DS9 Cancellation?
Philip Blaiklock
I heard that next season (1997-1998), the 6th, will be DS9's last. Does
anyone know if this is this true?
If so, it would be a travesty. TNG died an early death, and it would be
a pitiful shame if the same has happened to DS9, which is just reaching
its prime. If they plan to snuff out DS9 early, WE MUST STOP IT!!!!!
Sincerely,
_________________________________________________________________
|PHILIP BLAIKLOCK /|\ http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~philipb/ |
| "Expect /_|_\ * You Can't Do That On Star Trek!! |
| All \ | / * Why online services are obsolete |
| Expectations" \|/ * The TNG Top & Bottom 10! |
|________________________V________________________________________|
Robert M. Burns
Phillip,
The original cast of DS9 signed a 7 year contract, one that will expire
at the end of season six. Many of the cast may wish to come back, but I
sincerely doubt Avery Brooks would wish to, and the loss of Captain
Sisko would be the end of Deep Space Nine. I agree though that the run
is too short, and it should have more time to itself. Blame
Voyager...almost all of the Paramount resources for Trek went into
making that show, and they still haven't got it interesting yet.
--
Robert M. Burns
*****************************************************
For those of you who wish to believe that I exist
*****************************************************
Laura Gillenwater
"Robert M. Burns" <bur...@usit.net> wrote:
> The original cast of DS9 signed a 7 year contract, one that will >expire at the end of season six. Many of the cast may wish to co=
me back, >but I sincerely doubt Avery Brooks would wish to, and the loss of >Captain Sisko would be the end of Deep Space Nine.
I strongly disagree with this assessment - I think Captain Sisko's
character is *very* replacable with another Captain for the station. I
doubt that whether DS9 continues will be driven solely by whether Mr.
Brooks cares to return or not. Now if *several* of the current stars
decided not to return, then I think they'd probably be wise to give
up....
Laura
Nicholas Miller
Laura Gillenwater <twor...@nfi.com> wrote in article
<5cvirt$8...@nnrp1.farm.idt.net>...
"Robert M. Burns" <bur...@usit.net> wrote:
> The original cast of DS9 signed a 7 year contract, one that will >expire
at the >end of season six. Many of the cast may wish to come back, >but I
sincerely doubt >Avery Brooks would wish to, and the loss of >Captain Sisko
would be the end of >Deep Space Nine.
Amen. Without the mellow tones of Avery Brooks, I will watch DS9 with the
sound off, if I watch it all that is. But I am curious. Why wouldn't
Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the screen?
James K Nelsen
Nicholas Miller (nmi...@pcug.org.au) wrote:
: Amen. Without the mellow tones of Avery Brooks, I will watch DS9 with the
: sound off, if I watch it all that is. But I am curious. Why wouldn't
: Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the screen?
Because he doesn't like Star Trek.
--Jim
DUELLO
Loose ODO and QUARK and you are doomed
Sashi Alexandra German
In article <32F028...@owlnet.rice.edu>, phi...@owlnet.rice.edu says...
>I heard that next season (1997-1998), the 6th, will be DS9's last. Does
>anyone know if this is this true?
>
>If so, it would be a travesty. TNG died an early death, and it would be
>a pitiful shame if the same has happened to DS9, which is just reaching
>its prime. If they plan to snuff out DS9 early, WE MUST STOP IT!!!!!
Ethan Phillips at the Philadelphia Sci-Fi Expo last December said that everyon
on DS9 was contracted through 6 seasons on DS9... and that the rumor was that
DS9 next season would be DS9's last and that Paramount would not run another
series against Voyager.
--
-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-
SASHI ALEXANDRA GERMAN
Commodore, USS Thagard, Philadelphia, PA (USA) Star Trek Club
Starfleet Region-7 Chief of Staff
Member of "Now Voyager" - that fantastic Kate Mulgrew fan club!
sa...@feith.com
-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-
Adam Smith
- Nicholas Miller wrote:
> > The original cast of DS9 signed a 7 year contract, one that will >expire
> at the >end of season six. Many of the cast may wish to come back, >but I
> sincerely doubt >Avery Brooks would wish to, and the loss of >Captain Sisko
> would be the end of >Deep Space Nine.
>
-
> Amen. Without the mellow tones of Avery Brooks, I will watch
DS9 with the
> sound off, if I watch it all that is. But I am curious. Why wouldn't
> Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the screen?
- Star Trek TNG Lasted only 7 years. Star Trek DS9 is in it's 5th, and if the contracts run out after the 6th year, and Avery has decided not to come back, Deep Space Nine will end most probably permanently. There is no doubt, however, Avery would do a movie, in my opinion - it is fair for Trek, and he'd make a pack-load more than doing the TV series ;)
- --
Adam Smith,
mailto:asm...@dove.net.au
Walt Amante
Adam Smith wrote:
> Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the screen?
>
> Star Trek TNG Lasted only 7 years. Star Trek DS9 is in it's 5th, and
> if the contracts run out after the 6th year, and Avery has decided not
> to come back, Deep Space Nine will end most probably permanently.
> There is no doubt, however, Avery would do a movie, in my opinion - it
> is fair for Trek, and he'd make a pack-load more than doing the TV
> series ;)
Is there something about playing the character of captain????
The rumors with ST:TNG was that Capt. Picard was the one holding
the future of the show in his hands (return or not to return,
that was the question).
Now it is Capt. Sisko???
What's next, Capt. Janeway????
mgh mgh
If Janeway wants to go, I won't stand in her way.
There must be someone else in the Delta Quadrant capable of commanding a
starship. Hire a local I say.
Peter Choi
Adam Smith wrote:
>
> Nicholas Miller wrote:
>
> > > The original cast of DS9 signed a 7 year contract, one that
> will >expire
> > at the >end of season six. Many of the cast may wish to come back,
> >but I
> > sincerely doubt >Avery Brooks would wish to, and the loss of
> >Captain Sisko
> > would be the end of >Deep Space Nine.
> >
> > Amen. Without the mellow tones of Avery Brooks, I will watch DS9
> with the
> > sound off, if I watch it all that is. But I am curious. Why
> wouldn't
>
> Star Trek TNG Lasted only 7 years. Star Trek DS9 is in it's 5th, and
> if the contracts run out after the 6th year, and Avery has decided not
> to come back, Deep Space Nine will end most probably permanently.
> There is no doubt, however, Avery would do a movie, in my opinion - it
> is fair for Trek, and he'd make a pack-load more than doing the TV
> series ;)
>
I just heard that Avery is trying to make a DS( movie. Is it right?
Adam Smith
- The rumour is, that Star Trek 9 will either be a lead-on to the 5th Star Trek series (which I also have extra rumours about) or it might be a DS9/TNG Crossover.
msw
Adam Smith wrote:
> > Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the screen?
>
> Star Trek TNG Lasted only 7 years. Star Trek DS9 is in it's 5th, and
> if the contracts run out after the 6th year, and Avery has decided not
> to come back, Deep Space Nine will end most probably permanently.
> There is no doubt, however, Avery would do a movie, in my opinion - it
> is fair for Trek, and he'd make a pack-load more than doing the TV
> series ;)
>
> --
>
> Adam Smith,
> mailto:asm...@dove.net.au
>
Just to toss my thoughts out to usenet on this, I disagree. I think
the TV series, DS9 Can continue without Avery Brooks as Captain Sisco.
Avery Brooks doesn't like Star Trek, and didn't really want to take the
starring role as Commander Sisco in the first place. I believe in the
TV Guide interview, it was his wife that talked him into it. (Thank's
Mrs. Brooks... I like Sisco a lot!)
I agree with you, Avery Brooks might prefer to end his TV series role as
Captain Sisco, but might be more open to returning to the Big screen as
that character every few years. Guess what? We can have both.
Have Captain Sisco leave DS9 as the Commanding Officer. He can either
take command of a starship (Akira class battleship from FC maybe?
http://www.users.csbsju.edu/~rsorense/modelcitizen/trekships/STFCship1.html)
or the reason he and Jake Sisco leave can be simply his Father on earth
sufferes from a stroke so he has to give up his command to return home
and care for him.
Okay, so getting Captain Sisco (or any other actor currently on DS9 that
wants to leave) off the show is not really a problem.
Second point. Syndication theory 101 says, 7 year runs sell best.
Well, I don't know too much about that, but assuming it is true, let's
do this and save Paramount a ton of money on building new sets.
Rename the new show. My personnal favorite would be "Star Trek: Return
to Terra-Nor" and have the show revolve around not only the space
station, but also Gul Dukaut and his Pirate like campaign against the
Klingons in his stolen Bird of Prey.
But who would be the new Commander of DS9 if Sisco leaves? Gosh, there
are a number of options here. If it was me deciding, I'd bring in
someone new to the show. If I was drawing from the past, Captain
Jellico, who once took command of the Enterprise away from Picard, or
how about another woman Commander in the way of Commander Shelby? If
either of these people wouldn't want the job, you can always create a
whole new character and bring in a new actor/actress all together.
Any thoughts? Darn, if "Baywatch" can spin off into "Baywatch Nights" I
don't see where anything is sacred in the TV show buiness. ;>
F1
Acutally I could never imagine a captain of a starship living his job to
command a space station. It would be a big step down. But, I think
Shelby, whoim you mentioned would be a good candidate! Think of the this
way some of the Borg threat has subsided, although I still there is a
armada approaching sector o-o-1, and Dominion threat seems more
immenent. And since Shelby did pretty good job getting the fleet ready
for Borg threat, she could be sent to command DS9, where she could
analyize and formulate an another defense for Dominion.
Actually, I always thought Shelby was one of the most forceful and
full-faceted woman character in recent series. although she may be too
blunt and trigger-happy, she still, I think is a hell of a officer! Hey
man, if she was the captain of Voyager, she would have kicked everyone's
asses in Delta quadrant!
Mario Engelhardt
jne...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu wrote:
>> : Amen. Without the mellow tones of Avery Brooks, I will watch DS9 with
>> the : sound off, if I watch it all that is. But I am curious. Why
>> wouldn't : Brooks renew his contract? Does he prefer the stage to the
>> screen? :
> Because he doesn't like Star Trek.
And he needs 7 years to realize that?!?
--
Live Long and prosper! MaRiO
Adam Smith
No. He never originally wanted to do Star Trek. But, he has a 6-year contract to
finish. He can't just walk out on a contract.
Michael Day
What rumors have you heard about a possible 5th Star Trek series? I have
heard speculation of a Klingon or Romulan Trek series, but I doubt it.
Also, do you think Paramount would really do a DS9/TNG movie. I love DS9,
but I'm not sure Paramount thinks DS9 has enough of a strong fan base to
warrant a DS9-only film (which a DS9/TNG crossover would almost certainly
be a prelude to).
<snip>
Jessica Krucek
Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the end
of THIS season. They are getting more and more tolitarian towards the
Maquis, Kira's been so toned down, it's like she isn't there anymore,
Dax is ok until you get her a scene with Worf (instant bimbo), the
Dominion have taken over the show...
I've pretty much defected to other fandoms as a result.
<sigh>
- Jessica
Howling Bear
the writers saddled it within the beginning as you know 'one has to step backwards
to go forward' they are giving their characters alittle stretch. Now if they
would only walk into the shadows and get alittle darkness from the soul...
Then the plots could gain alittle of the folly of beings (Man) i think that
Dax is exploring their female side and letting that behavorial traite (sp) come for
ward as to the writing at least they aren't getting to out fo character.
besides you got to speak in this enviroment a few times before the world listen
so keep on this is the parlours of the 17 cent. get loud and state your case.
Hang out of the shadows.
Buck____________
Jack Stachowicz
I really would have to disagree. This last two part episode about the
Dominion/Cardassian alliance and the Klingons and Romulans joining forces
with the Federation to protect the Alpha quadrant was a great one.
