FLM films - My Webpage

1997-10-14 00:00:00 - Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net>)


Saw it, and it was okay. Need more action, and more fun with the cool space ships. I do think, with the proper writers, there might be a chance to kicj ST:VOY butt and kill them off in the ratings. Well??? jj.

1997-10-15 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (mcginn@direct.ca)


backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net> wrote: >I do think, with the proper writers, there might be >a chance to kicj ST:VOY butt and kill them off in the >ratings. >Well??? Didn't see the new Earth show (calling it a "Roddenberry show" is like calling a photocopy out of an art book an "original William Blake"). But yor comment about beating ST:VOY made me laugh. ST:VOY is one of the worst shows ever, the one ST series that has failed utterly at living up to the quality and depth that's made all other Star Trek series watchable. No character development whatsoever, no plots beyond dumb action episodes, fundamentally the show is as weak as a wet paper bag, and simply fails to achieve what Star Trek is all about. It is, in a word, a failure. (I love the way the VOY makers claim that interest in ST is dying out - no, I'm sorry, interest in mindless, juvenile CRAP immitating a ST series is dying out). Joe

1997-10-16 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net>)


Joe wrote: > > backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net> wrote: > > >I do think, with the proper writers, there might be > >a chance to kicj ST:VOY butt and kill them off in the > >ratings. > > >Well??? > > Didn't see the new Earth show (calling it a "Roddenberry show" is like > calling a photocopy out of an art book an "original William Blake"). > But yor comment about beating ST:VOY made me laugh. ST:VOY is one of > the worst shows ever, the one ST series that has failed utterly at > living up to the quality and depth that's made all other Star Trek > series watchable. No character development whatsoever, no plots beyond > dumb action episodes, fundamentally the show is as weak as a wet paper > bag, and simply fails to achieve what Star Trek is all about. It is, > in a word, a failure. (I love the way the VOY makers claim that > interest in ST is dying out - no, I'm sorry, interest in mindless, > juvenile CRAP immitating a ST series is dying out). > > Joe I have to agree. I didn't say ST:VOY was good. I'm saying it should have been canceled. The story lines are pathetic. I wanted a lot more out of it, but once I learned that Jeri Taylor was in charge, well, please... she's not a bad person, just not right for SF. Paramount should get a EP job on Ellen... then we'd see some interesting stuff. Otherwise, Star Trek has had its days. Maybe they'll make a seires out of "Starship Troopers?" Now that would be fun -- for a while. jj.

1997-10-16 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (ao@infinet.com)


Joe (mcginn@direct.ca) wrote: : backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net> wrote: : >I do think, with the proper writers, there might be : >a chance to kicj ST:VOY butt and kill them off in the : >ratings. : >Well??? : Didn't see the new Earth show (calling it a "Roddenberry show" is like : calling a photocopy out of an art book an "original William Blake"). : But yor comment about beating ST:VOY made me laugh. ST:VOY is one of : the worst shows ever, the one ST series that has failed utterly at : living up to the quality and depth that's made all other Star Trek : series watchable. No character development whatsoever, no plots beyond : dumb action episodes, fundamentally the show is as weak as a wet paper : bag, and simply fails to achieve what Star Trek is all about. It is, : in a word, a failure. (I love the way the VOY makers claim that : interest in ST is dying out - no, I'm sorry, interest in mindless, : juvenile CRAP immitating a ST series is dying out). Absolutely correct. I still watch Voyager if only because despite its flaws, its a million times better than anything on "Must *not* See TV". ST:DS9, IMHO, is one of the best shows ever done, if only because after 5(?) seasons, it *does* have the character development. /Mike -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Take the cheese to sickbay, the Doctor should take a look at it as soon | | as possible. -- B'lanna Torres - Star Trek Voyager - 'Learning Curve'. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

1997-10-16 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (mcginn@direct.ca)


ao@infinet.com (Mike Harrold) wrote: >ST:DS9, IMHO, is one of the best shows ever done, if only because after >5(?) seasons, it *does* have the character development. I agree completely (see my other post about it). The "war arc over several episodes" this season is being done extremely well, and they are using it specifically to create character development. The show had a couple shaky years early on, but in recent years has recaptured the magic that made the original DS9 pilot so good (and needless to say the tribbles episode last year was the most enjoyable ST episode in years, from any series). Joe

1997-10-17 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net>)


M. Keane wrote: > > In article <6232f8$957$1@brie.direct.ca>, Joe <mcginn@direct.ca> wrote: > >calling a photocopy out of an art book an "original William Blake"). > >But yor comment about beating ST:VOY made me laugh. ST:VOY is one of > >the worst shows ever, the one ST series that has failed utterly at > >living up to the quality and depth that's made all other Star Trek > >series watchable. No character development whatsoever, no plots beyond > > Actually, Voyager is [gasp] good now. They really built up some steam Please.... not crapy SF on TV. It is too lame. Just look at the ratings. 99 percent of the nation don't like watching ST:VOY. Enough said. jj.

