs) and the bigger picture wasn't able to be seen. Once B5 hit its second season, it rapidly became amazing.
I still remember seeing "The Coming of Shadows" the first time. It brought plotlines, themes, and characters together in a way that Trek has never been able to do. Shows often make a big deal about episodes that "change everything" or are somehow "shocking". That episode really did it, but you could see all the details and elements that went into it because they were there all along. And they continued to build.
If you at all liked DS9, you owe it to yourself to get over whatever reservations you have about the SFX or the hairstyles (which were intentionally ridiculous) and treat yourself to what is probably the best filmed episodic science fiction.
The only other show that comes close in my mind is BSG, and it's well known that they made a good deal of it up as they went along. B5 was planned from start to end and it shows. It shows in the stories and the characters. It shows in the way that the characters all have somewhere to go and how their choices have consequences.
I shall always have a fondness for TNG and DS9. But I would have loved for them to have been able to have the same persistence of vision and long-term planning that made B5 grow from a schlocky-looking Trek wannabe into a jewel of surprising depth.[/QUOTE]
You make a lot of solid, supported points that I in no way disagree with; However, because Star Trek's earlier goals were different - they WANTED to make every episode self-contained - it isn't entirely fair to judge it against another show with different goals and production philosophy by those same standards. It almost - I repeat "almost" - seemed like you were mad at Star Trek for being an apple because you like oranges better. The shows were different styles by design. I think in the pre Tevo era, the self-contained style might have had some serious advantages for a televised program but it absolutely meant that character development was limited - in that you're 100% correct. The things I tended to like best about Star Trek were the places where I saw something from the past coming back... like Picard and the Borg... and how those past events changed the characters in the 'present'.
I think Doctor Who (2005) is perhaps my favorite science fiction show of all time because of the combination of one-shot episodes that stand on their own and a greater narrative that takes the entire season (or longer), so I certainly see the value in both sides of the coin.
In any event, your passion for B5 is going to make me give the series another shot. It's been many, many years since I watched it and i was a kid at the time - I may appreciate it better this time around.
It's one of the artifacts of TNG's struggle between self-contained episodes and longer-term storytelling. Trek has never been comfortable with it, and DS9 got a lot of grief for it. I think it's one of the things that held Trek back. Apart from not having really big storylines, it inhibited character growth and change.
TNG eventually overcame it and created ongoing storylines, character arcs for even minor characters and unlikely ones (like Ensign Ro or Troi's pursuit of command), and episodes whose sole purpose was to deal with previous threads.
Tying some of the conversations here together, Babylon 5's strength was its narrative, which helped all the characters develop and change. Like TNG, the first season seemed to founder because it seemed like mostly self-contained shows (some of which were dogs) and the bigger picture wasn't able to be seen. Once B5 hit its second season, it rapidly became amazing.
I still remember seeing "The Coming of Shadows" the first time. It brought plotlines, themes, and characters together in a way that Trek has never been able to do. Shows often make a big deal about episodes that "change everything" or are somehow "shocking". That episode really did it, but you could see all the details and elements that went into it because they were there all along. And they continued to build.
If you at all liked DS9, you owe it to yourself to get over whatever reservations you have about the SFX or the hairstyles (which were intentionally ridiculous) and treat yourself to what is probably the best filmed episodic science fiction.
The only other show that comes close in my mind is BSG, and it's well known that they made a good deal of it up as they went along. B5 was planned from start to end and it shows. It shows in the stories and the characters. It shows in the way that the characters all have somewhere to go and how their choices have consequences.
I shall always have a fondness for TNG and DS9. But I would have loved for them to have been able to have the same persistence of vision and long-term planning that made B5 grow from a schlocky-looking Trek wannabe into a jewel of surprising depth.[/QUOTE]
You make a lot of solid, supported points that I in no way disagree with; However, because Star Trek's earlier goals were different - they WANTED to make every episode self-contained - it isn't entirely fair to judge it against another show with different goals and production philosophy by those same standards. It almost - I repeat "almost" - seemed like you were mad at Star Trek for being an apple because you like oranges better. The shows were different styles by design. I think in the pre Tevo era, the self-contained style might have had some serious advantages for a televised program but it absolutely meant that character development was limited - in that you're 100% correct. The things I tended to like best about Star Trek were the places where I saw something from the past coming back... like Picard and the Borg... and how those past events changed the characters in the 'present'.
I think Doctor Who (2005) is perhaps my favorite science fiction show of all time because of the combination of one-shot episodes that stand on their own and a greater narrative that takes the entire season (or longer), so I certainly see the value in both sides of the coin.
In any event, your passion for B5 is going to make me give the series another shot. It's been many, many years since I watched it and i was a kid at the time - I may appreciate it better this time around.
[quote name='shrike4242']There's more than one episode viewing guide on how to watch the show for best continuity, which includes the movie-length shows they did. [/QUOTE]
I would definitely watch the remastered version of the pilot, "The Gathering" first, but I would NOT watch the prequel "In the Beginning" (which is on the same DVD) until after Season 4. It would completely spoil the first 4 seasons of the show.
