Sign In

chyron8472

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
23-Aug-2010
Last activity
19-Jan-2018
Posts
2330

Post History

Post
#1112207
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Mike O said:

dahmage said:

In all fairness, the only Trek she enjoys is/are the new movies.

IV seems to be the one with the most mainstream, non-Trek fan appeal

I’d consider myself a casual more mainstream Trek fan and I really dislike IV.

I think the point is that most everyone, even non Trek fans, as least know about The Voyage Home in so much as many simply know it as “the one with the whales.” Therefore it is likely the most mainstream-ly accepted of the Prime Kirk movies.

Of the Prime movies, IV is my favorite, then VI, then II. The big detractor for Wrath of Khan for me was the bug-in-the-ear scene. I really… that scene makes me cringe and I usually skip it. I’ve seen Wrath of Khan umpteenkabillion times, but that scene alone makes it not my favorite.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1112182
Topic
Video Game Thread
Time

RayRogers said:

Recommended Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings games for PS2, GameCube, GBA, DS, PC?

Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, for GameCube and PS2.

It’s an RPG centering around another party (not the Fellowship) in Middle Earth whose adventures bring them across the path or in contact with the Fellowship itself. The idea for the game was that the Fellowship’s actions are fixed exactly to what they do in the books or movies, so exploration in an RPG as themselves would be limited. However, following someone who is following the Fellowship allows you to go where they went but you can also wander off on a tangent if you want.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1112180
Topic
Video Game Thread
Time

doubleofive said:

RayRogers said:

Harry Potter literally didn’t exist for me when I was 10 in 1989.

Good… for… you?

Yeah, I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean. I was also 10 in 1989, but I don’t see what being 10 has to do with reading Harry Potter.

Post
#1112178
Topic
Banned members
Time

One wonders why off-topic wasn’t moderated until recently.

Post
#1111507
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

For me it’s the adventure. I like lighthearted adventure. And space. And interesting characters.

The humor is crass, but that’s… that’s Seth MacFarlane. I just really do hope it doesn’t devolve from crudely obnoxious into deliberately offensive like some of Seth’s other stuff has.

Post
#1111498
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

Okay wait. I’m 5 minutes in to the first episode of The Orville and I’m hooked. It feels like Stargate SG-1 if the writers had dirty minds.

That gag with accidentally eating the marble is something I could seriously see Jack O’Neill doing.

JEDIT: …aand the Chief Medical Officer is Kasidy Yates from Deep Space Nine. Faaantastic. Sold.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111486
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

Well, I finally watched episode 2, and it was certainly better. And given that Michelle Yeoh does not captain the Discovery, that may fix one of my gripes since I thought the thickness of her accent got in the way of the emotion behind her dialogue.

I still say the Klingons were the most interesting part. Oh, and apparently the ugly “lateral transporters” is a technology that had already been phased out by Starfleet, so I gather they will not be on the Discovery.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111483
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

YodaFan67 said:

My point is, protesting is pointless unless there is a specific policy you want to enact/get rid of.
In this case, how about drug policy, or anti-fourth amendment search policies? Or maybe security cams on cops?

My point is, You may as well protest “evil”, so we can have a “nation discussion” about “evil”.

Beating up and killing black people because they are black (institutional racism) is a specific policy they want to get rid of. The solution is “stop beating us up and killing us.”

Institutional racism is not a political policy. “Stop beating us up and killing us” is vague and does not directly translate to specific political policy or legal changes (as opposed to “Under [these] specific circumstances must they stop beating us up.”) . If the community wants police institutional behavior to change, there must be specific regulation and a means to enforce it.

I agree that without a solution, complaining is ultimately meaningless; but the very fact that people are talking about it (I assume we’re not the only ones in the country who are), that suggests that a solution can actually be formulated.

In other words, acceptance is the first step on the road to recovery. But it is only one step of many required.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111474
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Calling attention to police brutality (including premeditated murder) is pointless? Police brutality is a dumb controversy?

I’ll bet black people would love to live in your world.

I think he’s trying to say there’s a difference between complaining about something and trying to affect change to fix it. And that to simply complain about something without an idea of how to specifically make a positive impact is useless.