Now that TNG is gone, DS9 is the only thing going that is keeping the Star
Trek universe we know alive. Voyager is off on it's own little tangent
stuck in the Delta quadrant.
Nah, for me DS9 is the better of the 2 Treks.
Howling Bear <bu...@belnet.com> wrote in article
<5e94ob$ome$1...@barad-dur.nas.com>...
sandra ferguson
> > >
> > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the end
> > > of THIS season.
hey, I just love anything ST so I hope it goes for a while longer yet- I
go into withdrawals waiting for movies to come out!!
Sandra
Shaun Turner
sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> wrote:
We still have 2 seasons to catch up on the US here in Australia, and
season for DS9 looks like being better that the first three combined
May we all live long, have many children, And die smiling.
Kody Belshe
>> > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the
end
>> > > of THIS season
Whoever wrote that has no sence of what is GOOD and BAD. I used to be only
an avid Voyager fan..then voyager began to get weaker and weaker plots each
week...Now I am more od a DS9 fan. The plots are excellent, the acting is
superb, and the episodes just keep getting better and better.
Chris Whites
sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> writes: > > > >
> > > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the end
>
>
> hey, I just love anything ST so I hope it goes for a while longer yet- I
> go into withdrawals waiting for movies to come out!!
> Sandra
Michael McGrath
In article <5ft8sm$t...@osh2.datasync.com>, Chris Whites <chr...@datasync.com> wrote:
>sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> writes: > > > >
>> > > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the end
>> > > > of THIS season.
>>
>>
>> hey, I just love anything ST so I hope it goes for a while longer yet- I
>> go into withdrawals waiting for movies to come out!!
>> Sandra
>I believe that the last episode of Star Trek: DS9 was better. The episode where
> Dr. Bashir's parents arrived on the station
<SNAP!>
Mate, I don't know if your cross posting was deliberate or not, but your
post has appeared in AUS.sf.star-trek. We're about two seasons behind, and
many of us prefer not to be spoiled. I'm allowing this to cross post in the
hope that others might take a little more care in the future.
Cheers,
Michael
F1
Kody Belshe wrote:
>
> >> > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the
> end
>
> Whoever wrote that has no sence of what is GOOD and BAD. I used to be only
> an avid Voyager fan..then voyager began to get weaker and weaker plots each
> week...Now I am more od a DS9 fan. The plots are excellent, the acting is
> superb, and the episodes just keep getting better and better.
About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced by
Berman and his Cohorts.
About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks
interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with this dumb
blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked. She seems
like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a true war
veteran wouldn't act like her.Vashir, he just can't act! Odo, was never
likable or respectable like Spock or Data. Sisko I like because of his
no nonsense attitude. I think he is the true warior in DS9. Worf is
always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor. True saving
grace of DS9 is O'Brien. He seems like a normal person, without some
serious problem like the others. He is someone you can relate to and
understand. If it weren't for Sisko and O"brien the show would be just
another Sci-Fi on TV.
de Klerk
I'd have to say DS9 really started to get boring and all'd they do was
fight with everyone, haven't they realized that it isn't Star Wars. The
last episode with Bashir's parents was excellent and well fitted, in my
opinion the fact that cloning just got invented at the same time.
F1
The Mad Philosopher wrote:
>
> In article <332356...@earthlink.net>, F1 <su...@earthlink.net> says:
>
> >About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
> >go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced by
> >Berman and his Cohorts.
> >About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
> >true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks
> >interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with this dumb
> >blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked. She seems
> >like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a true war
> >veteran wouldn't act like her.Vashir, he just can't act! Odo, was never
> >likable or respectable like Spock or Data. Sisko I like because of his
> >no nonsense attitude. I think he is the true warior in DS9. Worf is
> >always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
> >to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor. True saving
> >grace of DS9 is O'Brien. He seems like a normal person, without some
> >serious problem like the others. He is someone you can relate to and
> >understand. If it weren't for Sisko and O"brien the show would be just
> >another Sci-Fi on TV.
> >
> And frankly, I like Odo's consistent irritability. You're right about
> Kira, though....she's about as convincing a vet as say...Neelix as a "Han
> Solo" type character. Who keeps casting these bubbly shitheads as
> renegades?
>
> You gotta love Garrack, though. I wish they'd find more for him
> to do.
>
> The Mad Philosopher
Thank you for agreeing about Kira. I hate neelix too, the producers must
be barin dead to keep this walking joke on the series. About worf
though, if he were the villian kick ass klingon maybe he'd be better. I
thought his brother Kern was true nad only kick ass klingon on ST so
far.
The Mad Philosopher
Sandra Ferguson
Shaun Turner wrote:
>
> sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> wrote:
> We still have 2 seasons to catch up on the US here in Australia, and
> season for DS9 looks like being better that the first three combined
> May we all live long, have many children, And die smiling.
I agree with you, I'm still enjoying it heaps, even though the only way I
get to see it is on video. I think Tassie is even further behind than the
rest of Australia!!
Sandra
The Mad Philosopher
>> Hey hey now...Worf is the GREATEST ST straight-man of all time.
>> And frankly, I like Odo's consistent irritability. You're right about
>> Kira, though....she's about as convincing a vet as say...Neelix as a "Han
>> Solo" type character. Who keeps casting these bubbly shitheads as
>> renegades?
>>
>> You gotta love Garrack, though. I wish they'd find more for him
>> to do.
>>
>> The Mad Philosopher
>
>
>Thank you for agreeing about Kira. I hate neelix too, the producers must
>be barin dead to keep this walking joke on the series. About worf
>though, if he were the villian kick ass klingon maybe he'd be better. I
>thought his brother Kern was true nad only kick ass klingon on ST so
>far.
>
I think you're taking Worf too seriously, man. His 24/7 "pole-up
-the-ass" discomfort is just priceless. When he does comic relief, it's
comic relief. You know what I mean?
Alexander Mackay
In article <5ft8sm$t...@osh2.datasync.com>, chr...@datasync.com says...
>
>sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> writes: > > > >
>> > > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at
the end
>>
>> hey, I just love anything ST so I hope it goes for a while longer yet-
I
>> go into withdrawals waiting for movies to come out!!
>> Sandra
>I believe that the last episode of Star Trek: DS9 was better. The
that Bashir doe
What's wrong with the new season of DS9?! I'm enjoying every second of
it!!
Ken McAuliffe
F1 <su...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Kody Belshe wrote:
>>
>> >> > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the
>> end
>> >> > > of THIS season
>>
>> Whoever wrote that has no sence of what is GOOD and BAD. I used to be only
>> an avid Voyager fan..then voyager began to get weaker and weaker plots each
>> week...Now I am more od a DS9 fan. The plots are excellent, the acting is
>> superb, and the episodes just keep getting better and better.
>About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
>go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced by
>Berman and his Cohorts.
>About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
>true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks
>interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with this dumb
>blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked. She seems
>like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a true war
>veteran wouldn't act like her.Vashir, he just can't act! Odo, was never
>likable or respectable like Spock or Data. Sisko I like because of his
>no nonsense attitude. I think he is the true warior in DS9. Worf is
>always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
>to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor. True saving
>grace of DS9 is O'Brien. He seems like a normal person, without some
>serious problem like the others. He is someone you can relate to and
>understand. If it weren't for Sisko and O"brien the show would be just
>another Sci-Fi on TV.
Amen!
Joey
> F1 <su...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
> >go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced by
> >Berman and his Cohorts.
> >About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
> >true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks
> >interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with this dumb
> >blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked. She seems
> >like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a true war
> >veteran wouldn't act like her.Vashir, he just can't act! Odo, was never
> >likable or respectable like Spock or Data. Sisko I like because of his
> >no nonsense attitude. I think he is the true warior in DS9. Worf is
> >always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
> >to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor. True saving
> >grace of DS9 is O'Brien. He seems like a normal person, without some
> >serious problem like the others. He is someone you can relate to and
> >understand. If it weren't for Sisko and O"brien the show would be just
> >another Sci-Fi on TV.
You know what? You just view Star Trek as a collection of episodes.
Everybody who hates Voyager so strongly is just about the same. Sure, some
of the episodes were kind of silly, but it's drawing out new lines and
races in the Trek universe. Everybody seems to think that VOY's episodes
will all be the same... THEY AREN'T GOING TO BE THAT WAY. The Kazons are
out of the way, and Voyager is entering Borg space. So don't rule that
Voyager sucks, just wait a while and it's going to get a lot better. And if
you hate both VOY and DS9, do you just want to see TNG reruns for the next
20 years, occasionally mixed with a new movie?
I watch both DS9 and Voyager with no complaints because they are both Trek.
--
Joey Jones
joey...@prodigy.net
Begrudging Windows 95 user
"Where do you want to go after taking some aspirin and calling tech
support?"
MR OPINIONATED {Ray K Allen}
F1 wrote:. Worf is
> always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
> to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor.
HOLD IT!!!!
The inferance you make is that all Klingons attack when their personal
feelings lead towards it, (in humans it would be testosterone level and
addrenaline..I have no idea what it is for Klingons) and it just isn't
true. Worf himself has held off from violence in the past, even when
he truely wanted and needed to! Many Klingons do so also.
The Klingon culture is one of Violence, but the ideal is for order
through Strength. Not every Klingon (or human or whatever) is up to the
challenge of any established Ideal. Most fall short, some don't even
try. What you percieve as bullying is a part of Klingon Society.
"I want this." "NO.""I'll take it..."fight insues, if the defender is
as strong or stronger, he gets to keep the item/thing/honor and is
made better by surviving. Not all conflicts end when they should, and
not all Klingons recognize an opponants strength when they should.
Your comment, and appraisal is simply a Knee-jerk reaction and
uniformed.
Yes, SOME Klingons are Murderous, Theiving, Cowards who hide behind the
word honor Whenever they get pissed enough to Knife someone in the back.
But to say an entire Race and culture is made of Bullies because you
can't be bothered to get the facts straight, is simply prejudice.
*
Please don't Flame me with Klingon Quotes and Facts from the Many
recent resources for Klingon Language and Culture. This was my own
take on the subject and I don't think I am too far off mark.
Eduardo Esparza
On Sat, 15 Mar 1997, Ken McAuliffe wrote:
> From: Ken McAuliffe <def...@iglou.com>
> Subject: Re: DS9 Cancellation?
> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 08:18:56 GMT
>
> F1 <su...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> >About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
> >go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced by
> >Berman and his Cohorts.
> >About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
> >true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks
> >interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with this dumb
> >blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked. She seems
> >like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a true
war.......
Ok, I felt like I was obligated to reply to your response....You mention
above that Voyager lacks the true spirit of star trek...Well, I would like
to point out that in the ORIGINAL star Trek, they wee doing EXACTLY what
voyager is doing now! IN TOS, just like VOYU. the ships are exploring a
unknown part of the galaxy! VOY parallells TOS so much its not even
funny...from everything like the Mixed crew to the Vulcan Science officer.
I think out of 6 mediums of star trek. only Voyager and maybe the 1st
season of TNG parralles what the true spirit of star trek was all about...
Thanks, those are just my 2 cents.
Gordon Grant
I would rather see DS9 & Voyager continue now than anything new other than
movies.
Alexander Mackay <Jim.M...@btinternet.com> wrote in article
<5gcf1i$h...@neon.btinternet.com>...
> In article <5ft8sm$t...@osh2.datasync.com>, chr...@datasync.com says...
> >
> >sandra ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> writes: > > > >
> >> > > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at
> the end
Tom Kuchar
Joey (joey...@prodigy.net) wrote:
: I watch both DS9 and Voyager with no complaints because they are both Trek.
There's a discriminating opinion. :)
I've always maintained that if you slap the label "Star Trek" on it
will sell.