The show creator's intended chronological order is here, I would go with that order except for In the Beginning, which is listed first because its a prequel. I also would watch the movie River of Souls before Objects in Motion (which was when it aired) instead of breaking up the final 3 episodes with it. If you must watch the Legend of the Rangers movie I wouldn't do it until after you finish the series, and probably after Crusade if you have any interest in watching that.
http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/master/eplist.html
I would definitely watch the remastered version of the pilot, "The Gathering" first, but I would NOT watch the prequel "In the Beginning" (which is on the same DVD) until after Season 4. It would completely spoil the first 4 seasons of the show.
The show creator's intended chronological order is here, I would go with that order except for In the Beginning, which is listed first because its a prequel. I also would watch the movie River of Souls before Objects in Motion (which was when it aired) instead of breaking up the final 3 episodes with it. If you must watch the Legend of the Rangers movie I wouldn't do it until after you finish the series, and probably after Crusade if you have any interest in watching that.
http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/master/eplist.html
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
Star Trek is now on Amazon, if you didn't know already.
CaptainKirk
Banned
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Star Trek is now on Amazon, if you didn't know already.[/QUOTE]
For free if you got Prime
For free if you got Prime
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='BattleChicken']You make a lot of solid, supported points that I in no way disagree with; However, because Star Trek's earlier goals were different - they WANTED to make every episode self-contained - it isn't entirely fair to judge it against another show with different goals and production philosophy by those same standards. It almost - I repeat "almost" - seemed like you were mad at Star Trek for being an apple because you like oranges better. [/QUOTE]
I thought about this for awhile. I was ready to deny it, but there's more than some truth to it. However, I'd definitely clarify by saying I'm not mad at TNG or DS9. As you rightly note, the goals were different then. Star Trek only had the original series as a model, and turning TNG (whose success was not guaranteed) into something completely different would not have been a good idea.
And yet, I'm at least a little mad -- or perhaps disappointed is the better word -- that B5 did what Star Trek should have done, if not with TNG and DS9, then after. Trek is routinely thought of as groundbreaking and has a legion of devoted fans. Yet Trek the franchise became so timid. I fully believe that if Trek had done arc stories, character conflict, and B5-level plotting, the audience would have supported it.
In TNG it was a struggle. It's well known that Roddenberry did not want conflict among the main characters. I am mad at Roddenberry a little for wanting to get rid of character conflict or place it all in exterior/guest characters or aliens (like the Ferengi). I get what he's saying about Trek being a utopia, but the idea of characters who never disagree or humans without issues make them static. I think this was - and is - Trek's biggest problem. I hope we never see another Trek character who does nothing but their job function or spout technobabble for seven years, yet there's at least one in every show (except, perhaps, DS9).
But TNG had to figure itself out as it went along, and it did pretty well. As I said, it did try to add in ongoing character development and continuing storylines and episodes. With TNG, it's more of a sense of what could have been had more long term planning -- mostly for the characters -- had been made part of the mix. I would have loved to see something more (or, well, anything!) for characters like Geordi or Dr. Crusher.
I'm maybe a little mad/disappointed at DS9 for squandering the opportunities they had. DS9 was also figuring itself out. Whether by its own design or interference from above, DS9 tried to be both a self-contained and an arc show. That doesn't exactly work. I find the seventh season of DS9 more frustrating than anything else. With just a little work here and there, the season could have been outstanding and all the characters could have been utilized really well. Instead, it was kinda all over the place and doesn't seem all that well thought out. Had they spent less time with the holodeck, Vulcan baseball, and all the stuff with Ezri
, they could have given some of the characters
better sendoffs. It was good. It should have been great.
And yet, I don't want it to sound like I'm some sour guy who hates Trek. Continuing storylines wouldn't make "Cause and Effect", "The Visitor", "Yesterday's Enterprise", "Remember Me", "Duet", "Darmok" or dozens of other self-contained (or mostly self-contained) episodes any better. When Trek does its thing well, it does it really well, and they stand the test of time.
I am mad [no qualifier there] at Voyager and Enterprise. I won't unleash another tirade on Voyager except to say it did almost everything wrong, the complete opposite of DS9 and TNG, and it shouldn't have had to figure itself out like the other two. It made a conscious decision, more than the other two, to be self-contained to the point of lunacy. Like a ship that got too close to a black hole, Enterprise was not able to escape Voyager's destructive legacy.
I thought about this for awhile. I was ready to deny it, but there's more than some truth to it. However, I'd definitely clarify by saying I'm not mad at TNG or DS9. As you rightly note, the goals were different then. Star Trek only had the original series as a model, and turning TNG (whose success was not guaranteed) into something completely different would not have been a good idea.
And yet, I'm at least a little mad -- or perhaps disappointed is the better word -- that B5 did what Star Trek should have done, if not with TNG and DS9, then after. Trek is routinely thought of as groundbreaking and has a legion of devoted fans. Yet Trek the franchise became so timid. I fully believe that if Trek had done arc stories, character conflict, and B5-level plotting, the audience would have supported it.