In the grand scheme of the culture, I’m not sure the group protesting has to have the solution so long as they can get society at large to develop one. That is to say, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111471
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

YodaFan67 said:

If you aren’t protesting with a specific goal in mind (an actual concrete outcome) it’s pretty pointless IMO.

Their goal is to evoke a culture change in the attitudes police officers have toward minorities (particularly blacks).

It would not have worked were it just Colin Kaepernick, but enough people are involved now that it might actually provoke discussion about the actual topic at hand instead of the act itself.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111469
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

Bingowings said:

chyron8472 said:

Bingowings said:

pittrek said:

I’ve seen the first episode. I loved the first part and hated the second half. By the way this might be the first Star Trek lead I absolutely hate, she belongs to jail, why is she a hero?

She was right.
She correctly assessed the situation and did everything she could to prevent the conflict.
If Kirk did this it would be typical Kirk stuff and we would all be patting him on the back for disrespecting the chain of command as usual.

But Kirk is the captain, and TOS is incredibly cheesy, so over-the-top is expected. Plus, we have had enough time with Kirk and his crew to assess their personality. Meanwhile, this is the pilot episode of Discovery. We know very little about this crew; why they act the way they do; why they distrust and bicker with each other, et al.

The captain may have made a bad decision, but she’s the captain. It’s her call. It doesn’t matter if the first officer was right and ignoring her would get everyone killed. That’s not how a command structure works.

This is not TOS. In TOS, the characters are endearing. Plus, to have a mutiny now is like having “The Menagerie” two-parter be the actual TOS pilot, including the parts where Spock mutinied (not just “The Cage” bits). If that were the pilot, why do we know anything about Spock? Why would we care? Does Spock do this all the time? Is it normal on a starship for people to mutiny? Or it could be like if The Best of Both Worlds was the TNG pilot. Cmdr. Shelby went over Riker’s head, straight to the captain when Riker disagreed with her, and Riker called her on it. Is Riker always like this? Is Shelby? Is this normal?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOnC0dgHNDA&t=1m28s <-- I mean seriously, imagine this episode is the TNG pilot. It would give a whole different vibe to the characters.

It’s too early in the Discovery characters’ development onscreen to have this drama because we don’t have a baseline for what is supposed to be normal for this crew in interacting with each other.

You asked why she was the protagonist. Kirk was a captain but he frequently disobeyed the chain of command and was the ‘hero’ of the piece. I think all of the main protagonists have adopted this mode.

I did not ask that. And because Kirk is the captain, it’s his ship. Plus, he respects and cares about his crew. There is no indication that Burnham has any respect for her crewmates, nor is it obvious why she is second in command of the ship. The show casts her as basically the captain’s pupil, which devalues her authority as first officer over the rest of the crew.

Also, Star Trek has always previously tried to weave some level of a morality tale into most of its stories, whereas Discovery is just a treknobabbled space drama.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111441
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

Bingowings said:

pittrek said:

I’ve seen the first episode. I loved the first part and hated the second half. By the way this might be the first Star Trek lead I absolutely hate, she belongs to jail, why is she a hero?

She was right.
She correctly assessed the situation and did everything she could to prevent the conflict.
If Kirk did this it would be typical Kirk stuff and we would all be patting him on the back for disrespecting the chain of command as usual.

But Kirk is the captain, and TOS is incredibly cheesy, so over-the-top is expected. Plus, we have had enough time with Kirk and his crew to assess their personality. Meanwhile, this is the pilot episode of Discovery. We know very little about this crew; why they act the way they do; why they distrust and bicker with each other, et al.

The captain may have made a bad decision, but she’s the captain. It’s her call. It doesn’t matter if the first officer was right and ignoring her would get everyone killed. That’s not how a command structure works.

