Jump to content


Toggle shoutbox Squawkbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

Please don't post Youtube videos in the chat box. The forums software auto embeds them. 

@  TM2-Megatron : (14 November 2019 - 03:55 PM)

Admittedly, it's been a long time since I've been to a walk-in clinic, as I tend not to get sick (and the one time I do every 4-5 years, I prefer just riding it out at home), but the last time I went I'm pretty sure you could just show up, no appointment. It may be different in Quebec,though

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 02:36 PM)

One thing to note about health insurance in Germany is that we have a two-class system: mandatory health insurance is basically the economy class, while private health insurance is the business class.

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 02:32 PM)

My local doctor is actually a shared office with several doctors where you will get randomly assigned to one of the doctors available that day.

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 02:30 PM)

Also, employers are required by law to cover part of their employees' health insurance fees, so I only have to pay my part.

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 02:28 PM)

Basic examinations and sick notes (known as "work-inability certificates" in Germany) for the employer are covered by our health insurances by default.

@  TheMightyMol... : (14 November 2019 - 12:02 PM)

Around here, we can go to a walk-in clinic whenever, but might have to wait in the queue until there's a doctor available, which can take hours on a busy day. And then hope our insurance will cover anything.

@  wonko the sane? : (14 November 2019 - 07:38 AM)

There actually are a good number of clinics around here: but the walk ins require an appointment (what?) and are only done once a week. IF you can get an appointment, you see a doctor usually within 40 minutes, but good luck getting the appointment.

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 03:35 AM)

Depending on the day.

@  Nevermore : (14 November 2019 - 03:35 AM)

We have family doctors (called "house doctors") with regular office hours where you may need an hour or two of waiting time.

@  TM2-Megatron : (14 November 2019 - 12:50 AM)

Two weeks? That seems a little long; are there not a lot of walk-in clinics around you?

@  wonko the sane? : (13 November 2019 - 07:01 PM)

Does germany make it quick and easy to see a doctor too? Cause an emergency doctor visit can take two weeks out here, and an emergency ROOM visit can take 18-24 hours.

@  Nevermore : (13 November 2019 - 06:43 PM)

(Good thing is, under German law, if you call in sick during your vacation and see a doctor immediately, you get to keep your vacation days.)

@  Nevermore : (13 November 2019 - 06:42 PM)

Too bad. My plans wee to do two more overtime hours before having my last day of vacation for the year on Friday. Oh well.

@  Nevermore : (13 November 2019 - 06:41 PM)

So I'm currently on medical leave for a particularly stupid reason: Burned my back with a hot-water bag while sleeping last night. Though the doctor said I'm hardly the first person to have this happen to them.

@  Patch : (13 November 2019 - 06:11 PM)

Just a particularly odious example of the 90s era of depicting transgender women as either the subject of crude humor, or "Jerry Springer" material.

@  Ashley : (13 November 2019 - 04:55 PM)

I think Ace Ventura legit contributed to me spending years in self denial. I will never be ok with Jim Carrey.

@  Benbot : (13 November 2019 - 01:22 PM)

I thought he since changed his tune.

@  Tm_Silverclaw : (13 November 2019 - 12:51 PM)

Jim Carry Paladin?

@  Maximus Ambus : (13 November 2019 - 12:22 PM)

Don't doubt what he can do. Sonic the Hedgehog!

@  Paladin : (13 November 2019 - 11:51 AM)

not giving a dime to a transphobic antivaxxer.

@  wonko the sane? : (13 November 2019 - 11:25 AM)

It'll be a terrible movie if jim carrey phones it in. Otherwise it should be decent.

@  Paladin : (13 November 2019 - 10:45 AM)

sonics' still gonna be a terrible movie but at least they whined loud enough to make him look passable for a 2-minute trailer. "yay."

@  ▲ndrusi : (13 November 2019 - 10:37 AM)

But of course to annoying people there's no such thing as different decisions made for different reasons, there is only "I like it so it's right" and "I don't like it so it's wrong."

@  ▲ndrusi : (13 November 2019 - 10:35 AM)

Even if we pretend it's objective truth that they were both bad, then they were bad in very different ways.

@  ▲ndrusi : (13 November 2019 - 10:33 AM)

Sonic's previous movie design looked genuinely bad. The Transformers '07 designs just looked insufficiently like what certain loud and obnoxious parts of the fandom think Transformers are required to always look like.

