NeverarGreat

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don’t even know what game we’re playing anymore. Hungry Hungry Hippos?

This version maybe

Owen Lars

moviefreakedmind said:

chyron8472 said:

Mrebo said:

The idea that civil society is done and there’s a whole bunch of Hitlerites running around that need punching is not supported by the facts.

It’s really just an extension of how divisive and polarized American society has become. Both the left and the right so demonize each other, that to the right the left are filled with crazy oversensitive hippy tree-hugging [gay expletive]s; and to the left the right is filled with hate-mongering flag-worshiping gun-toting racist misogynist ignorant hillbillies.

One of those is significantly worse than the other.

A more up-to-date vision of the left from the right is that of violent masked members of Antifa roving the country, supported by the sinister Hollywood elite and SJWs. But yes, caricatures all around.

That’s vile. But it’s unfortunately the case now that this sort of toxicity has been emboldened, online and off. From personal experience, they seem to be hyper-focused on denigrating people’s masculinity (or sexuality in general).

chyron8472 said:

pittrek said:

Warbler said:

pittrek said:

ChainsawAsh said:

I liked Insurrection…

Me too. It feels like a long TNG episode, which for many people is a problem, and it contradicts an episode of TNG, but compared to Nemesis it’s a masterpiece.

Which episode did Insurrection contradict?

I don’t remember the English titles of the episodes, but there was the last episode with Wesley, I think season 7 - the situation was similar - the Federation has decided to forcefully remove a colony of American Indians because somebody else wanted it. Picard’s attitude was “I don’t like it, but it’s an order”. In Insurrection the situation is very similar, but now for some reason Picard decides to do a small insurrection to defend them.

Wil Wheaton has a cameo at Troi and Riker’s wedding, in a starfleet dress uniform. It contradicts Wesley leaving Starfleet to follow the Traveler. (The episode is called Journey’s End.)

Insurrection doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, especially considering that the people living on the planet were not originally from there. And this is not even the second time the Enterprise has been told to move colonists. The colonists in Journey’s End are among those who form the Maquis, due to the borders between the Federation and Cardassian territories being redrawn—but also there was The Ensigns of Command, where Data alone has to convince a large colony to move rather than be exterminated by the Sheliak.

So Picard’s decision to defy Starfleet in Insurrection does indeed seem really arbitrary.

In both Ensigns of Command and Journey’s End, the situation is of a Federation species in Non-Federation space, which in both cases may be destroyed if they are not evacuated. The situation in Insurrection is very different, since the colony is not under imminent threat of destruction from a non-Federation force.

The argument that the colonists aren’t originally from that planet is sort of a non-sequitur, since the same situation applies in Journey’s End and Picard recognizes that their new home is just as legitimate as Earth.

The Borg have been retconned from the beginning. Originally they were meant to be insectoid aliens, but then that was changed due to budgetary restraints to humanoids with cybernetic enhancements. In the episode where the Enterprise first encounters the Borg they do not attempt any assimilation of humans, and that attribute is only added in later episodes. So the Borg have assimilated new attributes throughout history, with First Contact continuing that noble tradition.

As for time travel, there is almost no story where it makes sense so it’s not a big deal to me. I imagine that the Borg would rather not resort to time travel themselves for just these paradoxical reasons, but when they are at risk of being destroyed why not?

Picard’s strange characterization is probably the worst part of the movie from a continuity perspective, but you’re going to set yourself up for disappointment if you expect any of the Star Trek movies to be particularly true to the TV shows. I view First Contact largely in isolation, and in that way it succeeds brilliantly. Kind of like TLJ actually. It’s when you try and reconcile it with the larger story that the issues appear.

Ozzel

Needa

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Aldansiab

Closest match in Wookieepedia: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aldanna

(So it’s still on ‘a’)

Midichlorians

I don’t know what it is about the original troll scene but it’s a total black hole of humor for me, and I even laugh at the Goblin King and the barrel chase antics.

Maybe it’s my preconceptions of how trolls have been portrayed in the Lord of the Rings - could you imagine the cave troll in Fellowship making quippy smalltalk, or gushing about a soup’s boquet? I imagined that they would think and talk slowly, almost Entlike, which is why they were still arguing about dinner when the sun came up. As it is they are just embarrassingly stupid.

If only there was a way to cut the whole thing…

Naboo

Warbler said:

NeverarGreat said:

Warbler said:

NeverarGreat said:

pittrek said:

Warbler said:

pittrek said:

ChainsawAsh said:

I liked Insurrection…

Me too. It feels like a long TNG episode, which for many people is a problem, and it contradicts an episode of TNG, but compared to Nemesis it’s a masterpiece.

Which episode did Insurrection contradict?

I don’t remember the English titles of the episodes, but there was the last episode with Wesley, I think season 7 - the situation was similar - the Federation has decided to forcefully remove a colony of American Indians because somebody else wanted it. Picard’s attitude was “I don’t like it, but it’s an order”. In Insurrection the situation is very similar, but now for some reason Picard decides to do a small insurrection to defend them.

Although the situation is similar in these respects, there is one major difference - in Journey’s End the colony has been recently reclassified as being in Cardassian space and may be wiped out if not relocated, whereas the colony in Insurrection is still in Federation space and under no existential threat.

It can also be argued that the situation Journey’s End did not constitute a violation of the prime directive where as the situation in Insurrection did.

But since it’s later established that the colony in Insurrection has advanced knowledge of warp drive, the Prime Directive doesn’t apply in this case.

In the movie, they sure talk like it does apply.

