Disgusterous

Author Topic: Star Trek  (Read 4073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36773
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2007, 03:42:14 PM »
I caught a tiny bit of what must have been the 'Making Of' programme. She sticks her hand down the garbage disposal and gets it mangled. Then there was a clip of her waking up on the autopsy table.

Now it's said her 'power' is regeneration but she doesn't seem to be in any pain. What does the Idiot's Guide say about that?

She is super, it doesn't need explaining! :)

Honestly, good question. I meant idiots guide in the sense that Mr Wench can't keep track of one character for more than two minutes at a time.

Oops MR Wench Cant? Err I did start a thread for you in the Library but I thought it was you that couldnt make any sense of it  scared2:
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22097
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2007, 03:44:35 PM »
Galaxy Quest was a spot on spoof of Star Trek  happy088

I'm a great fan of SF (not Sci-Fi horrible term) and I'm willing to suspend belief to a certain degree but when I spot something that is obviously bad science I can't enjoy it as much.

Star Trek at least tried to get the science right but Star Wars  ::)


Offline Darwins Selection

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 39138
  • Reputation: 6
  • I mostly despair
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2007, 03:53:56 PM »
I mostly despair

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36773
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2007, 04:00:39 PM »
You have to look at star wars in the right context. Young Lucas wanted to make an epic story and was heavily influenced by directors such as Akira Kurosawa. The science itself wasnt accurate because it wasnt an important part of the story. If the science had been accurate then most of the iconic images in the series would never have made it to film.
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36773
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #19 on: August 02, 2007, 05:40:44 PM »
I thought that was quite cool. Can't wait to see her pull herself together with that one.

You do realise that if you cant wait a week for the next episode its on BBC 3 just after (more or less). Unfortunatley the tail end of the preceeding program was more than a bit of an eye opener.  eeek:

Galaxy Quest was a spot on spoof of Star Trek  happy088

I'm a great fan of SF (not Sci-Fi horrible term) and I'm willing to suspend belief to a certain degree but when I spot something that is obviously bad science I can't enjoy it as much.

Star Trek at least tried to get the science right but Star Wars  ::)

If you ever get the chance Mort, have a look at a show called Babylon 5. The science is more realistic and its a much darker story spread out over the series.
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

Sour Puss

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2007, 12:27:31 AM »
Are you watching that Heros programme?

 whistle: I watched it all the way through...interesting ending.    ::) Are they showing it again already?  tunble:

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36773
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2007, 09:27:54 AM »
Its on terrestrial now PG not sky.

To be honest the one I'm waiting for to make it to regular TV is Dexter. CSI meets Henry with a load of dark humour  eyes:
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22097
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2007, 10:11:40 AM »
I thought that was quite cool. Can't wait to see her pull herself together with that one.

You do realise that if you cant wait a week for the next episode its on BBC 3 just after (more or less). Unfortunatley the tail end of the preceeding program was more than a bit of an eye opener.  eeek:

Galaxy Quest was a spot on spoof of Star Trek  happy088

I'm a great fan of SF (not Sci-Fi horrible term) and I'm willing to suspend belief to a certain degree but when I spot something that is obviously bad science I can't enjoy it as much.

Star Trek at least tried to get the science right but Star Wars  ::)

If you ever get the chance Mort, have a look at a show called Babylon 5. The science is more realistic and its a much darker story spread out over the series.


Seen a few episodes and did like them. Good science.

I'd recommend 'Firefly' and the film 'Serenity'. The US series was axed early on but it's developed cult status since out on DVD.

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36773
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Re: Star Trek
« Reply #23 on: August 03, 2007, 02:55:35 PM »
Got Serentiy and Firefly on DVD, they are next in line to be converted for my pda so I can watch while travelling.

There is a rumour about another B5 spin off coming out soon  cloud9: Hopefully it will last longer than the previous 2
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.