Let me state that I watch both series, too, in hopes that some good
stories come out of them. There have been some, but few. If you
compare the first three year of VOY w/ that of TNG, I'm sure that each
of us will find that TNG surpasses VOY in quality writing. perhaps
that comparison is like shooting fish in a barrel. However, I think
the same applies if you compare DS9 to TNG, although DS9 may fare
better. I'm not saying that DS9 or VOY didn't have some good shows,
but compared to the TNG, they've had far fewer.
Say what you want about Roddenberry and his penchant for stealing
ideas, but w/o him the current incarnations of ST are severely watered
down versions. He at least knew how to establish the format and
characters so that the series can evolve in a worth while way.
--
Tom Kuchar
kuc...@pldac.plh.af.mil
Phillips Laboratory/GPOB
Hanscom AFB, MA
Barry W. Brook
Gordon Grant wrote:
> >
> > What's wrong with the new season of DS9?! I'm enjoying every second of
> > it!!
> >
> >
I wish I'd seen a single second of it...Anyone know when it's coming
back?
Sandra Ferguson
MR OPINIONATED {Ray K Allen} wrote:
>
> F1 wrote:. Worf is
> > always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully
>
>
> The inferance you make is that all Klingons attack when their personal
> feelings lead towards it,
> can't be bothered to get the facts straight, is simply prejudice.
> *
supposed to be a show that opens your mind to the possibilities of what
could be out there. If every body was civilized or the same it'd be
pretty boring!!
Sandra
Sandra Ferguson
> You know what? You just view Star Trek as a collection of episodes.
> Everybody who hates Voyager so strongly is just about the same. Sure, some
> of the episodes were kind of silly, but it's drawing out new lines and
> races in the Trek universe. Everybody seems to think that VOY's episodes
> will all be the same... THEY AREN'T GOING TO BE THAT WAY. The Kazons are
> out of the way, and Voyager is entering Borg space. So don't rule that
> Voyager sucks, just wait a while and it's going to get a lot better. And if
> you hate both VOY and DS9, do you just want to see TNG reruns for the next
> 20 years, occasionally mixed with a new movie?
>
>
> Joey Jones
> joey...@prodigy.net
>
>I agree, sometimes the episodes are a slight yawn, but trek is trek and it's all worth watching
Sandra
lostsoul
Sandra Ferguson <san...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au> wrote in article
<3328C9...@nwit.dvet.tas.gov.au>...
> rest of Australia!!
> Sandra
I'm in Australia, and have seen upto Trials & Tribbilations, (season 5) and
IT is better than all 3 combined, season 4 was good... season 5 is
AWESOME...
David Johnston
Of course those good shows on TNG were almost entirely AFTER Roddenberry
stopped having significant input. I saw little sign that Roddenberry's
contribution at that point was constructive. Among the choices he made
that I object to, was his blatant and unjustifiable favouritism to his
own "Mary Jane", Wesley Crusher, and his insistence on binding the
Federation in a straitjacket of oppressive perfection and insularity.
MR OPINIONATED {Ray K Allen}
Sandra Ferguson wrote:
>
> MR OPINIONATED {Ray K Allen} wrote:
> > to say an entire Race and culture is made of Bullies because you
> > can't be bothered to get the facts straight, is simply prejudice.
> > *
> > What I want to know is , since when do all ST characters have to fit into our idea of honour or even our idea of good or bad. Isn't it
> supposed to be a show that opens your mind to the possibilities of what
> could be out there. If every body was civilized or the same it'd be
> pretty boring!!
> Sandra
There *IS* such a thing as Klingon honor, (not that *YOU* said there
wasn't) but not all of them hold to it. The origional re-actionary
idiot who posted was simply venting his feelings of inadequacy towards
a convieniant target, and a fictional one to boot!
Bryan Shailer
On Tue, 18 Mar 1997 13:07:12 -0600, Eduardo Esparza
<edes...@jove.acs.unt.edu> spake thusly to this newsgroup:
[snip leadup]
>Ok, I felt like I was obligated to reply to your response....You mention
>above that Voyager lacks the true spirit of star trek...Well, I would like
>to point out that in the ORIGINAL star Trek, they wee doing EXACTLY what
>voyager is doing now! IN TOS, just like VOYU. the ships are exploring a
>unknown part of the galaxy! VOY parallells TOS so much its not even
>funny...from everything like the Mixed crew to the Vulcan Science officer.
>I think out of 6 mediums of star trek. only Voyager and maybe the 1st
>season of TNG parralles what the true spirit of star trek was all about...
What "Mixed" crew was TOS ??
Every ST incarnation has had a mixed race/species crew.
--
Bryan E. Shailer
DoD Development (Canberra) | | | | | | Personal Opinions Only
bry...@mincom.com | | | | | |
Phone: +61 6 218 0208 | | | | | | And all I ask is a tall ship,
Fax: +61 6 218 0211 |M |I |N |C |O |M And a star to steer her by.
jjj
Sandra Ferguson wrote:
>
> > You know what? You just view Star Trek as a collection of episodes.
> > Everybody who hates Voyager so strongly is just about the same. Sure, some
> > of the episodes were kind of silly, but it's drawing out new lines and
> > races in the Trek universe. Everybody seems to think that VOY's episodes
> > will all be the same... THEY AREN'T GOING TO BE THAT WAY. The Kazons are
> > out of the way, and Voyager is entering Borg space. So don't rule that
> > Voyager sucks, just wait a while and it's going to get a lot better. And if
> > you hate both VOY and DS9, do you just want to see TNG reruns for the next
> > 20 years, occasionally mixed with a new movie?
> >
> >
> > Joey Jones
> > joey...@prodigy.net
You know, it's because of people like this that we get shit on trek.
--
The High Priest to the Shrine to Bruce Campbell:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/3331/index.html
"Hey, I paid for an hour!!!"
--Autolycus
tro...@icanect.net
There is a difference between continuing something and hacking it.
Voyager is a hack. The characters are flat and uninteresting. The plots
are just plane silly. In fact, I cant really name any qualities of any
of the characters. Janeway is a strong arm, Ripply type one minute and a
whiney little cry baby another. Tuvok does nothing but serve to slow
down an already tedious plot. Chekotay, well, theres nothing to say
about him. Hes as bland as chalk. Same with Kim, he's nice and nieve.
Paris was supposed to be a mimbo, but his just a cute and friendly as
the rest. Kes is nondescript as well. I cant think of any pronouced
characteristics these folks contain. Neelix is an annoying chump. All he
does is piss me off and the Doctor has gotten totally rediculous. I
cannot believe that a computer program can advance so far passed its
design. Data was not able, in a lifetime, to achieve whit the Doctor
has. And dont even get me started with DS9 or the last two movies. As
far as I'm concerned Trek died with All Good Things.
Eduardo Esparza wrote:
> Ok, I felt like I was obligated to reply to your response....You mention
> above that Voyager lacks the true spirit of star trek...Well, I would like
> to point out that in the ORIGINAL star Trek, they wee doing EXACTLY what
> voyager is doing now! IN TOS, just like VOYU. the ships are exploring a
> unknown part of the galaxy! VOY parallells TOS so much its not even
> funny...from everything like the Mixed crew to the Vulcan Science officer.
> I think out of 6 mediums of star trek. only Voyager and maybe the 1st
> season of TNG parralles what the true spirit of star trek was all about...
>
> Thanks, those are just my 2 cents.
--
_______________________________________________________________
__
Mark "Trotsky" Farinas / \
____ Leader of the Floridian Bolshevik Party / \
\ Head of the Temple of Our Lord GeneŽŠ | |
|---|--- | |
___/ When in Darkness, | _--- |
| Or in Doubt, | / \ |
O Phasers on Stun, |/ \|
USSR Good Luck, UFP
Kirk Out!
______________________________________________________________
recook77
MR OPINIONATED {Ray K Allen} <craz...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<33323F...@earthlink.net>...
>
> There *IS* such a thing as Klingon honor, (not that *YOU* said there
> wasn't) but not all of them hold to it. The origional re-actionary
> idiot who posted was simply venting his feelings of inadequacy towards
> a convieniant target, and a fictional one to boot!
Also, not all Klingons live to fight: note K'Ehleyr, Worf's lover, and
Gorkon and Azetbur from STVI.
>
John Walsh
trotsky,
But tell us how you really fell about it!
--
J O H N W A L S H All About Mormons
mor...@mormons.org http://www.mormons.org
And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?
Philip saith unto him, Come and see. (John 1:46)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
tro...@icanect.net wrote in article <333302...@icanect.net>...
Sneaky
<HTML><BODY>
Eduardo Esparza wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>On Sat, 15 Mar 1997, Ken McAuliffe wrote:
<BR>
<BR><I>> From: Ken McAuliffe <def...@iglou.com></I>
<BR><I>> Subject: Re: DS9 Cancellation?</I>
<BR><I>> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 08:18:56 GMT</I>
<BR><I>></I>
<BR><I>> F1 <su...@earthlink.net> wrote:</I>
<BR><I>></I>
<BR><I>></I>
<BR><I>> >About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now!
It needs to</I>
<BR><I>> >go and give another show a chance, preferrably one bot produced
by</I>
<BR><I>> >Berman and his Cohorts.</I>
<BR><I>> >About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean
it lacks</I>
<BR><I>> >true spirit of ST which is exploration of space. And it lacks</I>
<BR><I>> >interesting characters. Dax was likable at first then with
this dumb</I>
<BR><I>> >blond act with Worf is getting tiresome. Kira, I never liked.
She seems</I>
<BR><I>> >like a twit who always trying to prove how tough she is, a
true</I>
<BR>war.......
<BR>
<BR>Ok, I felt like I was obligated to reply to your response....You mention
<BR>above that Voyager lacks the true spirit of star trek...Well, I would like
<BR>to point out that in the ORIGINAL star Trek, they wee doing EXACTLY what
<BR>voyager is doing now! IN TOS, just like VOYU. the ships are exploring
a
<BR>unknown part of the galaxy! VOY parallells TOS so much its not even
<BR>funny...from everything like the Mixed crew to the Vulcan Science officer.
<BR>I think out of 6 mediums of star trek. only Voyager and maybe the 1st
<BR>season of TNG parralles what the true spirit of star trek was all about...
<BR>
<BR>Thanks, those are just my 2 cents.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Technically you are correct and incorrect. Gene Rodenberry's
one golden rule in making Star Trek was NO CONFLICT ON THE BRIDGE.
<BR>
<BR>Most of you will probably notice that this was slowly done away with after
the Great Bird's death in 1991, the theme of conflict between team members
became stronger Riker vs Worf wrt Troi is the primeval example.
<BR>Berman seems to like the idea of Conflict ( Voyager ..and DS9 to
an extent ) so the question is which spirit is worth adhering to. Personally
I think Star Trek has always been about change and that is what Berman
is about, he changed too much however when he brought in Janeway, Voyager
has excellent potential ( 5 year voyage theme ), she is singlehandedly
destroying the show.
<BR>And before anyone flames me, it is the actor playing Janeway ( Mulgrew)
I have the problem with, I maintain a female Captain is an excellent idea.
Any suggestions as to who would make a better female Captain form those
we know??
<BR>
<BR>Available for news, views,and abuze...
<BR>
<BR>Sneaky
</BODY>
</HTML>
Mark "Join the Holy Orgy" Farinas
Sneaky wrote:
> Technically you are correct and incorrect. Gene Rodenberry's one
> golden rule in making Star Trek was NO CONFLICT ON THE BRIDGE.
Gee, what do you call the relationship between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy?
McCoy and Spock use to insult eachother openly. McCoy would often
challenge both Kirk and Spocks desisions, sometimes threatening relief
of command. But did they have conflict to the point that the characters
hated eachother? No. Why should I like characters that dont
fundimentally get along and function as a good team?
