81–90 of 132 posts
Not a Star Trek related question, but I noticed that the title is printed in a special cursive font, while the rest of the document is typewritten. What kind of machine would have been used in 1964 to print a custom font for a one-off document?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>“series bible” for battlestar galactica You mean the Book of Mormon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob#Kolob_as_the_inspiration... https://www.beliefnet.com/entertainment/movies/2005/05/born-... https://www.deseret.com/2014/11/22/20553208/mormon-creator-o... https://www.millennialstar.org/battlestar-galactica-and-morm... http://www.mormonthink.com/glossary/battlestargalactica.htm https://www.quora.com/What-are-som…
That came out after the BSG reboot
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lost had a plan. Then management wanted to drag out the phenomenon. So the story had to expand, it's how all those arcs that never resolved started. Then suddenly, the fad was over and it needed a quick close. Kinda like how GoT fell off in the last season.
Game of Thrones suffered from overtaking the novels. It was less about being dragged out (in my opinion) and more about not having George RR Martin at the helm with a thousand pages material already written and waiting adaption. Martin is famously slow at writing the books, but that lead to some really deep and complex storylines. However when you try to compress that process into < 1 year and with different writers…
I.e. the TV series looks bad compared to the books because they had to tackle the hard part and Martin hasn't yet shown he'll do better.
In some ways I really love Star Trek. But you can see (like many things these days) that the initial paradigm has been carried through over the decades and it shows it's age and limitations. For example, stereotyping (each "alien race" has its own predominant substantive characteristics) and glorification of the military are core parts of the structure.
> stereotyping (each "alien race" has its own predominant substantive characteristics)
Yeah, the so-called "planet of hats" trope is integral to the show, and spilled to many others (Stargate franchise being a good example). They did try to subvert it a couple of times, most notably and to great effect with the Cardassians and the Bajorans in DS9, and to a lesser extent with the Klingons in ENT. I wish they'd do it some more[1].
> glorification of the military
It doesn't sound that bad in context of the show itself, because the people are different. Starfleet may be a military, but (at least in TNG-era shows) it's one that's philosophically focused on everything else other than fighting and killing. For proper glorification of the military, nothing beats the Stargate series, SG-1 in particular.
Still, I'd argue that it makes sense in context. Even with the science fantasy of the franchise, by the shows' own numbers, every starship in Star Trek is a mobile, FTL-capable WMD platform. A single TNG-era photon torpedo is given a yield 30% larger than that of a Tsar Bomba[2]; TNG's Enterprise-D carried a standard complement of 250. Phasers are capable of (and shown to be used for) impromptu geoengineering. Impulse engines can speed things up to double-digit percentage of the speed of light. There's no way in hell a future with tech like this isn't thoroughly militarized - not because of potential of conflicts, but because of the need to control the tech that can casually wipe out life on planets.
----
[0] - My second reaction was, my God, Roddenberry knew how to pitch a studio.
[1] - I generally wish the new shows would work more with what they have. There's decades of continuous worldbuilding to take from, there is no need to introduce new strange aliens and situations every other episode.
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba - 50 MT for the nuke, ~64 MT for a Starfleet photon torpedo, based on its stated 1.5 kg antimatter payload and E=mc².
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Game of Thrones suffered from overtaking the novels. It was less about being dragged out (in my opinion) and more about not having George RR Martin at the helm with a thousand pages material already written and waiting adaption. Martin is famously slow at writing the books, but that lead to some really deep and complex storylines. However when you try to compress that process into < 1 year and with different writers…
I'm pretty sure one major reason Martin hasn't finished WINDS OF WINTER after over 10 years (never mind A DREAM OF SPRING) is that he he finds it easier to spawn new characters and subplots than to wrap them up. I.e. the TV series looks bad compared to the books because they had to tackle the hard part and Martin hasn't yet shown he'll do better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like they were Lost . ("Lost" was an extremely promising SF show that claimed to have a plan, but was revealed not to. Which is unforgivable when the attraction of the show was figuring out the mystery. My own theory is that the wildly successful first season led to the writers purchasing too much celebratory cocaine, and subsequently just phoning it in, while the business people were happy to milk it like a s…
It’s down to JJ Abrams style of writing. He’s frequently talked about his love for a “mystery box” where he believes a good mystery is better than fact. The problem with his writing is, unlike most other writers who use mystery boxes, Abrams doesn’t even know himself what is inside that box. And you see this across all of his work. Frankly, I find him to be the most overrated writer and director in Hollywood because…
I wonder how Jose Ortega(s) becomes Hikaru Sulu or Pavel Chekov.
----
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing the word "misogyny" doesn't mean "woman-hating" any more? I'm which case, why is it still considered a bad thing?
Why is it considered by others to be a bad thing, to see women as lesser and to keep them down, just because they're women? Let me give you an easy out here, and tell you my assumptions. I am assuming it also only took you a minute to look up the definition. And after reading it, then couldn't come up for a reason for others to judge that kind of behavior. I am kind of stumped of how to actually reply to this, to me…
Eh? I thought you were using some obscure definition? What does any of that have to do with appreciating and making note of the female form?
Btw: this is kinda interesting: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncen...