It was the episode with Deanna and Lwaxana in the last season. I never really cared for either of them, but that episode... man. I came out viewing both in a completely different light.
I don't even have to look it up. You're talking about the episode with
I don't even have to look it up. You're talking about the episode with
the sister Deanna never knew she had.
Yup. That was the episode that really made me really like TNG. Like, I enjoyed the various Data episodes and weird things happening in space, but that was the one where after the end I was like, "Damn..."
Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Babylon 5 interest me the most out of that type of sci-fi show. B5 vs. DS9 is also a very interesting debate.
Also, someone pointed out to me why TOS of Trek turns so many fans of TNG/DS9/VOY off so much. It's because TOS isn't really a high-concept sci-fi series, and didn't delve into any such ideas as a whole until the films. What TOS really is...is a show about people. Or was that said on the Red Letter Media Into Darkness review. I forgot. Heard it somewhere.
I think that's why I like it the most. And you'll never get me to admit the original crew weren't the best.
Everyone loves Star Trek. Now the official site has all episodes of all series available to watch legally for free, so you can once again boldly go where no one has gone before.
I enjoyed the original six movies the most out of any Star Trek ever. Even the bad ones. But I liked the TNG show more than the original series show, because it had people and concepts. TOS... the connection that I had with the characters was primarily based on how I saw them from the movies... but nothing from the show helped solidify that. TNG gave me a connection with the characters... which the movies then completely ripped apart.
Everyone loves Star Trek. Now the official site has all episodes of all series available to watch legally for free, so you can once again boldly go where no one has gone before.
This is a great time to discuss the franchise.
Engage.
They're all on Netflix too. TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT.
You want to see how much Abramsverse screwed up. Watch Episode 2, Yesteryear, of The Animated Series.
Within that episode, young Spock is taught lessons about life that would shape him, and so are we. The audience is made to understand the way of life of Vulcan much better in that half hour, and the teachings and ways of Vulcans, and why they live without emotion, much better than Abrams could in five hours. It's relatable, instead of Spock is part human so Spock is angsty and also an asshole. Instead of just going on and on about morals for comic relief, Spock's logic dictates valuable insight.
The episode teaches us about Vulcans and Spock as a character much as a father would teach his child about life. It's great.
Babylon 5 veers more toward Space Opera than Science Fiction. TOS and TNG are clearly science fiction in a more traditional sense, especially owing to Gene's influence.
TNG was so good for me because it balanced small arcs with sci fi concept episodes and individual growth. It didn't hit the season wide arc styles of DS9 but that was truer to its science fiction heritage. DS9 started moving toward the space opera style. Nothing wrong with it, but somewhere along the way the vision of a humanity striving to better itself, to aim for high mindedness, elevated values, etc., all started to fall behind the large story arcs about the Jem Hadar and such. TNG presents a future in which they're clearly still dealing with an elevated sense of what humanity can become.
And just like Netflix these are not available outside the US.
How wonderful. Now I get to not watch them on two sites!
If you have a Netflix account and travel to the US you will get to watch the US content. You can travel to the US with stuff like the AnonymoX add-on for Firefox and Chrome. It's not great unless you go premium, but it's cheaper than an airline ticket.
Anywho, Star Trek might be the first thing I remember watching. Some of my first memories are watching Mudd's Women on VHS taken from the local library. Tere's something magical about those three years that I'll never grow tired of. A few years later I caught a rerun of a random episode of TNG, which by sheer luck was Relics, pretty mich the best episode to start TNG on after just watching TOS for so long.
TNG is my favorite Star Trek but it'll never be as special to me as the original five-year mission. If that makes any sense.
You want to see how much Abramsverse screwed up. Watch Episode 2, Yesteryear, of The Animated Series.
Within that episode, young Spock is taught lessons about life that would shape him, and so are we. The audience is made to understand the way of life of Vulcan much better in that half hour, and the teachings and ways of Vulcans, and why they live without emotion, much better than Abrams could in five hours. It's relatable, instead of Spock is part human so Spock is angsty and also an asshole. Instead of just going on and on about morals for comic relief, Spock's logic dictates valuable insight.