@  Otaku : (13 November 2019 - 08:50 AM)

Um... Purple Monkey Dishwasher?

@  TheMightyMol... : (13 November 2019 - 08:25 AM)

Do we really need to have Every Movie Transformer Thread Ever in the Squawkbox?

@  Bass X0 : (13 November 2019 - 08:13 AM)

Sure it made money but that doesn’t mean it has appealing character designs. Lot of god awful fugly faces in the Transformers movies.

@  Otaku : (12 November 2019 - 08:25 PM)

@Liege My issue with Transformers (2007) were elements I thought were unnecessary.  I know it was supposed to just be a joke, but I didn't ever need to hear about "Sam's Happy Time". >.> Which, being in awe of the first "live action" TF-film, didn't even register until I'd already purchased and watched it on DVD a few times (after seeing it in theaters 3 times).

@  Liege : (12 November 2019 - 08:22 PM)

For all the Bayisms in the 07 movie, it was tempered by Spielberg as producer. Designs aside it was an enjoyable popcorn blockbuster about a boy and his first car who happens to be an alien from another planet. They sequels are just Bay going unchecked after he proved how much bank he could bring in.

@  TM2-Megatron : (12 November 2019 - 07:12 PM)

I didn't find the designs in the '07 movie to be that bad, personally. What got really offputting was how Cybertronians in general become such huge a-holes in the later films; the designs were very much secondary to their horrible personalities

@  Sabrblade : (12 November 2019 - 06:59 PM)

And yet, Transformers still broke the bank at the box office, opened up the brand to a whole new generation of fans, shot the brand up to mainstream appeal, and enabled all kinds of new collector-oriented lines and other avenues to come about. Not saying Sonic's movie will do the same for his series, but the 2007 TF movie certainly did more good than harm.

@  Bass X0 : (12 November 2019 - 06:09 PM)

Paramount changed Sonic due to fan backlash but refused to redo Transformers 2007 with new cgi appearances based on their classic forms everyone’s knows and loves, and can relate to. Trailer 1 Sonic is as appealing a design as 2007 Bumblebee...

@  TheMightyMol... : (12 November 2019 - 02:14 PM)

I don't. They're a pain in the ass to repair.

@  Benbot : (12 November 2019 - 12:48 PM)

I wish car companies would bring back flip up headlights

@  TheMightyMol... : (12 November 2019 - 09:07 AM)

Wear a hazmat suit. It's Walmart, they're used to weird.

@  wonko the sane? : (12 November 2019 - 07:54 AM)

2 inches of snow on the side of the house, 2 feet of snow on the deck. I hate this winter already.

@  Tm_Silverclaw : (11 November 2019 - 11:33 PM)

But that requires actually going IN walmart. ;P

@  Liege : (11 November 2019 - 11:22 PM)

Pro tip for anyone hunting the for the Walmart 35th exclusives: try the seasonal aisles rather than the toy section. I found the display with all the exclusives and a bunch of the reflector wave practically untouched amongst those novelty arcade machines and a bunch of frozen merch.

@  SHIELD Agent 47 : (11 November 2019 - 09:45 PM)

Although that does spark an idea for me. In a new continuity, Censere the Necrobot could be the herald Cityspeaker for Quintessa the Necrotitan just to play on their monikers utilizing Greek for dead, nekrós.

@  SHIELD Agent 47 : (11 November 2019 - 09:26 PM)

I hate to burst your bubble, Maximus Ambus, but 90% of things said in IDW turned out to be amnesiac half-rememberings courtesy of Adaptus or outright lies courtesy of Shockwave.

@  Jenny : (11 November 2019 - 08:54 AM)

The toy's designed to look like Wipe-Out, anyway.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (11 November 2019 - 08:14 AM)

Didn't they try to retcon that into a figure of speech because that connection went against everybody else's long-term plans?

@  Maximus Ambus : (11 November 2019 - 03:53 AM)

There's still some connection given Trypticon was created by Mortilus.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (11 November 2019 - 12:12 AM)

Yeah that toy doesn't exactly look like Necrobot.

@  Sabrblade : (10 November 2019 - 08:24 PM)

But.... it's just "Necro" not "Necrobot".

@  TheMightyMol... : (10 November 2019 - 05:10 PM)

But why does the God of Death need a giant space kaiju? Wait, never mind, answered my own question.

@  Maximus Ambus : (10 November 2019 - 02:15 PM)

Yowza I just realised Titans Trypticon comes with Necro AKA Censere AKA Mortilus.