> Berman seems to like the idea of Conflict
Berman doesnt know what he likes. The two shows are something new every
season because every premise they come up with basically sucks.
> so the question is which spirit is worth adhering to.
Hey, how about niether? How about we let Trek die? Huh? The brilliance
of TOS can't be repeated. TNG, an almost wholey different consept, was
also good in its own right, but by the 7 year in got sour (Phantasms,
Masks) and obviously doesnt make good movies as the two out so far are
utter crap. Voyager and DS9 are just a continuation of TNG's
degradation.
> Personally I think Star Trek has always been about change and that is
> what Berman is about, he changed too much however when he brought in
> Janeway, Voyager has excellent potential ( 5 year voyage theme ), she
> is singlehandedly destroying the show.
I dont think its Janeways fault alone. The whole cast is weak and
undeveloped. Every single member of the cast is, well lets just say it,
an idiot. This is the most incompetent crew in the history of man made
vessels. They are indessisive, talk to much, and are too damn friendly.
They seem more conserned with Federation policy millions of lightyears
from any base than Kirk and crew who were always in reach of a station.
Janeways holier than those of the past aditutude is sickening.
The ship itself is rediculous. What did Roddenberry want his ship
based on? Utilitarian minimalism. The E had no fancy, useless
thingamubobs on it. It stutcturally was all it needed to be. But whats
with the folding of the Voyagers engines? There is none. Its there to
look pretty and its annoyed me since the premier. Same with the ships
"aerodynamic" design in an environment with no air. Ooops, I forgot, the
stupid ship lands. Theres a useless function. Its biomechanical
properties are idiotic, they were elaborated on once, but the plot was
so boring they never went back to it again. See, Berman knows what he's
making sucks, he just hasnt got a clue how to fix it and damages the
series even more.
And that is the fundimental problem Voyager has. Too much technology.
Technology that is always ready to save their butts. TOS has a real
feeling of loneliness, not because they were that far out in space (less
so than Voyager) but because they were out in space in a rusty old bath
tub. It was so damn hard for them to even get from one place to another.
Deck plates used to shake, the sound of engines in the background was
droning. My favourite was the sound of different decks communicating on
the bridge in the background. The bridge was cramped, noisey, and lit
with strange "alien" colours that gave a sense of claustrophobia. And
the technology was simple. We had a very vague idea of how the ships
systems worked, and thats all we did need because technology is not an
end unto itself.
And you know what? Every alien out there could practically kick their
ass in technology. The Romulans had better weapons and a cloak, but did
Kirk and crew spend the time looking for some fantastic way to penetrate
their cloak that would have sounded rediculous? No, he used his talents
as a tactition and the resources his crew could offer him. And when it
came time to go into battle Kirk felt guilt, a real emotion, unlike
Janeway's "Everything's gonna be ok cause we have big guns". The Gorn
were obviously superior in weapons, shielding, and propultion. There
were lots of superior races that found the ship to be no more than a
fly. I dont think VOyager will ever portray the fear and utter suprise
of the Fesarius intersepting the Enterprise and dwarfing her by at least
50 to 100 times in size.
And not every planet was a treasure trove. There were more barren,
rocky worlds than there were lush inhabited ones. Some were inhabited
once but were dead and filled with the leftovers of great civilizations
that made the universe seem more ancient and lived in as well as making
the galaxy seem larger. You had to look for life, it wasnt circling
every star.
And what about the civilizations they did meet? The aliens were enot
that alien looking, most were just humans, but their culture was
definatley alien. Look at one of my favourite episodes "A taste of
Armaggedon". That was one fucked up society, fighting a war through
computers. That is a very "inhuman" premise. It makes the people of
those warring planets seem alien even they dont look it. Most of the
planets Voyager visits are boing. They come in three types: Friendly,
War-like, or 1984-esque. Dull, dull, dull!
In conclusion (if you've actually read this far, but I've never known
Voyager fans to be that reseptive to critisism) TOS is like Magelan
circumnavigating he globe in a splintering wooden sailing ship. Very
exciting. Voyager is like Kathy Lee Giford on a carneval cruise and you
never know when she'll break out in some song from her idiotic "Bible
for Kids" video. I know which one I rather watch. No matter how much you
claim to like Voyager (I dont believe anyone really *likes* Voyager, I
think they grin and bare it becaue it has a "Star Trek" label, but
you'll never hear them admit it) you have to agree with at least half of
the stuff above. Voyager is the laugh of the SciFi world. It makes
movies like "Ice Pirates" or "Pod People" seem like reasonable premises.
Stop watching Voyager, and DS9 too, and, well, do anything else. Those
Star Wars movies they've got out look pretty good...
Geordi Pad
Sneaky wrote:
> And before anyone flames me, it is the actor playing Janeway (
> Mulgrew) I have the problem with, I maintain a female Captain is an
> excellent idea.
Woh! You're putting the *entire* blame of Voyager on Mulgrew? You need
to look at whole picture, friend.
She is a good actress, or else she wouldn't gotten the part. She
*simply* act out the way the director, producers, and writers *want* her
to act.
It seems the *real* problem is the combination of bad scripts and stupid
producers that do not *want* to develope the characters and show to its
full potential.
--
Geordi Pad - Cmdr., USS Avenger Engineering (Starfleet)
Capt. Kathryn Janeway: "Bottle of champane. Moon-light sail on Lake
George. How does that sound?" (smiling)
Cmdr. Chatokay: "Like something worth living for." (smiling)
recook77
Mark "Join the Holy Orgy" Farinas <tro...@icanect.net> wrote in article
<333850...@icanect.net>...
> In conclusion (if you've actually read this far, but I've never known
> Voyager fans to be that reseptive to critisism) TOS is like Magelan
> circumnavigating he globe in a splintering wooden sailing ship. Very
> exciting. Voyager is like Kathy Lee Giford on a carneval cruise and you
> never know when she'll break out in some song from her idiotic "Bible
> for Kids" video. I know which one I rather watch. No matter how much you
> claim to like Voyager (I dont believe anyone really *likes* Voyager, I
> think they grin and bare it becaue it has a "Star Trek" label, but
> you'll never hear them admit it)
Hey, I like some Voyager episodes. I don't think the show's reaching its
full potential, but I like it.
> you have to agree with at least half of
> the stuff above. Voyager is the laugh of the SciFi world. It makes
> movies like "Ice Pirates" or "Pod People" seem like reasonable premises.
> Stop watching Voyager, and DS9 too, and, well, do anything else. Those
> Star Wars movies they've got out look pretty good...
>
DS9?!? I thought this post was about Voyager. DS9 has been, with *very*
rare exceptions, consistently great, and deserves to go on as long as--or
longer than--TNG did.
Davy Stone
OK. I'm responding to two different posts, so this WILL get confusing.
Just try to follow through, and I'll try to delete peices of the prior
posts I'm not referring to.
BTW: someone I'm following up on is a bit cranky! be warned.
---------------
Mark "Join the Holy Orgy" Farinas wrote (all > belong to Mark Farinas):
>
> Hey, how about niether? How about we let Trek die? Huh? The brilliance
> of TOS can't be repeated. TNG, an almost wholey different consept, was
> also good in its own right, but by the 7 year in got sour (Phantasms,
> Masks) and obviously doesnt make good movies as the two out so far are
> utter crap. Voyager and DS9 are just a continuation of TNG's
> degradation.
I don't know if I'd call TOS brilliant. Conceptually, TOS did things
which, to that point, really hadn't been done on TV. That's brilliant.
But out of the three seasons of shows, there were some bad ones, some
silly ones, some cheesy ones, and many campy ones.
> Sneaky wrote (all double >> belong to Sneaky):
>
> > Personally I think Star Trek has always been about change and that is
> > what Berman is about, he changed too much however when he brought in
> > Janeway, Voyager has excellent potential ( 5 year voyage theme ), she
> > is singlehandedly destroying the show.
Quick question to Sneaky: How did Berman change too much by bringing in
Janeway? It almost seems like some fans have it out for him.
> I dont think its Janeways fault alone. The whole cast is weak and
> undeveloped. Every single member of the cast is, well lets just say it,
> an idiot. This is the most incompetent crew in the history of man made
> vessels. They are indessisive, talk to much, and are too damn friendly.
> They seem more conserned with Federation policy millions of lightyears
> from any base than Kirk and crew who were always in reach of a station.
> Janeways holier than those of the past aditutude is sickening.
I don't know. I don't really buy into that, "it was good enough for
Kirk, so it's good enough for me," philosophy. I liked Janeway's
contrast between "cowboy frontier" of Kirk's days and the "days of rules
and regs" of current trek continuity. If you notice, Picard lives (and
would die) by these same rules. We (as 20th cent. citizens) look back
at the wild west days as savage, and keep ourselves tied up with rules
and regulations. Which is better? Hard to say. But when contrasting
things, you don't have to prove one better than the other--you just
acknowledge the differences. Voyager, in many ways, is a contrast of
TOS. Again, exploring the unknown (something impossible in todays
alpha/beta quad), but this time with the experience of years of space
exploration and many first-contact situations.
I agree that the characters haven't gelled as much as I'd have liked.
But, that tends to be how things go with Trek. Who was Deanna Troi?
Beverly Crusher? Geordi LaForge? Even Riker, to an extent? It was
well into the fourth and fifth seasons of TNG before we got a GOOD look
into the psyches of these characters. It seems to take about three (3)
seasons for a trek series to get off the ground. I've recently started
(and stopped) watching TNG first and some second season episodes (uh-oh,
riker's beardless--turn the TV quick). The first season was almost
bad. I think Trek fans have romanticized these shows, and remember them
to be better than many of them were.
> The ship itself is rediculous. What did Roddenberry want his ship
> based on? Utilitarian minimalism.
.... stuff deleted about how poorly voyager looks/was designed
> See, Berman knows what he's
> making sucks, he just hasnt got a clue how to fix it and damages the
> series even more.
...more deleted, this time about how there's too much tech, and they
rely on it too much.
Whatever Roddenberry based his ship on doesn't really matter. If you
want continuity, several years have passed between TOS and VOY. Tech
should have improved (if it hadn't, then the Fed wasn't learning much
out in space). If Voyager was still a "rusty bathtub," I'd begin to
think that the Fed had no business out there. And again, Berman
bashing. At the very worst, he's guilty of trying to satisfy a bunch of
fanboys who still want TOS and TNG. Again, watch the first few seasons
of TNG or DS9. Both shows took time to work out the kinks. VOY isn't
being given that time; it was expected to be perfect from day 1.
I DO agree that VOY writers had a tendency to write themselves into a
situation where only tech could get them out. And I agree, tech doesn't
make a good plot. But that doesn't mean that to get a good plot we must
remove it. The writers are bringing more action into the show, and less
technobabble. I don't know if that's the niche I'd like to see VOY
filling -- Space action shoot-em-up series, but it's better than
Space-tech series.
> And you know what? Every alien out there could practically kick their
> ass in technology. The Romulans had better weapons and a cloak, but did
> Kirk and crew spend the time looking for some fantastic way to penetrate
> their cloak that would have sounded rediculous? No, he used his talents
> as a tactition and the resources his crew could offer him. And when it
> came time to go into battle Kirk felt guilt, a real emotion, unlike
> Janeway's "Everything's gonna be ok cause we have big guns".
...more deleted
Funny. I see this completely reversed. I never felt much emotion from
Kirk (except lust). Guilt? Fear that someone would better him, maybe.
And I've seen much more emotion from Janeway than you've given her
credit for.
> And not every planet was a treasure trove. There were more barren,
> rocky worlds than there were lush inhabited ones. Some were inhabited
> once but were dead and filled with the leftovers of great civilizations
> that made the universe seem more ancient and lived in as well as making
> the galaxy seem larger. You had to look for life, it wasnt circling
> every star.