In TNG it was a struggle. It's well known that Roddenberry did not want conflict among the main characters. I am mad at Roddenberry a little for wanting to get rid of character conflict or place it all in exterior/guest characters or aliens (like the Ferengi). I get what he's saying about Trek being a utopia, but the idea of characters who never disagree or humans without issues make them static. I think this was - and is - Trek's biggest problem. I hope we never see another Trek character who does nothing but their job function or spout technobabble for seven years, yet there's at least one in every show (except, perhaps, DS9).
But TNG had to figure itself out as it went along, and it did pretty well. As I said, it did try to add in ongoing character development and continuing storylines and episodes. With TNG, it's more of a sense of what could have been had more long term planning -- mostly for the characters -- had been made part of the mix. I would have loved to see something more (or, well, anything!) for characters like Geordi or Dr. Crusher.
I'm maybe a little mad/disappointed at DS9 for squandering the opportunities they had. DS9 was also figuring itself out. Whether by its own design or interference from above, DS9 tried to be both a self-contained and an arc show. That doesn't exactly work. I find the seventh season of DS9 more frustrating than anything else. With just a little work here and there, the season could have been outstanding and all the characters could have been utilized really well. Instead, it was kinda all over the place and doesn't seem all that well thought out. Had they spent less time with the holodeck, Vulcan baseball, and all the stuff with Ezri
that went nowhere
especially Kira, Dukat, Winn, Garak, and Jake
And yet, I don't want it to sound like I'm some sour guy who hates Trek. Continuing storylines wouldn't make "Cause and Effect", "The Visitor", "Yesterday's Enterprise", "Remember Me", "Duet", "Darmok" or dozens of other self-contained (or mostly self-contained) episodes any better. When Trek does its thing well, it does it really well, and they stand the test of time.
I am mad [no qualifier there] at Voyager and Enterprise. I won't unleash another tirade on Voyager except to say it did almost everything wrong, the complete opposite of DS9 and TNG, and it shouldn't have had to figure itself out like the other two. It made a conscious decision, more than the other two, to be self-contained to the point of lunacy. Like a ship that got too close to a black hole, Enterprise was not able to escape Voyager's destructive legacy.
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='ITDEFX']Does anyone know what was the point of having the Borg Children on Voyager?[/QUOTE]
Four possibilities:
1) Who knows. It's not like the Voyager writers ever thought about the future or continuity or consequences.
2) They were there to further develop Seven's humanity. The charitable view would be that through them she would be learning how to relate to others and recovering her lost childhood. The cynical view would be that she assimilated Janeway's mother complex, taking yet another character's traits, stories, and dialogue. Or perhaps it was yet another one of the show's mixed gender messages -- that you can't be a complete female without being a mother.
3) They were supposed to be used more in the seventh season, but for whatever reason got cut. Maybe the storylines changed or got axed. Maybe the actors were unavailable. Or maybe there were stories planned for Naomi Wildman and she was unavailable, requiring a substitute.
4) If adding one Borg was good, adding a bunch must be better! Sadly, because this is the simplest and most ludicrous answer (beating out #1 by a hair), it's probably closest to the truth.
On balance -- mostly because of Icheb -- they were probably a good idea. But their short, mostly pointless stay, is kinda WTF, moreso when you remember the Borg baby who was never mentioned or seen again.
Four possibilities:
1) Who knows. It's not like the Voyager writers ever thought about the future or continuity or consequences.
2) They were there to further develop Seven's humanity. The charitable view would be that through them she would be learning how to relate to others and recovering her lost childhood. The cynical view would be that she assimilated Janeway's mother complex, taking yet another character's traits, stories, and dialogue. Or perhaps it was yet another one of the show's mixed gender messages -- that you can't be a complete female without being a mother.
3) They were supposed to be used more in the seventh season, but for whatever reason got cut. Maybe the storylines changed or got axed. Maybe the actors were unavailable. Or maybe there were stories planned for Naomi Wildman and she was unavailable, requiring a substitute.
4) If adding one Borg was good, adding a bunch must be better! Sadly, because this is the simplest and most ludicrous answer (beating out #1 by a hair), it's probably closest to the truth.
On balance -- mostly because of Icheb -- they were probably a good idea. But their short, mostly pointless stay, is kinda WTF, moreso when you remember the Borg baby who was never mentioned or seen again.
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='blandstalker']I am mad [no qualifier there] at Voyager and Enterprise. I won't unleash another tirade on Voyager except to say it did almost everything wrong, the complete opposite of DS9 and TNG, and it shouldn't have had to figure itself out like the other two. It made a conscious decision, more than the other two, to be self-contained to the point of lunacy. Like a ship that got too close to a black hole, Enterprise was not able to escape Voyager's destructive legacy.[/QUOTE]
Right on both counts. Not even Scott Bakula could save Enterprise.
Right on both counts. Not even Scott Bakula could save Enterprise.
[quote name='blandstalker']Four possibilities:
1) Who knows. It's not like the Voyager writers ever thought about the future or continuity or consequences.
2) They were there to further develop Seven's humanity. The charitable view would be that through them she would be learning how to relate to others and recovering her lost childhood. The cynical view would be that she assimilated Janeway's mother complex, taking yet another character's traits, stories, and dialogue. Or perhaps it was yet another one of the show's mixed gender messages -- that you can't be a complete female without being a mother.
