Rather than only editing a spelling error, add some extra text at the bottom of the post, that seems to keep it happy and stop it from wiping the entire post
...When I first watched Plato's Stepchildren as a kid, nothing about it bothered me. I just thought that Uhura was scared because of the situation. When I watched Search for Spock, it never even occured to me, that 'Kirk's boss' wasn't the same color as him. It was just 'Kirk's Boss'.
That is the kind of thinking which Trek helps to engender.
There is no reason to believe Discovery won't do the same. We haven't seen a single episode yet.
When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up :-\
If Discovery having a **** crewmember can help give today's growing generation a more positive and inclusive view of **** people; Awesome. But they're not going to get to deliver that message to as wide a audience, if their audience is pre-restricted because of the rating their content attracts.
Keep in mind, all these "existing" fans everyone keeps mentioning are a lot older now than they were when the various incarnations of Trek aired. I know I'm older and my tastes have changed. I don't mind a more mature Trek, so long as it's written well and not done for gratuitous reasons - which Trek is notorious for anyway (eg. Seven of Nine and T'Pol's costumes anyone?).
Yes, fans are all older than they were, and I grant you, tastes do indeed change. But. Their marketing campaign is relying Very heavily on the nostalgia angle. One can't have it both ways. One can't try and create something New, and rely on the nostalgia for something Old, to lure in subscribers. Not just an audience, but a Paying audience. Why has their been such a backlash against Discovery? Because people were lured in with one thing, then given something else. To say they feel lied to, is to ignore the fact that they have been lied to. If not directly, then certainly by omission.
Seven and T'Pol, yeah, pretty gratuitous. One of the trailers showed Burnham in her space-knickers in what looked like Phlox's scanning chamber. So they're clearly not above using good old T&A to try and lure some viewers. Another strike against them.
If they wanted to do dark and gritty adult sci-fi, they could've just done it. Although I've never watched it, I do remember hearing of a 90s German sci-fi called Lexx, which was apparently pretty much just onrop, in a sci-fi dressing. The options are pretty much infinite, but as I've said countless times before, some NewName sci-fi couldn't be relied upon to pull in rubessubscribers in the way which something titled 'Star Trek' can. And again, their aim is for a flagship show to get the subscribers for the streaming service.
The sad thing, is had they come clean with what they're doing from the start, rather than all this cloak and dagger shenanigans and backtracking over revelations which weren't well received, many of the people currently against Discovery, would likely have been willing to give it a go.
There is also the possibility that a more mature program will attract more viewers because it isn't "cartoony" or "silly" like many of the reviews over the years have categorized Star Trek.
No one knows yet.
Regardless of how it's been catagorized in reviews, which are, at the end of the day, only personal opinions, Star Trek is a ludicrously popular franchise. Regardless of if it was camp, or cartoony, or any of those things, people still loved (and continue to love) it.
My earliest exposure, was TOS, but DS9 became my favorite. I also really like the aesthetic which the game has for the 25th century Odyssey uniforms. But. I also see people commenting, that the thing they like about the TOS content, is how true it is to that original aesthetic, in looks, and sounds' and 'feel'. That aesthetic still has its fans. Heck, by choice, I would have Kek flying round in the refit Constitution all the time, because that new skin Thomas cooked up, is The Business, and it just screams 'Star Trek'. I might like the Vesper nacelles (I have a softspot for the Excelsior) so it's not 100% like the Enterprise of the movies, but it still evokes that feeling.
Without that connection, Discovery could easily wind up as generic sci-fi, and derided for riding on the legacy of the title, rather than actually finding its own feet. Time will tell...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even if someone was seriously injured (or in the case of Neelix, minus his lungs) what better reason does one need, for the transporter chief, upon hearing the words "emergency beam-out to initiate the Pulaski Protocol, and restore all incoming patterns, to the last outgoing template.
I think the notion was simply that transporters not become a Magic Cure All, because that would kill any kind of plot tension.
Since when has a transporter EVER been seen to store the complete pattern of something that was transported? And well... there are SO many different half-bakes explanations for how they worked. There was one ep where they demonstrated that people remained conscious and aware of their surroundings while transporting. Although time spent in the beam was usually too short to be of much interest. Such as the episode with these things:
Mmm... nightmare fuel..... Wait it needs to wiggle more... Try at 5:40 on this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r7eIOLfisU
Yeah, that was a weird one. But the way the transporter worked in that ep showed that they didn't completely convert the person to data. The transporter O'Brien and Barclay were using didn't scan those wiggly things but was able to transport them back anyways.
Oh boy, that was indeed a wierd one. I'm going to toss that in the same pile as Spock's Brain and Threshold.
Without reviewing the episode, I can't be sure, but I'm sure that in the episode where they restored Pulaski, O'Brien did make some comment about how long the outgoing pattern file was kept for, before being erased... Sadly, it's one of those Plot Neccessity situations which makes something as reliable/unreliable as it needed to be. On the flipside, the episode of Enterprise where they got caught in a storm, and were beamed up with other matter spliced into them, was a great example of the less advanced transporter system (Would also explain how, in Beyond, the transporter beam pulled Jaylah through, just because she was touching Kirk, rather than Scotty simply getting Kirk by himself )
Another example of transporter inconsistency, would be that Odan couldn't be transported, but Dax could be
As I recall, Odan didn't WANT to be transported. The Trill were apparently secretive about their symbionts at the time, though obviously this is retconned by "Blood Oath" in DS9.
Yeah it was because the biofilter would see the Symbiote as a parasite and remove it. why? Simply because it didn't know what it was.