I'm sorry. I'm losing your train of thought here. TOS was better
because they encountered more DEAD or LIFELESS planets? Maybe it's true
that there are more dead worlds out there than thriving ones, but I find
the thriving ones much more interesting. And Voyager HAS encountered a
few lifeless planets (one just hours/days after it was destroyed).
> And what about the civilizations they did meet? The aliens were enot
> that alien looking, most were just humans, but their culture was
> definatley alien. Look at one of my favourite episodes "A taste of
> Armaggedon". That was one fucked up society, fighting a war through
> computers. That is a very "inhuman" premise. It makes the people of
> those warring planets seem alien even they dont look it. Most of the
> planets Voyager visits are boing. They come in three types: Friendly,
> War-like, or 1984-esque. Dull, dull, dull!
Again, I think you're looking for things to dislike. I've heard
complaints that Trek aliens look too human, but are you saying on VOY
they don't look human enough? I, for one, despised the MANY times that
TOS encountered a planet which seemed to develop exactly like earth.
Unrealistic, and Dull, dull, dull!
> In conclusion (if you've actually read this far, but I've never known
> Voyager fans to be that reseptive to critisism)
Alright. It was at this point in the post that I began to feel that
someone wasn't criticizing Trek, but was just flaming VOY and its fans.
Aparently you've been pretty closed minded to not know any VOY fans
receptive to criticism. I'm one. I've agreed with some--but not
all--things said in your post. VOY does have problems. Cast
development, for one. Taking WAY TOO LONG to get out of Kazon space,
for another. Too much technobabble, for even another. But just because
I don't call for the demise of VOY doesn't mean I'm not receptive to
criticism. I can accept criticism without agreeing to all of it, and
without resorting to name calling (ok, to be fair, I did some
name-calling when earlier I said someone was a bit cranky). But
responsible criticism, when offered up as such, shouldn't attack. It
should argue and pursuade.
> TOS is like Magelan
> circumnavigating he globe in a splintering wooden sailing ship. Very
> exciting. Voyager is like Kathy Lee Giford on a carneval cruise and you
> never know when she'll break out in some song from her idiotic "Bible
> for Kids" video. I know which one I rather watch. No matter how much you
> claim to like Voyager (I dont believe anyone really *likes* Voyager, I
> think they grin and bare it becaue it has a "Star Trek" label, but
> you'll never hear them admit it) you have to agree with at least half of
> the stuff above. Voyager is the laugh of the SciFi world. It makes
> movies like "Ice Pirates" or "Pod People" seem like reasonable premises.
> Stop watching Voyager, and DS9 too, and, well, do anything else. Those
> Star Wars movies they've got out look pretty good...
>
Again, you've reduced your arugement to name calling. I DO like VOY.
It has potential, and it keeps my interest week after week. I'm not
saying it's the best show on TV ever, but it doesn't have to be. It's
address some interesting issues. It has possiblities to address many
more. But if you don't want to give the show a chance, fine. Don't.
If you want to critize the show, fine. Do. But next time call a flame
a flame. It'll be easier for me to bypass it in place of more
constructive criticism.
Bee...@helix.net
>> > "aerodynamic" design in an environment with no air. Ooops, I forgot, the
>> > stupid ship lands.
>
>Aehm sorry, but I always thought that there is no absolute vacuum, even
>in space. The problem is, that the resistence in a fluid or gaz goes
>with the second power of speed, and warp 9 e.g. is a quite high speed.
>
Navigaionel deflecers take care of dust. the aletmet reason for
voyagers shape is warp feald efionsey, its beter to have a warp feald
that is longer than it is wide in the direction of travel. Also when
ships maik the jump to warp they under go a breaf moment of shok, and
then consistent sress thrue out travel. Modern star ships are desined
to transmit the stres down the length of the ship without absorbing to
mutch of it directly and whering the ship out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorey for the inconveanyens of reading thrue my posts!
However...
I will not respond to >un-frendly< coments regarding my
spelling.Dislexya does NOT = stupidity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 'Join the Holy Orgy' Farinas
Davy Stone wrote:
> I don't know. I don't really buy into that, "it was good enough for
> Kirk, so it's good enough for me," philosophy. I liked Janeway's
> contrast between "cowboy frontier" of Kirk's days and the "days of rules
> and regs" of current trek continuity. If you notice, Picard lives (and
> would die) by these same rules. We (as 20th cent. citizens) look back
> at the wild west days as savage, and keep ourselves tied up with rules
> and regulations. Which is better? Hard to say. But when contrasting
> things, you don't have to prove one better than the other--you just
> acknowledge the differences. Voyager, in many ways, is a contrast of
> TOS. Again, exploring the unknown (something impossible in todays
> alpha/beta quad), but this time with the experience of years of space
> exploration and many first-contact situations.
I'm not saying that things wouldn't turn out that way in the future, of
coarse things change. What I'm saying is that that time period is a
boring, decadent one. Again, which would you rather watch? A show about
frontiers men, or a show about people visiting a resort in Colorado
which gets raided by "Injuns" every once and awhile, but you know they
have everything under control?
> I agree that the characters haven't gelled as much as I'd have liked.
> But, that tends to be how things go with Trek. Who was Deanna Troi?
> Beverly Crusher? Geordi LaForge? Even Riker, to an extent? It was
> well into the fourth and fifth seasons of TNG before we got a GOOD look
> into the psyches of these characters. It seems to take about three (3)
> seasons for a trek series to get off the ground. I've recently started
> (and stopped) watching TNG first and some second season episodes (uh-oh,
> riker's beardless--turn the TV quick). The first season was almost
> bad. I think Trek fans have romanticized these shows, and remember them
> to be better than many of them were.
If you recall, TOS was only out for 3 years. In fact, the best shows are
in the first year. The only bad 1st year show was "Alternative Factor".
Which Lazerus is which? Do you care? I don't. The first 2 years of TNG
did suck, as did most of the last. I'm not romanticising, just being
objective. The only good episode of Voyager I have ever seen was the one
where Kim gets sucked out an airlock. And you know what I found out
later? That was a rejected TNG script.
> Whatever Roddenberry based his ship on doesn't really matter. If you
> want continuity, several years have passed between TOS and VOY. Tech
> should have improved (if it hadn't, then the Fed wasn't learning much
> out in space). If Voyager was still a "rusty bathtub," I'd begin to
> think that the Fed had no business out there. And again, Berman
> bashing. At the very worst, he's guilty of trying to satisfy a bunch of
> fanboys who still want TOS and TNG. Again, watch the first few seasons
> of TNG or DS9. Both shows took time to work out the kinks. VOY isn't
> being given that time; it was expected to be perfect from day 1.
DS9 is still crap. And like I said, that may be the normal evolution of
space travel, and if so, I dont find it particularly interesting. A
Spanish gallion is much more interesting than the QE2. You seem to be
missing that point.
> I DO agree that VOY writers had a tendency to write themselves into a
> situation where only tech could get them out. And I agree, tech doesn't
> make a good plot. But that doesn't mean that to get a good plot we must
> remove it. The writers are bringing more action into the show, and less
> technobabble. I don't know if that's the niche I'd like to see VOY
> filling -- Space action shoot-em-up series, but it's better than
> Space-tech series.
Technobabble is boring, plain and simple. I can't comprimise on that.
> Funny. I see this completely reversed. I never felt much emotion from
> Kirk (except lust). Guilt? Fear that someone would better him, maybe.
It sounds like you havent actually seen the show, just seen eddie
murphy's stand up. Kirk didn't fuck any green bitches no matter what he
says. "Balance of Terror" has a wonderful moment where Kirk speaks to
McCoy about crossing the nuetral zone, possibly lossing his ship and
crew and starting a war. There a number of scenes like this through out
the show, you just seem to have overlooked them.
> And I've seen much more emotion from Janeway than you've given her
> credit for.
Yeah, weeping like a baby for no reason.
> I'm sorry. I'm losing your train of thought here. TOS was better
> because they encountered more DEAD or LIFELESS planets? Maybe it's true
> that there are more dead worlds out there than thriving ones, but I find
> the thriving ones much more interesting. And Voyager HAS encountered a
> few lifeless planets (one just hours/days after it was destroyed).
It was better because it created what is called an atmosphere. A bigger,
broader universe, if you will. And even when there were barren planets
their were interesting thinks to do ("Obession", "What Are Little Girls
Made Of?", etc.).
> Again, I think you're looking for things to dislike. I've heard
> complaints that Trek aliens look too human, but are you saying on VOY
> they don't look human enough? I, for one, despised the MANY times that
> TOS encountered a planet which seemed to develop exactly like earth.
> Unrealistic, and Dull, dull, dull!
Your totally missing the point I've mad. I'm not complaining that the
Voyager aliens look to "alien", just that it doent take alot of makeup
to make someone alien. An additude is a more convincing device to show
inhumanity that a few bumps and spots. You dont need to make someone
*look* alien, you can just make them *act* alien and people will say
"Look, Buzz, its an alien!" Voyager relies totally on makeup to create
aliens and doesnt work very hard on the personalities.
> > In conclusion (if you've actually read this far, but I've never known
> > Voyager fans to be that reseptive to critisism)
>
> Alright. It was at this point in the post that I began to feel that
> someone wasn't criticizing Trek, but was just flaming VOY and its fans.
> Aparently you've been pretty closed minded to not know any VOY fans
> receptive to criticism.
Well, your the first. Although you've missed most of what I've said.
> all--things said in your post. VOY does have problems. Cast
> development, for one. Taking WAY TOO LONG to get out of Kazon space,
> for another. Too much technobabble, for even another. But just because
> I don't call for the demise of VOY doesn't mean I'm not receptive to
> criticism.
Get the sword out! I want to cut its head off! Voyager and DS9 should be
dead, dead, dead. Hell, I will make a comprimise on this point. You can
have DS9 and VGR, but stop calling in "Trek" because its not, and its
not what Roddenberry would ever have wanted.
> I can accept criticism without agreeing to all of it, and
> without resorting to name calling (ok, to be fair, I did some
> name-calling when earlier I said someone was a bit cranky). But
> responsible criticism, when offered up as such, shouldn't attack. It
> should argue and pursuade.
Pipe down, you just looking for a little bitty reason not to listen to
anything I've said. I'm not trying to persuade anyone, I'm just venting
to a group who does nothing but kisses Bermans ass. A possition that not
alot of people agree to as this group only gets about 40 messages a day
as apossed to a Star Wars group, for example, which gets about 500 or
more (and that was before all this Special Edition stuff). That plus
heavily falling ratings tells us something dropping population Trek
fans.
> Again, you've reduced your arugement to name calling. I DO like VOY.
> It has potential,
No it doesnt, its a bad premise, with bad writers and a bad cast.
and it keeps my interest week after week. I'm not
> saying it's the best show on TV ever, but it doesn't have to be. It's
> address some interesting issues. It has possiblities to address many
> more.
What issues? Seriously, I've missed them.
> But if you don't want to give the show a chance, fine. Don't.
I gave the show a chance, I watched the permier and almost, thats right,
almost liked it, and thought i just might turn out to be good, but its
disappointed me.
> If you want to critize the show, fine. Do. But next time call a flame
> a flame. It'll be easier for me to bypass it in place of more
> constructive criticism.
Two little sentences constitute a flame? You very touchy then. Let me
tell you that it is my observation that Voyager and DS9 fans have alway
been abusive toward me whenever I've tried to present a desent
aurguement. So why should I even bother anymore. I think current trek
fans know the two shows are crap and just dont want to addmit it so they
are very sensitive about it, worried someone will really make them see
the light, bring thier fantasy world crashing down. Personally I can
respect a show made by a man whos never seen TOS, doesnt care about it,
and loves explosions a little too much (you hear me Bragga, you
uneducated twit?).
Stop the plot;
Time to go;
No more "Trek";
No more shows!!!!!!!!!!!