3) They were supposed to be used more in the seventh season, but for whatever reason got cut. Maybe the storylines changed or got axed. Maybe the actors were unavailable. Or maybe there were stories planned for Naomi Wildman and she was unavailable, requiring a substitute.
4) If adding one Borg was good, adding a bunch must be better! Sadly, because this is the simplest and most ludicrous answer (beating out #1 by a hair), it's probably closest to the truth.
On balance -- mostly because of Icheb -- they were probably a good idea. But their short, mostly pointless stay, is kinda WTF, moreso when you remember the Borg baby who was never mentioned or seen again.[/QUOTE]
You bring up some good points. The little girl and the twins freaked me out. Naomi Wildman almost got annoying.
The borg baby...argh...
don't mention that again... I was waiting for the thing to inject Janeway with Nanoprobes
side stepping to TNG...
In the Episode Cause and Effect....
Do you think it Riker was over doing it when he said "Decompress main shuttle bay..." hoping that the decompression would push the ship out of the way... wouldn't it just push the ship forward?
The tractor beam *should* have worked as it should have stopped the ship... if anything I think WORF
ed that up by mis-firing it.
1) Who knows. It's not like the Voyager writers ever thought about the future or continuity or consequences.
2) They were there to further develop Seven's humanity. The charitable view would be that through them she would be learning how to relate to others and recovering her lost childhood. The cynical view would be that she assimilated Janeway's mother complex, taking yet another character's traits, stories, and dialogue. Or perhaps it was yet another one of the show's mixed gender messages -- that you can't be a complete female without being a mother.
3) They were supposed to be used more in the seventh season, but for whatever reason got cut. Maybe the storylines changed or got axed. Maybe the actors were unavailable. Or maybe there were stories planned for Naomi Wildman and she was unavailable, requiring a substitute.
4) If adding one Borg was good, adding a bunch must be better! Sadly, because this is the simplest and most ludicrous answer (beating out #1 by a hair), it's probably closest to the truth.
On balance -- mostly because of Icheb -- they were probably a good idea. But their short, mostly pointless stay, is kinda WTF, moreso when you remember the Borg baby who was never mentioned or seen again.[/QUOTE]
You bring up some good points. The little girl and the twins freaked me out. Naomi Wildman almost got annoying.
The borg baby...argh...
don't mention that again... I was waiting for the thing to inject Janeway with Nanoprobes
side stepping to TNG...
In the Episode Cause and Effect....
Do you think it Riker was over doing it when he said "Decompress main shuttle bay..." hoping that the decompression would push the ship out of the way... wouldn't it just push the ship forward?
The tractor beam *should* have worked as it should have stopped the ship... if anything I think WORF
ed that up by mis-firing it.
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='ITDEFX']You bring up some good points. The little girl and the twins freaked me out. Naomi Wildman almost got annoying.
The borg baby...argh...
don't mention that again... I was waiting for the thing to inject Janeway with Nanoprobes
side stepping to TNG...
In the Episode Cause and Effect....
Do you think it Riker was over doing it when he said "Decompress main shuttle bay..." hoping that the decompression would push the ship out of the way... wouldn't it just push the ship forward?
The tractor beam *should* have worked as it should have stopped the ship... if anything I think WORFed that up by mis-firing it.[/QUOTE]
I think in that episode, they had limited power - that's the plot device they used.
So long as the main shuttle bay was on the right side of the ship the physics of how the ship moved matched what happened in the show - the decompression force would have propelled the ship in the opposite direction.
I don't care how big your shuttle bay is, though... with the stuff the tractor beams in Star Trek can do, tractor beam > explosive decompression force.
The borg baby...argh...
don't mention that again... I was waiting for the thing to inject Janeway with Nanoprobes
side stepping to TNG...
In the Episode Cause and Effect....
Do you think it Riker was over doing it when he said "Decompress main shuttle bay..." hoping that the decompression would push the ship out of the way... wouldn't it just push the ship forward?
The tractor beam *should* have worked as it should have stopped the ship... if anything I think WORF
ed that up by mis-firing it.[/QUOTE]I think in that episode, they had limited power - that's the plot device they used.
So long as the main shuttle bay was on the right side of the ship the physics of how the ship moved matched what happened in the show - the decompression force would have propelled the ship in the opposite direction.
I don't care how big your shuttle bay is, though... with the stuff the tractor beams in Star Trek can do, tractor beam > explosive decompression force.
[quote name='BattleChicken']I think in that episode, they had limited power - that's the plot device they used.
So long as the main shuttle bay was on the right side of the ship the physics of how the ship moved matched what happened in the show - the decompression force would have propelled the ship in the opposite direction.
I don't care how big your shuttle bay is, though... with the stuff the tractor beams in Star Trek can do, tractor beam > explosive decompression force.[/QUOTE]
Yea but there was not real way to predict that the ED (Explosive Decompression) would cause the ship to move in the right direction.
So long as the main shuttle bay was on the right side of the ship the physics of how the ship moved matched what happened in the show - the decompression force would have propelled the ship in the opposite direction.
