Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
(One Of) My Problem(s) With "Star Trek II"
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PsyLiam: [QB] "Nick Meyer's trek movies are the most fun to watch, but contain troubling inconsistencies because they are very plot and scenery driven. If they need to forget to count planets to forward the plot, they will." I should point out that this is EXACTLY what Braga means in his oft-misquoted "Continuity is for gays and lesbians" quote. That said: "If phasers usually disintegrate people or just short out their nervous systems until dead, thats fine.. but all of a sudden, they will cause bloody messes for a cool SFX sequence" The novelisation makes a stab at this one, by saying that the assasians are using "burning phasers", and illegal weaping that makes cool SFX sequences. The other problem with "Ceti Alpha" blah, which even ruins Tim's option, is that the miscounting of planets is bad enough, but exactly how feasible is it that the explosion of Ceti Alpha VI would knock Ceti Alpha V into EXACTLY the same orbit as Ceti Alpha VI? Or even vaguaely close. For starters, VI is surely further out. And, if it explodes, surely it would knock CA V [i]inwards[/i] if anything. And, even then, what are the odds that 1/ The world would still be habitable. 2/ That the orbit would look even remotely like CA VI? "that was 'Star Trek III,' and look how bad that was..." Hey! ST III is good. Or, at the very least, it's the best out of the odd-numbered ones. [/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