logo Sign In

sybeman

User Group
Members
Join date
10-Apr-2005
Last activity
21-Apr-2014
Posts
1,775

Post History

Post
#156042
Topic
is there any Star Trek Enterprise fans here?
Time
My problems with Enterprise spring up when they tried to tie it in to the rest of Star Trek. Example: The Borg episode from season 2. Not only were the Borg unnecessary in Enterprise, but they try to tie into both First Contact, with these Borg having been frozen in the arctic for almost 100 years, and then into TNG, with the comment that they may have just postponed the invasion for a couple hundred years (basically until we first see then in TNG). Or in the first season when the Captain hoped stat, someday, someone would write "a directive" as to what they can and can't do, obvioulsy refering to the Prime Directive.

The show was alright, and it was fun, but it screwed up a lot.
Post
#156038
Topic
Sometimes do you feel like you should give up on the cause?
Time
I don't think ricar forgot that scene, but there's a wonderful example. Star Wars was a wonderful fluke for GL, and he did the right thing -- he let someoen better than himself take the reins for sequels. But somewhere down the line, it all got too big for him. He figured we'd eat it up no matter what, and that, hey, if he did it all, he doesn't have to pay someoen else to do it. Well, he was right. People still eat it up, but he disenfranchised so many fans in the process. Someday Star Wars will finally die (or GL will), and I think we'll all be better for it.
Post
#155724
Topic
The Return of Six Degrees of Star Wars
Time
Originally posted by: Bossk
Janet Alexander (Queen's Evidence) Pardoe Woodman (Night Train to Munich) Rex Harrison (Doctor Doolittle) Richard Attenborough (Jurassic Park) SLJ


Whereas I would have gone: Janet Alexander (Not Quite A Lady) Gibb McLaughlin (The Card) Alec Guinness.

Maggie Gyllenhaal (A Dangerous Woman) David Strathairn (Twisted) SLJ

Another birthday, Philip Strange
Post
#155719
Topic
Reasons to hate the Special Editions
Time
Now, let me get this straight. Gaffer says two different things -- contradicting things, at that (that there should be an epilogue scene ending the war, and that the war goes on for years afterwards) and Adam agrees with both. Why not contradict the first point the first time?

This goes back to "the fool or the fool who follows..." except that I don't think Gaffer a fool.