I don't care how big your shuttle bay is, though... with the stuff the tractor beams in Star Trek can do, tractor beam > explosive decompression force.[/QUOTE]
Yea but there was not real way to predict that the ED (Explosive Decompression) would cause the ship to move in the right direction.
[quote name='ITDEFX']Yea but there was not real way to predict that the ED (Explosive Decompression) would cause the ship to move in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
They've calculated time travel sometimes, I think they could've figured out a little explosive decompression.
They've calculated time travel sometimes, I think they could've figured out a little explosive decompression.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
I think it's a 53 minute serial and you're overthinking it.
It should've been more than that. The concept they started out with was "Hill Street Blues in Space", then after no network would commit to a full season it had to be self contained because of syndication. Then Rodenberry decided he wanted to forbid interpersonal conflict and greed and power as motivations for humans, and there's season 1. Nevermind that some of the best moments in Star Trek were the arguments between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, and examining the flaws of humanity.
TNG might not have made it to season 2 if not for Patrick Stewart, he was the only thing that show had going for a while.
TNG might not have made it to season 2 if not for Patrick Stewart, he was the only thing that show had going for a while.
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='dafoomie']TNG might not have made it to season 2 if not for Patrick Stewart, he was the only thing that show had going for a while.[/QUOTE]
True enough.. Levar Burton had a bit part season 1 and Data wasn't an interesting character until season 3ish. By the end of the show, I think Frakes also developed Riker into a more interesting character.
But yeah.. Season 1? There is no question that Patrick Stewart made the show.
[quote name='ITDEFX']Yea but there was not real way to predict that the ED (Explosive Decompression) would cause the ship to move in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
In that scenario, the ship would be in a complete vacuum stopped. There would be a known PSI of air in the shuttle bay, a known total volume of the shuttle bay, and a known size and shape of the hole the air would escape from. Because the hole was of an inflexible, unchanging shape - the shuttle bay door - the direction of the force would be easily calculated from available information; The escaping air would create thrust. Newton's Third law (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) would mean that thrust would result in movement in the opposite direction, (because the ship had no other forces acting on it - it's in a vacuum). Finally, because there is very little in space that would slow an object down (friction from atmosphere, gravitational pull, etc) the ship wouldn't just stop moving after the force was applied - it would keep moving in the direction of the force, so every second after decompression would result in the ship being that much further away from the object coming towards it.
So, yeah... it would absolutely be possible to calculate direction and velocity, ITDEFX.
True enough.. Levar Burton had a bit part season 1 and Data wasn't an interesting character until season 3ish. By the end of the show, I think Frakes also developed Riker into a more interesting character.
But yeah.. Season 1? There is no question that Patrick Stewart made the show.
[quote name='ITDEFX']Yea but there was not real way to predict that the ED (Explosive Decompression) would cause the ship to move in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
In that scenario, the ship would be in a complete vacuum stopped. There would be a known PSI of air in the shuttle bay, a known total volume of the shuttle bay, and a known size and shape of the hole the air would escape from. Because the hole was of an inflexible, unchanging shape - the shuttle bay door - the direction of the force would be easily calculated from available information; The escaping air would create thrust. Newton's Third law (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) would mean that thrust would result in movement in the opposite direction, (because the ship had no other forces acting on it - it's in a vacuum). Finally, because there is very little in space that would slow an object down (friction from atmosphere, gravitational pull, etc) the ship wouldn't just stop moving after the force was applied - it would keep moving in the direction of the force, so every second after decompression would result in the ship being that much further away from the object coming towards it.
So, yeah... it would absolutely be possible to calculate direction and velocity, ITDEFX.
Last edited by a moderator:
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='blandstalker']I agree with you. The episode's big problem is that it's a single episode. Like "Lessons" (aka Picard gets a girlfriend), it suffers because this big experience is shoved into a tiny episode and then mostly unreferenced. I think it would have been devastating had Lahl hung around for, say, six episodes or a season.[/QUOTE]
I think the character sucked. The name says it all - LOL
I like the data vs evil data plotline better - while cheesy it was also hella entertaining.
I think the character sucked. The name says it all - LOL
I like the data vs evil data plotline better - while cheesy it was also hella entertaining.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
Farscape is ing awesome. The aliens are way more actually alien then any other TV show. The show also gives a much better sense of the vastness of space and always raises interesting existential questions. The Chriton guy was a good actor but his character always bordered on annoying. I always found the peacekeeper chick attractive, she has quite a honker but for some reason she's still hot.
ing awesome. The aliens are way more actually alien then any other TV show. The show also gives a much better sense of the vastness of space and always raises interesting existential questions. The Chriton guy was a good actor but his character always bordered on annoying. I always found the peacekeeper chick attractive, she has quite a honker but for some reason she's still hot.I'm almost done with Season 1. It is definitely getting better towards the end but still not great. Last night's episode was the one with the weapons manufacturers on the planet that got wiped out. Man the sets were so bad. They did a saucer separation though - it had been referenced before but I think this was the first episode where they actually showed it. Some random engineering dude was giving Geordi a hard time when he took command of the ship. I'd give that episode a C- even though it was one of the better ones I've seen so far in the first season.
