OpinionIt was good for the Star Trek franchise to have a break from TV
      – BorgClown, 2009-11-04 at 21:28:50   (21 comments)

On 2009-11-04 at 21:32:24, BorgClown wrote...
The series started to compete with itself (ST TNG, DS9, star Fleet Academy) and became gradually less bold. I suppose all franchises suffer aging, and it's good to see that Star Trek entered a hiatus instead of becoming the joke that Star Wars is today.
On 2009-11-04 at 23:14:23, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Star Wars was never a series though - it has no real substance. Star Trek, on the other hand, had too many average or below average episodes - you could only watch it in the hope that you'd eventually get to a good episode. Deep Space 9 was perhaps the worst - it really lacked direction and had too many political episodes (fictional politics, of course) which no-one really cared about. Really all of the series could have done with either better writers or a head writer who had some real vision.
On 2009-11-05 at 00:01:09, BorgClown wrote...
Now that you mention it, I remember eagerly expecting the week's TNG episode, but only a bunch of them blew my mind. The rest were entertaining or so-so. Enterprise tried to be epic and barely avoided corny. I hope the comeback is well done.
On 2009-11-05 at 02:45:43, DigitalBoss wrote...
It really blows my mind how goofy William Shatner is now. I have seen him on some of the late night shows recently, he is crazy. I loved the way they did Spock in the new movie, that was cool.
On 2009-11-05 at 06:23:47, BorgClown wrote...
He didn't age as graciously as others, maybe the Galaxy Quest movie really hit the nail about the captain.
On 2009-11-05 at 11:03:22, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Re: William Shatner http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLpLU7D7MWk
On 2009-11-05 at 18:20:04, BorgClown wrote...
Great, that was awesome!
On 2009-11-08 at 09:40:02, Lee J Haywood wrote...
http://io9.com/5391989/a-black-hole-engine-that-could-power-spaceships
On 2009-11-08 at 23:42:14, Lee J Haywood wrote...
You inspired me to finally watch the JJ Abrams film yesterday. I already knew that it had a lot of recognisable actors in it, and had expected it to fail completely to adhere to the established Star Trek universe. With the first point it was worse than I imagined, with even minor characters played by actors from Alias and FlashForward, etc. but at least I was prepared for it. As for the second point, I was impressed how well it managed to integrate a lot of canon - more than enough to keep the fans happy - and liked the whole idea of using an alternate reality to keep things fresh. Thumbs up for that film.
On 2009-11-08 at 23:55:19, BorgClown wrote...
Of course you already know, the black hole engine idea has been around long enough for star Trek to use it: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Romulan_technology#Propulsion
On 2009-11-09 at 00:00:38, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: Yes, that's true and always struck me as odd at the time. I doubt they knew about Hawking radiation back then, so I don't understand why the writers thought it made sense. Even with the article I posted it's hard to imagine actually containing a black hole in a non-lethal manner and actually getting the mass of the black hole to move - the size of its inertia would far outweigh (pun) any energy the hole gave off.
On 2009-11-09 at 00:10:42, BorgClown wrote...
Damn, you also inspired me to watch it. I was "son, I am disapoint" after Nemesis and decided to skip the last. I downloaded it for my wife, and she liked it, but I didn't want to watch it.
On 2009-11-09 at 00:18:24, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: I never thought about Hawkins radiation back then, but I knew that microscopic black holes evaporate on their own, and always thought that they fed them just enough matter for them to stay alive, and used the evaporation as a source of energy. The article states that a perfect black hole for the engine has to weight the same as a starship, maybe it's not that implausible to move it.
On 2009-11-12 at 10:30:28, BorgClown wrote...
Just saw Star Trek (2009), it's very good, alright. Awesome way to let the franchise enter its hiatus.
On 2009-11-12 at 10:41:39, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: No to the hiatus... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29#Sequel
On 2009-11-12 at 20:50:06, BorgClown wrote...
Uh oh. Taking liberties with the alternate reality, prequel trilogy set up... Oh well, what could possibly go wrong?
On 2009-11-13 at 00:53:11, DigitalBoss wrote...
2011.
On 2009-11-13 at 03:16:29, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Sci-Fi trilogies tend to start awesome, continue so-so and end lousy. But I'll watch the second anyway, just because the first was that good.
On 2009-11-13 at 03:17:07, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Your link went to re school and failed =)
On 2009-11-16 at 18:23:42, Lee J Haywood wrote...
http://www.thrfeed.com/neverbeforeseen-star-trek-pilot-found.html
On 2009-11-17 at 04:15:22, BorgClown wrote...
"The restored pilot will be included in the 'Star Trek: Original Series - Season 3' Blu-ray release" Pfft, Star Trek marketers wants you to buy the same things over and over...