That’s because they were operating under the assumption that it was a low-technology species until midway through the movie, when they realized that the aliens had the knowledge but simply decided not to use it in their lives.

Warbler said:

NeverarGreat said:

pittrek said:

Warbler said:

pittrek said:

ChainsawAsh said:

I liked Insurrection…

Me too. It feels like a long TNG episode, which for many people is a problem, and it contradicts an episode of TNG, but compared to Nemesis it’s a masterpiece.

Which episode did Insurrection contradict?

I don’t remember the English titles of the episodes, but there was the last episode with Wesley, I think season 7 - the situation was similar - the Federation has decided to forcefully remove a colony of American Indians because somebody else wanted it. Picard’s attitude was “I don’t like it, but it’s an order”. In Insurrection the situation is very similar, but now for some reason Picard decides to do a small insurrection to defend them.

Although the situation is similar in these respects, there is one major difference - in Journey’s End the colony has been recently reclassified as being in Cardassian space and may be wiped out if not relocated, whereas the colony in Insurrection is still in Federation space and under no existential threat.

It can also be argued that the situation Journey’s End did not constitute a violation of the prime directive where as the situation in Insurrection did.

But since it’s later established that the colony in Insurrection has advanced knowledge of warp drive, the Prime Directive doesn’t apply in this case.

pittrek said:

Warbler said:

pittrek said:

ChainsawAsh said:

I liked Insurrection…

Me too. It feels like a long TNG episode, which for many people is a problem, and it contradicts an episode of TNG, but compared to Nemesis it’s a masterpiece.

Which episode did Insurrection contradict?

I don’t remember the English titles of the episodes, but there was the last episode with Wesley, I think season 7 - the situation was similar - the Federation has decided to forcefully remove a colony of American Indians because somebody else wanted it. Picard’s attitude was “I don’t like it, but it’s an order”. In Insurrection the situation is very similar, but now for some reason Picard decides to do a small insurrection to defend them.

Although the situation is similar in these respects, there is one major difference - in Journey’s End the colony has been recently reclassified as being in Cardassian space and may be wiped out if not relocated, whereas the colony in Insurrection is still in Federation space and under no existential threat.

DuracellEnergizer said:

NeverarGreat said:

First Contact is great and I will fight anyone who dares say otherwise.

*puts on boxing gloves*

It’s not great.

Well this isn’t an argument, it’s just contradiction!

Obi-wan Kenobi

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Possessed said:

ESPN Jeapordy.

yeah so this isn’t as good of a category as I envisioned. To dahmage and all my other adoring fans, I’m sorry I’ve let you down.

Yahtzee

DuracellEnergizer said:

Yahtzee

I’m so sorry.

First Contact is great and I will fight anyone who dares say otherwise.

As for returning to the original timeline, it could work if it comes from a place of visionary optimism for the human species. The trouble is that it’s hard to escape the gravitational influence of edginess and cynicism in any form of media these days.

Great idea and execution!

suspiciouscoffee said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

★★★★★★★★★☆

After some reconsideration, I’ve decided to upgrade my rating to a perfect 10.

Satisfied, Java Man?

Of course I’m not satisfied. Why do you think I write? A man writes because he is tormented. Because he doubts. He needs to constantly prove to himself and others that he is worth something.

Deep.

It’s a puppet which was present in the original film.

TV’s Frink said:

You started and ended on high notes there.

Like any good performance, really.

US Republican Party voters/supporters - Your thoughts and prayers

The Original Ending of Baba Yaga

George Lucas, Comma

Some Actor in Star Wars

When Han Solo was Frozen in Carbonite How did he survive so long without Watto?

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

I’m almost 60, and I’ve been hearing this Fall of the Roman Empire stuff since I was in elementary school.

True, but it’s always been applied to the USA in general, not to ‘the left’.

Mrebo said:

This article helped me understand the intense dislike some have for Jordan Peterson.

I read that entire article and still have no idea what this Peterson guy is on about or why people dislike him.

Also, and sort of a tangent, what’s this about Leftism being like the final days of the Roman Empire? It’s an overly ominous attitude about the Left that has seemed to grow on the Atlantic these past few years. I’ve noticed it especially in their pieces on Trump, where the authors write as if his policies and tweets are couched in some form of intelligent strategy or overriding ideology instead of what they almost always are - an attempt to distract from the latest scandal and/or channel the media’s attention. This means that the Atlantic, and many other publications, play right into his hands when they ought to know better, and in fact they often do. When you read right to the end of the pieces, the authors often admit that they know just how cynical his ploys are, but the impression I get is one of defeat from the authors in their assumption that their article will not change anybody’s mind so why bother.

This is from the same publication that wrote this when supporting a presidential candidate for only the third time since 1857:

“In its founding statement, The Atlantic promised that it would be “the organ of no party or clique,” and our interest here is not to advance the prospects of the Democratic Party, nor to damage those of the Republican Party. If Hillary Clinton were facing Mitt Romney, or John McCain, or George W. Bush, or, for that matter, any of the leading candidates Trump vanquished in the Republican primaries, we would not have contemplated making this endorsement. We believe in American democracy, in which individuals from various parties of different ideological stripes can advance their ideas and compete for the affection of voters. But Trump is not a man of ideas. He is a demagogue, a xenophobe, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a liar. He is spectacularly unfit for office, and voters—the statesmen and thinkers of the ballot box—should act in defense of American democracy and elect his opponent.”

This is why the Atlantic infuriates me. If they are convinced that Trump is such a danger to the Republic, they should fight him regardless of how partisan it makes them look.