CaptainKirk
Banned
[quote name='Javery']I'm almost done with Season 1. It is definitely getting better towards the end but still not great. Last night's episode was the one with the weapons manufacturers on the planet that got wiped out. Man the sets were so bad. They did a saucer separation though - it had been referenced before but I think this was the first episode where they actually showed it. Some random engineering dude was giving Geordi a hard time when he took command of the ship. I'd give that episode a C- even though it was one of the better ones I've seen so far in the first season.[/QUOTE]
referenced before?
they did it in the first episode
referenced before?
they did it in the first episode
Yeah, the first episode with super-old Bones had a separation. I forgot about that.
TNG was a weird show. The show ran 7 (?) years, but it feels like there's decades between the first and last season. Those S1 episodes feel 20 years older than even the S3+ episodes. Young Riker really seemed so much younger early on, he was so dishy there for a season or two.
EDIT: Also, the separation was a weird idea, it always looked lousy. I wonder why they insisted on that.
And is S1 the only season where Troi gets the thigh-high boots and skirts? Hubba hubba. I'm curious, but not curious enough to actually go back and watch it to find out.
TNG was a weird show. The show ran 7 (?) years, but it feels like there's decades between the first and last season. Those S1 episodes feel 20 years older than even the S3+ episodes. Young Riker really seemed so much younger early on, he was so dishy there for a season or two.
EDIT: Also, the separation was a weird idea, it always looked lousy. I wonder why they insisted on that.
And is S1 the only season where Troi gets the thigh-high boots and skirts? Hubba hubba. I'm curious, but not curious enough to actually go back and watch it to find out.
[quote name='BattleChicken']
In that scenario, the ship would be in a complete vacuum stopped. There would be a known PSI of air in the shuttle bay, a known total volume of the shuttle bay, and a known size and shape of the hole the air would escape from. Because the hole was of an inflexible, unchanging shape - the shuttle bay door - the direction of the force would be easily calculated from available information; The escaping air would create thrust. Newton's Third law (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) would mean that thrust would result in movement in the opposite direction, (because the ship had no other forces acting on it - it's in a vacuum). Finally, because there is very little in space that would slow an object down (friction from atmosphere, gravitational pull, etc) the ship wouldn't just stop moving after the force was applied - it would keep moving in the direction of the force, so every second after decompression would result in the ship being that much further away from the object coming towards it.
So, yeah... it would absolutely be possible to calculate direction and velocity, ITDEFX.[/QUOTE]
Oh I agree it would be possible but a few things
-is the shuttle bay usually empty at red alert? (or was everyone lucky enough to be in that launch control area at the time?)
-it was either a visual effects glitch, but didn't Worf activate the TB at the time Data realized it's not going to work?
-Honestly I think that the TB in conjunction with the shuttle bay blow out is what saved the ship. Maybe that will be corrected in the remastered TNG?
[quote name='Javery']I'm almost done with Season 1. It is definitely getting better towards the end but still not great. Last night's episode was the one with the weapons manufacturers on the planet that got wiped out. Man the sets were so bad. They did a saucer separation though - it had been referenced before but I think this was the first episode where they actually showed it. Some random engineering dude was giving Geordi a hard time when he took command of the ship. I'd give that episode a C- even though it was one of the better ones I've seen so far in the first season.[/QUOTE]
You know to this day I wondered how Geordi got such a big promotion like that. What he did in that episode is enough to earn him a commendation, but a promotion to chief engineer of a galaxy class starship??! it was a good movie but his promotion was questionable.
In that scenario, the ship would be in a complete vacuum stopped. There would be a known PSI of air in the shuttle bay, a known total volume of the shuttle bay, and a known size and shape of the hole the air would escape from. Because the hole was of an inflexible, unchanging shape - the shuttle bay door - the direction of the force would be easily calculated from available information; The escaping air would create thrust. Newton's Third law (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) would mean that thrust would result in movement in the opposite direction, (because the ship had no other forces acting on it - it's in a vacuum). Finally, because there is very little in space that would slow an object down (friction from atmosphere, gravitational pull, etc) the ship wouldn't just stop moving after the force was applied - it would keep moving in the direction of the force, so every second after decompression would result in the ship being that much further away from the object coming towards it.
So, yeah... it would absolutely be possible to calculate direction and velocity, ITDEFX.[/QUOTE]
Oh I agree it would be possible but a few things
-is the shuttle bay usually empty at red alert? (or was everyone lucky enough to be in that launch control area at the time?)
-it was either a visual effects glitch, but didn't Worf activate the TB at the time Data realized it's not going to work?
-Honestly I think that the TB in conjunction with the shuttle bay blow out is what saved the ship. Maybe that will be corrected in the remastered TNG?
[quote name='Javery']I'm almost done with Season 1. It is definitely getting better towards the end but still not great. Last night's episode was the one with the weapons manufacturers on the planet that got wiped out. Man the sets were so bad. They did a saucer separation though - it had been referenced before but I think this was the first episode where they actually showed it. Some random engineering dude was giving Geordi a hard time when he took command of the ship. I'd give that episode a C- even though it was one of the better ones I've seen so far in the first season.[/QUOTE]
You know to this day I wondered how Geordi got such a big promotion like that. What he did in that episode is enough to earn him a commendation, but a promotion to chief engineer of a galaxy class starship??! it was a good movie but his promotion was questionable.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
I hate Pulaski as well.