@  Nevermore : (10 November 2019 - 01:15 PM)

I... think the best equivalent would actually be the British "There is room for improvement".

@  Nevermore : (10 November 2019 - 01:15 PM)

There's always a sense of irony to it, but what the ratio between irony (you really failed) and straightworwardness (at least you achieved something) is depends on the situation and the speaker.


Photo
- - - - -

Star Trek General Discussion


2940 replies to this topic

#21 (Deactivated) Smitty

(Deactivated) Smitty
  • Guests

Posted 27 November 2012 - 05:13 PM

QUOTE(Rust @ Nov 27 2012, 06:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(Smitty @ Nov 27 2012, 05:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(MrBlud @ Nov 27 2012, 05:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The same time they figure out Star Trek doesn't need to be an action movie.

It does if they want "Joe Sixpack" to go see and not just "Tim Trekgeek" thus allowing them to make more money.


While I do somewhat agree with you, Smitty (Can't let the movie get bogged down in its own premise, or you risk alienating the average moviegoer) I can't help but point out the most financially successful Trek movie was Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. The one that was about time travel and didn't have a main antagonist.

Personally, I wish they'd find the balance they had back in Star Trek VI. A action-thriller for the general movie crowd, but with enough character moments and in-depth look at the universe to sate the fan's appetite for geekitude. For myself personally, Star Trek VI is when the movie franchise peaked.

But by 91 Trek had almost three decades of history and following. Yeah ti's good but with this new Trek they are starting over from a failed TV show that was four years forgotten.

Edited by Smitty, 27 November 2012 - 05:47 PM.


#22 Benbot

Benbot

    What a nerd

  • Supporter
  • 5407 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Never Past Bedtime Land

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:34 PM

And now they have almost 50 years of history and following. Enterprise getting cancelled doesn't just negate that.

#23 (Deactivated) Smitty

(Deactivated) Smitty
  • Guests

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:30 PM

QUOTE(Benbot @ Nov 27 2012, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
And now they have almost 50 years of history and following. Enterprise getting cancelled doesn't just negate that.

Not to geek like you and me, but Paramount has to think about Joe Sixpack.

#24 The Doctor Who

The Doctor Who

    Mummy...?

  • Supporter
  • 18245 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, United States
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:59 PM

QUOTE(Smitty @ Nov 27 2012, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(Benbot @ Nov 27 2012, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
And now they have almost 50 years of history and following. Enterprise getting cancelled doesn't just negate that.

Not to geek like you and me, but Paramount has to think about Joe Sixpack.

Which they clearly didn't have to do for the nine movies and five television series before the reboot.

I mean, Trek can't attract a wide audience. It's not like it was world-wide popular in it's heyday and has some of the most ubiquitously iconic imagery this side of Star Wars. Obviously what's wrong with Trek has nothing to do with poor story writing, badly fleshed out characters, shallow, cynical marketing ploys and an overall dismissal of the audience's intelligence.

It's just that it doesn't pander enough to idiots.

nzo8WYb.png


#25 Rust

Rust

    Slightly Off

  • Supporter
  • 46502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nebraska
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 27 November 2012 - 08:08 PM

QUOTE(ZeroX @ Nov 27 2012, 06:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh no, the entire fleet with the exception of the Enterprise gets destroyed?! That's terri... Wait, didn't that already happen in the last movie?


No, that was only half the Fleet. They mention another one the Enterprise was supposed to rendezvous with. My guess is that'll be the one that gets destroyed this movie.

Starfleet insurance premiums have to be through the roof by this point. And don't give me any Trek claptrap about not needing money, DS9 wisely flushed that particular bout of idiocy and in one of the few things Enterprise I felt did right, made mention of the crew getting paid.

QUOTE(The Doctor Who @ Nov 27 2012, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Obviously what's wrong with Trek has nothing to do with poor story writing, badly fleshed out characters, shallow, cynical marketing ploys and an overall dismissal of the audience's intelligence.

It's just that it doesn't pander enough to idiots.


Clearly what we need are more Enterprise-esque Decontamination scenes.

#26 The Doctor Who

The Doctor Who

    Mummy...?

  • Supporter
  • 18245 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, United States
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:18 PM

QUOTE(Rust @ Nov 27 2012, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(ZeroX @ Nov 27 2012, 06:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh no, the entire fleet with the exception of the Enterprise gets destroyed?! That's terri... Wait, didn't that already happen in the last movie?


