[sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
Abrigon Gusiq
Trek on the big screen. Best Trek film since TWoK.
--
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1993-1951
------------------------------------
=== To unsubscribe, send an email to: ===
sfconsim-l-...@yahoogroups.com
SFCONSIM-L web page -- http://www.kentaurus.com/sfconsiml.htmYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sfconsim-l/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sfconsim-l/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:sfconsim...@yahoogroups.com
mailto:sfconsim-l-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
sfconsim-l-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Abrigon Gusiq
> Trek on the big screen. Best Trek film since TWoK.
We saw it last week and Derek's still trying to wipe the grin off my face... He only came close by announcing he is going to see it on iMAX with his Dad when he travels to Townsville this week.
If you want some fun "popcorn" entertainment this gets many stars from me
Beth
Abrigon Gusiq
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, beth....@csiro.au <beth....@csiro.au> wrote:
From: beth....@csiro.au <beth....@csiro.au>
Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
To: sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 2:25 AM
> It's not not hard SF or realistic anything. What it is, is classic
> Trek on the big screen. Best Trek film since TWoK.
We saw it last week and Derek's still trying to wipe the grin off my face... He only came close by announcing he is going to see it on iMAX with his Dad when he travels to Townsville this week.
If you want some fun "popcorn" entertainment this gets many stars from me
Beth
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Abrigon Gusiq
F.P. Kiesche III "Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book. Always, scribble, scribble, scribble, eh?" (The Duke of Gloucester, on being presented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.) Blogging at The Lensman's Children and TexasBestGrok!
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Cooper Fox <fox...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Cooper Fox <fox...@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
To: sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 5:51 AM
GREAT MOVIE!!! I suspect there will be some ticked off Trekkers out there... Due to the changes in cannon (sp?) But, that's all I can say without giving anything away.
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, beth.fulton@ csiro.au <beth.fulton@ csiro.au> wrote:
From: beth.fulton@ csiro.au <beth.fulton@ csiro.au>
Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
To: sfconsim-l@yahoogro ups.com
Abrigon Gusiq
On May 11, 2009, at 2:51 AM, Cooper Fox wrote:
> GREAT MOVIE!!! I suspect there will be some ticked off Trekkers out
> there... Due to the changes in cannon (sp?) But, that's all I can
> say without giving anything away.
The ticked off trekkers can go back to their mother's basement. For
myself, I'll take a 5-year mission, err series of this stuff. Sadly,
we won't get a tv series, just 3 or 4 more movies.
Prediction for the next movie: a throwaway line in the background
mentions a Vulcan ship found the Botany Bay drifting in space, the
passengers will stand war crimes trials back on Earth.
--
Michael Llaneza
mase...@speakeasy.net
Abrigon Gusiq
Did see some .. oddlities, like the name of the drink Uhuru drank,
Cardassian? They already met them in the new line? or ..
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cooper Fox" <fox...@yahoo.com>
To: <sfcon...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:51 AM
Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
GREAT MOVIE!!! I suspect there will be some ticked off Trekkers out there...
Due to the changes in cannon (sp?) But, that's all I can say without giving
anything away.
Abrigon Gusiq
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Kiesche" <recursi...@yahoo.com>
To: <sfcon...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:41 AM
Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
"Canon" (since you asked). As in "canonical". A subject of endless debate,
no matter what set of things you talk about (which is canon in Sherlock
Holmes vs. not, etc.).
F.P. Kiesche III "Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book. Always,
scribble, scribble, scribble, eh?" (The Duke of Gloucester, on being
presented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.)
Blogging at The Lensman's Children and TexasBestGrok!
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
understand the whole (alternate timeline thing)
I guess I will reserve judgement till I see it
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Abrigon Gusiq <abr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I like Scottys Gremline.. In an odd way/
>
> Mike
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fred Kiesche" <recursi...@yahoo.com<recursive_loop%40yahoo.com>
> >
> To: <sfcon...@yahoogroups.com <sfconsim-l%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:41 AM
> Subject: RE: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
>
> "Canon" (since you asked). As in "canonical". A subject of endless debate,
> no matter what set of things you talk about (which is canon in Sherlock
> Holmes vs. not, etc.).
>
> F.P. Kiesche III "Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book. Always,
> scribble, scribble, scribble, eh?" (The Duke of Gloucester, on being
> presented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.)
> Blogging at The Lensman's Children and TexasBestGrok!