This is not TOS. In TOS, the characters are endearing. Plus, to have a mutiny now is like having “The Menagerie” two-parter be the actual TOS pilot, including the parts where Spock mutinied (not just “The Cage” bits). If that were the pilot, why do we know anything about Spock? Why would we care? Does Spock do this all the time? Is it normal on a starship for people to mutiny? Or it could be like if The Best of Both Worlds was the TNG pilot. Cmdr. Shelby went over Riker’s head, straight to the captain when Riker disagreed with her, and Riker called her on it. Is Riker always like this? Is Shelby? Is this normal?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOnC0dgHNDA&t=1m28s <-- I mean seriously, imagine this episode is the TNG pilot. It would give a whole different vibe to the characters.

It’s too early in the Discovery characters’ development onscreen to have this drama because we don’t have a baseline for what is supposed to be normal for this crew in interacting with each other.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111230
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

SilverWook said:

chyron8472 said:

Every Trek series has its haters. It’s just Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise get a lot more hate because.
Because? I dunno, because haters gonna hate.

Deep Space Nine got hate because 1) it was a Babylon 5 ripoff, and 2) the cast was stuck on the station and didn’t go anywhere (such people didn’t watch during the Defiant years).

Voyager got hate because 1) it was a TNG rehash, 2) the captain was female, 3) it didn’t challenge cultural norms. 4) have a major story arc with the renegade terrorists that are the Maquis, 5) it nerfed the Borg.

Enterprise got hate because 1) It was on UPN and not everyone had UPN; 2) it had several callbacks to the other series rather than standing as its own show.

Also, apparently plenty of people seem to think Rick Berman held the franchise back by not rocking the cultural boat.

They all did callbacks to other series, even the films. McCoy was in Encounter at Farpoint. Spock and Scotty showed up a few seasons later. DS9 revisited the Tribbles epsiode, brought back Kang, Koloth and Kor, (further highlighting the Klingon headridges issue) and Voyager revisited Captain Sulu.

I am aware of all of these. But apparently people accuse Enterprise of being fanservice-heavy when complaining about it.

Post
#1111208
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

Every Trek series has its haters. It’s just Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise get a lot more hate because.
Because? I dunno, because haters gonna hate.

Deep Space Nine got hate because 1) it was a Babylon 5 ripoff, and 2) the cast was stuck on the station and didn’t go anywhere (such people didn’t watch during the Defiant years).

Voyager got hate because 1) it was a TNG rehash, 2) the captain was female, 3) it didn’t challenge cultural norms 4) it didn’t have a major story arc with the renegade terrorists that are the Maquis, 5) it nerfed the Borg.

Enterprise got hate because 1) It was on UPN and not everyone had UPN; 2) it had several callbacks to the other series rather than standing as its own show.

Also, apparently plenty of people seem to think Rick Berman held the franchise back by not rocking the cultural boat.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111183
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

SilverWook said:

NeverarGreat said:

chyron8472 said:

NeverarGreat said:

Fun fact: I watched the pilot for Enterprise for the first time right before watching Discovery.

Both pilots left me with much the same feeling.

I love Enterprise. All of the senior staff are great. Archer, T’Pol, Trip, Reed, Hoshi, and Travis. They all are interesting characters in their own right. And Scott Bakula is a fantastic actor.

The main problem Enterprise has is actually addressed by Archer himself—they keep getting drawn in to the temporal cold war so much that Archer has to straight up tell Daniels to knock it off.

I haven’t seen more than the pilot for Enterprise, but save from the song choices it wasn’t bad. The actors are decent, but I’ve no desire to see the rest of the show. Same with Discovery. I enjoy Michelle Yeoh but the crew interaction doesn’t endear me to them at all.

You could just skip to season 3 and 4. 😉

What is wrong with the first two seasons?

Post
#1111181
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

NeverarGreat said:

chyron8472 said:

NeverarGreat said:

Fun fact: I watched the pilot for Enterprise for the first time right before watching Discovery.

Both pilots left me with much the same feeling.

I love Enterprise. All of the senior staff are great. Archer, T’Pol, Trip, Reed, Hoshi, and Travis. They all are interesting characters in their own right. And Scott Bakula is a fantastic actor.

The main problem Enterprise has is actually addressed by Archer himself—they keep getting drawn in to the temporal cold war so much that Archer has to straight up tell Daniels to knock it off.

