Posted August 11, 2016
GioVio123
Hunt..Hunt..Hunt
Registered: Mar 2014
From United States
real.geizterfahr
Grumpy Old Gamer
Registered: Apr 2010
From Spain
Posted August 11, 2016
I own TNG, DS9 and Voyager on DVD (DS9 being my favorite, TNG comes second and Voyager third). Then there's TOS (which I find kinda hard to watch nowadays) and Enterprise (which is okay-ish, but I'm not enough of a fan of it to get it). And then there's The Animated Series, which isn't bad, but I don't own it. I've never been a huge fan of the movies (old or new), so I don't own a single one of them.
And I started to read the Deep Space 9 books (basically "Sason 8"). They're pretty good and I think of getting the TNG and Voyager books too when I'm finished with DS9.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.
And I started to read the Deep Space 9 books (basically "Sason 8"). They're pretty good and I think of getting the TNG and Voyager books too when I'm finished with DS9.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.
BenKii
Captain
Registered: Mar 2010
From United States
Posted August 13, 2016
Thanks Breja for starting a centralized thread for everything Star Trek. :)
I got a little update for the ship design from the Discovery show. According to this article, it appears the ship design presented at Comic Con was only a work in progress. The final design is to be revealed within the coming months.
I got a little update for the ship design from the Discovery show. According to this article, it appears the ship design presented at Comic Con was only a work in progress. The final design is to be revealed within the coming months.
snowkatt
Easily Bored
Registered: Oct 2010
From Netherlands
Posted August 13, 2016
not directed at me but hell
i own tos and tng on vhs
tos and tng partially on dvd ( season 1 for tos and seasons 1 2 3 4 and 7 for tng )
i have ds 9 on dvd
there are also voyager enterprise and the animated series but i dont care enough to buy those
the animated series is a bit off an oddity it was as the name implies an animated series
but it was the first time star trek was continued in any way shape or form on either the tv screen or big screen
and is these days considered as season 4 and 5 ( or year 4 and 5 ) of the tos sries
most of the voices were done by the original tos actors
so basically tas is tacitly star trek canon though paramount is really wishy washy about it
as far as i am concerned ds 9 is the pinnacle of star trek
followed by tng
tos is a bit hard to watch these days with its rampant sexism and chauvinism
i own tos and tng on vhs
tos and tng partially on dvd ( season 1 for tos and seasons 1 2 3 4 and 7 for tng )
i have ds 9 on dvd
there are also voyager enterprise and the animated series but i dont care enough to buy those
the animated series is a bit off an oddity it was as the name implies an animated series
but it was the first time star trek was continued in any way shape or form on either the tv screen or big screen
and is these days considered as season 4 and 5 ( or year 4 and 5 ) of the tos sries
most of the voices were done by the original tos actors
so basically tas is tacitly star trek canon though paramount is really wishy washy about it
as far as i am concerned ds 9 is the pinnacle of star trek
followed by tng
tos is a bit hard to watch these days with its rampant sexism and chauvinism
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
snowkatt
Easily Bored
Registered: Oct 2010
From Netherlands
Posted August 13, 2016
come on your telling me that mudd's women or charlie x or turnabout intruder are not sexist or chauvinistic ?
tos is a product of its time and despite all its forward thinking its still obviously rooted in 1960's mentality
uhura is one of the core characters but the most she usually did was push buttons
tos is a product of its time and despite all its forward thinking its still obviously rooted in 1960's mentality
uhura is one of the core characters but the most she usually did was push buttons
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
Posted August 13, 2016
low rated
Episodes with Mudd are to silly to be treated as anything that serious in any way. Charlie X... again, what's the problem? That the teen boy gone crazy with power acts towards women like a teen boy crazy with power?
As much could be said about Sulu and Chekov most of the time.
None of that, in any way, justifies talking about "rampant sexism". I could come up with bullshit reasons to call absolutely anything sexist, if TOS qualifies.
Post edited August 13, 2016 by Breja
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
Posted August 15, 2016
I just realised that the messed up release schedule of Beyond may be distorting it's box office results. It's yet to release in many countries, including a huge chunk of Europe (later on in August), Mexico, China (both in September) and Japan (21st of October!). All that should significatnly boost the final box office result, especially with the good reviews it got. It's not going to suddenly become a massive hit, but it should be in a much better place than now. I imagine that's why Abrams and the studio are all silent about the already announced sequel- they're waiting for the final result before they commit to anything.
Post edited August 15, 2016 by Breja
Fantasysci5
Sale Addict
Registered: Oct 2009
From United States
Posted August 15, 2016
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
Posted August 18, 2016
http://www.treknews.net/2016/08/17/star-trek-discovery-details-mission-new-york/
Hopefuly we'll get more details about Discovery on september 3rd. I hope it's some solid good news this time, because what we've heard so far isn't thrilling me. And let's get some casting announcments too. I don't know how the show can be so close to production and we don't know about a single castmember.