No, that was only half the Fleet. They mention another one the Enterprise was supposed to rendezvous with. My guess is that'll be the one that gets destroyed this movie.

Starfleet insurance premiums have to be through the roof by this point. And don't give me any Trek claptrap about not needing money, DS9 wisely flushed that particular bout of idiocy and in one of the few things Enterprise I felt did right, made mention of the crew getting paid.

QUOTE(The Doctor Who @ Nov 27 2012, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Obviously what's wrong with Trek has nothing to do with poor story writing, badly fleshed out characters, shallow, cynical marketing ploys and an overall dismissal of the audience's intelligence.

It's just that it doesn't pander enough to idiots.


Clearly what we need are more Enterprise-esque Decontamination scenes.

Please, Trek's been doing T&A since TOS. But I'll take Shirtless Shatner over Blank-face Bakula any day. George Takei wasn't so bad either. And don't even mention Jolene "Parasite Lips" Blalock. She can't hold a candle to even the one-off love interests that Kirk wooed in his day.

It's funny... Trek has had a long history of attractive women (and men). That really hasn't changed. It's just that, at some point, the Powers That Be ran out of good ideas. Or something. I honestly think Trek could work again if they just stopped being lazy about the stories. Give us characters who are more than just physically attractive. Give us explosions we care about. Give us some meat with those tasty taters.

And the fleet will be destroyed off screen... again. Because why have explosions when you can have a stupid parking-brake joke, right?

nzo8WYb.png


#27 Pale Rider

Pale Rider

    ...and Hell followed with him.

  • Citizen
  • 8674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:29 PM

QUOTE(The Doctor Who @ Nov 27 2012, 06:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But I'll take Shirtless Shatner over Blank-face Bakula any day.

Shirtless Shatner NOW or circa 1966?

#28 2019

2019

    Merciless.

  • Citizen
  • 42884 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Freezing Tropics

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:29 PM

Bring back Seven of Nine.

PM me if you're bored!


#29 TM2-Megatron

TM2-Megatron
  • Supporter
  • 10678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Faction::Equestrian

Posted 27 November 2012 - 10:22 PM

If T'Pol and Hoshi Sato in the decon chamber (okay, so they were with Archer and Porthos, lol) couldn't make Star Trek succeed on sex appeal, Seven of Nine certainly won't. Especially now that the Borg are toast. I honestly prefer what the books are currently doing with the Prime Universe, so unless Paramount or CBS are willing to go back and make genuine Trek again, I'd prefer they limit these watered down popcorn flicks to the Abramsverse. With interesting books being released for the Prime Universe that are slowly retconning the worst Trek had to offer from the Voyager years onwards, TNG being remastered for Blu-Ray, a Blu-Ray release of Enterprise beginning next year, old Trek soundtracks and scores being released left and right, and a potential remaster of DS9 after they're finished with TNG... let JJ do what he wants with the movies for the next few years.

Not to say I completely disliked Trek '09... I just found it to be a better Star Wars movie than a Star Trek movie. The first 9 minutes of the next one will play in front of 500 IMAX 3-D screenings of The Hobbit in two and a half weeks, though, so some of us will get a chance to see a bit of what we're in store for. And anyone who doesn't will no doubt hear all about it.

Personally, I'd rather the antagonist in this upcoming film be Gary Seven than either Mitchell or Charlie X. Now that was an interesting guy, with a potentially interesting back story.

Edited by TM2-Megatron, 27 November 2012 - 10:27 PM.


#30 ▲ndrusi

▲ndrusi

    Praise be to Stakeout.

  • Supporter
  • 26942 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:YES TOWN
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 27 November 2012 - 10:56 PM

QUOTE(Axaday @ Nov 27 2012, 05:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It is difficult to detonate a whole fleet. It could be done.

I have no idea how to detonate what they stand for. That would take a whole different bomb.

Maybe every ship's name is a different acronym and they're going to blow up all the things described by the acronyms.

QUOTE(TM2-Megatron @ Nov 27 2012, 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Personally, I'd rather the antagonist in this upcoming film be Gary Seven than either Mitchell or Charlie X. Now that was an interesting guy, with a potentially interesting back story.

Star Trek versus Doctor Who? Count me in!

