Here's a rare one: We're watching the rerun of First Contact on Sci-Fi, and they've just blown up the emitter module on the deflector dish.
So my dad (my dad!) asked, "Now, don't they need to use the deflector dish to create the temporal vortex to make it back home?"
My jaw dropped, mainly because I couldn't think of a good answer. A treknology nit that my dad thought of, but not me? Egads!
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Must resist the urge to rant about how overrated and hackneyed First Contact is...must resist...
Oh shit, you're right!! Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Does the Enterprise-E have an auxiliary deflector assembly like the Enterprise-D had? If so, then they might have been able to use that instead.
Your dad made a good catch. I never noticed that before, either.
Posted by Manticore (Member # 1227) on :
They did? Didn't they use the warp coils to recreate the "temporal vortex"?
And Mim, shush. Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Where is the aux deflector on the Sovy?
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Now that I've thought about it, I leaning with Manticore. I missed the first half-hour when Sci-Fi played it tonight, and it's been about two years since I last First Contact. However, I can't remember Data, LaForge, Picard, or anyone saying that they were using the deflector dish to follow the Borg cube into the temporal conduit. All I remember is the report of Borgified Earth, discussion of the Borg going back in time, and Picard ordering them to follow the Borg.
If I could find my copy of the movie, I'd check.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
One relevant piece of technobabble in the time travel scene is that the shields of the E-E (and apparently also of the sphere) are down. It doesn't sound likely, then, that a "deflector" would be vital for the trick, either...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I believe that Geordi says they're using the deflector to recreate the Borg's temporal vortex during the return trip. He might have even said the main deflector. I could be wrong. I do know that this question has been raised before and that the PTB have suggested they had another deflector on board in mothballs that they installed.
And yes, I'm pretty sure the Ent E has an Aux. Nav Deflector. All the cool ships are installing them these days.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Isn't the dish and the deflector different? Isn't the dish mainly for communications? On the Refit Connie the deflector parts were points around the outside of the 'dish' part.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
I searched through the script and nothing indicates they used the deflector to return home. In fact, from a quick scan, I didn't see any technobabble explaination of HOW they generated the temporal vortex to return home.
As for what the main deflector dish is for, here is an excerpt from the script:
quote: RIKER What are they doing?
WORF They appear to be modifying the deflector dish.
TROI To do what? If they wanted a weapon, they could've taken over a phaser bank or torpedo bay...
RIKER Deflector dish... why the deflector dish...?
WORF It doesn't make sense. The deflector is only used for shielding and long range sensors...
Riker stares at the screen... notices something.
RIKER Computer -- magnify grid twenty- one alpha.
The image on the Viewscreen ZOOMS IN to a specific point on the deflector dish, giving us a clear view of two Borg who have opened a gigantic panel on the dish. They appear top be modifying power conduits in some fashion.
WORF They're re-routing the deflector power conduits...
RIKER Computer -- thermal enhancement.
The image now is overlaid with an INFRARED VIEW of what they're doing. The power conduits are glowing bright red, very hot -- we can see the heat signature travel back behind the dish and connect to a corkscrew-shaped coil, which is pulsing.
RIKER They're connecting the conduits to subspace communications...
WORF (realizing) They're converting the deflector dish into an antennae...
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
Into an antennae... Hmm. *peeks through window* Oh look, an eagles!
If they could build a com device capable of reaching the opposite side of the galaxy using only parts of a Sovereign deflector dish, wouldn't Starfleet want to learn of that device? Sounds useful.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The aired version of the movie has Geordi simply say that he has modified "the warp field" to match that of the Borg Sphere to recreate the time vortex. Nothing about deflectors there. And the piece with Riker and Worf speculating is also missing, replaced by Picard's superior knowledge of Borg motivations and plans.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Or, they coulda just fixed the thing, replacing whatever it was that was shot off - Voyager did this weekly. Or, the part that was lost wasn't integral to forming a temporal vortex - the rest of the thing isn't just a dish, you know.
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: The aired version of the movie has Geordi simply say that he has modified "the warp field" to match that of the Borg Sphere to recreate the time vortex. Nothing about deflectors there. And the piece with Riker and Worf speculating is also missing, replaced by Picard's superior knowledge of Borg motivations and plans.