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I hate Pulaski as well.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Clak']I hated her too, but you have to watch the first Sherlock Holmes episode, which unfortunately has her in it.[/QUOTE]
Honestly it would have been nice to have some sort of final follow up to Moriarty's character. Heck who knows if the program box survived the Enterprise D crash or got transferred to Jupiter Station?
[quote name='Javery']He got a promotion as a result of his actions in that episode? Weird. I'm debating on whether to just skip Season 2 or maybe cherry pick the better episodes instead of watching them all... any thoughts? I really don't like Dr. Pulaski.[/QUOTE]
Honestly he was a bit too cocky in season 1. I think there was one episode where he was screwing around down in engineering in season 1 but that was it. I think there was like 2-3 Chief Engineer's during the first season before LaForge took over.
O'brien also got a strange promotion as well to transporter chief as well during season 2. I am really glad they moved him to DS9.
Pulaski was there to act like "bones" from TOS. Why did McFaddin leave again?
Cherry Pick season 2..you will thank me later.
[quote name='Clak']I hated her too, but you have to watch the first Sherlock Holmes episode, which unfortunately has her in it.[/QUOTE]
Honestly it would have been nice to have some sort of final follow up to Moriarty's character. Heck who knows if the program box survived the Enterprise D crash or got transferred to Jupiter Station?
[quote name='Javery']He got a promotion as a result of his actions in that episode? Weird. I'm debating on whether to just skip Season 2 or maybe cherry pick the better episodes instead of watching them all... any thoughts? I really don't like Dr. Pulaski.[/QUOTE]
Honestly he was a bit too cocky in season 1. I think there was one episode where he was screwing around down in engineering in season 1 but that was it. I think there was like 2-3 Chief Engineer's during the first season before LaForge took over.
O'brien also got a strange promotion as well to transporter chief as well during season 2. I am really glad they moved him to DS9.
Pulaski was there to act like "bones" from TOS. Why did McFaddin leave again?
Cherry Pick season 2..you will thank me later.
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought it was because they wanted to go in a different direction with the character but when Pulaski was such a failure they asked her to come back but she needed convincing by Patrick Stewart.
She is the center of one of my favorite episodes when the universe is collapsing around her... although she is the center of one of the worst episodes when the ghost was living in her grandmother's candle. Ugh.
She is the center of one of my favorite episodes when the universe is collapsing around her... although she is the center of one of the worst episodes when the ghost was living in her grandmother's candle. Ugh.
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='Clak']I hated her too, but you have to watch the first Sherlock Holmes episode, which unfortunately has her in it.[/QUOTE]
Pulaski got just about everyone to dislike her by hating on Data. Being a warmed over clone of Bones didn't help.
But she grew on me. Absolutely the wrong way to go about character conflict, but if you can get over disliking her for being abrasive and for replacing Crusher and for being a transparent attempt at imitating an established character, I thought she did fine. That's a lot of ifs, though.
I would definitely cherry-pick. There are a lot of meh episodes, but there are some very good ones as well. I'd watch:
Elementary Dear Data
A Matter of Honor
The Measure of a Man
Contagion
Pen Pals
Q-Who
The Emissary
Peak Performance
Peak Performance's payoff is actually better if you dislike Pulaski.
Then there are a few that you may want to either watch or avoid:
Time Squared -- has some great stuff but also some things that just don't hold up well. Watch it if you are fond of trippy/time-oriented episodes.
Samaritan Snare -- Watch only if you don't know who the Pakleds are. Then, after about five minutes of them, turn it off.
Manhunt -- Lwaxana Troi. That will either have you watching it or running in horror
Pulaski got just about everyone to dislike her by hating on Data. Being a warmed over clone of Bones didn't help.
But she grew on me. Absolutely the wrong way to go about character conflict, but if you can get over disliking her for being abrasive and for replacing Crusher and for being a transparent attempt at imitating an established character, I thought she did fine. That's a lot of ifs, though.
I would definitely cherry-pick. There are a lot of meh episodes, but there are some very good ones as well. I'd watch:
Elementary Dear Data
A Matter of Honor
The Measure of a Man
Contagion
Pen Pals
Q-Who
The Emissary
Peak Performance
Peak Performance's payoff is actually better if you dislike Pulaski.
Then there are a few that you may want to either watch or avoid:
Time Squared -- has some great stuff but also some things that just don't hold up well. Watch it if you are fond of trippy/time-oriented episodes.
Samaritan Snare -- Watch only if you don't know who the Pakleds are. Then, after about five minutes of them, turn it off.