Was that stated in The Host? In The Lives of Dax, it was speculated that the transporter would simply read the symbiont as an internal organ. To be honest, it would have been more plausible if they had stuck to that rule and reasoning with Dax, but, they didn't...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
At one point Trill Symbionts were not known to the Federation. That was the reason the biofilter didn't work with them. After the biofilter was reprogrammed to know what they are it was fine.
That bridge is... very large and empty. The Shenzou's bridge was also really large... Those other crew stations seem to be really far removed from the captain. The layout doesn't seem to lend itself to the group shots of the crew... although it is hard to get a proper feel for it without having more of the cast inside it.
That bridge is... very large and empty. The Shenzou's bridge was also really large... Those other crew stations seem to be really far removed from the captain. The layout doesn't seem to lend itself to the group shots of the crew... although it is hard to get a proper feel for it without having more of the cast inside it.
That's what I thought too. Plus the Turbolift doors look like they are from the Kelvinprise which seems odd to me also.
Since this a Discovery thread and not a transporter tech one here is a nice reveal of Discoverys bridge. https://youtu.be/9jdQH3EA2-k
On the one hand I do like their videos, they seem fairer than the knee-jerking reactionary rubbish certain fans will use. On the other hand they need to learn what a reboot is and stop using it to refer to both the KT films and DSC just because neither look like cardboard sets from the 60s.
I also think they're not really trying enough to point out the established links in certain designs, simply writing them off as so called 'generic sci-fi' despite those designs being inspired from ST in the first place. A circular bridge with centre seat and wall consoles and a paired drive console at the front is unquestionably ST, it is not Alien, it's not Star Wars, it's not UFO, Doctor Who, Space 1999, Red Dwarf or any other form of Sci-Fi, it's Star Trek.
And their constant rejection of the Kelvin and Franklin and their dismissal of the latter as 'JJverse' (really? Where was JJ in BEY?) shows they're not even bothering to look for prime ships the DSC ships can be based off of other than the NX.
They however do seem to be using their brain more than the average DSC hater here or on the You Tube comments and are willing to suggest possibilities such as both DSC and Shenzou pre-dating the Constitution Class and thus would't have the Cage style interior anyway.
As for the bridge itself, I'm not too keen, it does look too big, as big as the KT Enterprise's bridge, which is a little bit too big, too much empty space. The style of the Bridge does however resemble it's canon, prime counterparts of the Shenzou, the Kelvin, the NX, and the Franklin. Vaulted walls, blue and silver colour scheme, overhead lighting, physical controls and not jellybeans or LCARS touchscreens, high ceilings, etc.
Physically it doesn't resemble them, but neither of the others match each other closely enough to show a direct link. The TOS one looks nothing like the TMP one (other than being round) which looks nothing like the TNG one, which is nothing like the Defiant's which is nothing like the Voyager's etc.
That's what I thought too. Plus the Turbolift doors look like they are from the Kelvinprise which seems odd to me also.
That's a really odd thing to pick out as the KT doors resemble the TWoK era doors. which is right on the money because they look much better than plain curved cardboard.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Since this a Discovery thread and not a transporter tech one here is a nice reveal of Discoverys bridge. https://youtu.be/9jdQH3EA2-k
On the one hand I do like their videos, they seem fairer than the knee-jerking reactionary rubbish certain fans will use. On the other hand they need to learn what a reboot is and stop using it to refer to both the KT films and DSC just because neither look like cardboard sets from the 60s.
I also think they're not really trying enough to point out the established links in certain designs, simply writing them off as so called 'generic sci-fi' despite those designs being inspired from ST in the first place. A circular bridge with centre seat and wall consoles and a paired drive console at the front is unquestionably ST, it is not Alien, it's not Star Wars, it's not UFO, Doctor Who, Space 1999, Red Dwarf or any other form of Sci-Fi, it's Star Trek.
And their constant rejection of the Kelvin and Franklin and their dismissal of the latter as 'JJverse' (really? Where was JJ in BEY?) shows they're not even bothering to look for prime ships the DSC ships can be based off of other than the NX.
They however do seem to be using their brain more than the average DSC hater here or on the You Tube comments and are willing to suggest possibilities such as both DSC and Shenzou pre-dating the Constitution Class and thus would't have the Cage style interior anyway.
As for the bridge itself, I'm not too keen, it does look too big, as big as the KT Enterprise's bridge, which is a little bit too big, too much empty space. The style of the Bridge does however resemble it's canon, prime counterparts of the Shenzou, the Kelvin, the NX, and the Franklin. Vaulted walls, blue and silver colour scheme, overhead lighting, physical controls and not jellybeans or LCARS touchscreens, high ceilings, etc.
Physically it doesn't resemble them, but neither of the others match each other closely enough to show a direct link. The TOS one looks nothing like the TMP one (other than being round) which looks nothing like the TNG one, which is nothing like the Defiant's which is nothing like the Voyager's etc.
That's what I thought too. Plus the Turbolift doors look like they are from the Kelvinprise which seems odd to me also.
That's a really odd thing to pick out as the KT doors resemble the TWoK era doors. which is right on the money because they look much better than plain curved cardboard.
You need to learn that not everyone is as literal as you, and that the language used by most people, uses less-than-precise terms which are generally accepted, even if they aren't absolutely accurate to dictionary definitions.
For example, would you say that you are going to do the vacuuming? Or would you say that you are going to do the hoovering?