#31 (Deactivated) BB Shockwave

(Deactivated) BB Shockwave
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:49 AM

QUOTE(MrBlud @ Nov 27 2012, 11:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE
It didn't work in the Xindi Arc, it's not going to work here. When are writers going to realize Earth should not be the center of the Star Trek universe?


The same time they figure out Star Trek doesn't need to be an action movie.

So.....never.

icon-screamer.gif

My petulant bitching aside, as they've gone on record saying it's not Gary Mitchell; odds are it's this Universe's version of Charlie "X" Evans.


Are the "Orczmann" duo still associated with this movie?

'Cause if they are, it'll still be "Trek Wars" and not a proper Trek movie...

QUOTE(TM2-Megatron @ Nov 28 2012, 04:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If T'Pol and Hoshi Sato in the decon chamber (okay, so they were with Archer and Porthos, lol) couldn't make Star Trek succeed on sex appeal, Seven of Nine certainly won't.


People liked Seven not just because she was smokin' hot - but because she could ACT, and because her character was interesting and well-written.

T'Pol? Not so much. Seriously, when the whole "emotion drug abuse" arc came along, I facepalmed. Then again she was not the worst things in Enterprise... (ahem... Xindi Wars... ahem... continuity)

I wish for an intelligent, cerebral Trek movie - much like some of the old ones that made sense. Sure, there needs to be action in it too, but it should NOT be all action. I kinda died a little inside when after watching the new movie with my 19-year old half-brother (to whom I often offered to lend my TNG, DS9 and Voyager DVDs), he told me afterwards: "Why didn't you tell me Star Trek was like this? I loved all the action!" ... I spent some time explaining to him how this is NOT what ST is about...


QUOTE(Rust @ Nov 27 2012, 10:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Odd, I thought Pine was fantastic as Kirk.

Though hands down, the best of the best has to be Karl Urban. I don't know what dark ritual he enacted to do it, but the man was channeling DeForest Kelly so well it got spooky.


OH yes. He probably had a mind-meld with Kelly some time ago. icon-hotrod.gif Actually, that just increased my disappointment with "Trek Wars" - all the actors, even 'Sylar' were spot-on for the roles (well, except for Simon Pegg, whoever thought he'd be a good Scotty?) - it's just that the asinine writing made them either underused or gave them totally different personalities (no, I will not forgive emotional Spock...)

QUOTE(Rust @ Nov 27 2012, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Personally, I wish they'd find the balance they had back in Star Trek VI. A action-thriller for the general movie crowd, but with enough character moments and in-depth look at the universe to sate the fan's appetite for geekitude. For myself personally, Star Trek VI is when the movie franchise peaked.


Funny, I was just about to suggest that. icon-hotrod.gif From the Kirk era movies, that one is my favourite, even though I prefer TNG to TOS. It had a nice setup, a good antagonist, gave some much-needed fleshing out to the klingon race, and even helped Kirk overcome some character flaws and evolve by the end of the movie. That, and awesome space battles.

Anyway, I'll be disappointed if the new movie doesn't have klingons in it...

Edited by BB Shockwave, 29 November 2012 - 02:04 AM.


#32 TM2-Megatron

TM2-Megatron
  • Supporter
  • 10678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Faction::Equestrian

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:05 AM

Admittedly, having the Xindi play such a major role in 22nd-century Earth history only to never be heard from again (even though all the things that took place in later time periods were made far earlier, and of course couldn't have included the Xindi) seems a bit odd, this is hardly the worst thing ever done by Trek writers. IMHO, completely ignoring Andorians and Tellarites in the 24th-century was a far greater offense; and a completely avoidable one.

Personally, putting aside their anomalous introduction, I found the Xindi fairly interesting. And the books written since do mention them on occasion, though I've yet to read any with an actual Xindi character. It's possible the Xindi aren't yet Federation members, which wouldn't be entirely surprising given what they did to Earth.

#33 Rust

Rust

    Slightly Off

  • Supporter
  • 46502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nebraska
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 29 November 2012 - 05:01 AM

QUOTE(BB Shockwave @ Nov 29 2012, 12:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
T'Pol? Not so much. Seriously, when the whole "emotion drug abuse" arc came along, I facepalmed. Then again she was not the worst things in Enterprise... (ahem... Xindi Wars... ahem... continuity)


The Xindi arc at least tried. I'd say the ultimate failing of Enterprise was the half baked Temporal Clone War. It never was well realized, and the culmination of it was Time Traveling, Space Alien Nazis. Admittedly, said Nazis vs Gangsters tickled me in the same way A Piece of the Action is a beloved TOS favorite of mine, but it was still extremely poor storytelling and an example of modern show writers coming up with a concept with no backstory or resolution to the concept.