1997-10-17 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (aexia@u.washington.edu)


In article <6232f8$957$1@brie.direct.ca>, Joe <mcginn@direct.ca> wrote: >calling a photocopy out of an art book an "original William Blake"). >But yor comment about beating ST:VOY made me laugh. ST:VOY is one of >the worst shows ever, the one ST series that has failed utterly at >living up to the quality and depth that's made all other Star Trek >series watchable. No character development whatsoever, no plots beyond Actually, Voyager is [gasp] good now. They really built up some steam last season and the last 7 or 8(counting last season) episodes have all been pretty good. It's a bit like TNG... okay 1st season, utter crap 2nd season, uneven, but promising 3rd season, and it appears to be going on a great season now. -- Micheal (Chris) Keane - Associate Professor of Gravitational Morality University of Edicara Join the Church of Last Thursday and worship Queen Maeve! E-mail me to join. http://weber.u.washington.edu/~aexia/thursday.htm

1997-10-18 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (mcginn@direct.ca)


aexia@u.washington.edu (M. Keane) wrote: >Actually, Voyager is [gasp] good now. They really built up some steam last >season and the last 7 or 8(counting last season) episodes have all been >pretty good. It's a bit like TNG... okay 1st season, utter crap 2nd >season, uneven, but promising 3rd season, and it appears to be going on a >great season now. I cannot agree. It's been the same old dull action stories and feeble attempts at character-building. Joe

1997-10-19 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (mcginn@direct.ca)


kalel@thewebcorp.com (Kalel) wrote: >In the past, and during first-run broadcast, I would schedule the >evening around Star Trek (especially during the ill-fated Friday night >time slot) and then Next Gen (which fell on Saturdays at 8:00 here). I >have not, in any way, felt tempted to do the same with either DS9 or >Voyager. They are each an amusing diversion with which to wile away an >hour when there's nothing better to do (Gee, and I could've been >having root-canal surgery!), but neither is worth actually scheduling. DS9 is a fair bit better. I now tape episodes when I'm not home so I don't miss one. >As we all know, quality science fiction on television is rare, so I >will give this new "contact" a fair viewing, but how much is his and >how much is good remains to be seen. It sounds horribly dull. Aliens that impersonate humans, no one knows who is or isn't an alien, yada yada yada. God, that's original - it's only been redone about 400 times since the first Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Joe

1997-10-19 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (kalel@thewebcorp.com)


kalel@thewebcorp.com (Kalel) wrote: >mcginn@direct.ca (Joe) wrote: > >>aexia@u.washington.edu (M. Keane) wrote: >> >>>Actually, Voyager is [gasp] good now. They really built up some steam last >>>season and the last 7 or 8(counting last season) episodes have all been >>>pretty good. It's a bit like TNG... okay 1st season, utter crap 2nd >>>season, uneven, but promising 3rd season, and it appears to be going on a >>>great season now. >> >>I cannot agree. It's been the same old dull action stories and feeble >>attempts at character-building. >> >>Joe >> >In the past, and during first-run broadcast, I would schedule the >evening around Star Trek (especially during the ill-fated Friday night >time slot) and then Next Gen (which fell on Saturdays at 8:00 here). I >have not, in any way, felt tempted to do the same with either DS9 or >Voyager. They are each an amusing diversion with which to wile away an >hour when there's nothing better to do (Gee, and I could've been >having root-canal surgery!), but neither is worth actually scheduling. > >I have yet to see the new Roddenberry series, but having endured the >others in the early Seventies (one of which I actually auditioned >for), my personal view is this: Gene Roddenberry is to be lauded for >giving us the first two incarnations, amazingly proving lightning can >not only be captured in a bottle, but that it can happen twice! Having >said that, I personally feel that he was a "one trick pony", that one >trick being Trek... a happy happenstance of luck, timing, casting, and >yes, talent. Unfortunately, Mr. Roddenberry was never able to align >the planets in quite the same fashion again, no matter how he tried. >Had the films not been taken out of his domain, we would've had the >Enterprise time travel to the 60s to stop the Kennedy assassination, >only to have Spock become the second gunman on the grassy knoll! This >was his dream film, the one he pitched to Paramount each time >production on a new film was announced. > >As we all know, quality science fiction on television is rare, so I >will give this new "contact" a fair viewing, but how much is his and >how much is good remains to be seen. > >Kal Strangly enough, the pilot aired last night, shortly after posting the previous message. I'll still retain (retard?) judgement until a few more episodes air, but there were several times when I felt that, if I muted the sound, I'd be actually watching an episode of TekWar!... the Jake Cardigan clone was intact, the Bascome entity, the attractive female backup. Wouldn't it be ironic, after all the years of bashing Mr. Shatner had to endure, for Mr. Roddenberry to have used his lamented "captain"'s creation as a springboard for his own?

1997-10-25 00:00:00 - Re: Roddenberry's EARTH??? - (Joe NIffen <"Joe NIffen">)


Joe wrote: > > backjohn <backjohn@mail.softcom.net> wrote: > > >Otherwise, Star Trek has had its days. > > Actually I've been quite impresed by DS9 so far this year. The "war > arc over several episodes" is working well, with interesting subplots > and character stories/motivations. Last weeks episode (where they were > stuck on a planet fighting a Jemadar group) was superb. The scene > where the feds had to slaughter the enemy troup was very well done. > And when the Baijor religious leader committed suicide on the DS9 > promenade my jaw dropped, I was so suprised. Very good writing. > > Joe Is it my imagination or the federation can win a war. This one isn't looking too good for them, we know they will win of course. The Episode with Enterprise D meets Ent. C they were loosing the war, and even with the parallel universe in DS9 the earth base society lost the war and was taken over by bajor etc. Any way thank for letting me be off topic for a while. --