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
There were a few parts that as a science fiction fan I flinched from the
bad science or contrinved writing, but as a trekkie and fan of the orginal
series I was very happy with it in general. Oh it was definite
adventure space opera, but the franchise need some type of fresh start to
even get off the ground.
Plus there are a lot of
nice space combat additions to the star trek paradigm I enjoyed.
Earl
> As a trekkie (Trekker?) whatever... I am not
sure what I am going to
> think.I
> understand the whole
(alternate timeline thing)
> I guess I will reserve judgement
till I see it
>
>
Abrigon Gusiq
so throw out all the old trek books tey no longer means a thing, but hell I was upset with the Nex Gen, but I watched it, lol
they could have placed it with another crew, I was always curious about Kirk's nephew, or his other nephews or nieces, LOL
________________________________
From: "spac...@stellarcollisions.com" <spac...@stellarcollisions.com>
To: sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 5:49:34 PM
Subject: Re: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
Abrigon Gusiq
Or is it part of the same milieu
Abrigon Gusiq
On May 11, 2009, at 4:50 PM, eric henry wrote:
> Is it fair to call this a reimagined trek ala new Battlestar
> Galactica?
>
> Or is it part of the same milieu
It's part of the same milieu, but somewhere around 8 years after
ST:Nemesis, the timeline does an abrupt 180, rolls back about 150
years and starts rolling forwards again. All the old canon still
happened, but this time around anything that took place after Kirk's
birth will be different. Up to exactly the opening of the film,
everything should be identical, things begin to diverge after that.
I'm expecting a throwaway line in the next film to reference a Vulcan
ship "finding" the Botany Bay and returning her passengers to Earth
for war crimes trials. Ambassador Spock may not want to muck with the
timeline, but Khan did *kill* him, so...
--
Michael Llaneza
mase...@speakeasy.net
Abrigon Gusiq
and his First Officer George Kirk ran into Romulans during the USS
Enterprise's shakedown cruise.... That didn't happen in THIS FILM's
reality... but an interesting parallel event did.
Key element to remember about the new film series.... It's NOT the Star
Trek we all know.. but a darn close duplicate reality.
Nitpicking aside (just to make a point, nothing hostile intended) I
enjoyed the film immensely, and as I stated to a fellow SF fan who was
with us for my 2nd viewing:
"They found a way to put the best Crew on the most beloved Starship in
SF history, and bring the series back to life."
Since this film (and a few of the last ones) have already done the Kahn
scenario to death, let's hope they do something different with the next
one.. Hoping to see an updated movie based on the episode "The Doomsday
Machine" myself.
Since I brought up the subject of most beloved SF Starships, It'd be
interesting to see others choices, here goes my list:
1: USS Enterprise (Star Trek)
2: Dauntless (Lensman)
3: Millenium Falcon (Star Wars)
4: White Star (Babylon 5)
5: Serenity (Firefly)
Joe Rispoli: Star Trek Fan since Sept 66... Star Wars Fan since May
77... and SF fan since 1955.
----------------------------
Michael Llaneza wrote:
>
>
>
> On May 11, 2009, at 4:50 PM, eric henry wrote:
>
> > Is it fair to call this a reimagined trek ala new Battlestar
> > Galactica?
> >
> > Or is it part of the same milieu
>
> It's part of the same milieu, but somewhere around 8 years after
> ST:Nemesis, the timeline does an abrupt 180, rolls back about 150
> years and starts rolling forwards again. All the old canon still
> happened, but this time around anything that took place after Kirk's
> birth will be different. Up to exactly the opening of the film,
> everything should be identical, things begin to diverge after that.
>
> I'm expecting a throwaway line in the next film to reference a Vulcan
> ship "finding" the Botany Bay and returning her passengers to Earth
> for war crimes trials. Ambassador Spock may not want to muck with the
> timeline, but Khan did *kill* him, so...
>
> --
> Michael Llaneza
> mase...@speakeasy.net <mailto:maserati%40speakeasy.net>
Abrigon Gusiq
Or new scenarios?
Season 1 they did ...
Season 2 they did?
Season 3 they died but what else could have done or was slated to, but the
show got cancelled?
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
until then.
Or when did Nero come thru? USS Kelvin destruction yes.
What changed since that event? Cardasians met or known off?
So when you expect Dr. Who or another Timelord to show up at?
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
ST on the other hand... How many words of fiction exist? Between the shows, movies, games, books, etc.