Hopefuly we'll get more details about Discovery on september 3rd. I hope it's some solid good news this time, because what we've heard so far isn't thrilling me. And let's get some casting announcments too. I don't know how the show can be so close to production and we don't know about a single castmember.
mystikmind2000
New User
Registered: Sep 2012
From Australia
Posted August 18, 2016
They should not have invented the time police in the Voyager series.
Because then we know they would have had to destroy the Borg in first contact if Picard had failed! so his whole mission was pointless!!!!!
Also how come the time agents did not attack the Romulan mining ship???? Riddle me that?
Because then we know they would have had to destroy the Borg in first contact if Picard had failed! so his whole mission was pointless!!!!!
Also how come the time agents did not attack the Romulan mining ship???? Riddle me that?
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
Posted August 18, 2016
Because then we know they would have had to destroy the Borg in first contact if Picard had failed! so his whole mission was pointless!!!!!
Also how come the time agents did not attack the Romulan mining ship???? Riddle me that?
Breja
You're in my spot
Registered: Apr 2012
From Poland
Posted August 20, 2016
So, we have an interview with Fuller about Discovery:
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star-trek-discovery/257867/bryan-fuller-shares-details-on-star-trek-discovery
and frankly it says nothing new, and when he gives an answer longer than three words, I don't understand a thing. Seriously, can someone explain this?
"Why was this timeline attractive, rather than going forward from Voyager?
I think for me, since we are doing this series in 2016 and all of the other series have been produced in a timeline that isn’t as sophisticated as we are now with what we can do production-wise, we’re going to be re-establishing an entire look for the series. Not only for the series, but also for what we want to accomplish with Star Trek beyond the series. So we have to start early on with a touch point where people can understand and have access into it, show them how we’re re-imagining Star Trek and then hold their hand as we pull them into hopefully a lot of different iterations of different timelines beyond what we have seen."
It makes zero sense to me. They are starting in an established period of Trek universe, between two shows and very close to the Original Series and not in the further future because they want to change and re-establish everything? What? Different timelines? What in the fuck are they doing?
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star-trek-discovery/257867/bryan-fuller-shares-details-on-star-trek-discovery
and frankly it says nothing new, and when he gives an answer longer than three words, I don't understand a thing. Seriously, can someone explain this?
"Why was this timeline attractive, rather than going forward from Voyager?
I think for me, since we are doing this series in 2016 and all of the other series have been produced in a timeline that isn’t as sophisticated as we are now with what we can do production-wise, we’re going to be re-establishing an entire look for the series. Not only for the series, but also for what we want to accomplish with Star Trek beyond the series. So we have to start early on with a touch point where people can understand and have access into it, show them how we’re re-imagining Star Trek and then hold their hand as we pull them into hopefully a lot of different iterations of different timelines beyond what we have seen."
It makes zero sense to me. They are starting in an established period of Trek universe, between two shows and very close to the Original Series and not in the further future because they want to change and re-establish everything? What? Different timelines? What in the fuck are they doing?
Post edited August 20, 2016 by Breja
apehater
cdpr red & gog = a fraud, liars, russophobs...
Registered: Jul 2012
From Cuba
Posted August 20, 2016
i'm only interested in stuff about klingons, everything else in star trek is boring for me. so hopefully we'll get a new series like "star trek: yan isleth" soon
mystikmind2000
New User
Registered: Sep 2012
From Australia
Posted August 22, 2016
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star-trek-discovery/257867/bryan-fuller-shares-details-on-star-trek-discovery
and frankly it says nothing new, and when he gives an answer longer than three words, I don't understand a thing. Seriously, can someone explain this?
"Why was this timeline attractive, rather than going forward from Voyager?
I think for me, since we are doing this series in 2016 and all of the other series have been produced in a timeline that isn’t as sophisticated as we are now with what we can do production-wise, we’re going to be re-establishing an entire look for the series. Not only for the series, but also for what we want to accomplish with Star Trek beyond the series. So we have to start early on with a touch point where people can understand and have access into it, show them how we’re re-imagining Star Trek and then hold their hand as we pull them into hopefully a lot of different iterations of different timelines beyond what we have seen."
It makes zero sense to me. They are starting in an established period of Trek universe, between two shows and very close to the Original Series and not in the further future because they want to change and re-establish everything? What? Different timelines? What in the fuck are they doing?
Anyway, i don't think fans like having their star trek universe destroyed.... almost feels like when you wonder what to do with the pile of old photographs after getting divorced? What to do with all those memories now it has been destroyed? not good.