Double Trailer Sci Fi Special: Star Trek: Picard and Terminator Dark Fate.

[Casual Shinji]

Not a fan of the T1000 made of black goo from Prometheus. Both the T800 and T1000 with the chrome look from previous movies looked better imo. It doesn't help that the guy playing the T1000 just seems dull. Other than that it's ok.

Apparently that guy is super ripped, but with his shirt on he just looks like a plain old nobody.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Did you watch it..?

Yes, all the way through a couple of times on DVD, and some of the more popular eps on videos that they had at the local rental place many years ago.

With the exception of the ep where the Ferengi go back in time to Roswell. Nope, will put up with the random waffling on holodecks, the alien presences making everyone kiss for comic purposes, and the Ferengi the rest of the time, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

I flat out do not understand why people keep saying it's a great series. Stories vary between "meh" and painful IMHO, with the exception of some that don't try to be DS9 and instead redo "The Trouble with Tribbles" or something.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

 

[Trunkage]

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

I was going to say Star Trek did sets better but then I realised sterile hospital theme isnt much better than 90s rainbow mud theme. I'd also give them a draw on random chit chat becuase they are both bad

Otherwise, B5 is better

 

[Trunkage]

Did you watch it..?

Yes, all the way through a couple of times on DVD, and some of the more popular eps on videos that they had at the local rental place many years ago.

With the exception of the ep where the Ferengi go back in time to Roswell. Nope, will put up with the random waffling on holodecks, the alien presences making everyone kiss for comic purposes, and the Ferengi the rest of the time, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

I flat out do not understand why people keep saying it's a great series. Stories vary between "meh" and painful IMHO, with the exception of some that don't try to be DS9 and instead redo "The Trouble with Tribbles" or something.

The Tribbles ep was terrible and I always skip it. But the orginal was terrible too. Holodeck, mirror universe and time travel eps are always bad in any Star Trek. (I was supriser when Discovery made me care about the mirror universe. I didn't think it was possible.) It's just filler. So are Ferengi eps but I do like when they're interacting with Odo without Ferengi society.

Me personally, I think the arcs and stories over season, not the monster of the week. But then, I'm currently watching The 100. So my opinion probably isn't worth squat

 

[Seanchaidh]

Did you watch it..?

Yes, all the way through a couple of times on DVD, and some of the more popular eps on videos that they had at the local rental place many years ago.

With the exception of the ep where the Ferengi go back in time to Roswell. Nope, will put up with the random waffling on holodecks, the alien presences making everyone kiss for comic purposes, and the Ferengi the rest of the time, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

I flat out do not understand why people keep saying it's a great series. Stories vary between "meh" and painful IMHO, with the exception of some that don't try to be DS9 and instead redo "The Trouble with Tribbles" or something.

You should watch the Roswell episode, it's great.

 

[Seanchaidh]

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

The two shows weren't really different enough in quality to judge one better than the other. While similar in many respects, they went in rather different directions and made different decisions with respect to tone, focus, and other things. Tell me with a straight face that, for example, the cheap 18C Versailles that is what we see of the Centaurum is half as interesting as the Dominion or the elaboration that we see on the Klingon Empire.

Naturally, there are so many missed opportunities in both shows that they are impossible to count; and hitting them all would have made an incomprehensible mess. They're both good.

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

I was going to say Star Trek did sets better but then I realised sterile hospital theme isnt much better than 90s rainbow mud theme. I'd also give them a draw on random chit chat becuase they are both bad

Otherwise, B5 is better

Sterile hospital is TNG and maybe 5-10% of DS9.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

...time travel eps are always bad in any Star Trek.

City on the Edge of Forever, Past Tense, The Visitor, and The Sound of Her Voice are bad episodes?

What about "alternate universe" episodes where time travel changes the timeline? That'd be Tapestry and Yesterday's Enterprise. Are those bad episodes, too?

How about the ones where characters aren't necessarily sent into the past, but given "visions" of it? They're time travel episodes...of a sort, anyhow. Far Beyond the Stars and Inner Light are bad episodes?

 

[Trunkage]

...time travel eps are always bad in any Star Trek.

City on the Edge of Forever, Past Tense, The Visitor, and The Sound of Her Voice are bad episodes?

What about "alternate universe" episodes where time travel changes the timeline? That'd be Tapestry and Yesterday's Enterprise. Are those bad episodes, too?

How about the ones where characters aren't necessarily sent into the past, but given "visions" of it? They're time travel episodes...of a sort, anyhow. Far Beyond the Stars and Inner Light are bad episodes?

Yep. I cant immediately remember Sound of Her Voice but the others I can quickly recall. The Visitor is usually seen as one of the best DS9 episode and I cant understand why.

Which is funny, because I like Doctor Who and that's all about time travel.

Sterile hospital is TNG and maybe 5-10% of DS9.