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Michael Llaneza <mase...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
From: Michael Llaneza <mase...@speakeasy.net>
Subject: Re: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
To: sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 8:45 PM
On May 11, 2009, at 4:50 PM, eric henry wrote:
> Is it fair to call this a reimagined trek ala new Battlestar
> Galactica?
>
> Or is it part of the same milieu
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger
PC-to-PC calls
Call your friends
worldwide - free!
Yahoo! Groups
Auto Enthusiast Zone
Discover Car Groups
Auto Enthusiast Zone
Yahoo! Groups
Mom Power
Discover doing more
for your family
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
1- Serenity- Firefly
2- Gallactica- BSG
3- Hyperion Class Cruisers- B5
4- Enterprise- Enterprise
5- Enterprise- JJ Abrams ST
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Joseph Rispoli <jris...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
From: Joseph Rispoli <jris...@columbus.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: [sfconsim-l] Star Trek: See It
To: sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
------------ --------- -------
Michael Llaneza wrote:
>
>
>
> On May 11, 2009, at 4:50 PM, eric henry wrote:
>
> > Is it fair to call this a reimagined trek ala new Battlestar
> > Galactica?
> >
> > Or is it part of the same milieu
>
> It's part of the same milieu, but somewhere around 8 years after
> ST:Nemesis, the timeline does an abrupt 180, rolls back about 150
> years and starts rolling forwards again. All the old canon still
> happened, but this time around anything that took place after Kirk's
> birth will be different. Up to exactly the opening of the film,
> everything should be identical, things begin to diverge after that.
>
> I'm expecting a throwaway line in the next film to reference a Vulcan
> ship "finding" the Botany Bay and returning her passengers to Earth
> for war crimes trials. Ambassador Spock may not want to muck with the
> timeline, but Khan did *kill* him, so...
>
> --
> Michael Llaneza
> maserati@speakeasy. net <mailto:maserati% 40speakeasy. net>
Abrigon Gusiq
> Since I brought up the subject of most beloved SF Starships, It'd be
> interesting to see others choices, here goes my list:
> 1: USS Enterprise (Star Trek)
> 2: Dauntless (Lensman)
> 3: Millenium Falcon (Star Wars)
> 4: White Star (Babylon 5)
> 5: Serenity (Firefly)
Serenity is not a starship.
I'd say the most beloved SF Starships are:
Enterprise
Macross
TARDIS
Isaac Kuo
Abrigon Gusiq
> --- In sfcon...@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Rispoli <jrispoli@...> wrote:
>
>
> Serenity is not a starship.
>
given the nature of the nature of the setting it has to be a starship.
Whether the creators say so or not
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
> given the nature of the nature of the setting it has to be a starship.
> Whether the creators say so or not
Agree. Serenity does what SF starships traditionally do, travel among shirtsleeves extrasolar planets. Nothing actually shown in Firefly or the movie contradicts this, other than the vague reference to the 'system' in Mal's voiceover, and absence of the standard FTL F/X and technobabble.
Joss Whedon says it isn't a starship, but he cheerfully admits that science makes his head hurt, and his explanation sounds like a weak retcon. If he'd just stuck to creating a wonderiffic setting instead of trying to explain it, an interstellar setting with (unshown) FTL would have been taken for granted by the handful of geeks like us who care about such background details.
But hell, I'd call Serenity a galleon if it would bring Firefly back!
-- Rick
Abrigon Gusiq
Or are we limiting starship here to terms that mean travel from one star
system to another.
If so, technically I could agree since as far as I have read everything
takes place within one solar system.
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:30 AM, rmrobinson1227 <Lyon...@compuserve.com>wrote:
>
>
> --- In sfcon...@yahoogroups.com <sfconsim-l%40yahoogroups.com>, eric
> henry <ehenry0623@...> wrote:
>
> > given the nature of the nature of the setting it has to be a starship.
> > Whether the creators say so or not
>
> Agree. Serenity does what SF starships traditionally do, travel among
> shirtsleeves extrasolar planets. Nothing actually shown in Firefly or the
> movie contradicts this, other than the vague reference to the 'system' in
> Mal's voiceover, and absence of the standard FTL F/X and technobabble.
>
> Joss Whedon says it isn't a starship, but he cheerfully admits that science
> makes his head hurt, and his explanation sounds like a weak retcon. If he'd
> just stuck to creating a wonderiffic setting instead of trying to explain
> it, an interstellar setting with (unshown) FTL would have been taken for
> granted by the handful of geeks like us who care about such background
> details.