The episode teaches us about Vulcans and Spock as a character much as a father would teach his child about life. It's great.
There is a Voyager episode about why Vulcans suppress emotions, as well it is explored a bit in Enterprise.
As I have said, Trek needs new fans, and making another Prime Universe show or movie isn't going to do it. Now that the reboot uses a different timeline, the characters and their culture can be explored in new and different ways without restrictions imposed on them by the Prime universe.
People used to complain that Berman was holding Trek back from trying new things. Now that the franchise has a fresh start, people complain because it's not what they are used to.
It also occurs to me that people cite one episode or movie and say "that is the epitome of Trek," and use it to explain why Abrams sucks; yet at the same time, they complained about Trek long before the reboot.
Kind of like the (really did exist) play of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, starring Patrick Stewart, in which Patrick Stewart plays every single part.
People used to complain that Berman was holding Trek back from trying new things. Now that the franchise has a fresh start, people complain because it's not what they are used to.
It also occurs to me that people cite one episode or movie and say "that is the epitome of Trek," and use it to explain why Abrams sucks; yet at the same time, they complained about Trek long before the reboot.
Very true. When the first JJ movie came out, trekkies complained about "too much action". While I could see the problem with the movie itself, action overload is hardly a point of critique we haven't experienced before in Star Trek movies! I mean, it's not as if we haven't actually had Captain Picard and Captain Kirk both fistfighting Dr. Soren in Generations as the supposed finale.
All I'm saying is that I wish it was easier to talk about what we love about Star Trek without having to wade through all the bitching that Trek fans seem to love doing.
I was trying to find a quote from the ENT episode "Breaking The Ice" today, and the top Google Search result was to the blog of some guy who took it upon himself to pick the entire episode apart and explain why it was stupid and contrived.
It's Star Trek - we'll probably have gone back in time and changed things about a dozen times before the week's over. Just you wait and see.
EDIT: Oh look, it appears that a parallel dimension version of myself crossed over and changed history so there is now only the original Star Trek thread. Fascinating.
There is a Voyager episode about why Vulcans suppress emotions, as well it is explored a bit in Enterprise.
As I have said, Trek needs new fans, and making another Prime Universe show or movie isn't going to do it. Now that the reboot uses a different timeline, the characters and their culture can be explored in new and different ways without restrictions imposed on them by the Prime universe.
People used to complain that Berman was holding Trek back from trying new things. Now that the franchise has a fresh start, people complain because it's not what they are used to.
It also occurs to me that people cite one episode or movie and say "that is the epitome of Trek," and use it to explain why Abrams sucks; yet at the same time, they complained about Trek long before the reboot.
This is untrue. What was wrong with Star Trek wasn't the Prime Universe or the lore it established, it was just bad characterization and writing. Voyager, interesting premise, bad writing. I mean continuously bad writing. Periods of brilliance mixed with nonsense.
DS9, even if it wasn't true sci fi for a lot of its later stretch, was great stuff. Interesting characters, interesting places, moral dilemmas, conflict you could become invested in. That'll keep people watching.
There is a Voyager episode about why Vulcans suppress emotions, as well it is explored a bit in Enterprise.
As I have said, Trek needs new fans, and making another Prime Universe show or movie isn't going to do it. Now that the reboot uses a different timeline, the characters and their culture can be explored in new and different ways without restrictions imposed on them by the Prime universe.
People used to complain that Berman was holding Trek back from trying new things. Now that the franchise has a fresh start, people complain because it's not what they are used to.
It also occurs to me that people cite one episode or movie and say "that is the epitome of Trek," and use it to explain why Abrams sucks; yet at the same time, they complained about Trek long before the reboot.
Fuck off. I want people to acknowledge this great episode exists. The most JJ Abrams is going to explore is the possibility of a wallet that can hold trillion dollar bills.
Fuck off. I want people to acknowledge this great episode exists. The most JJ Abrams is going to explore is the possibility of a wallet that can hold trillion dollar bills.
Are you... serious? The new Star Trek engages the very real moral dilemma of preemptive striking, the moral justification of murder without trial, the use of drones to kill foreigners abroad, the declaration of guilt of a citizen without a fair hearing,and the unilateral declaration of war in general. These are all very real, modern issues we're having to grapple with in foreign policy today.