Hoover might only be a brand, but it has become synonymous to the type of device and the activity. I've heard people say they're going to get Henry out and do the hoovering (and yet there's no Hoover involved! Shock Horror! They must be Using The Wrong Words!!!!!)
Such it is with the Kelvin Timeline and that series of movies.
They are generally refered to as reboots. They were refered to as the JJverse before the term Kelvin Timeline was created at CBS, and that is what the zeitgeist generated, so the term has stuck. Popular convention, over dictated speech.
It doesn't matter if JJ didn't direct Beyond, he still had a hand in it, and it ran on the tracks which he laid down in 09 and Into Darkness. He directed two out of three. That's the majority of that body of work. It's understandable why his name is so heavily linked to people's concept of those films.
And yet there wasn't a similar occurence with the Force Awakens. I've not seen anyone refering to that as JJWars.
If I had to guess at the reason, I would guess that it's because with TFA, he stayed within the same visual style as the original movies, with some plausible progressions, such as the design of Poe's X-Wing. The Star Trek movies (due to licensing reasons, we now find out) had to look different to TOS. But Star Wars, that was created under the aegis of Disney, who had bought all the rights to Star Wars, so he was able to make TFA in a visually consistent way, which he was contractually unable to do, with 09 and Into Darkness.
So that's why people call it JJtrek.
That's why those movies (And Discovery) are refered to by the zeitgeist as reboots, even if they may not fit your fanatical devotion to the definition of the word 'reboot'.
You're welcome.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up
Avery Brooks has been referred to as the first African American Captain and Kate Mulgrew has been referred to as the first female Captain many, many times over the years throughout various news bits, interviews and documentaries. I grant you, it isn't necessary to say it because quite frankly it doesn't matter, however it's not unheard of Trek to market characters this way.
It's also demonstrably false. Wrath of Khan had Captain Terrell, and Voyage Home had Captain Sinclair. But Captain Sisko and Captain Janeway were the first leading captains, of their respective demographics. Like you say, it doesn't (or at least it shouldn't) matter, and as mentioned before by myself and others, Trek always worked by Showing the lack of need for identity politics. And yet the execs repeatedly pander to it in their promotional material.
Seven and T'Pol, yeah, pretty gratuitous. One of the trailers showed Burnham in her space-knickers in what looked like Phlox's scanning chamber. So they're clearly not above using good old T&A to try and lure some viewers. Another strike against them.
Why is it a "strike against them?" Trek has always had this starting back in TOS and more often than not, for gratuitous purposes.
T&A is nothing new to Star Trek. Holding that against Discovery is a little silly.
Given that you don't really care for an explanation of my thoughts, I don't feel the need to provide one.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
> @valoreah said: > silverlobes#2676 wrote: » > > When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up > > > > > Avery Brooks has been referred to as the first African American Captain and Kate Mulgrew has been referred to as the first female Captain many, many times over the years throughout various news bits, interviews and documentaries. I grant you, it isn't necessary to say it because quite frankly it doesn't matter, however it's not unheard of Trek to market characters this way.
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
And steps like this can be very important as a lack of popular cultural role models really interferes with the feeling of being perceived as "normal". Prior to Luke Cage and Black Panther there were virtually no black superheroes on the screens and it took a really long time before homosexuals weren't depicted as comic relief any more and it's still common to use horribly distorted stereotypical pictures of ethnicity or sexuality for laughs. Integration into pop culture is a very important step towards an inclusive society.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Don't forget about characters like Blade, Cyborg, Storm, Misty Knight, Falcon and War Machine to name a few more and all great characters in their own right.
But none of those had the pop cultural exposition the current MCU offers, but you are right essentially.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
And steps like this can be very important as a lack of popular cultural role models really interferes with the feeling of being perceived as "normal". Prior to Luke Cage and Black Panther there were virtually no black superheroes on the screens and it took a really long time before homosexuals weren't depicted as comic relief any more and it's still common to use horribly distorted stereotypical pictures of ethnicity or sexuality for laughs. Integration into pop culture is a very important step towards an inclusive society.
I'm a little confused, but could you clarify, how and what, you define as an Inclusive Society?
Seth MacFarlane, for example, will frequently use minority characters (as well as any other character) as the butt of his jokes in stuff like Family Guy. It could be argued, that that is inclusive, as it's treating those characters just the same as any other. In South Park, no one ever made fun of Timmy for being disabled and in a wheelchair. He was just another of their friends, and treated just the same as any of the other kids.
Same as with TOS: They never made a big deal about Uhura's skin color, or Chekov's or Sulu's ancestry. Because it wasn't relevant. That's an inclusive society. Take Voyager's Odd Couple Tuvok and Paris, for example. Paris would often bust Tuvok's chops about Vulcan Issues, yet it was always abundantly clear, that there was Massive mutual respect between the two. Tuvok was clearly the 'big brother', but it was always clear that he valued Paris' input.
So what're you defining as Inclusive? Where it's okay to make jokes about one demographic, but not another? Where one demographic can be the butt of a joke, but another Never can be? Because that's not inclusionary, that's Protected Class. Or maybe one where it's not okay to make jokes about Any demographic? Because that's an even scarier thought into dicatorial conformity
*MoarExtrra text blahblahblahblah
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Given that you don't really care for an explanation of my thoughts, I don't feel the need to provide one.
Which, generally, translates into English as "I don't have one."
Incidentally, using "hoover" in place of "vacuum" is a local neologism, not a generally-accepted reusage of a trade name (as "kleenex" has become synonymous with "facial tissue", and Bayer has lost the trademark on "aspirin" for salicylic acid). Everywhere I've lived in the US (basically, everywhere west of the Missouri River) would look at you oddly, and possibly ask what you're talking about, if you said you were going to "do the hoovering".