>
> But hell, I'd call Serenity a galleon if it would bring Firefly back!
>
> -- Rick
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
Starships, since they travelled from planet to planet within a single
star system.
I'd still enjoy being onboard.... definitely a classic Traveller RPG
scenario there.
Of course, bringing up the Macross (which didn't last long enough to
establish a viable career as a starship) also brings to mind a whole
slew of Anime SF starships...
but I'd rather not go there... but I'd love to be First (and only) Mate
on Benten's ship... (Urusei Yatsura FTW! grin)
As far as the new Star Trek movie went, I mentioned to a fellow Star
Trek / Dr Who fan that it felt to me that Simon Pegg was playing Scotty
as if he were trying out as the next Doctor... But please, Simon... get
a better looking Companion if you get the job!
Ran across some info on Wikipedia and IMDB.com recently...
Wiki: Ron Howard has the rights to do a Lensman movie... and JMS is
writing the script for the first (?) film.
IMBD: Film in prep status, with a tentative 2011 release.
I'd heard the first rumor over a year ago, but it's nice to find out a
bit more about the status of the project. If anyone can unravel some of
the Lensman twists and turns to make it enjoyable to old time fans as
well as modern audiences, I'd put my money on JMS!
Joe Rispoli
++++++++++++++++++++
mechdan wrote:
>
>
> --- In sfcon...@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:sfconsim-l%40yahoogroups.com>, Joseph Rispoli <jrispoli@...>
> wrote:
>
> > Since I brought up the subject of most beloved SF Starships, It'd be
> > interesting to see others choices, here goes my list:
>
> > 1: USS Enterprise (Star Trek)
> > 2: Dauntless (Lensman)
> > 3: Millenium Falcon (Star Wars)
> > 4: White Star (Babylon 5)
> > 5: Serenity (Firefly)
>
> Serenity is not a starship.
>
> I'd say the most beloved SF Starships are:
>
> Enterprise
> Macross
> TARDIS
>
> Isaac Kuo
>
> _
Abrigon Gusiq
--- On Tue, 5/12/09, Joseph Rispoli <jris...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
>Of course, bringing up the Macross (which didn't last long
>enough to establish a viable career as a starship)
The original Macross was an ancient starship; it wasn't
from our star system. Like the Enterprise, there's a
starship named Macross starring in almost every Macross
related series (if not always the original SDF-1).
>also brings to mind a whole slew of Anime SF starships...
>but I'd rather not go there...
Hardly any other anime starship spans multiple series over
multiple decades, limiting popularity across generations.
In terms of how "beloved" the starship is, the only other
anime starship that even compares is GE999. (There are
no starships in Gundam.)
I chose Macross over GE999 because of the larger
international fanbase.
Of course, Star Trek and Doctor Who have over a decade
on either Macross or Galaxy Express, or Star Wars for
that matter.
>but I'd love to be First (and only) Mate
>on Benten's ship... (Urusei Yatsura FTW! grin)
Lum's starship has appeal for one generation, but it lacks
multi-generational appeal.
Isaac Kuo mec...@yahoo.com
Abrigon Gusiq
--- On Tue, 5/12/09, rmrobinson1227 <Lyon...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>Joss Whedon says it isn't a starship, but ...
No buts! That should be good enough!
But more seriously, it's not just some Joss Whedon throaway
comment. He really did conceive of the world of Firefly
as within a single star system, with no FTL travel. Sure,
he doesn't have a scientific handle on the physics
implications of "realistic" interplanetary travel. That's
just something you're going to have to live with.
Abrigon Gusiq
On May 11, 2009, at 6:31 PM, Joseph Rispoli wrote:
> Hmm, I noticed that "all of the old canon" didn't happen... Capt April
> and his First Officer George Kirk ran into Romulans during the USS
> Enterprise's shakedown cruise.... That didn't happen in THIS FILM's
> reality... but an interesting parallel event did.
Of all things Trek, Enterprise still happened. After the Xindi, I'd
think "giant power drill" would be on Planetary Defense Command's
watch list. Or was that some other Admiral Archer who had his beagle
transported into the unknown by Scotty's prototype ?
And the Federation in the new timeline knows about Romulans. There
were enough survivors from the Kelvin that some records survived,
which would associate someone with pointy ears with known Romulan
communications characteristics. That changes another TOS episode.