Are you... serious? The new Star Trek engages the very real moral dilemma of preemptive striking, the moral justification of murder without trial, the use of drones to kill foreigners abroad, the declaration of guilt of a citizen without a fair hearing,and the unilateral declaration of war in general. These are all very real, modern issues we're having to grapple with in foreign policy today.
As comic relief. When the original did it, I stop and listen. When the Abramsverse does it, thanks to the tone he sets, the entire audience is too busy laughing at that rapscallion Spock. Literally every line Spock said in my theater was met with giggles. It sets these issues up, but it doesn't explore them in any real depth. I liked that it added the set up, but by the time the movie was over, it was all forgotten. These weren't lessons the characters learned. It didn't stick. It just made for a cute little ending speech.
CUTE. LITTLE. Ending speech.
Cute....and little.
EDIT: You do kind of have a point. Sort of. Maybe. I refuse to acknowledge further lest I come close to saying I'm wrong. OH NO NOT THAT
This is untrue. What was wrong with Star Trek wasn't the Prime Universe or the lore it established, it was just bad characterization and writing. Voyager, interesting premise, bad writing. I mean continuously bad writing. Periods of brilliance mixed with nonsense.
DS9, even if it wasn't true sci fi for a lot of its later stretch, was great stuff. Interesting characters, interesting places, moral dilemmas, conflict you could become invested in. That'll keep people watching.
That blog which picks apart Star Trek episodes which I mentioned earlier--one of the things it complained about was "missed continuity" in that the episode in question failed to directly refer to the Vulcans' behavior during the immediately preceding episode. Nevermind that it was still the first season, or that Enterprise was largely aiming for episodic stories up until Season 3.
Yes, Voyager did have some stupid moments, like the Doctor's conclusion that Paris and Janeway had evolved to humanity's next evolutionary stage (being giant salamanders) after Paris broke the Warp 10 barrier. Then again, there was an episode of TNG where the whole crew "de-evolved" (and that episode was quite good, even if Barclay inexplicably became a spider); plus there are all the deus ex machina bits at the end of various TNG episodes just to get the crew back to status quo for the next episode... so such contrivances aren't found in Voyager alone, nor does it make the show bad for it. Sure, the conflict between Starfleet and Maquis was underused in Voyager, and the Borg became severely underpowered and inept for the sake of plot, but the series as a whole was fairly decent.
The one thing I disliked about TNG was that it took a firm stance on religious faith as being outmoded and archaic superstitious nonsense. Whereas DS9 greatly explored the beliefs of the Bajorans, and what it really means to have faith in God. (I am not inviting people to troll me on this subject.)
Never been a big Star Trek fan. I did enjoy the two newest films though. They made me want to try and get into the series. Still couldn't do it. I just can't get through any of the episodes.
However, I did catch some of the older movies on Sci-Fi before going see "Into Darkness". One of them was Nemisis and I thought that one was cool.
I find it weird that I can sit through a Star Trek movie and get invested but I can't even watch a single episode without getting bored.
I said this in a Trek forum, and I'm going to say it again here. As much as I love the new films and the new universe and the new crew and the new Enterprise...it IS more action packed, and it's that way for a reason. They have to get butts into those theater seats. Where Star Trek belongs and where it truly thrives isn't the big screen. It's the small. The movies are great, but Trek deserves a series again. Perhaps a series about the USS Kelvin in the Prime timeline. I would also like an animated series based on the new crew's 5 year mission, perhaps in the same style as Star Wars Clone Wars.
Also, one of these days, I'm going to do a write up about some of the things in Into Darkness that people gripe about that I've at least theorized possibilities for.
It's not as ridiculous as you might initially think. The Eugenics Wars are right within West's timeline, he's created a universal serum for bringing dead things back to life (generally a whole lot stronger and more savage than before), and at the end of the last movie, he got the idea of giving that serum to people who were already alive.
