posted
Mabye we could rent some of those bus ads: those really seem to draw attention.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
AGT wasn't a two-parter when it first aired and I didn't like BoBW and Gambit. My opinion is no more or less wrong than yours.
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Personal opinion is a poor measure of a show's quality. After all there are people out there who think that Battlestar Galactica was really, really good.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I just feel that Descent was very poorly written and contrived
i was pondering this the other day, because as episodes go that SHOULD have been a good one.. the whole Borg/David Koresh thing was nonsensical and the writers should be flogged for it.. but there could have been a damn better cinematography and plotting for it, and it would have fared better. the main thing that would have been great: if the whole thing had been poorly lit. that right, poorly lit. the whole show was shot regular lighting, with no imagination as to camera angles. i couldnt even watch the second half all the way through it was so dull. if they had decided not to use the ever present Power Rangers building, and maybe an actual Borg set: can you imagine how creepy the interior scenes would have been in Borg corridors and wrecked equipment, rather than that retarded building? and if the horribly talky Crusher-Taitt-Barnaby scenes had shown the bridge wrecked, a few smoke bombs and red alert lighting? with the ship on normal illumination and the unimaginative camera work, all i walked away with from that whole half of the episode was 'okay, im supposed to say were flying into the sun' 'ok, im supposed to say our shields are dropping'.. no drama whatsoever. if they had used some gimmicks to give the impression of danger, the characters in that scene would have been given some chance to shine (this is assuming most of the badness didnt come from the stilted delivery of all the lines.. soap opera actors playing Star Trek it seemed)
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Aren't we getting a little into General Trek Discussion territory here, gentlemen? Perhaps opening a thread on the quality of TNG two-parters in that forum would be more prudent than continued debate here?
Or, I suppose you could all collectively tell me to fuck off...er...something like that...
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Or, I suppose you could all collectively tell me to fuck off...er...something like that...
-MMoM
Fuck off, you monkey (mighty, might I add, but still a monkey).
Since the original topic seems to be more or less solved,...
TNG-twoparters (and two-parters in general for Trek) all lack the same thing: strength. You expect a two-parter to have a stronger story, something heavier than the average episode. Hence the additional 45 minutes. Sadly, the writers usually don't notice this and stretch an episode that could have worked as a standalone too to 90 minutes. The 45 minutes of filler material are usually what makes them "boring". Times Arrow: the Guinan/Mark Twian-subplot was a waste of time. It had nothing to do with the story at all; Reunion: The T'Pau-plot may have been nice, but in the end they seemed to forget what it was all about - those pirates, the deflector, the Trieste, three ships to invade a planet and so on - you could have done it without stretching that part of the story; Voyager's Workforce; and you can find other examples. On the other hand, there are several stories which would have made excellent two-parters; VOY's Dragon's Teeth come to my mind first. Obviously the Trek writers seem to have a problem with the right feeling for those two-partes (interestingly they didn't pull the mid-season two parter on Enterprise yet for two years in a row - OTOH Voyager's final season had 3 two-part-episodes, even 4 if you count Unimatrix Zero). Let's talk about the reasons critics just see the TNG-movies as "pumped-up TV-episodes".
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Even the much maligned Insurrection was far far better than a TNG two parter (BOBW is the only exception). The problem foe me with TNG two parters is that if you watch them back to back you get two wholly seperate stories instead of one big episode. Even BOBW: Shelby must have had her bitch-ness assimilated over on the Borg ship off camera to be the quiet lobotomized extra she plays in part two. She might as well have gotten killed on the Borg ship: it would have been better drama and something for Riker to feel bad about later.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm only talking about the TNG two-parters sucking. "Year of Hell" is indeed one of the best of Voyager's episodes. DS9 had many many excellent two-parters as well (except those "Bell Riots" thing).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dax: Not all Trek two-parters suck. "Year of Hell" was great (especially for Voyager) and "Improbable Cause"/"The Die is Cast" was brilliant.
Hoooooo YEAH! ImprobCause/DieCast - AWESOME episodes. Can you imagine the anguish I felt for a year or even more at being able to see Improbable Cause on Video from the states (yes back before everyone had the 'net) and the ad for Die is Cast - but no Die is Cast - it wasn't taped.
See it now of course.
I hate when they count 'movie' episodes as two episodes. Emissary, Way of the Warrior and What You Leave Behind are 2 hour episodes. So are Encounter at Farpoint, All Good Things... Caretaker, Dark Frontier, The Killing Game, Endgame and Broken Bow.
How about ranking the two-hour movies.
1.All Good Things 2.Way of the Warrior 3.Emissary 4.Caretaker 5.Dark Frontier 6.What You Leave Behind 7.Endgame 8.Encounter at Farpoint 9.Broken Bow 10.The Killing Game
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
Topic Closed
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