And I will personally kill anyone who thinks "Star Fleet Academy", aka
"Trek:90210", would be a good idea for a show.
Ted Clancy
Mark "Join the Holy Orgy" Farinas wrote (About Voyager):
>
> The ship itself is rediculous. What did Roddenberry want his ship
> based on? Utilitarian minimalism. The E had no fancy, useless
> thingamubobs on it. It stutcturally was all it needed to be. But whats
> with the folding of the Voyagers engines? There is none. Its there to
> look pretty and its annoyed me since the premier. Same with the ships
I thought the reason for the folding nacelles was to help prevent the
environmental damage refered to in "Force of Nature". I doubt Voyager
would
want to travel with a Warp 5 speed limit.
> "aerodynamic" design in an environment with no air. Ooops, I forgot, the
> stupid ship lands. Theres a useless function. Its biomechanical
> properties are idiotic, they were elaborated on once, but the plot was
> so boring they never went back to it again. See, Berman knows what he's
> making sucks, he just hasnt got a clue how to fix it and damages the
> series even more.
Hmmm, I think that they don't do enough science, or at least not enough
pertinent science. Let's talk about the potential dangers of science,
like
biological warfare, or genetic engineering.
I'll agree that TOS and TNG were unduplicatable phenomena, but I don't
think
DS9 nor Voyager are trying to duplicate it. That's why they set DS9 on a
space station, and Voyager away from the established universe of
Klingons
and Starfleet.
I think Voyager's getting better, and by ditching the Kazon they are
returning
to the idea of going where no one has gone before, which was the premise
of the
original 5-year "trek", and of no show since then. (Add to that the
racially
diverse crew and the butch captain, and you've almost got TOS. Now they
just
have to find a god which is really a computer :-) )
As for Rick Berman, I'd really like to give him a few pointers for the
next
movie, but that's a topic for another posting.
--
Ted Clancy | "...This is Pauline Hanson of Borg
s34...@student.uq.edu.au | Resistance is futile
BE/BA, University of Queensland. | You _will_ be assimilated..."
HurghwI'
Mark 'Join the Holy Orgy' Farinas wrote:
>[...]
> It sounds like you havent actually seen the show, just seen eddie
> murphy's stand up. Kirk didn't fuck any green bitches no matter what he
> says. "Balance of Terror" has a wonderful moment where Kirk speaks to
> McCoy about crossing the nuetral zone, possibly lossing his ship and
> crew and starting a war. There a number of scenes like this through out
> the show, you just seem to have overlooked them.
It seems to me that every Trek fan has some unexplained dislike for some
part of the shows. I know a lot of people who would say William Shatner
can't act worth crap, as opposed to Janeway.
>[blah blah blah]
To toss in my two cents, I think the reason Voyager is bosing is because
it just isn't all that wierd and off-the-wall. DS9 was bad at first
because it was sometimes like a space soap-opera. TOS was good because
you never knew what to expect - strange aliens, gods, time travel,
asylums, whatever. Voyager is so predictable - meet some boring aliens,
have some problem, then do some amazing technical feat at the end, and
have Janeway get all emotional. They're out in the middle of nowhere,
they need to do better that rehash old TNG ideas.
Colin W. Glenn
Stone Cold Aaron Kjos
This last message is what makes Usenet great. Awesome response, I agree
Totally, and great poem at the end.
Kirk, Spock, and McCoy 4 life!!1
Stone Cold Aaron Kjos
Your on drugs dude, DS9 has had a few good episodes, and no great ones.
Eric Gindrup
Mark 'Join the Holy Orgy' Farinas wrote:
>
> Davy Stone wrote:
>
> I'm not saying that things wouldn't turn out that way in the
> future, of coarse things change. What I'm saying is that that
> time period is a boring, decadent one. Again, which would you
> rather watch? A show about frontiers men, or a show about
> people visiting a resort in Colorado which gets raided by
> "Injuns" every once and awhile, but you know they have
> everything under control?
Anticipating some of your DS9 commentary, I *sort of* agree with
you. What is missing is the actual intrigue that coule be had in
a decadent society. Comparatively, Bab5 has done a better job of
presenting decadent intrigue than have *any* of the new Treks.
DS9 should have been more political. Instead, they started out
trying to be like TOS. "Let's all pile in a runabout and see the
next interesting phenomenon or unexplored planet near Bajor."
This failed to properly address the issues that are important in
a large stationary space facility.
While agree that "frontieering" is more interesting than watching
a boring dinner party. Political intrigue has more opportunity
for invoking higher brain functions than either.
>> Funny. I see this completely reversed. I never felt much
>> emotion from Kirk (except lust). Guilt? Fear that someone
>> would better him, maybe.
>
> [...] "Balance of Terror" has a wonderful moment where Kirk
> speaks to McCoy about crossing the nuetral zone, possibly
> lossing his ship and crew and starting a war. There a number of
> scenes like this through out the show, you just seem to have
> overlooked them.
Rhetoric does not equate with emoting. Even Shatner comments that
the character of Kirk was pretty poor. Unfortunately, he had
created the character in the first season, before he had really
learned what acting was all about, and was stuck with that form
of the character forever. Unfortunately, bad acting became an
intrinsic property of Kirk. (*sigh*)
> It was better because it created what is called an atmosphere.
> A bigger, broader universe, if you will. And even when there
> were barren planets their were interesting thinks to do
> ("Obession", "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", etc.).
When your mission is to explore, you do neat things everywhere
you go. Wasting time and resources in the book-docks is
contrary to the idea of the Voyager story-line.
> Get the sword out! I want to cut its head off! Voyager and DS9
> should be dead, dead, dead. Hell, I will make a comprimise on
> this point. You can have DS9 and VGR, but stop calling in
> "Trek" because its not, and its not what Roddenberry would ever
> have wanted.
Whipping out my trusty history book, I see that DS9 *is* what
Roddenberry wanted. It may not have turned out exactly as he had
hoped, but any opinion in that arena would be pure speculation.
Further, DS9 and VOY have to be taken in the larger context that
there isn't much better on elsewhere to watch.
> No it doesnt, its a bad premise, with bad writers and a bad cast.
Please describe exactly how the *premise* is bad.
> What issues? Seriously, I've missed them.
Well, there've been a few, with a density similar to that of TOS.
> I gave the show a chance, I watched the permier and almost,
> thats right, almost liked it, and thought i just might turn out
> to be good, but its disappointed me.
Judging shows by their premiers is pretty dangerous. If TNG had
continued like "Encounter at Farpoint" it would have been a pretty
horrible thing.
> Stop the plot;
> Time to go;
> No more "Trek";
> No more shows!!!!!!!!!!!
Now *this* would be contrary to Roddenberry's vision.
> And I will personally kill anyone who thinks "Star Fleet
> Academy", aka "Trek:90210", would be a good idea for a show.
(*shudder*) And if you're too far away to do it, I'll pick up the
slack.
[...]
-- Eric Gindrup ! gin...@okway.okstate.edu
Barry Arnold
On 29 Mar 1997 05:46:50 GMT, "Stone Cold Aaron Kjos"
<pack...@lax.net> wrote:
>Your on drugs dude, DS9 has had a few good episodes, and no great ones.
you are wrong DS9 has developed a number of story lines that are well
worth following particularly those involving the gamma quadrent, the
changelings and the dominion. You need to hang on in there.
barry.
HKV Bagdad TNT-0042
> > "aerodynamic" design in an environment with no air. Ooops, I forgot, the
> > stupid ship lands.
Aehm sorry, but I always thought that there is no absolute vacuum, even
in space. The problem is, that the resistence in a fluid or gaz goes
with the second power of speed, and warp 9 e.g. is a quite high speed.
Adm. Huus'De Guud'Zel
HKV Bagdad
http://www.goecities.com/Area51/Corridor/5272
Louis Patterson
You _could_ hang in there. Or you could watch Babylon 5. I know which one
I'd rather watch.
---
Louis Patterson
l.patt...@ugrad.unimelb.edu.au
Mark 'Silly Head' Farinas
Ted Clancy wrote:
> I thought the reason for the folding nacelles was to help prevent the
> environmental damage refered to in "Force of Nature". I doubt Voyager
> would
> want to travel with a Warp 5 speed limit.
Is that your own personal theory? I hate that warp 5 limit. No one has
ever followed it and it was a bad idea from the begining. How can you
get anywhere at warp 5? And how will folding engines help? I really dont
get it.
> Hmmm, I think that they don't do enough science, or at least not enough
> pertinent science. Let's talk about the potential dangers of science,
> like
> biological warfare, or genetic engineering.
Thats been done already, in TOS. Theres no new ground to cover.
> I'll agree that TOS and TNG were unduplicatable phenomena, but I don't
> think
> DS9 nor Voyager are trying to duplicate it. That's why they set DS9 on a
> space station, and Voyager away from the established universe of
> Klingons
> and Starfleet.
Well Star Trek: DS9 is an oxymoron. How can you "Trek" if your on a
station? It doesnt work. And what are the kazon? Klingons in kilts. How
boring.
>
> I think Voyager's getting better, and by ditching the Kazon they are
> returning
> to the idea of going where no one has gone before,
And getting into more idiotic plot developments like Harry falling in
love with a Holodeck program, Belana going into heat, and Chekotay
lossing the individual personality he never actually had to a
collective.
which was the premise
> of the
> original 5-year "trek", and of no show since then.
The premies of TOS was to explore. Voyager is not exploring, they are
trying to get from point A to point B and getting into trouble on the
way. The most exploring they've done was looking for coffee. How do they
really expect to get back? I'm sure stopping at all these places has
added years to thier journey. The only ones who will make it back will
be thier children, which they arent having any of. And look at all the
nice places they could have stayed at rather then going through all this
crap? And how the f*ck do they fix that damn ship every episode for
almost fatal damage?
(Add to that the
> racially
> diverse crew and the butch captain, and you've almost got TOS.
Just because Janeway is a dyck doesnt mean shell ever have as many women
as Kirk. Kim is not the swash bukler Sulu was. Tuvok is about as
interesting as a tree stump as aposed to the depths of Spock. Dont make
me sick.
> As for Rick Berman, I'd really like to give him a few pointers for the
> next
> movie, but that's a topic for another posting.
Like not make one at all.
Mark "Trotsky" Farinas
_____
Capitalism is dry and stodgy and smells like Grandma's house.
Socialism?
Smells like Jeneane Garofalo.
Trek Babe
Ken McAuliffe wrote:
>
> F1 <su...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Kody Belshe wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > > Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the
> >> end
> >> >> > > of THIS season
> >>
> >> Whoever wrote that has no sence of what is GOOD and BAD. I used to be only
> >> an avid Voyager fan..then voyager began to get weaker and weaker plots each
> >> week...Now I am more od a DS9 fan. The plots are excellent, the acting is
> >> superb, and the episodes just keep getting better and better.
>
> >About the Voyager, it sucks big time! It needs to die now! It needs to
> >About DS9, it still doesn't seem to measure up to STNG, I mean it lacks
> >veteran wouldn't act like her.Vashir, he just can't act! Odo, was never
> >likable or respectable like Spock or Data. Sisko I like because of his
> >no nonsense attitude. I think he is the true warior in DS9. Worf is
> >always doing his warrior crap but he is just a bully who got something
> >to prove. Just like other klingons, he has no true honor. True saving
> >grace of DS9 is O'Brien. He seems like a normal person, without some
> >serious problem like the others. He is someone you can relate to and
> >understand. If it weren't for Sisko and O"brien the show would be just
> >another Sci-Fi on TV.
>
> Amen!
And I second that! (esp. the Worf/Dax-dumb thing.) Give Voyager a chance
though....
Ed Tang
>Your on drugs dude, DS9 has had a few good episodes, and no great ones.