A slight push says he figured out how to make the serum work on living people, got rid of the obvious side effect of exploding them, and then injected himself and turned into Benedict Cumberbatch. Since the original resurrection serum was still in his blood, of course, it could raise the dead. This also helps with the plot because all the other frozen dudes were just genetically modified and didn't have the serum, so they had to get it specifically from Khan.
Everyone should watch Re-Animator at least once. It's great. Even the third one is so cornball at the end that it was enjoyable, despite the fact that all the non-Herbert characters were boring and awful.
Comments
P.S. everybody's favorite character should either be Lt. Barkley or Miles O'Bryan.
I don't even have to look it up. You're talking about the episode with
Yup. That was the episode that really made me really like TNG. Like, I enjoyed the various Data episodes and weird things happening in space, but that was the one where after the end I was like, "Damn..."
Also, someone pointed out to me why TOS of Trek turns so many fans of TNG/DS9/VOY off so much. It's because TOS isn't really a high-concept sci-fi series, and didn't delve into any such ideas as a whole until the films. What TOS really is...is a show about people. Or was that said on the Red Letter Media Into Darkness review. I forgot. Heard it somewhere.
I think that's why I like it the most. And you'll never get me to admit the original crew weren't the best.
http://www.startrek.com/
Everyone loves Star Trek. Now the official site has all episodes of all series available to watch legally for free, so you can once again boldly go where no one has gone before.
This is a great time to discuss the franchise.
Engage.
They're all on Netflix too. TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT.
Within that episode, young Spock is taught lessons about life that would shape him, and so are we. The audience is made to understand the way of life of Vulcan much better in that half hour, and the teachings and ways of Vulcans, and why they live without emotion, much better than Abrams could in five hours. It's relatable, instead of Spock is part human so Spock is angsty and also an asshole. Instead of just going on and on about morals for comic relief, Spock's logic dictates valuable insight.
The episode teaches us about Vulcans and Spock as a character much as a father would teach his child about life. It's great.
TNG was so good for me because it balanced small arcs with sci fi concept episodes and individual growth. It didn't hit the season wide arc styles of DS9 but that was truer to its science fiction heritage. DS9 started moving toward the space opera style. Nothing wrong with it, but somewhere along the way the vision of a humanity striving to better itself, to aim for high mindedness, elevated values, etc., all started to fall behind the large story arcs about the Jem Hadar and such. TNG presents a future in which they're clearly still dealing with an elevated sense of what humanity can become.
And just like Netflix these are not available outside the US.
How wonderful. Now I get to not watch them on two sites!
Go us.
I'm used to videos not working.
Whoever did this, they've disobeyed the Prime Directive. It goes THIS FAH....NO FURTHAH.
Another reason to love this guy is he sings "The Minstrel Boy" as his personal theme song.
If you have a Netflix account and travel to the US you will get to watch the US content. You can travel to the US with stuff like the AnonymoX add-on for Firefox and Chrome. It's not great unless you go premium, but it's cheaper than an airline ticket.
Anywho, Star Trek might be the first thing I remember watching. Some of my first memories are watching Mudd's Women on VHS taken from the local library. Tere's something magical about those three years that I'll never grow tired of. A few years later I caught a rerun of a random episode of TNG, which by sheer luck was Relics, pretty mich the best episode to start TNG on after just watching TOS for so long.
TNG is my favorite Star Trek but it'll never be as special to me as the original five-year mission. If that makes any sense.
As I have said, Trek needs new fans, and making another Prime Universe show or movie isn't going to do it. Now that the reboot uses a different timeline, the characters and their culture can be explored in new and different ways without restrictions imposed on them by the Prime universe.
People used to complain that Berman was holding Trek back from trying new things. Now that the franchise has a fresh start, people complain because it's not what they are used to.
It also occurs to me that people cite one episode or movie and say "that is the epitome of Trek," and use it to explain why Abrams sucks; yet at the same time, they complained about Trek long before the reboot.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol_(play)
Very true. When the first JJ movie came out, trekkies complained about "too much action". While I could see the problem with the movie itself, action overload is hardly a point of critique we haven't experienced before in Star Trek movies! I mean, it's not as if we haven't actually had Captain Picard and Captain Kirk both fistfighting Dr. Soren in Generations as the supposed finale.