--
Michael Llaneza
mase...@speakeasy.net
Abrigon Gusiq
On May 12, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Joseph Rispoli wrote:
> Wiki: Ron Howard has the rights to do a Lensman movie... and JMS is
> writing the script for the first (?) film.
Sounds like somebody's been dropping acid and updating random
wikipedia pages again. I mean honestly, a good pairing of director and
writer to do a science fiction classic in an era where the CGI
technology exists to do the subject justice ? Nope, somebody's
hallucinating.
Not getting my hopes up for that until I see a trailer and a release
date.
--
Michael Llaneza
mase...@speakeasy.net
Abrigon Gusiq
> -----Original Message-----
>
> I chose Macross over GE999 because of the larger
> international fanbase.
I had the impression this was supposed to be a personal list, not a list of what designs had the most impact on the collective vision of SF.
So, mine was:
1: USS Cygnus (The Black Hole)
2: Pride of the Skies II (Jayce and the Wheeled Warriors *)
3: Yamato/Argo (Space Battleship Yamato / Starblazers)
4: Serenity (Firefly - I love that ship, so it's on my list)
5: Imperial Star Destroyer (Star Wars)
Out of all of those, I think only the ISD has had a lasting impact on SF.
The Serenity may yet, but it's too early to tell. I think the influence Firefly had was more in the line of re-focusing televised SF away from government employees, and down to the everyday working folks.
* It's a kid's cartoon from 1985, and it is to blame for the weak spot I have for spaceships that look like sailing ships. In my defense, Joe Straczynski was on the writing staff.
http://www.wheelies.net/wwb5/ww-b5-jms.html
Abrigon Gusiq
in the UY series)... Benten's the Sky Biker Goddess with her own
starship... grin
Joe Rispoli
Isaac Kuo wrote:
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Joseph Rispoli <jris...@columbus.rr.com
> <mailto:jrispoli%40columbus.rr.com>> wrote:
> >Of course, bringing up the Macross (which didn't last long
> >enough to establish a viable career as a starship)
>
> The original Macross was an ancient starship; it wasn't
> from our star system. Like the Enterprise, there's a
> starship named Macross starring in almost every Macross
> related series (if not always the original SDF-1).
>
> >also brings to mind a whole slew of Anime SF starships...
> >but I'd rather not go there...
>
> Hardly any other anime starship spans multiple series over
> multiple decades, limiting popularity across generations.
> In terms of how "beloved" the starship is, the only other
> anime starship that even compares is GE999. (There are
> no starships in Gundam.)
>
> I chose Macross over GE999 because of the larger
> international fanbase.
>
> Of course, Star Trek and Doctor Who have over a decade
> on either Macross or Galaxy Express, or Star Wars for
> that matter.
>
> >but I'd love to be First (and only) Mate
> >on Benten's ship... (Urusei Yatsura FTW! grin)
>
> Lum's starship has appeal for one generation, but it lacks
> multi-generational appeal.
>
> Isaac Kuo mec...@yahoo.com <mailto:mechdan%40yahoo.com>
Abrigon Gusiq
http://jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-17727
and here's a quote:
In brief, and withoiut getting into details that are still in the
process of being worked out, I've chosen to focus on the story of
Kimball Kinnison, using his story as the fulcrum by which I can get
into the whole history of the Lens and outward from there.
jms
All I can say is "Go Joe!!!"
Been waiting 45 years to see this one...
Joe Rispoli
+++++++++++++++
Michael Llaneza wrote:
>
>
>
> On May 12, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Joseph Rispoli wrote:
>
> > Wiki: Ron Howard has the rights to do a Lensman movie... and JMS is
> > writing the script for the first (?) film.
>
> Sounds like somebody's been dropping acid and updating random
> wikipedia pages again. I mean honestly, a good pairing of director and
> writer to do a science fiction classic in an era where the CGI
> technology exists to do the subject justice ? Nope, somebody's
> hallucinating.
>
> Not getting my hopes up for that until I see a trailer and a release
> date.
>
> --
> Michael Llaneza
> mase...@speakeasy.net <mailto:maserati%40speakeasy.net>
Abrigon Gusiq
Dr. Who or Paratime Corps or like would show up to try to rebuild the time
line or recorde it?
Dr. Who vs Nero? Hum..
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
Serenity or Firefly?
Red Dwarf
Dark Star (?)
The ship form 2001? HAL and ship?