I haven’t seen more than the pilot for Enterprise, but save from the song choices it wasn’t bad. The actors are decent, but I’ve no desire to see the rest of the show. Same with Discovery. I enjoy Michelle Yeoh but the crew interaction doesn’t endear me to them at all.

I did not enjoy Michelle Yeoh. As I said, often I can’t tell if she’s asking a question to make sure her crew knows the answer or because she herself is genuinely asking. And when she picks on two crewmembers because they finally agree on something, I can’t tell if she’s being sardonic or jovial. For what it’s worth, I guess I wish her accent wasn’t so thick.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111176
Topic
Video Game Thread
Time

Okay, I spoiler tagged it. Sorry about that.

You did, however, ask me to elaborate. While I do think present-day Zelda has a bit slow, weary, ethereal sounding voice, I’m saying there’s an obvious reason for it. To each their own opinion, sure, but I feel you’re being too harsh on the character by saying her dialogue is the one glaringly annoying flaw especially in comparison to Skyward Sword. I’m saying there are reasons why she sounds the way she does; and given that I didn’t know if you meant Zelda from the memories or Zelda from “The blood moon rises again…” I felt obligated to defend both.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111118
Topic
Video Game Thread
Time

My wife actually says that BOTW Zelda is one of her least favorite iterations of the Zelda character, but she says so because she feels BOTW Zelda is too emotionally fragile; whereas, for example, Twilight Princess’ Zelda shows more emotional strength.

However, that’s not a problem with bad writing or acting; that’s just a personality preference.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111091
Topic
Video Game Thread
Time

ray_afraid said:

Care to elaborate? Her voice puts me to sleep. She speaks so slowly and the vocal delivery is so flat. Her dialog is stiff.
In Skyward Sword she was so full of life and character. Sad to see that kind of characterization go this time around.
But, it’s a small gripe and hardly a knock against BOTW. I’m truly loving this game.

chyron8472 said:

SPOILERS in Expanded view

Where would I even start? For one thing, you might as well accuse Twilight Princess’ Zelda of being stiff. And are you even watching the Captured Memories? She is a princess, and she is trying to honor her station by doing what is expected of her, but she also has a curiosity about the world around her to the chagrin of her father because he thinks it distracts her from unlocking her power. Speaking of which, she is tasked with tapping into the power of the Triforce of Wisdom within her, but she has no idea how to do that. She prays to the goddess(es?) at the Springs but it doesn’t help, and in the end it is in defense of her most trusted friend against the Guardians that her powers awaken, though it’s too little too late.

In Skyward Sword she was so full of life and character.

Umm, she has no spoken dialogue in Skyward Sword. I wouldn’t call her feisty just because she can stand up for Link against Groose, and she doesn’t really interact with Link that much after she falls from Skyloft at the beginning. She does have quite a lot of dialogue at the end, but most of it is expository, laying out what Impa’s plan was for her in aiding to seal Demise.

Also, SS Zelda is directly following the instruction of Impa and the Sheikah Clan. BOTW Zelda is figuring this out entirely on her own with little to no outside help. And if some of BOTW Zelda’s dialogue is stilted in the memories, it’s because she’s a young princess trying to honor her station. SS Zelda is not even a princess; she’s the daughter of the Academy headmaster. She is not held to the same societal standard as BOTW Zelda is. In the present, BOTW Zelda is a disembodied being of energy, weary from a constant struggle against Ganon, so she’s not going to sound perky.

I feel like you’re comparing your unreachable expectation of BOTW Zelda with your nostalgia for SS Zelda. And it is because of people who have opinions like yours that I think it would be a horrible mistake for Nintendo to ever give spoken dialogue to Link, since he could never ever live up to the expectation.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1111086
Topic
All Things Star Trek
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Fun fact: I watched the pilot for Enterprise for the first time right before watching Discovery.

Both pilots left me with much the same feeling.

I love Enterprise. All of the senior staff are great. Archer, T’Pol, Trip, Reed, Hoshi, and Travis. They all are interesting characters in their own right. And Scott Bakula is a fantastic actor.

The main problem Enterprise has is actually addressed by Archer himself—they keep getting drawn in to the temporal cold war so much that Archer has to straight up tell Daniels to knock it off.

This post has been edited.

To the top