I would say brown sterile hospital. I don't think Star Trek places ever feel lived in

 

[Seanchaidh]

I think some people confuse "is always bad" with "always utilizes a concept in a way that, if you think about it, is completely absurd". These are not the same things.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

The two shows weren't really different enough in quality to judge one better than the other. While similar in many respects, they went in rather different directions and made different decisions with respect to tone, focus, and other things. Tell me with a straight face that, for example, the cheap 18C Versailles that is what we see of the Centaurum is half as interesting as the Dominion or the elaboration that we see on the Klingon Empire.

Naturally, there are so many missed opportunities in both shows that they are impossible to count; and hitting them all would have made an incomprehensible mess. They're both good.

That's pretty much how I feel about TNG. Meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them. Definitely more self righteous and has a stick up it's own butt

I tend to agree with that, but then TNG got it right by not making the show about things it wasn't going to do. No character arcs, just monsters of the week, ethical dilemmas and Picard giving speeches.

DS9 also was pretty meaningless, meandering, uninterested in characters or developing them, but then tried to make things they weren't interested in doing well the basis of the show.

Not having plot or character arcs, not building the show around them is the right move when you're not going to do them well. I get the feeling that DS9 didn't care about those things more than TNG did.

... are you from the mirror universe with this perception of DS9..?

No, I'm one of those wise enlightened types that DS9 fans might one day evolve into

Did you watch it..?

I did. And Babylon 5 did everything it did better.

I was going to say Star Trek did sets better but then I realised sterile hospital theme isnt much better than 90s rainbow mud theme. I'd also give them a draw on random chit chat becuase they are both bad

Otherwise, B5 is better

Sterile hospital is TNG and maybe 5-10% of DS9.

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Yep.

Okay, then what exactly is your idea of a good Trek episode.

I cant immediately remember Sound of Her Voice...

That's the one where the Defiant picks up a distress call from the lone survivor of a downed ship in a medical emergency, they respond but are only able to established audio communication, the crew start talking to her in shifts to keep her company and get to know her, get there and find out she's been dead for three years, and a temporal anomaly was actually shifting communications back in time.

 

[Thaluikhain]

City on the Edge of Forever, Past Tense, The Visitor, and The Sound of Her Voice are bad episodes?

IMHO, you've put those in declining order or quality, City on the Edge of Forever was one of the best Star Trek stories made, Past Tense amongst the best of DS9 (not great, but definitely given a pass), The Visitor was "meh" and The Sound of Her Voice was just a bad episode.

I forget the name, but I would say that the one where O'Brien keeps jumping briefly into the future and seeing bad stuff happen to the station was decent, IIRC.

 

[Seanchaidh]

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

It's a bit telling that you need to invent an extreme judgment of the the performances of those actors in order to justify that opinion.

 

[Trunkage]

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

1. Andreas is a better actor than Jurasik. 2. Sisko was better than Sinclair. But Sheridan outclasses both.

It's a bit telling that you need to invent an extreme judgment of the the performances of those actors in order to justify that opinion.

Extreme? Pale Moonlight is Avery Brooks acting. Far Beyond the Stars is him overacting. Star Trek swings from Michael O'Hare's Sinclair (too restrained, unnaturally calm that deletes the sense of stakes in the story) to Far Beyond the Stars Avery Brooks. There is usually no middle ground.

 

[Trunkage]

Yep.

Okay, then what exactly is your idea of a good Trek episode.

Character flaws that build up over time, that these flaws actually feel hard to overcome and might not take one episode, stories that move the season or character plot forward and/or build the mythology, the characters actually losing, factions having multiple interactions with each other in each season, subtlety changing the way that characters act that makes sense. Like, when Sheridan was pointed out that he used to be fun but now was dour through the weight of war and that had changed slowly over 2 seasons without me noticing? That's good story telling....


Oh wait, Star trek. Siege of AR-some numbers. Previously: Rom enlisted against his culture because he saw something in what they were fighting for. And, during the episode, that something was utterly crushed under real battle conditions that actually cost a character something big. Rom was actually scared, actually pushed, actually crushed. And it wasn't fixed straight away. The Jem'Hadar was stated as being a hardcore fighting force for many seasons. But this is the episode where they actually tried fighting. Every other cast member could cough and kill thousands of them. It completely negates any sense of threat from the Jem'Hadar when they are so easy to beat.

 

[Seanchaidh]

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

1. Andreas is a better actor than Jurasik. 2. Sisko was better than Sinclair. But Sheridan outclasses both.

It's a bit telling that you need to invent an extreme judgment of the the performances of those actors in order to justify that opinion.

Extreme? Pale Moonlight is Avery Brooks acting. Far Beyond the Stars is him overacting. Star Trek swings from Michael O'Hare's Sinclair (too restrained, unnaturally calm that deletes the sense of stakes in the story) to Far Beyond the Stars Avery Brooks. There is usually no middle ground.

I could agree with all of that and it wouldn't make the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion. The idea that Londo Mollari is a performance so spectacularly better than, say, that of Weyoun such that it singlehandedly makes the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion is preposterous.

 

[Trunkage]

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

1. Andreas is a better actor than Jurasik. 2. Sisko was better than Sinclair. But Sheridan outclasses both.

It's a bit telling that you need to invent an extreme judgment of the the performances of those actors in order to justify that opinion.