It's especially infuriating because Enterprise is set around the time period of the Romulan War...and we only start getting a inkling of that towards the end of the show's run.

But to give Enterprise its due, its focus on Andorians and Tellarites gave both species some much needed attention.


QUOTE
Anyway, I'll be disappointed if the new movie doesn't have klingons in it...


Personally, I'm still burnt out on Klingon antagonists from the TOS era of movies. That having been said, I actually do agree with you. I think we need to "go back to formula" a bit. Starfleet on one side, Klingons on the other, with an objective both are trying to seize for themselves.

#34 NightViper

NightViper

    Ehhhhh...

  • Retired Staff
  • 42417 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Faction::RIBFIR

Posted 29 November 2012 - 07:51 AM

IF there's Klingons to be had, I'd hope they have a bit more of the TOS personality and lose some of the TNG/Movie dramatic build.

In TOS, the Klingons were just intergalactic bullies. There really wasn't anything special about them; the were the bad guys and we fight them. None of the quest for honor or warrior's duty tripe that they beat over our heads repeatedly in TNG/Movies (Seriously, I cannot watch the TNG Klingon episodes anymore. Just so incredibly eye-rolling at the OMG KLINGONS ARE SUPER-BAD-ASS!!! of it all.)

So yeah, if they return, I'd very much like to see them simplified. (And possibly, like the Romulans, lose some of the forehead ridging. Not all of it, but something a little more subtle. Like General Chang and Chancellor Gorkon from Star Trek VI.)

#35 (Deactivated) BB Shockwave

(Deactivated) BB Shockwave
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:15 AM

ToS Klingons were boring. You could switch them with ToS Romulans and would not notice the difference. The few ToS Klingons who got major roles were your basic moustache-twirling villains (and man, they DID have some large moustaches to twirl!)

TNG and later Klingons are interesting. The whole war/battle-centered culture, the "honor" system that is actually more about "who shoots first" then real honor... I loved Worf episodes, because he was like Grey Owl (Archie Belaney) - he learned what it means to be a Klingon from books and had an idealistic view of what a Klingon is. Hence when he meets with real Klingons... hilarity ensues. In D&D terms, Worf is the guy trying to play a by-the-book paladin thrown into a mix of people who play Chaotic Evil characters for giggles. icon-hotrod.gif

QUOTE(TM2-Megatron @ Nov 29 2012, 08:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Admittedly, having the Xindi play such a major role in 22nd-century Earth history only to never be heard from again (even though all the things that took place in later time periods were made far earlier, and of course couldn't have included the Xindi) seems a bit odd, this is hardly the worst thing ever done by Trek writers. IMHO, completely ignoring Andorians and Tellarites in the 24th-century was a far greater offense; and a completely avoidable one.

Personally, putting aside their anomalous introduction, I found the Xindi fairly interesting. And the books written since do mention them on occasion, though I've yet to read any with an actual Xindi character. It's possible the Xindi aren't yet Federation members, which wouldn't be entirely surprising given what they did to Earth.


Yes, but to have a whole set of species, living in a semi-separate dimension, who attacked Earth and did more damage then even Klingons or Romulans - and for them to be never mentioned again even though we learnt they will become part of the Federation in the future?

Of course, unless they planned to have something happen to the Xindi wars, like that Timey-Wimey stuff erasing it from existence. BTw, on that note... did the producers ever tell anyone WHO the mysterious shadowy time-lord-guy was supposed to be whom we have seen since Season 1?

Oh and I forgot to add my biggest gripe about Enterprise - Vulcans. When I said I wanted Trek to explore them more, I did not want them to be portrayed as your stereotypical "holier-then-thou" arrogant High Elves - for all intents and purposes, that's what they were like in Enterprise. So much, that sometimes the writers forgot Vulcans are meant to be logical, not emotional, and had some antagonistic Vulcans be actively trying to discredit Earth or just being dicks with humans for no logical reason whatsoever.

Edited by BB Shockwave, 29 November 2012 - 09:20 AM.