Nestromo - where the ship is possessed or near a dark star/black hole?
Ships with character?
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
What was the name of the ship that was or appeared to be an ancient sailing
ship but was a star ship?
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
(or something like that)
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Abrigon Gusiq <abr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yamato, ancient times.. Old memories.
>
> What was the name of the ship that was or appeared to be an ancient sailing
>
> ship but was a star ship?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
> Sure he doesn't have a scientific handle on the physics
> implications of "realistic" interplanetary travel. That's
> just something you're going to have to live with.
Along with the idea of that many habitable balls of rock in a single star system.... Myopic concept of ecology at a planetary scale..... Etc etc. Like most science fiction you have to close your eyes to a lot of things and just enjoy the ride ;)
Though to be honest I do think him quibbling over whether it's a starship or not is a bit like JK Rowling saying Harry Potter doesn't rate as fantasy genre wise.
Beth
Abrigon Gusiq
> >Joss Whedon says it isn't a starship, but ...
>
> No buts! That should be good enough!
>
> But more seriously, it's not just some Joss Whedon throaway
> comment. He really did conceive of the world of Firefly
> as within a single star system, with no FTL travel. Sure,
> he doesn't have a scientific handle on the physics
> implications of "realistic" interplanetary travel. That's
> just something you're going to have to live with.
Let's go PoMo! There's an interesting and serious question here about the nature of canon, and authors' philosophical 'rights' over their created worlds. I would argue that created worlds take on an imaginative life of their own, and can (and should) be judged on their own terms ... even if the author disagrees.
Take a different case, the Foundation-verse. I just can't regard Asimov's later Foundation books (*Foundation and Earth*, et al.) as canonical. Maybe for the robot-verse, but with respect to Foundation Trilogy they are not even a retcon - they ignore the whole spirit of the original books and go off in a different direction. Donald Kingsbury's *Psychohistorical Crisis* has a much better claim to be a 'real' Foundation book.
In the case of Firefly/Serenity, the 'verse has the look and feel of a classic interstellar setting, with a core of developed worlds and a fringe of frontier worlds. The only thing in the series or movie that even hints at anything else is the vague throwaway line about 'system.' So I think it's perfectly legitimate to ignore what Whedon says, which is a muddle, in favor of what he shows, which is brilliant.
-- Rick
Abrigon Gusiq
--- On Tue, 5/12/09, beth....@csiro.au <beth....@csiro.au> wrote:
>>Sure he doesn't have a scientific handle on the physics
>>implications of "realistic" interplanetary travel. That's
>>just something you're going to have to live with.
>Along with the idea of that many habitable balls of rock
>in a single star system.... Myopic concept of ecology at
>a planetary scale..... Etc etc.
We know little enough about extrasolar planetary systems
and the details of Firefly's terraforming technology to
give Joss some wiggle room. We don't even know enough
about our own solar system to say definitively there aren't
a bunch of decent sized planet and moon systems out beyond
Pluto--too cold and dark, of course, but if you replaced
the Sun with a much brighter star...
>Like most science fiction you have to close your eyes
>to a lot of things and just enjoy the ride ;)
>Though to be honest I do think him quibbling over whether
>it's a starship or not is a bit like JK Rowling saying
>Harry Potter doesn't rate as fantasy genre wise.
It's more like JK Rowling saying that Hogwarts Express
isn't a subway. Even if you insist that it's impossible
for the Hogwarts Express to leave central London unnoticed
without travelling underground, you're just going to have
to live with whatever JK Rowling decided.
If you wanted, you could logically map out all of the
logical problems of the Hogwarts Express and retcon
your own alternate explanation where it's actually a
subway connected to the Chunnel and that the only
scientifically logical place for Hogwarts to exist
is within EuroDisney, Paris, France. You COULD rewrite
the entire background to retcon this "scientifically
superior" explanation into all of the Harry Potter stories.
Or you could just take JK Rowling at her word, and accept
that she decides what's canon, not you.
That's what I think of fans thinking Firefly is set
in an interstellar setting. Yes, I think it's on the
same level as a crazed Potterhead retconning Hogwarts
onto the grounds of EuroDisney, Paris, France.
Isaac Kuo mec...@yahoo.com
Abrigon Gusiq
I just have to throw my 5 cents in here (inflation you know).
1. Relay Girl (Venus Equilateral)
2. Munin (Trigon
Disunity)
3. USS Enterprise (Star Trek -Constitution class)
4.