Similarly, a few malcontents trying to call either the movie Trek or TRIBBLE a "reboot" just because it looks different doesn't mean that's what it is. It's just what you want to call it. Get over yourself, you're not that important. (Neither am I, but the key difference here is that I acknowledge the fact.)
As for bridge design - the center seat, surrounded by consoles, isn't generic, it is in fact a specifically Star Trek design. No ship in fiction of which I'm aware (and I'm aware of quite a few) had that design, or anything like it - in the majority of cases, in fact, they had them laid out more like a jetliner cockpit than anything else.
However, the design is considered sufficiently practical that, starting with the destroyer USS Zumwalt DDG-1000 (commanded by Captain James Kirk!), the US Navy has decided to use a similar design for ship bridges.
I was talking about instances people play "The negro" or "The flamboyant TRIBBLE" as opposed to emancipated roles we see more and more of today.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up
Avery Brooks has been referred to as the first African American Captain and Kate Mulgrew has been referred to as the first female Captain many, many times over the years throughout various news bits, interviews and documentaries. I grant you, it isn't necessary to say it because quite frankly it doesn't matter, however it's not unheard of Trek to market characters this way.
Seven and T'Pol, yeah, pretty gratuitous. One of the trailers showed Burnham in her space-knickers in what looked like Phlox's scanning chamber. So they're clearly not above using good old T&A to try and lure some viewers. Another strike against them.
Why is it a "strike against them?" Trek has always had this starting back in TOS and more often than not, for gratuitous purposes.
T&A is nothing new to Star Trek. Holding that against Discovery is a little silly.
Strike against them? For these women who feel liberated by the idea to remove the shackles of what is expected off them, something like this on screen is just as good for them as it is for the producers even though some people may find it degrading. For womens rights back then and even now it was a key moment in their movement, gone are the days women can't show more than a little ankle out in public with big heavy restricting dresses where they need to look up to these backwards values.
if it was intended as excessive or not, women showing skin to promote their cause on a regular basis has always been apart of star trek, it's the perfect platform to broadcast their message as it's still one of the most controversial space opera series to of graced the TV screens in 50 years and i doubt it's done doing so regardless if there is the expected T&A to go with the space version of the German party from 1930-40's and the usual violence.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
And steps like this can be very important as a lack of popular cultural role models really interferes with the feeling of being perceived as "normal". Prior to Luke Cage and Black Panther there were virtually no black superheroes on the screens and it took a really long time before homosexuals weren't depicted as comic relief any more and it's still common to use horribly distorted stereotypical pictures of ethnicity or sexuality for laughs. Integration into pop culture is a very important step towards an inclusive society.
I'm a little confused, but could you clarify, how and what, you define as an Inclusive Society?
Seth MacFarlane, for example, will frequently use minority characters (as well as any other character) as the butt of his jokes in stuff like Family Guy. It could be argued, that that is inclusive, as it's treating those characters just the same as any other. In South Park, no one ever made fun of Timmy for being disabled and in a wheelchair. He was just another of their friends, and treated just the same as any of the other kids.
For comedies, it's kinda pointless, since everyone is being mocked. Though if some are only mocked for stereotypes and not something unique about the character, it might be a problem if only the "minorities" get this treatment. Of course, in some comedies everyone is just a stereotype with know unique characteristics.
Same as with TOS: They never made a big deal about Uhura's skin color, or Chekov's or Sulu's ancestry. Because it wasn't relevant. That's an inclusive society. Take Voyager's Odd Couple Tuvok and Paris, for example. Paris would often bust Tuvok's chops about Vulcan Issues, yet it was always abundantly clear, that there was Massive mutual respect between the two. Tuvok was clearly the 'big brother', but it was always clear that he valued Paris' input.
Do you actually really still remember the advertisements that were made for TOS?
Though I suspect they wouldn't highlight it much, because things needed to be a lot more under the Radar back then.
So what're you defining as Inclusive? Where it's okay to make jokes about one demographic, but not another? Where one demographic can be the butt of a joke, but another Never can be? Because that's not inclusionary, that's Protected Class. Or maybe one where it's not okay to make jokes about Any demographic? Because that's an even scarier thought into dicatorial conformity
*MoarExtrra text blahblahblahblah
Are people only defined by their minority status? Then you're doing it wrong.
That doesn't say anything about the advertisement material, however - Some details of the character are better revealed and explored during the show, since it's part of what makes it interesting.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
The only one of the three characters that i could see returning is Pike, Kirk and Spock have their history in detail and don't need further exploring but very little is known about Pike beyond what was seen at the start of TOS, we got a little backstory on what happened to Pike and how it's effected him, but knowing a bit more could give clues as why he felt like this and how he is viewed by others.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Given that you don't really care for an explanation of my thoughts, I don't feel the need to provide one.
Which, generally, translates into English as "I don't have one."
Incidentally, using "hoover" in place of "vacuum" is a local neologism, not a generally-accepted reusage of a trade name (as "kleenex" has become synonymous with "facial tissue", and Bayer has lost the trademark on "aspirin" for salicylic acid). Everywhere I've lived in the US (basically, everywhere west of the Missouri River) would look at you oddly, and possibly ask what you're talking about, if you said you were going to "do the hoovering".
Similarly, a few malcontents trying to call either the movie Trek or TRIBBLE a "reboot" just because it looks different doesn't mean that's what it is. It's just what you want to call it. Get over yourself, you're not that important. (Neither am I, but the key difference here is that I acknowledge the fact.)
