Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Noooooo!!!!! 22nd Century confirmed for Series V.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by crobato: [QB] You are obviously blind Jeff. You just want to support your Braga apologist friends. The moment you insert words like below on a text, it is deemably offensive. "Um, bullshit. Stardates are irrelevant. Like I said, Okuda put two and two together and made an OK conjecture. But let's not wet the bed if it gets overwritten and the result doesn't suck ass." Let me tell you that this old 35 year old series is the start of everything. Star Trek is built on TOS. TNG had higher ratings, but the loss of ratings by VOY (TNG in Delta quadrant) and DS9 showed that wasn't the foundation enough. The old idea of BOTF was partly to lure old timers who *already* left the series in droves. Instead of building from TOS, you break it down anyway. All this talk about going to back to the "roots" sounds so hypocritical when the "roots" are being violated anyway, and is only being copied in a superficial way (like making a cast derivative of the classic cast.) You're assuming the conjecture is okay when half of the fan base doesn't already think so. Most of Berman's and Braga's results do suck ass anyway. Breaking continuity AGGRAVATES an already existing problem where results already suck. "So fucking what. It's Paramount's money. It's not like they're charging a subscription fee to let you watch the show. If they want to spend more money to get better talent, all power to them. Look at the cast of some other sci-fi shows and you'll see what you get when you go cheap on the talent." I never heard of so weak arguments in my life. That's what apologists like to do, point out how better budget Trek is in comparison to other SF series, which by the way, seems to garner equal to better ratings for much less money spent per episode. "I nearly choked on what I was eating when I read this. I think it's cute enough that we refer to the established body of the Trek community by a religious term, canon. But introducing legal precedent. Honestly, that's too funny." Here's another one. Maybe you don't understand this, Tom. The whole idea is still the same as with any action. The letter of the action and the intent of the action. This does not just govern legalities---it governs basic action. It's about basic ethics. The intent to violate something in spirit is as good as violating it in letter. And here is a laugh from Tom: "If you're wishing for post-TOS writers to pore over Encylopedias and Chronologies and TOS scripts before even considering the big picture, that being a good teleplay, you're wishing for a series with no viewers except people like you who put 35-year old lines of dialogue ahead of quality in every single case." Maybe it's time to stick your head out of your ass, Tom. The facts are THERE IS NOT ENOUGH VIEWERS ANYWAY. They already left it. You've already sacrificed continuity problems for "story" but the other problem is, the stories do SUCK. People will excuse you for violating continuity if you come up with a good story but not if the story is bad or even simply mediocre. And that's what happened. The old excuse for violating continuity for good story does not deliver because good stories are not delivered in the first place. Let me put it this way. A show that cannot respect its legacies does not deserve respect at all. [/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