Galactica (both versions)
5. Argo/Yamato (Star Blazers/Space
Battleship Yamato
Earl
>
> Since I brought up
the subject of most beloved SF Starships, It'd be
> interesting to
see others choices, here goes my list:
>
> 1: USS
Enterprise (Star Trek)
> 2: Dauntless (Lensman)
> 3:
Millenium Falcon (Star Wars)
> 4: White Star (Babylon 5)
> 5: Serenity (Firefly)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Nick Maggs <nick...@blueyonder.co.uk>wrote:
> Favourite ships . . . hmmm
>
> 1. Nostromo from Alien- no doubt about it. Pure class.
> 2. Event Horizon from the movie of the same name.
> 3. Liberator from Blakes 7. Wobbly sets and all
> 4 & 5. Rebel blockade runner & imperial star destroyer. Just cause the
> opening scene in starwars made me go wow back in '77
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> === To unsubscribe, send an email to: ===
> sfconsim-l-...@yahoogroups.com
> SFCONSIM-L web page -- http://www.kentaurus.com/sfconsiml.htmYahoo! Groups
> Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
> Since I brought up the subject of most beloved SF Starships, It'd be
> interesting to see others choices, here goes my list:
In no particular order:
The entire menagerie of Culture ships from Iain M. Banks' universe of
the same name.
<http://www.scifishy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/early_era_culture_rou_by_mallacore.jpg>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_(The_Culture)>
Rama.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_(spacecraft)>
B5 Sharlin (Minbari War Cruiser).
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharlin_Class_Warcruiser>
Star Wars Executor class Star Destroyers.
<http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Executor-class_Star_Dreadnought>
Star Wars Lambda class shuttles.
<http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lambda-class_T-4a_shuttle>
Star Trek Danube class runabouts.
<http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Danube_class>
Star Trek Nebula class.
<http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Nebula_class>
Star Trek Wells class.
<http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Wells_class>
Abrigon Gusiq
creation - its magic.
On May 12, 2009, at 5:57 PM, Isaac Kuo wrote:
> It's more like JK Rowling saying that Hogwarts Express
> isn't a subway. Even if you insist that it's impossible
> for the Hogwarts Express to leave central London unnoticed
> without travelling underground, you're just going to have
> to live with whatever JK Rowling decided.
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
Paratime Corps from from some place or what?
H.Beam Piper or .... maybe from some place outside space/time?
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Dzafovic" <sdza...@gmail.com>
To: <sfcon...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [sfconsim-l] Dr. Who
> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Abrigon Gusiq <abr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> With the whole going back in time, changing the time line, that someone
>> like
>> Dr. Who or Paratime Corps or like would show up to try to rebuild the
>> time
>> line or recorde it?
>>
>> Dr. Who vs Nero? Hum..
>
> Good god. No.
Abrigon Gusiq
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> Out of all of those, I think only the ISD has had a lasting impact
> on SF.
What!?
no. Enterprise is as ubiquitous as they come
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
What about the name of the one from "Lost in Space"?
Did it have a name? Been to long.
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
where there is a baby.
So what is there origin? Where the Borg from originally?
Mike
Abrigon Gusiq
> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:35 AM, L'Etoile, Chris <chrisl@...>wrote:
>
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > Out of all of those, I think only the ISD has had a lasting impact
> > on SF.
>
>
> What!?
>
> no. Enterprise is as ubiquitous as they come
The Enterprise may have had one lasting - and unfortunate - effect, by establishing the convention that Hollywood spaceships fly 'horizontally,' with decks running front to back. In the 50s tail landers were common, and while Enterprise didn't land at all, if Roddenberry had chosen an 'upright' configuration it might well have become the convention.
Beyond that, I don't think any particular starship has had a lasting impact on the genre, beyond its own setting. Star Wars ships don't look like Trek ships. Nor did the 'idea' of the Enterprise - somewhere between a survey ship and a warship - become a standard convention. BSG has a carrier type instead of a battlecruiser type. Taken all together you can see a set of conventional assumptions developing, but they don't really form a family tree.
In contrast, Star Wars Tie (sp?) fighters clearly established the convention of what space fighters look like.
My own list:
1. Liner-freight Asgard, from RAH *Starman Jones*, which formed my basic idea of what starships are like - transverse decks, control room at the forward/top end (and not called a 'bridge'), and jump FTL.
