Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

I liked his work on DS9 and Voyager and loved Dead Like Me, Pushing Daisies, both of which he created and which had great dialogue, great characters and great plots, and liked his work on Heroes in the first few seasons.  He wrote or co-wrote a few dozen Voyager episodes.

If I had to guess, he’s hoping to come back at some point, so some criticisms he’s keeping to himself. He’s a huge Trekkie.

Ditto, it’s a travesty Pushing Daisies was cancelled so early. 

  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)

I've bone back recently and watch them all and you just have to watch TSfS.  It's not bad at all imo..

Edited by Drew
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 2/20/2025 at 4:27 PM, BoomMF said:

Is this gem finally getting it's due?

5 hours ago, Drew said:

I've bone back recently and watch them all and you just have to watch TSfS.  It's not bad at all imo..

Yeah, it’s not bad at all.  It feels more Star Trek-like than some of the TNG movies.

I even like The Motion Picture now. I used to be a real snob about it as a kid (saw it in the theater when it came out) and rave about II-III-IV, but now that I  am older and understand everything that was going on with ST at the time, I appreciate it for what it is.  I want to take my kid to see TMP and the others at Alamo when they occasionally show them.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Yeah basically the first 4 and Undiscovered Country are all MUST watches for me.  5 still doesn't hold up well unfortunately.

2/3/4 is about as perfect a continuous trilogy as you can get.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
Posted

Star Trek III is so devoid of real emotion though, like Kirk's only child dies, there is the reaction, and poof gone from existence. It wasn't till VI that they had to retcon a character change.

Posted
1 hour ago, linux said:

Star Trek III is so devoid of real emotion though, like Kirk's only child dies, there is the reaction, and poof gone from existence. It wasn't till VI that they had to retcon a character change.

3 isn't bad...but it's obviously the weak link of the 2/3/4 Arch.   And 6 is still my favorite one...always watch it when I see it on.

Posted (edited)

5 is sooo bad. BUT the scenes you pulled are pretty fun to watch...even if only for the unintentional comedy.  

It's also the movie that really sold how close and connected the 3 leads are.  Kirk/Spock/Bones.

Edited by Drew
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 hours ago, linux said:

I really like V for some reason, maybe because I only had IV, V, and VI on VHS and liked them all, like seriously these scenes are pure gold

2 hours ago, Drew said:

5 is sooo bad. BUT the scenes you pulled are pretty fun to watch...even if only for the unintentional comedy.  

It's also the movie that really sold how close and connected the 3 leads are.  Kirk/Spock/Bones.

I always felt like there was potentially a decent movie lurking within V's plot(s), but it shouldn't have been Spock's brother to start with, and Roddenberry and Paramount really meddled with the original plot that Shatner had (which was a decent plot), and both meddled for different reasons.

The writing was a shit-show for a lot of reasons (writer's strike, etc.) . I always found it amusing that after they couldn't get Sean Connery for Sybok because he was doing Last Crusade, that they named the planet "Sha Ka Ray" or whatever after him.  Would have been interesting with him in it and Paramount might have been willing to splurge for more time or budget.

The interesting thing to me, is that by all accounts, Shatner was a competent director and even Takei had praise for him.

Posted
I always felt like there was potentially a decent movie lurking within V's plot(s), but it shouldn't have been Spock's brother to start with, and Roddenberry and Paramount really meddled with the original plot that Shatner had (which was a decent plot), and both meddled for different reasons.
The writing was a shit-show for a lot of reasons (writer's strike, etc.) . I always found it amusing that after they couldn't get Sean Connery for Sybok because he was doing Last Crusade, that they named the planet "Sha Ka Ray" or whatever after him.  Would have been interesting with him in it and Paramount might have been willing to splurge for more time or budget.
The interesting thing to me, is that by all accounts, Shatner was a competent director and even Takei had praise for him.

They ended up making him Spock’s brother pretty late in the process, because initially they had Spock turning on Kirk and following this guy for basically no reason. So they had to give Spock a reason, because he’s Spock and would never betray Kirk like that. Thus, they’re brothers! Which is why that’s introduced about halfway through the movie and then never mentioned again.
Posted
19 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

They never mentioned Spock having an adopted sister, either. 

WEll that was stricken from all records if you remember...her existence and what happened was expunged. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Drew said:

WEll that was stricken from all records if you remember...her existence and what happened was expunged. 

Yep, they "died" and everything related to Discovery was classified. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yep, they "died" and everything related to Discovery was classified. 

Love a good ole' retcon....don't you?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...