I was trying to find a quote from the ENT episode "Breaking The Ice" today, and the top Google Search result was to the blog of some guy who took it upon himself to pick the entire episode apart and explain why it was stupid and contrived.
Well, that's four years of carefully never starting a thread ever down the drain... I was special in my special lack of doing anything!
EDIT: Oh look, it appears that a parallel dimension version of myself crossed over and changed history so there is now only the original Star Trek thread. Fascinating.
This is untrue. What was wrong with Star Trek wasn't the Prime Universe or the lore it established, it was just bad characterization and writing. Voyager, interesting premise, bad writing. I mean continuously bad writing. Periods of brilliance mixed with nonsense.
DS9, even if it wasn't true sci fi for a lot of its later stretch, was great stuff. Interesting characters, interesting places, moral dilemmas, conflict you could become invested in. That'll keep people watching.
Fuck off. I want people to acknowledge this great episode exists. The most JJ Abrams is going to explore is the possibility of a wallet that can hold trillion dollar bills.
Are you... serious? The new Star Trek engages the very real moral dilemma of preemptive striking, the moral justification of murder without trial, the use of drones to kill foreigners abroad, the declaration of guilt of a citizen without a fair hearing,and the unilateral declaration of war in general. These are all very real, modern issues we're having to grapple with in foreign policy today.
As comic relief. When the original did it, I stop and listen. When the Abramsverse does it, thanks to the tone he sets, the entire audience is too busy laughing at that rapscallion Spock. Literally every line Spock said in my theater was met with giggles. It sets these issues up, but it doesn't explore them in any real depth. I liked that it added the set up, but by the time the movie was over, it was all forgotten. These weren't lessons the characters learned. It didn't stick. It just made for a cute little ending speech.
CUTE. LITTLE. Ending speech.
Cute....and little.
EDIT: You do kind of have a point. Sort of. Maybe. I refuse to acknowledge further lest I come close to saying I'm wrong. OH NO NOT THAT
That blog which picks apart Star Trek episodes which I mentioned earlier--one of the things it complained about was "missed continuity" in that the episode in question failed to directly refer to the Vulcans' behavior during the immediately preceding episode. Nevermind that it was still the first season, or that Enterprise was largely aiming for episodic stories up until Season 3.
Yes, Voyager did have some stupid moments, like the Doctor's conclusion that Paris and Janeway had evolved to humanity's next evolutionary stage (being giant salamanders) after Paris broke the Warp 10 barrier. Then again, there was an episode of TNG where the whole crew "de-evolved" (and that episode was quite good, even if Barclay inexplicably became a spider); plus there are all the deus ex machina bits at the end of various TNG episodes just to get the crew back to status quo for the next episode... so such contrivances aren't found in Voyager alone, nor does it make the show bad for it. Sure, the conflict between Starfleet and Maquis was underused in Voyager, and the Borg became severely underpowered and inept for the sake of plot, but the series as a whole was fairly decent.
The one thing I disliked about TNG was that it took a firm stance on religious faith as being outmoded and archaic superstitious nonsense. Whereas DS9 greatly explored the beliefs of the Bajorans, and what it really means to have faith in God. (I am not inviting people to troll me on this subject.)
However, I did catch some of the older movies on Sci-Fi before going see "Into Darkness". One of them was Nemisis and I thought that one was cool.
I find it weird that I can sit through a Star Trek movie and get invested but I can't even watch a single episode without getting bored.
1.) TNG
2.) BS5
3.) DS9
4.) VOY
5.) ENT
Also, one of these days, I'm going to do a write up about some of the things in Into Darkness that people gripe about that I've at least theorized possibilities for.
While ridiculous...that's pretty funny.
A slight push says he figured out how to make the serum work on living people, got rid of the obvious side effect of exploding them, and then injected himself and turned into Benedict Cumberbatch. Since the original resurrection serum was still in his blood, of course, it could raise the dead. This also helps with the plot because all the other frozen dudes were just genetically modified and didn't have the serum, so they had to get it specifically from Khan.
I expect my No Prize to arrive any day now.
...god I hate that episode. -_-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zKDQfVbWqc
My point, exactly.