2. Klingon battlecruisers - FAR cooler looking than the Enterprise.
3. Imperial Star Destroyers - same.
4. Babylon 5 *Agamemnon* - for its nod to spin gravity.
5. Serenity - not really the ship itself, just the coolness of the show.
-- Rick
Abrigon Gusiq
> We know little enough about extrasolar planetary systems
> and the details of Firefly's terraforming technology to
> give Joss some wiggle room.
This is a fair enough point - it is stretchy, but hardly as much as FTL is!
My reaction is based more on the Serenity doing what SF starships traditionally do, traveling among earthlike planets, and the fact that nothing in the show itself really indicated otherwise.
> It's more like JK Rowling saying that Hogwarts Express
> isn't a subway. Even if you insist that it's impossible
> for the Hogwarts Express to leave central London unnoticed
> without travelling underground, you're just going to have
> to live with whatever JK Rowling decided.
Since we're being frivolously pedantic (pedantically frivolous?), I don't have any reason to think it is a subway. While Platform 9 3/4 is not accessible to most passengers, nothing (at least in the bits I've seen in the films) would bar trains departing that platform from simply running out through the throat tracks and onto the mainline, presumably north. (The last purely my guess.)
The equipment is not typical contemporary British railway stock, but who other than trainspotters would notice? :>
-- Rick
Abrigon Gusiq
Space 1999 I believe it was Eagle??
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Abrigon Gusiq <abr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> What was the ships from Space 1999? I know not star but space ships.
>
> What about the name of the one from "Lost in Space"?
>
> Did it have a name? Been to long.
>
> Mike
>
>
--
Yours, Keith
Abrigon Gusiq
Blake's 7 - the Liberator
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/BlakeLiberator.jpg
Space Patrol - Galasphere 347
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLNa_YUPXes&
Starring a 60's version of Londo Mollari
Who can forget the takeoff sequence in Fireball XL5?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oboly57qxjg
Abrigon Gusiq
--- In sfcon...@yahoogroups.com, Abrigon Gusiq <abrigon@...> wrote:
>
> Favorite Star Ships
>
> Serenity or Firefly?
>
> Red Dwarf
> Dark Star (?)
> The ship form 2001? HAL and ship?
> Nestromo - where the ship is possessed or near a dark star/black hole?
>
> Ships with character?
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike
>
In a popularity contest, the Enterprise[that's NCC-1701, no
bloody A, B, C, or D!] wins,
hands down. Been around for 43 years, and has enormous fan following.
But as for personal favorites, my top 5 are:
1)The NCC-1701-D Enterprise![we're talking the SHIP, not the bald headed
captain, or
anyone else in the crew, though, I always thought Gates McFadden was
sorta 'warm'(not
quite 'hot')]. What with the separation feature((which the TOS
Enterprise was supposed to
have, but we never saw), holodecks, and a bar, I think it was cooler
than the original
Enterprise{I.M.O.! I.M.O.! So, put those flamethrowers away!]
2)The NCC-1701 Enterprise[TOS]. Too much history not to put it here.
3)My Dark Horse-The Phantom Cruiser...Space Ghost's ride! Both
invisible and Force
Field equipped! Cool. n And it had a monkey, too! [:))]
4)Hmmm...TARDIS, I guess. A starship that's much bigger inside, than
out[just how big is
the TARDIS supposed to be, anyway? In Tonnage equivalent, I
mean...after all, outside, it's
only as big as an English Police Call Box ]
5)The 'Death Star'. What's that you say? "It's a Battle Station, not a
Starship!" Is it now? Let's
see...it can make extended voyages, and it can travel interstellar
distances...that fits my
definition of a Starship. And don't give me, "It's too big to be a
ship!". It's ony the size of a
small moon(160KM diameter), or large asteroid. And asteroids as ships
have shown up in
SF occasionally.
Honorable menton: Borg cube[ST:TNG]; Imperial Star Destroyer[Star Wars];
Millenium
Falcon[also Star Wars]; Silver Surfboard[Silver Surfer's ride, from
Marvel Comics]; Pyramid
shaped Mother ships[Stargate SG-1]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Abrigon Gusiq
universe. I am not sure you can stick a tonnage limit on it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 4)Hmmm...TARDIS, I guess. A starship that's much bigger inside, than
> out[just how big is
>
> the TARDIS supposed to be, anyway? In Tonnage equivalent, I
> mean...after all, outside, it's
>
> only as big as an English Police Call Box ]
>