Hey, DS9 has had some great episodes! Way of the Warrior springs to
mind! And so what if I'm on drugs? <taking a guzzle of some CAFFEINE
coffee> <smirk>
Ed Tang
Dan Attreed
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95.97040...@gromit.ecr.mu.oz.au>,
l...@gromit.ecr.mu.oz.au says...
>
>On Sun, 30 Mar 1997, Barry Arnold wrote:
>
>> <pack...@lax.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Your on drugs dude, DS9 has had a few good episodes, and no great ones.
>>
>> worth following particularly those involving the gamma quadrent, the
>> changelings and the dominion. You need to hang on in there.
>>
>> barry.
>
>I'd rather watch.
>
*Or* you could watch *both*. DS9 and B5 are too different to be
judging them side by side. DS9 follows the more classic ST formula of having
long, embedded storylines, with the episodes more or less being self
contained. You can miss a week or 2 of DS9 and still catch up with the plot.
B5 is somewhat different. For the most part, B5 is a lot like a long novel
with each episode being a chapter. If you didn't start reading story back at
the TV movie pilot, you don't get the full effect. B5 doesn't let up on the
main plot for nearly a minute, and you'd better hang on tight if you want to
follow it. Both series have their ups and downs and their own unique twists
and turns, but niether is superior to the other.
-Dan
"Can't we all just get along?" :)
Alain Breton
<HTML><BODY>
Ed Tang wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>On 29 Mar 1997 05:46:50 GMT, "Stone Cold Aaron
Kjos"
<BR><pack...@lax.net> wrote:
<BR>
<BR><I>>Your on drugs dude, DS9 has had a few good episodes, and no great
ones.</I>
<BR>
<BR>Hey, DS9 has had some great episodes! Way of the Warrior springs to
<BR>mind! And so what if I'm on drugs? <taking a guzzle of some CAFFEINE
<BR>coffee> <smirk>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Wait a minute everyone! Deep Space is the Best serie off all. I used to
like more TNG but until some time, the show that we saw in the last two
season of DS9 are one of the best trek never had. You want to know great
show? Well... think about Hard Time, The Visitor, The Ship or In Purgatory's
Shadow. These are only a few exemples of Ds9 greatest hits and they were
all in the last two seasons. I don't mean that it wasen't good before...
but now, DS9 in on the road to get us great hits like we haven't seen before.
<BR>
<BR>Synapthis.
<BR>
<BR>"Where the tides of fortune takes us no man can know."
<BR> -- Gowron, "By Inferno's Light"
<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
Louis Patterson
On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Alain Breton wrote:
People who make html posts should be shot. There is no advantage to be
gained by making a html post (like, what sort of smart-ares fancy
formatting were you going to use)
Please die.
---
Louis Patterson
l.patt...@student.unimelb.edu.au
Dilbert
__ I Saw this on a news group
"Honestly, with the way DS9's going, I'd sooner it ended at the
end
of THIS season..."
I think that DS9 is very good even though It can't be as good as STNG it is
getting up there,
And IT IS getting Better and Better!
If you share my ideas Show you support e-mail me or post a message!!!!!!
E-mail
dil...@nicom.com
www.nicom.com/~dilbert
Capt.Ja...@usa.net
I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
Buggs
Captain STARK
WAIT A MINUTE! HOLD THE PHONE!! EVERYONE OUT OF THE POOL!!!
"It can't be as good as ST: TNG"? Give me a break! The last two seasons
of TNG were the absolute worst television that ever aired. Don't try and
tell me that wasn't the reason it was yanked off the air early. DS9 is by
the far the best TREK on television. TNG may have proven that you *can*
catch lightning in a bottle twice but DS9 proves that you can do it with
flair.
Dilbert <dil...@nicom.com> wrote in article
<33514...@dcez3.nicom.com>...
Paul Duff
You can say that again!
Voyager just does not have the snap the other Star Trek Series have.
G. Dailey
assume you all haven't watched Voyager lately. Like most of Star Trek
it starts out slow and gets better. Just recently was Before and After
and that was a good d*** episode and then there's Blood Fever, one of my
favorite episodes, and many others if you would just watch. Next season
it's suppose to get real good. There will be tons of action in the
season finale that streches over the summer. Two words: THE BORG! And
I don't mean Unity. I am Roxanne Kate Farrell and I hope you listen to
me. I love Star Trek. DS9, TNG, and Voyager, the whole thing even the
original. Watch the season finale of Voyager and tell me it's a crapy
series then. I'll see you on the flip side. -R.K.F.
Bryan Shailer
On 14 Apr 1997 10:05:56 GMT, "Captain STARK" <glen...@gol.com> spake
thusly to this newsgroup:
>WAIT A MINUTE! HOLD THE PHONE!! EVERYONE OUT OF THE POOL!!!
> "It can't be as good as ST: TNG"? Give me a break! The last two seasons
>of TNG were the absolute worst television that ever aired.
Actually, they were a mixture of very good episodes (Lower Decks for
example) and some pitiful ones (eg Masks). Unfortunately there was
very little middle ground.
>Don't try and
>tell me that wasn't the reason it was yanked off the air early.
Why not. It wasn't.
The decision to end TNG after Season 7 was made sometime during Season
5 (or maybe Season 4?). Whichever it was, the decision was made at
least 2 years in advance to end the series & switch to the big screen.
--
Bryan E. Shailer
DoD Development (Canberra) | | | | | | Personal Opinions Only
bry...@mincom.com | | | | | |
Phone: +61 6 218 0208 | | | | | | And all I ask is a tall ship,
Fax: +61 6 218 0211 |M |I |N |C |O |M And a star to steer her by.
Melissa
On 13 Apr 1997 Capt.Ja...@usa.net wrote:
> I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
> Buggs
Granted I haven't seen much of Voyager, but I think DS9 is the
best of all the non-classic series... It has good continuity, and yet
doesn't feel nearly as soap-operaish as next gen...I think the actors over
all are better, and the stories are more interesting because of, not in
spite of, the station-focus. The players are grounded, and so are able to
play out an interesting plot line more fully...wheras in next gen if a
story-line came around twice, it would seem like too much of a
coincidence, being explorers out and about in different locations and all.
=) I think that perhaps DS9, because of the potential for stories thick
with subplots and underplots that aren't limited to the time constraints
of one show, is a tad more cerebral than the other two "adventure" treks
recently.
--
--------------------------
| "Stand on your own head | O o .
| for a change..." | Melissa
\ ______________________ / kayb...@ucdavis.edu
Melissa
On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, G. Dailey wrote:
> I don't mean Unity. I am Roxanne Kate Farrell and I hope you listen to
> me. I love Star Trek. DS9, TNG, and Voyager, the whole thing even the
> original. Watch the season finale of Voyager and tell me it's a crapy
Tut tut...don't you mean "*especially* the original."? ;)
Lars Ormberg
G. Dailey wrote:
>
> Capt.Ja...@usa.net wrote:
> >
> > I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
> > Buggs
> Hold on just one minute here!! I like DS9 and all but I'm just going to
> assume you all haven't watched Voyager lately. Like most of Star Trek
> it starts out slow and gets better.
Okay, look at last week. We have probably one of the 10 best Voyager
episodes ever: namely Kes's travel through time. We also had Quark's
little weapons trick. Kes's time travel was interesting though the
concept was flawed completely, so congrats for that one. On the other
hand, Quark the arms merchant gave us action, intrigue, a moral dilemna,
an interesting conclusion 100% independant of technobabble, and a chance
to explore some interesting character development.
> Just recently was Before and After
> and that was a good d*** episode and then there's Blood Fever, one of my
> favorite episodes, and many others if you would just watch.
Blood Fever was an example of where they kind of botched up the concept
and made an okay episode until you look at the premise in which event
you have to see that there's trouble afoot.
> Next season
> it's suppose to get real good. There will be tons of action in the
> season finale that streches over the summer. Two words: THE BORG! And
> I don't mean Unity. I am Roxanne Kate Farrell and I hope you listen to
> me. I love Star Trek. DS9, TNG, and Voyager, the whole thing even the
> original.
The show that started it all is terrific entertainment. Much better
than Voyager. At least TOS can be reasoned upon its existence in the
late 60s (along with Mission:Impossible and Man from UNCLE) with so many
other cheezy adventure dramas.
> Watch the season finale of Voyager and tell me it's a crapy
> series then. I'll see you on the flip side. -R.K.F.
Having read the script, it don't look good. They do a reprehensible
thing that never should be done.
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives. Stop phoning my home)
- I'm a genuine, certified, dixie fried, full of pride, 'til I die
pure bred redneck!
la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
____
You know you want to give it a try. Come and visit the official web
home of the Commodore. Java...Klingons...animations...and so much much
more! Check out http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/ and experience Lars
On-Line!
* The Borg -- our most lethal enemy -- had begun an invasion of the
Federation. Assimilation has failed, resistance was not futile. STAR
TREK:FIRST CONTACT is still showing in theatres, and the story of the
treachery of a Queen, the courage of a Captain, and the destiny of a
planet is coming to video May 20!
Eric Gindrup
Melissa wrote:
>
> On 13 Apr 1997 Capt.Ja...@usa.net wrote:
>
> > I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
> > Buggs
>
> Granted I haven't seen much of Voyager, but I think DS9 is
> the best of all the non-classic series... It has good continuity,
> and yet doesn't feel nearly as soap-operaish as next gen...I think
> the actors over all are better, and the stories are more
> interesting because of, not in spite of, the station-focus. The
> players are grounded, and so are able to play out an interesting
> plot line more fully...wheras in next gen if a story-line came
> around twice, it would seem like too much of a coincidence, being
> explorers out and about in different locations and all. =)
> I think that perhaps DS9, because of the potential for stories
> thick with subplots and underplots that aren't limited to the time
> constraints of one show, is a tad more cerebral than the other two
> "adventure" treks recently.
>
> -- Melissa kayb...@ucdavis.edu
Sounds like a good idea for DS9. When do you think that sort of
thing will actually occur in the series?
Thomas Pugh
Actually, what Melissa is describing in her last paragraph is Babylon5.
While DS9 had a good concept of a place where a number of races, all
with different agendas, interact, Babylon5 executed it much better,
precisely because DS9 is strictly episodic while B5 is a serial.
By definition, an episode needs to be self-contained and leave the
status-quo intact. This makes it impossible to have relationships built
over time or character growth. TOS worked because it was a 'space
western' as Roddenberry put it. Kirk rode into town, ran off the bad
guys, got the girl (or whatever the closest thing to a girl was on that
planet), and rode into the sunset. TNG took that away, and ST has been
drifting ever since. Anything beyond that simple formula requires plot
and character development of more than 1 hr.
BTW, I understand that the producer of B5 originally pitched his idea to
Paramount. Paramount declined, then tried to steal the idea with DS9.
Geoff Shang
On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Lars Ormberg wrote:
{SNIP}
> Okay, look at last week. We have probably one of the 10 best Voyager
{SNIP}
One of the newsgroups you posted in is aus.sf.star-trek which exists for
discussion of Star Trek in Australia. If you guys MUST post these
crossposts to this group, please bare in mind that DS9 season 4 and
Voyager season 2 are just about to show on television here. Video
releases are much further advanced, though the DS9 videos haven't reached
season 5 yet as far as I'm aware. In view of this, much of what you may
write can be viewed as spoiler material, and people justifiably get upset
about seeing information about shows that haven't aired when they'd prefer
not to know. Now if it were another newsgroup then it'd be ok, but just
keep in mind that much of what has aired in the US and Canada hasn't aired
here yet.
Geoff.