As for bridge design - the center seat, surrounded by consoles, isn't generic, it is in fact a specifically Star Trek design. No ship in fiction of which I'm aware (and I'm aware of quite a few) had that design, or anything like it - in the majority of cases, in fact, they had them laid out more like a jetliner cockpit than anything else.
However, the design is considered sufficiently practical that, starting with the destroyer USS Zumwalt DDG-1000 (commanded by Captain James Kirk!), the US Navy has decided to use a similar design for ship bridges.
Given that you don't really care for an explanation of my thoughts, I don't feel the need to provide one.
Which, generally, translates into English as "I don't have one."
And in this instance, it translates as "I'm not wasting my time explaining my thoughts to someone who will only argue/counter/dismiss/reject whatever answer is provided for the sake of contrarian lulz."
Incidentally, using "hoover" in place of "vacuum" is a local neologism, not a generally-accepted reusage of a trade name (as "kleenex" has become synonymous with "facial tissue", and Bayer has lost the trademark on "aspirin" for salicylic acid). Everywhere I've lived in the US (basically, everywhere west of the Missouri River) would look at you oddly, and possibly ask what you're talking about, if you said you were going to "do the hoovering".
Sure, there are regional variations in language and expressions. Is it coke? or soda? or pop? or even cold-drink?
The point is, communities define their language as they use it. It's only the most pedantic who insist on everyone else using words as per the definition which They want it to mean (even if said preference is backed up by a dictionary) There's a difference between being accurate, and being pedantic. The majority of fandom (including how the media refers to the JJ movies) is quite happy to use the term 'reboot' as a catch-all summary for them. Pretty sure I've seen articles referring to Discovery as a reboot as well.
Now while that may not be definition accurate, if that's what the generally accepted view is, then no amount of pedantism is going to make them stop using the term
Similarly, a few malcontents trying to call either the movie Trek or TRIBBLE a "reboot" just because it looks different doesn't mean that's what it is. It's just what you want to call it. Get over yourself, you're not that important. (Neither am I, but the key difference here is that I acknowledge the fact.)
But you clearly Don't acknowledge that, or you wouldn't be trying to put me in my place and telling me to get over myself, for explaining zeitgeist concepts to someone who clearly doesn't get them
As for bridge design - the center seat, surrounded by consoles, isn't generic, it is in fact a specifically Star Trek design. No ship in fiction of which I'm aware (and I'm aware of quite a few) had that design, or anything like it - in the majority of cases, in fact, they had them laid out more like a jetliner cockpit than anything else.
True, it's pretty much only Trek, Galaxy Quest and The Orville, which go with that kind of layout. The bridge of the White Stars were a bit more on the Trek line, but I think the Earth Force destroyer bridges were indeed more like a cockpit...
However, the design is considered sufficiently practical that, starting with the destroyer USS Zumwalt DDG-1000 (commanded by Captain James Kirk!), the US Navy has decided to use a similar design for ship bridges.
Awesome
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
And steps like this can be very important as a lack of popular cultural role models really interferes with the feeling of being perceived as "normal". Prior to Luke Cage and Black Panther there were virtually no black superheroes on the screens and it took a really long time before homosexuals weren't depicted as comic relief any more and it's still common to use horribly distorted stereotypical pictures of ethnicity or sexuality for laughs. Integration into pop culture is a very important step towards an inclusive society.
I'm a little confused, but could you clarify, how and what, you define as an Inclusive Society?
Seth MacFarlane, for example, will frequently use minority characters (as well as any other character) as the butt of his jokes in stuff like Family Guy. It could be argued, that that is inclusive, as it's treating those characters just the same as any other. In South Park, no one ever made fun of Timmy for being disabled and in a wheelchair. He was just another of their friends, and treated just the same as any of the other kids.
For comedies, it's kinda pointless, since everyone is being mocked. Though if some are only mocked for stereotypes and not something unique about the character, it might be a problem if only the "minorities" get this treatment. Of course, in some comedies everyone is just a stereotype with know unique characteristics.
I was referring more along the lines of something Trey Parker once said in interview, about how it has to be okay to laugh at everything and everyone, because to do otherwise, is assigning or allowing one group (for whatever reason) protected class status over another, and thus undercutting the notion of equality. Angrytarg explained what she was refering to, and I'm appreciative for that clarification
Same as with TOS: They never made a big deal about Uhura's skin color, or Chekov's or Sulu's ancestry. Because it wasn't relevant. That's an inclusive society. Take Voyager's Odd Couple Tuvok and Paris, for example. Paris would often bust Tuvok's chops about Vulcan Issues, yet it was always abundantly clear, that there was Massive mutual respect between the two. Tuvok was clearly the 'big brother', but it was always clear that he valued Paris' input.
Do you actually really still remember the advertisements that were made for TOS?
No, they were a little before my time.
So what're you defining as Inclusive? Where it's okay to make jokes about one demographic, but not another? Where one demographic can be the butt of a joke, but another Never can be? Because that's not inclusionary, that's Protected Class. Or maybe one where it's not okay to make jokes about Any demographic? Because that's an even scarier thought into dicatorial conformity
*MoarExtrra text blahblahblahblah
Are people only defined by their minority status? Then you're doing it wrong.