#36 TM2-Megatron

TM2-Megatron
  • Supporter
  • 10678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Faction::Equestrian

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:43 AM

I like to think of the varying depiction of Klingons between TOS and the TNG era as being the result of our seeing them through the perceptions of humanity in each respective time period. And I suppose it's possible via a bit of retconning that the Klingons who did appear during TOS had a bit more resentment and hostility towards humanity than might have been typical (hence their almost comically exaggerated aggression) considering they had second-class status in their own society due to their human appearance. Possibly that's why ships crewed by Klingons possessing the Augment mutation were assigned to border skirmishes in the first place, since they would have been considered more expendable.

QUOTE(BB Shockwave @ Nov 29 2012, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
BTw, on that note... did the producers ever tell anyone WHO the mysterious shadowy time-lord-guy was supposed to be whom we have seen since Season 1?


Nope. I honestly don't think even they knew, lol. But wisely, the people who came in to work on Season 4 just ignored it once they'd used the Space Nazis to bring the Temporal Cold War to a close.

QUOTE(BB Shockwave @ Nov 29 2012, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh and I forgot to add my biggest gripe about Enterprise - Vulcans. When I said I wanted Trek to explore them more, I did not want them to be portrayed as your stereotypical "holier-then-thou" arrogant High Elves - for all intents and purposes, that's what they were like in Enterprise. So much, that sometimes the writers forgot Vulcans are meant to be logical, not emotional, and had some antagonistic Vulcans be actively trying to discredit Earth or just being dicks with humans for no logical reason whatsoever.


I dunno, I think a bit of friction between two species that are so different is only natural. Both ultimately want peace, but you can see why humanity would make Vulcans nervous; even 100 years after first contact. Vulcans are so long-lived, they've forgotten what it's like to be impatient. Besides, Season 4 established that the Romulans had been interfering in Vulcan society, and it was never said how long they'd been at it. But considering they'd managed to establish a relationship with the leader of the High Command, it's probably safe to assume they'd been working at it for quite a while. It's entirely possible that the gradual shift in the High Command's policy towards a more aggressive stance was due primarily to Romulan interference. And since it's the High Command that governs all of Vulcan's official dealings with other species (with the average populace, logically, leaving it to those designated to do so), that's pretty much the only side of Vulcan we saw in the first 3 years of Enterprise.

Anyway, one of the funniest moments in Star Trek I'd ever seen was Archer trying to deal with Captain Vanik during dinner aboard Enterprise in 'Breaking the Ice'. Vulcans are good for a laugh, if nothing else.

Edited by TM2-Megatron, 29 November 2012 - 09:45 AM.


#37 2019

2019

    Merciless.

  • Citizen
  • 42884 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Freezing Tropics

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:57 AM

I wish they'd bring in some new aliens for a change.

PM me if you're bored!


#38 The Doctor Who

The Doctor Who

    Mummy...?

  • Supporter
  • 18245 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, United States
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:15 AM

QUOTE(14000 Years @ Nov 29 2012, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I wish they'd bring in some new aliens for a change.

Or maybe just use more than the main three.

I mean, we have Bolians, Tholians, KardashianCardassians, Ferengi, More races than I would care to count starting with T, and the like. Trek doesn't need NEW races, it just needs to make use of the ones it has.

Edited by The Doctor Who, 29 November 2012 - 10:17 AM.

nzo8WYb.png


#39 NICK NEMESIS

NICK NEMESIS

    Www.scatterville.com

  • Supporter
  • 17065 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:40 AM

2009 star trek was awesome. I just wish its sequel was out by now.
Http://www.scatterville.com

#40 (Deactivated) Smitty

(Deactivated) Smitty
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2012 - 07:05 PM

QUOTE(BB Shockwave @ Nov 29 2012, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh and I forgot to add my biggest gripe about Enterprise - Vulcans. When I said I wanted Trek to explore them more, I did not want them to be portrayed as your stereotypical "holier-then-thou" arrogant High Elves - for all intents and purposes, that's what they were like in Enterprise. So much, that sometimes the writers forgot Vulcans are meant to be logical, not emotional, and had some antagonistic Vulcans be actively trying to discredit Earth or just being dicks with humans for no logical reason whatsoever.

They kinda of explained that. One Vulcan said to Archer that other races were so single minded that they were easy to deal with, but Humans were so all over the place with their motivation that it almost scared them. He said that Humans reminded them of themselves. I recall he gave the impression that Vulacns wanted to guide Humans to the same path of "logic and reason" that they had found with with out all the troubles they went through.

Edited by Smitty, 29 November 2012 - 08:55 PM.




Reply to this topic



  


2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users