Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
The Braga Strikes back
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The_Tom: [QB] Points by and large well-taken, Bernd. I think my big thing about continuity is not that errors in the past were "bigger" or "smaller" than those on today. It's that for 35 years the fact that all the facts don't compute has never seemed to stop people from enjoying Trek. TOS is rife with errors (I don't consider that the mark of an inferior series by any stretch of the imagination) and that never stopped people from immersing themselves in the universe. Similarly, TNG stepped on plenty of toes and people didn't let that bother them (with the exception of James Dixons and his crusade to rack Michael Okuda for chronologizing in a contrary manner). The audience, intelligent lifeforms (like your quote says) that they were, were more than capable of understanding it was a TV show and filing the fact that occasionally the facts didn't square (like the idea of Data being unique and thus conflicting with Ruk & co.) in the same category as reasons why sometimes the aliens on TOS looked like sock puppets and why sometimes a boom mike crept into the shot and why most Excelsiors on TNG were NCC-2000. It was for the same reason they accepted that the science was frequently out to lunch. Trek took place in TV-land, so the laws of the universe as we knew them didn't exist. There was such a thing as having "excess baryons" and Will Riker could be Bill Riker for an episode and the Battle of Setlik III could be referred to take place both in the 2350s and the 2360s. And I just don't get what caused things to change. Again, like you said, blame the internet or whatever, but people today, simply put, will dislike a episode from the depths of their hearts for making a trivial goof. And much as I'd like to chalk it up to just a few silly 12-year olds, the fact is that a lot of people who I mightn't consider screwballs are the ones being rather anal retentive about the issue. Now, the rehash issue is a slightly different kettle of fish and deserves a bit more serious consideration than tiny trivia screwups. But the whole phenomena of "the episode was only slightly above average and rehashed episode X Y and Z but it also had a continuity contradiction therefore it sucks" is an altogether too-common practice of using silly continuity issues as a millstone. And while a respect your right to review episodes how you see fit and draw conclusions as you will, Bernd, I'm afraid your <a href=http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/episodes/ent1.htm>Enterprise reviews</a> thus far have struck me as being pretty unbecoming a bright guy like you. It seems as if you start with 10 points and deduct one for anything that rubs you the wrong way, be it a character reacting a way you wished they didn't or some ulterior motives of the producers being written into a throwaway line or indeed one of those aforementioned tiny little trivia tidbits that you just said don't bother you. Granted, it all boils down to taste, but are you honestly willing to hop up and down on one leg shouting that "Shuttlepod One" was one of Trek's all time worst episodes, which is what this implies. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3