Arno Zwegers
Eric Gindrup <gin...@okway.okstate.edu> wrote:
>
>Melissa wrote:
>>
>> On 13 Apr 1997 Capt.Ja...@usa.net wrote:
>>
>> > I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
>> > Buggs
>>
>> Granted I haven't seen much of Voyager, but I think DS9 is
>> the best of all the non-classic series... It has good continuity,
>> and yet doesn't feel nearly as soap-operaish as next gen...I think
>> the actors over all are better, and the stories are more
>> interesting because of, not in spite of, the station-focus. The
>> players are grounded, and so are able to play out an interesting
>> plot line more fully...wheras in next gen if a story-line came
>> around twice, it would seem like too much of a coincidence, being
>> explorers out and about in different locations and all. =)
>> I think that perhaps DS9, because of the potential for stories
>> thick with subplots and underplots that aren't limited to the time
>> constraints of one show, is a tad more cerebral than the other two
>> "adventure" treks recently.
>>
>> -- Melissa kayb...@ucdavis.edu
>
>Sounds like a good idea for DS9. When do you think that sort of
>thing will actually occur in the series?
> -- Eric Gindrup ! gin...@okway.okstate.edu
The fact that DS9 can make longer series makes it more like a soap.
The nice thing about TNG was that there was allways something new to
discover in the universe.
I like that about Voyager as well.
Arno Zwegers
amz...@cistron.nl
http://www.cistron.nl/~amzweg
Anita Whiting
Mark 'Silly Head' Farinas wrote:
>
> Just because Janeway is a dyck doesnt mean shell ever have as many women
> as Kirk.
Pardon me? I don't think I heard that. Are you saying that just
because a woman is strong and in control, she's "butch" or "dyke"?
First of all, she has a boyfriend back on Earth (and, if you've read
"Mosaic", she was engaged for a while), so she is NOT homosexual.
Secondly, Captain Janeway is the best example I have ever seen of a
strong woman who remains feminine. She demonstrates how female
characteristics can be just as effective as male traits. She shows
caring and compassion, while making the right decisions in tough spots.
True, they often give her stupid dialog ("let's leave the future to the
future"), but she's still a damn better captain than Sisko or Kirk.
Voyager is often bad, but Janeway is the best.
Anita
Aaron K.
Anita Whiting <an...@altair.com> wrote in article
<335646...@altair.com>...
> Mark 'Silly Head' Farinas wrote:
but she's still a damn better captain than Sisko or Kirk.
> Voyager is often bad, but Janeway is the best.
You are on frickin drugs if you think Janebitch is a better captain than
James T. Kirk. That's part of the reason Star Trek sucks today, stupid
fans like you!
U R A Loser
Melissa
Damn...I totally want to prune this ng list...but I don't know
which groups are relevant and who'd mind...
Arno brought up something about:
>The fact that DS9 can make longer series makes it more like a soap.
>The nice thing about TNG was that there was allways something new to
>discover in the universe.
>I like that about Voyager as well.
Uh...yeah...the almost serial nature of DS9 does make it more of a
soap *structure* but what I meant to indicate with my statement was that
Next Gen particularly had soap *characteristics* ie, love triangles,
cheesy violin music, interstellar sluts (uh huh huh huh..."Riker") that
aren't married to their ships, those close-ups of Crusher and Troi as they
smiled in a bemused/charming way...(heh, I just remembered the diffused
lens close-ups of Kirk's love interests in old trek...god I hated those.
=) ) the acting...For all that Next Gen was said to be, it always struck
me as a Days of Our Lives in Space with Great Special Effects! show.
Anyway...on with your regularly scheduled civil flame war.
Joey
Aaron K. spammed...
>
>
> You are on frickin drugs if you think Janebitch is a better captain than
> James T. Kirk. That's part of the reason Star Trek sucks today, stupid
> fans like you!
>
> U R A Loser
One: Star Trek does not suck.
Two: You vaguely remind me of a Star Wars fan.
Three: People like you are the ones destroying Star Trek, by dividing the
fans.
Four: You suck.
Thank you for your patience.
Webrunner
On DS9 they can explore using the defiant or they can be explored.
DS9 is alot more diverse then any starship.. cause its not a federation
post.
It was made by the cardassians and owned by bajor.
the federation just runs it!
There are enuf different species on ds9 for it to be interesting.
>
>The fact that DS9 can make longer series makes it more like a soap.
>The nice thing about TNG was that there was allways something new to
>discover in the universe.
>I like that about Voyager as well.
>
Webrunner
>little weapons trick. Kes's time travel was interesting though the
>concept was flawed completely, so congrats for that one. On the other
Well time travel is very hard to understand.. there is no *RIGHT* way to
explain it yet.
Vape - Dave G.
Kamin wrote:
>
> > I think the REAL piont is that they picked the wrong person for the
> > acting job. I won't go into detail about who I think could do a better
> > job of being a female captain but let's just say, "the PERSON that
> > they did choose isn't a very good actor/actress".IMHO.
> I really don't think Mulgrew is that bad(In fact, I have a hard time
> picking between her, Roxanne Dawson, and Robert Picardo for who I think
> is the most talented on the show); if you look at episodes like
> "Resistance" or "Deadlock," she's wonderful...
There are several problems with voyager one is the stupidity of the
writing... nothing -really- new has been explored... just more humanoid,
boring races and a few experiments... the only things they've done is
run into mysterious temporal anomalies that pop up so regularly that it
becomes boring... also this big thing with 'energy reserves' is really
getting to annoy me, I mean it isn't like Voyager is some floating AA
size battery in space is it?
And we all know how it will end because it was spelt out in Caretaker...
they will find the other banjoman alien and it will reluctantly (because
it will be bored of them like caretaker) send them back...
Thomas P. Beaty aka: GONZO
On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:48:11 -0400, Anita Whiting <an...@altair.com>
wrote:
>Mark 'Silly Head' Farinas wrote:
>>
>
>> Just because Janeway is a dyck doesnt mean shell ever have as many women
>> as Kirk.
>
>Pardon me? I don't think I heard that. Are you saying that just
>because a woman is strong and in control, she's "butch" or "dyke"?
>First of all, she has a boyfriend back on Earth (and, if you've read
>"Mosaic", she was engaged for a while), so she is NOT homosexual.
>Secondly, Captain Janeway is the best example I have ever seen of a
>strong woman who remains feminine. She demonstrates how female
>characteristics can be just as effective as male traits. She shows
>caring and compassion, while making the right decisions in tough spots.
>True, they often give her stupid dialog ("let's leave the future to the
>future"), but she's still a damn better captain than Sisko or Kirk.
>Voyager is often bad, but Janeway is the best.
>
>Anita
Kamin
> I think the REAL piont is that they picked the wrong person for the
> acting job. I won't go into detail about who I think could do a better
> job of being a female captain but let's just say, "the PERSON that
> they did choose isn't a very good actor/actress".IMHO.
Gareth Wilson
The acting is definatly NOT the problem with Voyager. The real problem is
the appalling writing.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gareth Wilson
gr...@student.canterbury.ac.nz
Christchurch
New Zealand
"I take great comfort in the
injustice and cruelty of the Universe"
-Marcus, "Babylon 5"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Waylon
Lars Ormberg wrote:
>
> G. Dailey wrote:
> >
> > Capt.Ja...@usa.net wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't think DS9 is that bad, atleast not compared to Voyager.
> > > Buggs
>
> > assume you all haven't watched Voyager lately. Like most of Star Trek
> > it starts out slow and gets better.
>
> concept was flawed completely, so congrats for that one. On the other
> an interesting conclusion 100% independant of technobabble, and a chance
> to explore some interesting character development.
>
> > Just recently was Before and After
> > and that was a good d*** episode and then there's Blood Fever, one of my
> > favorite episodes, and many others if you would just watch.
DS9 is just o-kay. Watching an episode about Quark (a very unappealing
character) go through a moral dilemna was like watching Neelix do the same
in an episode this season. I simply can't sleep (dripping sarcasm) until
Quark's character is developed.
Before and After, and Blood Fever were two terrific episodes.
Waylon
Mark 'Easy Listening' Farinas
Thomas P. Beaty aka: GONZO wrote:
> I think the REAL piont is that they picked the wrong person for the
> acting job. I won't go into detail about who I think could do a better
> job of being a female captain but let's just say, "the PERSON that
> they did choose isn't a very good actor/actress".IMHO.
I think the REAL point is that there is no point. There is no *one*
wrong thing with Voyager. You cant totally blame the actors (even if
they are bad) because the directors are also below par. I maen, in three
years you would think that at least one character, guest or regular,
would have a good preformance, but it is not to be. Then there's the
horrendous writing. With writing like this you can expect much from
directors or cast. They could be doing their best with what they are
given, which is pure crap. Then, of course, you cant make a good episode
for a lousy premise. Voyager is about a rag tag team of boring
Starfleeters mixed with revolutionary freedom fighters that dont act
that revolutionary going from point A to point B getting in no real
danger along the way and screwing up every chance of leading happy lives
because of thier obsession to get to a home they can never reach in
there lifetime. Together they bore the crap out of me each time I
actually bother to tune in, which is less and less these days. Every
part of Voyager is crap. Crap, crap, crap!
Mark "Trotsky" Farinas
______
Your country will one day choke on the vomit of its capitalist excess.
Webrunner
Acutally the premise is good.. they needed SOME way to get to the delta
quardrant.
I say they should get with the program and finish the work of that DS9
Trill.. whats her name.. she is Dax's X-Wife. (from Tobais's lifetime)
:-)
but if they finally did that it would be a boring end.
David Johnston
Webrunner wrote:
>
> Acutally the premise is good.. they needed SOME way to get to the delta
> quardrant.
Why?
The problems with the premise is this: Because of the format, the
Voyager has been given a goal, but no way to actually make progress
toward said goal. One episode before the multi-part end of the series,
they will be no further toward the end of their voyage in any meaningful
sense than they are right now. Further, because of the format, they are
compelled to make a stupid decision, or a mistake any time a story
offers them a way home, or a legitimate chance to make a good life where
they are. Be that as it may, at the same time they are still operating
under Prime Directive restraints that preclude a lot of the stories that
keep a similar series premise, such as Sliders, interesting. With any
truly nomadic show, the freedom to meddle is an invaluable tool, but one
denied Voyager if it is to live up to it's "principles" and the law.
That leaves only concentration on survival as the real goal of the
Voyager, but if they didn't insist on jumping into every YASTA they ran
across, survival would be no real difficulty. In fact, their existence
is downright cushy despite being cut off from resupply, suffering none
of the physical hardships, rationing, depleted resources and manpower
and accumulating make-shift repairs which should by rights be a problem
and a source of drama for the series.
To sum it up, the Voyager is going nowhere slowly, and it should be
going nowhere fast. Woooah W'ooh.
Mojo
>
>On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:48:11 -0400, Anita Whiting <an...@altair.com>
>wrote:
Captain Janeway is the best example I have ever seen of a
>>strong woman who remains feminine. She demonstrates how female
>>characteristics can be just as effective as male traits. She shows
>>caring and compassion, while making the right decisions in tough spots.
>>True, they often give her stupid dialog ("let's leave the future to the
>>future"), but she's still a damn better captain than Sisko or Kirk.
>>Voyager is often bad, but Janeway is the best.
>>
>>Anita
>
>I think the REAL piont is that they picked the wrong person for the
>acting job. I won't go into detail about who I think could do a better
>job of being a female captain but let's just say, "the PERSON that
>they did choose isn't a very good actor/actress".IMHO.
Hi, Gonzo,
I'm surprised that you find Kate Mulgrew a bad actress. Personally, I
think she's the best part of the show. In fact, I even included her
in my list of favourite Trek characters on the Psi Phi DS9 board.
Considering how much I dislike Voyager, that's quite an achievement on
Ms Mulgrew's part. I think my post ran along the lines of: "Good
actress, lovely voice...now if they could just find her a decent
series.
As for Anita's opinion that "she's a better captain than Sisko or
Kirk", well I think that's open to debate, and since I rarely watch
'Voyager', I can't make an informed decision either way, so that's one
debate which I'll stay out of!
Regards
MOJO
>