Unfortunately. It looks like a cool scene as lost there....but Riker was on Earth for the whole movie in the final version, so they would have had to use someone else: Hwak would have been ideal in that scene though (with Worf saying Riker's lines and Hawk with Worf's).
Mark's right about the ability to fix the Deflector: with only one deflector, the ship would need to be able to make repairs to it and fabricate parts when needed.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Okay, I did a little digging around EAS just now, and it seems that the Sovereign design actually does have a secondary deflector -- one of those types that is probably just a window according to the CGI modellers, but is repurposed according to Okuda or Sternbach or whoever.
I'll dig out my copy of "Star Trek: Captain's Chair" tonight and see what the interactive MSD has to say for itself.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Ug. I hate that style of cutaway. It makes the ship look like it has mange.
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
Well... Call me weird, but I don't think that there's any kind of problem - it's not like enitre dish blew up or something - they have only detached "particle emitter".
We simply don't know enough to determine whether this would disable entire deflector dish or not. Clearly, this didn't seemed to be a problem for Picard&Co.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
They burned the deflector out in TNG so that leads me to belive they have replacement components. I imagine a burn out would require alot of replacements.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The Enterprise D was designed with a deflector on the saucer- those big square things that most take to be windows on the saucer's ventral side- just fore of the (horribly lame) captain's yacht.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
Captain's YECHT.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Spelled "Raymond luxury jatcht" but pronounced "Throatwobbler mangrove"...
Actually those are the same "windows" that are missing on the unmodified AMT/ERTL Model of the D.
And as for
quote:Where is the aux deflector on the Sovy?
Right next to the flux capacitor!
By the way and off-topic, I rewatched "Hollow Pursuits" yesterday and in that episode Barclay actually says something about a "flux capacitor" he checked in an antigrav-module! I guess it was an in-joke...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A Buckaroo Banzai joke- Denise Okuda worked on that movie.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The flux capacitor is from Back to the Future, not Buckaroo Banzai.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Ah. I was thinking of the Overthruster, I guess.
I really can't sit throygh any of those BTTF movies.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
<--- Owns the DVD set Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Not to get into opinions-that-people-are-perfectly-entitled-to-have, but...
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I really can't sit throygh any of those BTTF movies.
You are an idiot.
Posted by Commander Dan (Member # 558) on :
I always wondered whether they would have needed a working deflector to get �home,� though I never really thought that there was enough technobabble in FC to establish this one way or the other.
quote:Originally posted by Austin Powers: Actually those are the same "windows" that are missing on the unmodified AMT/ERTL Model of the D.
Actually, the windows that are missing from the ERTL 1701-D kit forward of the Captain�s Yacht are just that: windows. The four square windows that are generally identified as the secondary deflector are indeed on the model.
Quite frankly, I think that these square ports were likely originally conceived as simply windows, and it was later �decided� that the ship needed a secondary deflector.
Nice models there: if you like the 650th scale TOS stuff, run a search for John Payne and for Dave Tomita's models: the best TOS stuff I've ever seen.
...I think you may have used too bright an orange on your Galaxy's deflector dish though (but I prefer the "onscreen look").
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Not to get into opinions-that-people-are-perfectly-entitled-to-have, but...
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I really can't sit throygh any of those BTTF movies.
You are an idiot.
And you like sugary Hollywood crap. Next you'll be telling us you like The Black Hole. Really, the BTTF stuff is just too silly for my tastes (though far better than a lot of the drek out there (Event Horizon, Pitch Black, etc.).
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I don't see how BTTF can be compared to The Black Hole. Mainly because I haven't seen it. But calling a comedy "silly" would seem to be missing the point somewhat.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Hey, I like The Black Hole as well! Campy, yes...but so is Forbidden Planet. Both are still great vintage sci-fi flicks.
The BTTF trilogy is very nearly right up there with Star Wars and Indiana Jones in my book. At the very least, it had a major impact on the genre and pop culture at large. But then, we've had this debate before.
And I haven't seen it in ages, but just what the hell was wrong with Event Horizon??? As I recall, it was quite atmospheric and creepy, which is quite obviously what was intended. Not every film is supposed to be as high-concept as 2001: A Space Odyssey...