Tell that to the current ideologues and their identitarian politics which has America in the grip of a cultural civil war
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up
Avery Brooks has been referred to as the first African American Captain and Kate Mulgrew has been referred to as the first female Captain many, many times over the years throughout various news bits, interviews and documentaries. I grant you, it isn't necessary to say it because quite frankly it doesn't matter, however it's not unheard of Trek to market characters this way.
Seven and T'Pol, yeah, pretty gratuitous. One of the trailers showed Burnham in her space-knickers in what looked like Phlox's scanning chamber. So they're clearly not above using good old T&A to try and lure some viewers. Another strike against them.
Why is it a "strike against them?" Trek has always had this starting back in TOS and more often than not, for gratuitous purposes.
T&A is nothing new to Star Trek. Holding that against Discovery is a little silly.
Strike against them? For these women who feel liberated by the idea to remove the shackles of what is expected off them, something like this on screen is just as good for them as it is for the producers even though some people may find it degrading. For womens rights back then and even now it was a key moment in their movement, gone are the days women can't show more than a little ankle out in public with big heavy restricting dresses where they need to look up to these backwards values.
if it was intended as excessive or not, women showing skin to promote their cause on a regular basis has always been apart of star trek, it's the perfect platform to broadcast their message as it's still one of the most controversial space opera series to of graced the TV screens in 50 years and i doubt it's done doing so regardless if there is the expected T&A to go with the space version of the German party from 1930-40's and the usual violence.
They are generally refered to as reboots. They were refered to as the JJverse before the term Kelvin Timeline was created at CBS, and that is what the zeitgeist generated, so the term has stuck. Popular convention, over dictated speech.
And it's still not accurate. Especially as hoover vs. vacuum cleaner is not used as the crux of an argument is it?
It doesn't matter if JJ didn't direct Beyond, he still had a hand in it, and it ran on the tracks which he laid down in 09 and Into Darkness. He directed two out of three. That's the majority of that body of work. It's understandable why his name is so heavily linked to people's concept of those films.
No, all the influence of BEY was Pegg and Lin, unless you're claiming every single part of the first two films was solely JJs influence, so what carried over is down to him and not the dozens of other artists, writers, etc that created the series. So again, I don't care how common it is, it's not accurate.
That's why those movies (And Discovery) are refered to by the zeitgeist as reboots, even if they may not fit your fanatical devotion to the definition of the word 'reboot'.
So a person who would refer to a vacuum cleaner as that is also fanatical? OR just correct? You seem to be getting slightly hysterical over this.
And now I remember why I hid your posts in the first place, lots of empty words and a general tone of condescension with nothing of value. Oh well, back to that again I suppose. Still, as I'm hiding your replies you'll be able to get the last word in, that'll go nicely with your ego, an overwhelming internet victory like that,
You're welcome.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Comments
When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up :-\
Yes, fans are all older than they were, and I grant you, tastes do indeed change. But. Their marketing campaign is relying Very heavily on the nostalgia angle. One can't have it both ways. One can't try and create something New, and rely on the nostalgia for something Old, to lure in subscribers. Not just an audience, but a Paying audience. Why has their been such a backlash against Discovery? Because people were lured in with one thing, then given something else. To say they feel lied to, is to ignore the fact that they have been lied to. If not directly, then certainly by omission.
Seven and T'Pol, yeah, pretty gratuitous. One of the trailers showed Burnham in her space-knickers in what looked like Phlox's scanning chamber. So they're clearly not above using good old T&A to try and lure some viewers. Another strike against them.
If they wanted to do dark and gritty adult sci-fi, they could've just done it. Although I've never watched it, I do remember hearing of a 90s German sci-fi called Lexx, which was apparently pretty much just onrop, in a sci-fi dressing. The options are pretty much infinite, but as I've said countless times before, some NewName sci-fi couldn't be relied upon to pull in rubessubscribers in the way which something titled 'Star Trek' can. And again, their aim is for a flagship show to get the subscribers for the streaming service.
The sad thing, is had they come clean with what they're doing from the start, rather than all this cloak and dagger shenanigans and backtracking over revelations which weren't well received, many of the people currently against Discovery, would likely have been willing to give it a go.
Regardless of how it's been catagorized in reviews, which are, at the end of the day, only personal opinions, Star Trek is a ludicrously popular franchise. Regardless of if it was camp, or cartoony, or any of those things, people still loved (and continue to love) it.
My earliest exposure, was TOS, but DS9 became my favorite. I also really like the aesthetic which the game has for the 25th century Odyssey uniforms. But. I also see people commenting, that the thing they like about the TOS content, is how true it is to that original aesthetic, in looks, and sounds' and 'feel'. That aesthetic still has its fans. Heck, by choice, I would have Kek flying round in the refit Constitution all the time, because that new skin Thomas cooked up, is The Business, and it just screams 'Star Trek'. I might like the Vesper nacelles (I have a softspot for the Excelsior) so it's not 100% like the Enterprise of the movies, but it still evokes that feeling.
Without that connection, Discovery could easily wind up as generic sci-fi, and derided for riding on the legacy of the title, rather than actually finding its own feet. Time will tell...
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Without reviewing the episode, I can't be sure, but I'm sure that in the episode where they restored Pulaski, O'Brien did make some comment about how long the outgoing pattern file was kept for, before being erased... Sadly, it's one of those Plot Neccessity situations which makes something as reliable/unreliable as it needed to be. On the flipside, the episode of Enterprise where they got caught in a storm, and were beamed up with other matter spliced into them, was a great example of the less advanced transporter system (Would also explain how, in Beyond, the transporter beam pulled Jaylah through, just because she was touching Kirk, rather than Scotty simply getting Kirk by himself
Was that stated in The Host? In The Lives of Dax, it was speculated that the transporter would simply read the symbiont as an internal organ. To be honest, it would have been more plausible if they had stuck to that rule and reasoning with Dax, but, they didn't...
