Meenzer 15836 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 But post Enterprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5569 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 I never really watched any of the others and have only seen the movies, so for me, it really doesn't matter where in the timeline it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Started off alright. The lead woman has a mans name so the social engineering is in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5569 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) Wait, she does? I thought that was her surname Shows how much attention I was paying. I thought she was pretty good though. I noticed they made a comment about "the problem being culture, not race" which sounds like something the Alt Right would say Dog whistle iyam. Edited October 10, 2017 by Rayvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 7 minutes ago, Rayvin said: Wait, she does? I thought that was her surname Shows how much attention I was paying. I thought she was pretty good though. I noticed they made a comment about "the problem being culture, not race" which sounds like something the Alt Right would say Dog whistle iyam. The Klingons were always the Russians in the days the CIA were writing the scripts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 25 minutes ago, Meenzer said: It's pre both. Even though the in-universe tech is way ahead of Kirk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Just now, The Fish said: Even though the in-universe tech is way ahead of Kirk? I haven't really seen much of the original series. Is the tech properly ahead or is it just that it's made of CGI not cardboard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, The Fish said: Even though the in-universe tech is way ahead of Kirk? Yeah the same fuck up as Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, Meenzer said: I haven't really seen much of the original series. Is the tech properly ahead or is it just that it's made of CGI not cardboard? No whoosh noise when the doors slide shut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, Meenzer said: I haven't really seen much of the original series. Is the tech properly ahead or is it just that it's made of CGI not cardboard? Well all the snazzy new aliens aside, and bear in mind I don't remember much of the original series, but they've got those magical devices that create whatever you need out of thin air, which I can't remember from Kirk's show, but definitely from Picard's. Holographic Skype calls. And also, they've got a ship that can bamf anywhere instantaneously. And lens flare, which I don't remember from Kirk's time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 14 minutes ago, The Fish said: And also, they've got a ship that can bamf anywhere instantaneously. The reasons why that technology doesn't/won't/can't exist in future iterations are obviously going to be central to the plot of the thing though. Fair point about the replicators, don't know how commonplace they were on the original series (for food yes, I guess? but presumably not for magicking up actual things like you get in the later-made series). Such are the perils of prequels, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, Meenzer said: The reasons why that technology doesn't/won't/can't exist in future iterations are obviously going to be central to the plot of the thing though. Fair point about the replicators, don't know how commonplace they were on the original series (for food yes, I guess? but presumably not for magicking up actual things like you get in the later-made series). Such are the perils of prequels, I suppose. Yeah I figured that. The discomfort Burnham feels at hooking the beastie up to jump-cables, so that they can get wherever they need to go is obviously going to lead up to a confrontation with Jason Isaacs. But the rest of the doohickeys they use, like floating interactive intangible screens and so on. Just jars a bit. That aside it's decent, much better than I thought it would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Prequel just means we have no ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 1 minute ago, The Fish said: Yeah I figured that. The discomfort Burnham feels at hooking the beastie up to jump-cables, so that they can get wherever they need to go is obviously going to lead up to a confrontation with Jason Isaacs. But the rest of the doohickeys they use, like floating interactive intangible screens and so on. Just jars a bit. That aside it's decent, much better than I thought it would be. Maybe the season finale will be the Klingons breaking everything and sending us back to the Stone Age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Tbf the Klingons in this are much better thought through and fascinating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Park Life said: Prequel just means we have no ideas. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is pretty good mind. Batman Begins too. Does Godfather II count as a prequel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 8 minutes ago, Park Life said: Tbf the Klingons in this are much better thought through and fascinating. Their scenes slow everything down so far, but the plot has potential. I realise it's a massively nerdy point but I actually think the choice of subtitle font - Extremely Portentous Game Of Planets Lettering - doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, Meenzer said: Their scenes slow everything down so far, but the plot has potential. I realise it's a massively nerdy point but I actually think the choice of subtitle font - Extremely Portentous Game Of Planets Lettering - doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 35910 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 20 minutes ago, The Fish said: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is pretty good mind. Not really a prequel though, is it? Does Godfather II count as a prequel? Nah, I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 21 minutes ago, Alex said: Lies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollars_Trilogy "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is considered a prequel,[4] since it depicts Eastwood's character gradually acquiring the clothing he wears throughout the first two films and because it takes place during the American Civil War (1861–1865), whereas the other two films feature comparatively more modern firearms and other props. For example, Lee Van Cleef's character in For a Few Dollars More appears to be a Confederate veteran who has come down in the world, and a graveyard scene in A Fistful of Dollars features a gravestone dated 1873." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 35910 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, The Fish said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollars_Trilogy "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is considered a prequel,[4] since it depicts Eastwood's character gradually acquiring the clothing he wears throughout the first two films and because it takes place during the American Civil War (1861–1865), whereas the other two films feature comparatively more modern firearms and other props. For example, Lee Van Cleef's character in For a Few Dollars More appears to be a Confederate veteran who has come down in the world, and a graveyard scene in A Fistful of Dollars features a gravestone dated 1873." I think that's bollocks though. For several reasons. First, it's an opinion based on one only source being cited. Which is also just some fan site. And Sergio Leone never intended for them to be a trilogy. It was just dreamed up by the studios after the event and the popularity of the films. There's clues in TGTBATU that suggest it's set before the other two but they're only loosely connected as films anyway. You could even argue Clint's character isn't meant to be the same person. He's nicknamed 'Joe' in AFFOD, 'Manco' in FAFDM and 'Blondie' in TGTBATU. Also Lee Van Cleef plays two different characters in the films and they're adversaries in TGTBATU and work together in FAFDM and Van Cleef's character dies at the end of TGTBATU. If it was a proper trilogy would it make sense to have one person killed in a prequel after they'd played a different character in a film set later? Of course it wouldn't. Edited October 10, 2017 by Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11068 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 11 minutes ago, Alex said: I think that's bollocks though. For several reasons. First, it's an opinion based on one only source being cited. Which is also just some fan site. And Sergio Leone never intended for them to be a trilogy. It was just dreamed up by the studios after the event and the popularity of the films. There's clues in TGTBATU that suggest it's set before the other two but they're only loosely connected as films anyway. You could even argue Clint's character isn't meant to be the same person. He's nicknamed 'Joe' in AFFOD, 'Manco' in FAFDM and 'Blondie' in TGTBATU. Also Lee Van Cleef plays two different characters in the films and they're adversaries in TGTBATU and work together in FAFDM and Van Cleef's character dies at the end of TGTBATU. If it was a proper trilogy would it make sense to have one person killed in a prequel after they'd played a different character in a film set later? Of course it wouldn't. Now is probably a good time to say I've never watched them and I'm just being a dick. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 35910 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 I love them and have seen them loads so you probably did pick a bad example. Loads of people wouldn't have owned up to never having seen them and would've been frantically googling, so fair play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 34422 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 20 minutes ago, The Fish said: Now is probably a good time to say I've never watched them and I'm just being a dick. You should've just blamed the 'Mag at work' for duff information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31582 Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 So you've watched pretty much all of the Marvel/DC movies but never seen any of the Dollars trilogy? Sort your life out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now