Extreme? Pale Moonlight is Avery Brooks acting. Far Beyond the Stars is him overacting. Star Trek swings from Michael O'Hare's Sinclair (too restrained, unnaturally calm that deletes the sense of stakes in the story) to Far Beyond the Stars Avery Brooks. There is usually no middle ground.

I could agree with all of that and it wouldn't make the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion. The idea that Londo Mollari is a performance so spectacularly better than, say, that of Weyoun such that it singlehandedly makes the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion is preposterous.

Weyoun was pretty good imo. Weyoun was definitely the underacted Sinclair style. Which, imo, really works for that character. All this genocide is just a humdrum job for him.

But I was calling out that you thought Gordon was using extremes. They might have a different opinion.

When I see Londo's room, there are many props that are there to develop a sense of Centuari lifestyle. The Dominion doesn't (quite possibly because it shouldn't, lore wise). More interesting? Well that's going to be subjective. Clones are cool, evidence by the continual renewal of Weyouns. Doesn't tell you much about the Dominion other than you are disposable

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Yep.

Okay, then what exactly is your idea of a good Trek episode.

Character flaws that build up over time, that these flaws actually feel hard to overcome and might not take one episode, stories that move the season or character plot forward and/or build the mythology, the characters actually losing, factions having multiple interactions with each other in each season, subtlety changing the way that characters act that makes sense. Like, when Sheridan was pointed out that he used to be fun but now was dour through the weight of war and that had changed slowly over 2 seasons without me noticing? That's good story telling....


Oh wait, Star trek. Siege of AR-some numbers. Previously: Rom enlisted against his culture because he saw something in what they were fighting for. And, during the episode, that something was utterly crushed under real battle conditions that actually cost a character something big. Rom was actually scared, actually pushed, actually crushed. And it wasn't fixed straight away. The Jem'Hadar was stated as being a hardcore fighting force for many seasons. But this is the episode where they actually tried fighting. Every other cast member could cough and kill thousands of them. It completely negates any sense of threat from the Jem'Hadar when they are so easy to beat.

That was Nog, otherwise you're dead on the money.

I have a special place in my heart for Jeffrey Sinclair, but John Sheridan is undeniably the stronger of the two - although Michael O'Hare will have my respect until I die for managed to get Season 1 finished considering how unwell he was.

This is me telling you with a straight face, the Centaurum are more interesting than the Dominion; if only because Peter Jurasik could act rings around anyone on DS9 not named Marc Alaimo; and when he was operating opposite Andreas Katsulas, honestly they out-perform Trek on all but its best days.

1. Andreas is a better actor than Jurasik. 2. Sisko was better than Sinclair. But Sheridan outclasses both.

It's a bit telling that you need to invent an extreme judgment of the the performances of those actors in order to justify that opinion.

Extreme? Pale Moonlight is Avery Brooks acting. Far Beyond the Stars is him overacting. Star Trek swings from Michael O'Hare's Sinclair (too restrained, unnaturally calm that deletes the sense of stakes in the story) to Far Beyond the Stars Avery Brooks. There is usually no middle ground.

I could agree with all of that and it wouldn't make the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion. The idea that Londo Mollari is a performance so spectacularly better than, say, that of Weyoun such that it singlehandedly makes the Centauri more interesting than the Dominion is preposterous.

The Dominion are a bunch galactic conquerors with God complexes - no more interesting or nuanced than the Goa'uld of Stargate fame except Stargate realized the best way to use such characters was the make them as over the top as possible and Star Trek didn't. Had the war with the Alpha Quadrant started because the Obsidian Order and Tal Shiar combined assault force actually succeeded in giving them a bloody nose and their many (unseen) subjects begun to question their Godhood that would be compelling.

 

[Seanchaidh]

The Dominion are a bunch galactic conquerors with God complexes - no more interesting or nuanced than the Goa'uld of Stargate fame except Stargate realized the best way to use such characters was the make them as over the top as possible and Star Trek didn't. Had the war with the Alpha Quadrant started because the Obsidian Order and Tal Shiar combined assault force actually succeeded in giving them a bloody nose and their many (unseen) subjects begun to question their Godhood that would be compelling.

No, the Founders are a bunch of galactic conquerors with God complexes. The Dominion is the more complex result of that and their more particular practical, political, ethical, and aesthetic choices. Whereas the Centauri are a decadent imperialist monarchy that could be basically any successful Earth empire. In space.

There's nothing wrong with that; a lot can be done with such a basic archetype. But it's not terrifically interesting in itself. Much like you can do cool things with someone performing spirituality even if that spirituality is the most boring, safe mush imaginable (G'Kar).

Here's a question: does anyone think B5 had a better executed ending than DS9?

Had the war with the Alpha Quadrant started because the Obsidian Order and Tal Shiar combined assault force actually succeeded in giving them a bloody nose and their many (unseen) subjects begun to question their Godhood that would be compelling.

I can agree with that. Missed opportunity, perhaps. (Would hasten to add that it would also close off or lessen the impact of some of the elements they actually did do. Weyoun's fawning over Odo, for example.)