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
That's what I thought too. Plus the Turbolift doors look like they are from the Kelvinprise which seems odd to me also.
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
On the one hand I do like their videos, they seem fairer than the knee-jerking reactionary rubbish certain fans will use. On the other hand they need to learn what a reboot is and stop using it to refer to both the KT films and DSC just because neither look like cardboard sets from the 60s.
I also think they're not really trying enough to point out the established links in certain designs, simply writing them off as so called 'generic sci-fi' despite those designs being inspired from ST in the first place. A circular bridge with centre seat and wall consoles and a paired drive console at the front is unquestionably ST, it is not Alien, it's not Star Wars, it's not UFO, Doctor Who, Space 1999, Red Dwarf or any other form of Sci-Fi, it's Star Trek.
And their constant rejection of the Kelvin and Franklin and their dismissal of the latter as 'JJverse' (really? Where was JJ in BEY?) shows they're not even bothering to look for prime ships the DSC ships can be based off of other than the NX.
They however do seem to be using their brain more than the average DSC hater here or on the You Tube comments and are willing to suggest possibilities such as both DSC and Shenzou pre-dating the Constitution Class and thus would't have the Cage style interior anyway.
As for the bridge itself, I'm not too keen, it does look too big, as big as the KT Enterprise's bridge, which is a little bit too big, too much empty space. The style of the Bridge does however resemble it's canon, prime counterparts of the Shenzou, the Kelvin, the NX, and the Franklin. Vaulted walls, blue and silver colour scheme, overhead lighting, physical controls and not jellybeans or LCARS touchscreens, high ceilings, etc.
Physically it doesn't resemble them, but neither of the others match each other closely enough to show a direct link. The TOS one looks nothing like the TMP one (other than being round) which looks nothing like the TNG one, which is nothing like the Defiant's which is nothing like the Voyager's etc.
That's a really odd thing to pick out as the KT doors resemble the TWoK era doors. which is right on the money because they look much better than plain curved cardboard.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
For example, would you say that you are going to do the vacuuming? Or would you say that you are going to do the hoovering?
Hoover might only be a brand, but it has become synonymous to the type of device and the activity. I've heard people say they're going to get Henry out and do the hoovering (and yet there's no Hoover involved! Shock Horror! They must be Using The Wrong Words!!!!!)
Such it is with the Kelvin Timeline and that series of movies.
They are generally refered to as reboots. They were refered to as the JJverse before the term Kelvin Timeline was created at CBS, and that is what the zeitgeist generated, so the term has stuck. Popular convention, over dictated speech.
It doesn't matter if JJ didn't direct Beyond, he still had a hand in it, and it ran on the tracks which he laid down in 09 and Into Darkness. He directed two out of three. That's the majority of that body of work. It's understandable why his name is so heavily linked to people's concept of those films.
And yet there wasn't a similar occurence with the Force Awakens. I've not seen anyone refering to that as JJWars.
If I had to guess at the reason, I would guess that it's because with TFA, he stayed within the same visual style as the original movies, with some plausible progressions, such as the design of Poe's X-Wing. The Star Trek movies (due to licensing reasons, we now find out) had to look different to TOS. But Star Wars, that was created under the aegis of Disney, who had bought all the rights to Star Wars, so he was able to make TFA in a visually consistent way, which he was contractually unable to do, with 09 and Into Darkness.
So that's why people call it JJtrek.
That's why those movies (And Discovery) are refered to by the zeitgeist as reboots, even if they may not fit your fanatical devotion to the definition of the word 'reboot'.
You're welcome.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
The front console, by which they were standing, for aome reason reminded me of the bridge of the NSEA Protector
And there's another ship with that 'directly behind the captain's chair exit,: The USS Orville
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
It's also demonstrably false. Wrath of Khan had Captain Terrell, and Voyage Home had Captain Sinclair. But Captain Sisko and Captain Janeway were the first leading captains, of their respective demographics. Like you say, it doesn't (or at least it shouldn't) matter, and as mentioned before by myself and others, Trek always worked by Showing the lack of need for identity politics. And yet the execs repeatedly pander to it in their promotional material.
Given that you don't really care for an explanation of my thoughts, I don't feel the need to provide one.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
> silverlobes#2676 wrote: »
>
> When they have to use a character's sexuality as a selling point, I'm not inclined to get my hopes up
>
>
>
>
> Avery Brooks has been referred to as the first African American Captain and Kate Mulgrew has been referred to as the first female Captain many, many times over the years throughout various news bits, interviews and documentaries. I grant you, it isn't necessary to say it because quite frankly it doesn't matter, however it's not unheard of Trek to market characters this way.
Ira Steven Behr also stated in the interview I linked on the previous page that with Sisko they deliberately set out to have a non-white lead ("a brown captain" as he put it in the story), though not specifically a black one. So that's nothing new either.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
And steps like this can be very important as a lack of popular cultural role models really interferes with the feeling of being perceived as "normal". Prior to Luke Cage and Black Panther there were virtually no black superheroes on the screens and it took a really long time before homosexuals weren't depicted as comic relief any more and it's still common to use horribly distorted stereotypical pictures of ethnicity or sexuality for laughs. Integration into pop culture is a very important step towards an inclusive society.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
But none of those had the pop cultural exposition the current MCU offers, but you are right essentially.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I'm a little confused, but could you clarify, how and what, you define as an Inclusive Society?