Oh wait. You didn't like that either.
-MMoM Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Uh, did you just compare cinema classic Forbidden Planet to dandruffy Disney lamefest The Black Hole?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Come on now, Forbidden Planet is a classic (I am quite fond of it) but it too is lame and dandruffy at times. So were Flash Gordon and Buck Rodgers. And TOS. It was the era. (Not the same era in all those cases of course.)
Besides, as I was hinting at before, the intent of a film is important to keep in mind when judging it. The Black Hole was primarily intended for a young (kids/teenagers) audience. It was exciting and creepy and and pretty there's a "cute" flying R2-D2 ripoff in it. What's not to like?
You don't watch Mary Poppins and complain that it's too silly and sugar-coated, do you? No. You take it for what it is, an entertaining children's film that is most certainly one of the finest ever made. If you don't find it sufficiently diverting as an adult, it's only because no one ever intended to make it so.
And truthfully, it's down to a great deal of mindset as well. If you are in the mood to make fun of something or be bored with it or otherwise not enjoy it, you will surely find justification to do so. On the other hand, if you let go the criticism and elitism, you can get caught up in the enjoyment of almost anything. Heck, that's the very reason why TWOK is soooo bloody popular...
Not to say that there aren't good films and bad films, but you've got to be careful about which standards you apply to which ones.
-MMoM Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I wrote an IMDb comment about that seemed to sum up my views on the film, must try to find it. . .
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Forbidden Planet is not camp. Parts may be old-tymey now, but it is not camp.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Robby the Robot and the drunkard cook?
What about Anne Francis' "education" (or lack thereof) about the facts of life?
I rest my case.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Seriously, I do love Forbidden Planet, though.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Maybe the girl approaches it, but the robot? No way.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
You don't think the scene where the cook asks the Robby to "make some more of this stuff for him" to be maybe perhaps just a little campy? Come on, now.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
BTTF is okay if you look at it as comedy, but it's not really sci-fi (to me). Just like Spaceballs is not really sci-fi.
The Black Hole just sucks out loud. I read an artick on it's making that explained that the actors refused to wear the (stuffy) hoods their uniforms had (which were supposed to somehow act as spacesuits) so the director just filmed the spacewalk sequence without them. Plus, the main spaceship is a flying greenhouse.
That's bad on a scale not seen since Ed Wood stopped making movies.
Event Horizon sucks for the same reason Fifth Element sucks: they made a bueatiful movie with several neat moments that had no plot whatsoever.
They're flashy 2 hour music videos. Even Heavy Metal made far more sense.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I suppose this would be a bad time to mention that I thought Heavy Metal was great as well, then?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Heavy Metal is actually pretty good for the time and the odd "story within a story" style (matched only by Cat's Eye) way it's told.
As a kid, I really loved it (for the sexy bondage bits if nothing else).
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
The spaceship in The Black Hole was designed to resemble a Victorian era chandelier. I think they succeeded in that respect.
And since you brought up Space Balls, does anyone have a picture of Tim Russ in that movie? Apparently he was one of the troopers.
B.J.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
He didn't find shit.
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
You guys throw the word "camp" around without even understanding what it means.
v.t. To give a deliberately artificial, vulgar, or banal quality to: "camped up their cowboy costumes with chaps, tin stars, and ten-gallon hats."
The BATMAN show was camp...it was arch and deliberate. TOS wasn't camp ("I Mudd" aside). "The Black Hole" wasn't camp, it was dreadfully serious but for it's kiddie relief. "Flash Gordon" which came out the following year was completely camp.
Maybe TOS and Forbidden Planet have qualities that seem campy to some by today's standards, but that's only because styles have changed. Bonanza's style is just as antiquated, and no one calls it camp.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
(That's totally what I am on about!)
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
"Having deliberately artificial, vulgar, banal, or affectedly humorous qualities or style..."
When they stick stuff in there deliberately to be comic relief, like the boozer cook with the robot or the "admiration" of an innocent female body, it's campy. So were the scenes at the ends of all those TOS episodes where Kirk, McCoy, and the entire bridge crew stand around and laugh exaggeratedly about something Spock said.
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
But not when it's just unintentionally shit (like The Black Hole).
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)