posted
"like Obi-Wan Kenobi's disappearing lightsaber in SW"
"Eh? What, the actual prop wasn't on his robe in one scene, but back for the other?"
I think he refers to a point during the fight with Vadar when, for some reason, his lighsabre seems to dissapear. Or at least shrink down to nothingness.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
quote:Originally posted by targetemployee: Now, in the latest version (one of three or four), we see that the events which occured at the Headquarters were prior to the Epsilon Nine sequence (7410.20 is earlier than 7411.40). If stardate 7411.40 is retained, what would be the reason that Admiral Kirk demanded his former command?
What's the big deal? Lieutenant Yar died on stardate 41601.3 ("Skin of Evil") but visited Minos on stardate 41798.2 ("The Arsenal of Freedom"). Spock died on stardate 8127 (Star trek III) but was at Starfleet Academy on stardate 8130 (Star Trek II). Stardates have always been useless for pinpoint relative dating, even if they might give a general timeframe for events.
If we want to use Gene Roddenberry's old explanation of time dilation and unusual warp effects, Epsilon IX is a long way from Earth, moving at a different relativistic velocity, and the rendezvousing scouts at a different position and velocity still. Wherever the Revere and Columbia are meeting, it's stardate 7411 while it's still 7410 on Earth. We'll leave the potential paradoxes to the Temporal Investigation spooks.
posted
Um... Didn't the "chatter" say that the two ships were being ordered to rendezvous on that stardate? Obviously it couldn't be the current one.
"You two ships rendezvous! Immediately, if not sooner! And don't give me any of that 'we're two-hundred light-years apart' crap! I want you together yesterday!"
It would have the be a date in the future, don't you think?
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Maybe it was an old message being relayed? Maybe it was a review of a previously sent message being sent back as an acknowledgement.. I love this stuff
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by targetemployee: ...space station Epsilon Nine received intelligence on the failed Klingon attack on stardate 7411.40. How do I know this? Listen to the background chatter...in the latest version (one of three or four), we see that the events which occured at the Headquarters were prior to the Epsilon Nine sequence (7410.20 is earlier than 7411.40)...
As Arnold Rimmer would say, "Wrong. Wrong. Brimming over with wrongability." The dialogue actually goes:
"Scout Columbia, NCC-621, to rendezvous with scout Revere, NCC-595 on stardate 7411.4. Further orders will be relayed at that time. Signed, Commodore Probert, Starfleet. End of transmission."
7411.4 is refered to as "at that time", meaning future tense, meaning it isn't that date.
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
I don't mind being corrected when I have written inadvertencies into a response. However, I do mind gloating over those inadvertencies by you or anyone else.
posted
I think what you've done there, TargetEmployee, is mistake "gloating" for "being funny". As a hint, if someone is quoting someone from a TV show who is a complete twat, then they are possibly trying to be humorous. Watch out for that, eh?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
We are all a bunch of snots anyway.. I particularly had a good time with someone who displayed very little knowledge of Knight Rider.. (actually the fact that I know so much about Knight Rider, more than the other person, doesnt necessarily give me reason to gloat.. perhaps i should be a little ashamed)
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, what I displayed was little knowledge of the character "Michael Knight". If someone had ever mentioned "Knight Rider" in that thread, I probably could have put the two together.
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: (actually the fact that I know so much about Knight Rider, more than the other person, doesnt necessarily give me reason to gloat.. perhaps i should be a little ashamed)
Very ashamed, I think... (shudders at the thought of David Hasselhoff's chest hair)
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Since this thread has gone off the subject (the Star Trek I DVD) ill drag it back towards it (yet not fully home) by asking
What requirements are there to watch a DVD on a computer.. a DVD player is probably a few years off for my household, but my computer is doing pretty good (i should know, i built it) if i were to watch a DVD on my PC..: Do i need a special DVD drive or can a CD drive read it? what system requirements (or software) would be required? how about the availability of boards so i could output to a TV?.. (and input while im at it, because ive been dying to become a screencapper)
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
You also need software to play the movie. However, your DVD drive should come with some, unless you buy it out of the back of a '74 Econoline. Screencapturing is, I think, usually part of the basic package. Still, it would pay to check before you buy the drive.
Watching it on TV is a video card matter, though. Do you have input/output plugins?
The dialogue actually goes:
(shudders at the thought of David Hasselhoff's chest hair)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