Seth MacFarlane, for example, will frequently use minority characters (as well as any other character) as the butt of his jokes in stuff like Family Guy. It could be argued, that that is inclusive, as it's treating those characters just the same as any other. In South Park, no one ever made fun of Timmy for being disabled and in a wheelchair. He was just another of their friends, and treated just the same as any of the other kids.
Same as with TOS: They never made a big deal about Uhura's skin color, or Chekov's or Sulu's ancestry. Because it wasn't relevant. That's an inclusive society. Take Voyager's Odd Couple Tuvok and Paris, for example. Paris would often bust Tuvok's chops about Vulcan Issues, yet it was always abundantly clear, that there was Massive mutual respect between the two. Tuvok was clearly the 'big brother', but it was always clear that he valued Paris' input.
So what're you defining as Inclusive? Where it's okay to make jokes about one demographic, but not another? Where one demographic can be the butt of a joke, but another Never can be? Because that's not inclusionary, that's Protected Class. Or maybe one where it's not okay to make jokes about Any demographic? Because that's an even scarier thought into dicatorial conformity
*MoarExtrra text blahblahblahblah
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Incidentally, using "hoover" in place of "vacuum" is a local neologism, not a generally-accepted reusage of a trade name (as "kleenex" has become synonymous with "facial tissue", and Bayer has lost the trademark on "aspirin" for salicylic acid). Everywhere I've lived in the US (basically, everywhere west of the Missouri River) would look at you oddly, and possibly ask what you're talking about, if you said you were going to "do the hoovering".
Similarly, a few malcontents trying to call either the movie Trek or TRIBBLE a "reboot" just because it looks different doesn't mean that's what it is. It's just what you want to call it. Get over yourself, you're not that important. (Neither am I, but the key difference here is that I acknowledge the fact.)
As for bridge design - the center seat, surrounded by consoles, isn't generic, it is in fact a specifically Star Trek design. No ship in fiction of which I'm aware (and I'm aware of quite a few) had that design, or anything like it - in the majority of cases, in fact, they had them laid out more like a jetliner cockpit than anything else.
However, the design is considered sufficiently practical that, starting with the destroyer USS Zumwalt DDG-1000 (commanded by Captain James Kirk!), the US Navy has decided to use a similar design for ship bridges.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Strike against them? For these women who feel liberated by the idea to remove the shackles of what is expected off them, something like this on screen is just as good for them as it is for the producers even though some people may find it degrading. For womens rights back then and even now it was a key moment in their movement, gone are the days women can't show more than a little ankle out in public with big heavy restricting dresses where they need to look up to these backwards values.
if it was intended as excessive or not, women showing skin to promote their cause on a regular basis has always been apart of star trek, it's the perfect platform to broadcast their message as it's still one of the most controversial space opera series to of graced the TV screens in 50 years and i doubt it's done doing so regardless if there is the expected T&A to go with the space version of the German party from 1930-40's and the usual violence.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Do you actually really still remember the advertisements that were made for TOS?
Though I suspect they wouldn't highlight it much, because things needed to be a lot more under the Radar back then.
Are people only defined by their minority status? Then you're doing it wrong.
That doesn't say anything about the advertisement material, however - Some details of the character are better revealed and explored during the show, since it's part of what makes it interesting.
The only one of the three characters that i could see returning is Pike, Kirk and Spock have their history in detail and don't need further exploring but very little is known about Pike beyond what was seen at the start of TOS, we got a little backstory on what happened to Pike and how it's effected him, but knowing a bit more could give clues as why he felt like this and how he is viewed by others.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Sure, there are regional variations in language and expressions. Is it coke? or soda? or pop? or even cold-drink?
The point is, communities define their language as they use it. It's only the most pedantic who insist on everyone else using words as per the definition which They want it to mean (even if said preference is backed up by a dictionary) There's a difference between being accurate, and being pedantic. The majority of fandom (including how the media refers to the JJ movies) is quite happy to use the term 'reboot' as a catch-all summary for them. Pretty sure I've seen articles referring to Discovery as a reboot as well.
Now while that may not be definition accurate, if that's what the generally accepted view is, then no amount of pedantism is going to make them stop using the term
But you clearly Don't acknowledge that, or you wouldn't be trying to put me in my place and telling me to get over myself, for explaining zeitgeist concepts to someone who clearly doesn't get them
True, it's pretty much only Trek, Galaxy Quest and The Orville, which go with that kind of layout. The bridge of the White Stars were a bit more on the Trek line, but I think the Earth Force destroyer bridges were indeed more like a cockpit...
Awesome
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
No, they were a little before my time.
Tell that to the current ideologues and their identitarian politics which has America in the grip of a cultural civil war
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And it's still not accurate. Especially as hoover vs. vacuum cleaner is not used as the crux of an argument is it?
No, all the influence of BEY was Pegg and Lin, unless you're claiming every single part of the first two films was solely JJs influence, so what carried over is down to him and not the dozens of other artists, writers, etc that created the series. So again, I don't care how common it is, it's not accurate.
You're not looking very far then.
So a person who would refer to a vacuum cleaner as that is also fanatical? OR just correct? You seem to be getting slightly hysterical over this.
And now I remember why I hid your posts in the first place, lots of empty words and a general tone of condescension with nothing of value. Oh well, back to that again I suppose. Still, as I'm hiding your replies you'll be able to get the last word in, that'll go nicely with your ego, an overwhelming internet victory like that,
You're welcome.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!