Manhunt -- Lwaxana Troi. That will either have you watching it or running in horror
blandstalker
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
[quote name='Javery']I thought it was because they wanted to go in a different direction with the character but when Pulaski was such a failure they asked her to come back but she needed convincing by Patrick Stewart.[/quote]
I never knew, but I did some googling. Looks like writer/producer Maurice Hurley didn't like her and convinced Roddenberry to fire her. Most sources say it had to do with her acting or the way the character was developing. [Personally, I'd blame the writers for that: Gates did the best anyone could hope for with the thin material she was given]
[quote name='Javery']She is the center of one of my favorite episodes when the universe is collapsing around her... although she is the center of one of the worst episodes when the ghost was living in her grandmother's candle. Ugh.[/QUOTE]
Ooh, totally agree with you on both counts. Remember Me is one of my favorites: great concept, terrific vehicle for the character, good use of Wesley. That other one is a total waste.
I never knew, but I did some googling. Looks like writer/producer Maurice Hurley didn't like her and convinced Roddenberry to fire her. Most sources say it had to do with her acting or the way the character was developing. [Personally, I'd blame the writers for that: Gates did the best anyone could hope for with the thin material she was given]
[quote name='Javery']She is the center of one of my favorite episodes when the universe is collapsing around her... although she is the center of one of the worst episodes when the ghost was living in her grandmother's candle. Ugh.[/QUOTE]
Ooh, totally agree with you on both counts. Remember Me is one of my favorites: great concept, terrific vehicle for the character, good use of Wesley. That other one is a total waste.
I'm sure watching full seasons episode-by-episode would sour me on the idea, but when TNG was being shown regularly on SciFi long ago and I was reviewing a lot of stuff I hadn't seen since first broadcast, some of the really bad episodes bordered on "so-bad-it's-good" territory. That includes Lwaxana stuff.
I've been watching TNG very selectively on Netflix, but I'll cop to seeking out the S2 episode where she's looking to ride Picard like a ten speed. That'd be "Manhunt," I guess (ty, blandstalker). I don't know what it is about Lwaxana eps, I know they're bad, I think what makes them enjoyable is that maybe the cast knew they were bad, too, and so things feel a little looser.
I've been watching TNG very selectively on Netflix, but I'll cop to seeking out the S2 episode where she's looking to ride Picard like a ten speed. That'd be "Manhunt," I guess (ty, blandstalker). I don't know what it is about Lwaxana eps, I know they're bad, I think what makes them enjoyable is that maybe the cast knew they were bad, too, and so things feel a little looser.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
My all time worst episode is the one where they're doing the trials for conspiracy.
Soing whiny.
Edit: The Drumhead.ing hate it.
So
ing whiny.Edit: The Drumhead.
ing hate it.[quote name='CocheseUGA']My all time worst episode is the one where they're doing the trials for conspiracy.
Soing whiny.
Edit: The Drumhead.ing hate it.[/QUOTE]
I thought that was one of TNG's best.
I remembered being surprised when Picard was the one taking the stand...wow Picard really managed to turn the tables on that one.
So
ing whiny.Edit: The Drumhead.
ing hate it.[/QUOTE]I thought that was one of TNG's best.
I remembered being surprised when Picard was the one taking the stand...wow Picard really managed to turn the tables on that one.
Yeah, Drumhead is one a lot of people claim as a favorite.
I'm not so big on it because it's yet another crazy admiral, and the threat to the Enterprise crew is hard to take seriously. We know that they're not going to upset the equilibrium on the Enterprise, so it's just a matter of waiting for Picard or something/someone else to save the day.
That's not to say a lot of ST isn't like that (all episodes return to where they started). I'm not complaining at all, it can make for entertaining TV, it's just not the stuff of my favorites.
I'm not so big on it because it's yet another crazy admiral, and the threat to the Enterprise crew is hard to take seriously. We know that they're not going to upset the equilibrium on the Enterprise, so it's just a matter of waiting for Picard or something/someone else to save the day.
That's not to say a lot of ST isn't like that (all episodes return to where they started). I'm not complaining at all, it can make for entertaining TV, it's just not the stuff of my favorites.
BattleChicken
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
The only episode I skipped on my recent rewatch of TNG was the one where there was an alien ship with a bunch of injured aliens (who didn't trust anyone on the Enterprise) and one of the aliens was this blonde human teen.
The aliens/human kid all started to do this high pitched sound at multiple times in the episode and I just could not stand to watch it. It was just terrible.
The aliens/human kid all started to do this high pitched sound at multiple times in the episode and I just could not stand to watch it. It was just terrible.
[quote name='BattleChicken']The only episode I skipped on my recent rewatch of TNG was the one where there was an alien ship with a bunch of injured aliens (who didn't trust anyone on the Enterprise) and one of the aliens was this blonde human teen.
The aliens/human kid all started to do this high pitched sound at multiple times in the episode and I just could not stand to watch it. It was just terrible.[/QUOTE]
oh the episode in season 4? where the kid is raised by his attackers that killed his parents.... Kind of bastard move of Picard to play that tennis game with him in the room that makes the blaster sounds... lol.
yea hate that episode.
The aliens/human kid all started to do this high pitched sound at multiple times in the episode and I just could not stand to watch it. It was just terrible.[/QUOTE]
oh the episode in season 4? where the kid is raised by his attackers that killed his parents.... Kind of bastard move of Picard to play that tennis game with him in the room that makes the blaster sounds... lol.
yea hate that episode.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
Jean Simmons voice just grated on me the entire episode. I think she did it rather well, but I couldn't stand it.
bread's done