Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About doctor_odd

  • Rank
    It is happening again.

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Marital Status
  • Favorite Trek Movie
    The Undiscovered Country
  • Favorite Trek Captain
    Benjamin Sisko
  • Favorite Trek Series
    Deep Space Nine

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

14,662 profile views
  1. This image explains it, without spoilers. As for how modern it feels, yeah, that makes a lot of sense! So much of what we take for granted today in television comes from Lynch and Frost's innovation. When you're done with the show, I strongly recommend you watch the films Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, and Mulholland Drive to get an idea of who David Lynch is as a filmmaker. Then treat yourself to Fire Walk With Me, the Twin Peaks movie. It's an excellent film but it was panned upon release for various reasons, that being said, plenty of critics have come around to it over time. At that point, you should be primed and ready for season 3, or, "Twin Peaks: The Return", which is so far an amazing experience, and the first 11 episodes all get a "damn fine" rating from me so far. :D
  2. I guess there's not much interest on this board for Twin Peaks, but holy hell is it just getting better and better.
  3. I think the saucer gap is smart. It's a clear reference to the design of the Constitution class. We're used to it now because it's so iconic, but look at the flimsy little things holding the warp nacelles on, or even the neck connecting the saucer to the stardrive section. It's kind of ridiculous! The Enterprise was designed to intentionally look flimsy. Why? So that we'd think it was made of some futuristic technology we couldn't quite fathom. If it spins, that's another story, but I doubt it does. I think the Discovery just may be the most beautiful ship in the fleet, second perhaps to the Galaxy-class which is unbeatable in my mind. <3
  4. I just watched Twin Peaks 3.08, "Gotta Light?" I don't think I can watch any other TV anymore. The entire medium has been deconstructed. Holy crap. I wish I'd been around for other groundbreaking moments of TV history, like The Best of Both Worlds, or that I'd got my shit together and actually watched The Wire when it aired. I feel that with this new season I'm watching TV history in the making, and this episode was crazy. I pity anyone for whom tonight's episode was their first exposure to the show.
  5. Something I've thought of is that potentially, the Shenzhou is in the Kelvin timeline, and the Discovery is in the Prime timeline. From the latest descriptions ("universe-changing decisions") it seems like it could be a possibility. A good way to ease in fans who've only heard of the new movies. Probably won't happen, but hey? Who knows?
  6. Thanks, Sehlat Vie! So far it feels like we're slowly watching a really long movie unfold. I love it! As a huge fan of Lynch's films, I think the difference between Season 3 and the previous seasons is fairly indicative of how much Lynch was kept on a short leash during the original run. Season 3 feels like his movies do. SPOILERS! That scene with Amanda Seyfried coked out in the car with the music playing was haunting and beautiful. It reminded me very much of Mulholland Drive. Also the whole "Mr. Strawberry" bit, and, frankly, everything about BobCoop is so effectively creepy. I've never felt this kind of fear or disorientation from a TV show.
  7. Twin Peaks season 3 is blowing my mind! David Lynch is a genius. I'm just so happy that at least one reboot/revival of a franchise I love is really good. I wasn't a fan of the X-Files revival, save for one or two of the episodes. I'm not sure if there's a Twin Peaks thread but "Holy Jumping George" (as Gordon Cole says) would I be happy to participate in it! That's it for me until DSC finally comes out. I just started The Wire, though, and I've heard great things. The pilot was really excellent.
  8. What I'm kinda hoping for is that Discovery spurs new interest in Trek, regardless of whether it's my kind of show or not. With enough popularity, we might just earn some post-Nemesis prime timeline content. I am still pretty excited for the show, just for the fact that it's *new* Star Trek television. I grew up with DS9 and VOY and since Enterprise was cancelled there's been a Star Trek-shaped hole in the world. And while I very much enjoyed Beyond and some aspects of ST2009 and Into Darkness they didn't scratch that particular itch. And for those of you who feel that this show is somehow insulting or perverting something you love, I feel that. I really do. Every butchered cover of a song I like comes to mind, but I try to think of it like this: if someone likes the cover they just might listen to the original, and a small but real group just might prefer that original, but still be thankful that the cover got them there. Also I just gotta say that Mr.Picard has spoken some amazing wisdom in this thread and I'm super impressed.
  9. Absolutely. His work on First Contact was stunning, considering it was his first time directing a major motion picture.
  10. I love Star Trek enough to pay for it. I'm actually so excited right now. I grew up watching Voyager and Deep Space Nine, and then Enterprise after that. Star Trek is such an important part of my life, I would pay $40 a month for it, easy. Just knowing that I'm going to be getting to know a new crew and a new ship (and maybe crew(s) and ship(s)!) is bringing joy to my life.
  11. Personally, what I'm most excited about is the USS Discovery being a "rank" on this message board. Doug Jones confirms what Stella posted!
  12. A couple random thoughts since it's been a few weeks since I last posted. I see around the internet a lot of the "Discovery is going to fail" sentiment. It's strange to me, almost seems like people want it to fail. I see so much hatred of the prequel concept and I'm so fed up with it. A prequel doesn't limit the things that can happen. I mean, yes, the federation can't be annihilated, and Sarek can't die, but the thing about space is that it is gigantic. Do we really think that in the less than a thousand hours in this universe we've been exposed to, every major event has been mentioned? I only just learned about Hadrian's Wall, and I've lived a lot longer than a thousand hours. I also speak French, and yet for most of my life it never even crosses my mind. What I'm getting at is that we've only seen a tiny window into this vast world. The idea that a prequel is more limited in scope is just preposterous. The only limit is the writers' imagination. And besides, there's nothing wrong with a show that strays from major galaxy-shaping events. If the show ends up being a reimagining, that's fine too. I'm a huge fan of Leonard Cohen and yet I prefer some covers of Hallelujah to the original. On the whole I prefer the Kelvin movies to 50% of the Prime Timeline movies, maybe more. Let's judge Discovery not by our expectations, but by its own merits. So far, I'm excited by what I see. The actors are all amazing, the ship already looks iconic to me, and I have tremendous faith in the writing staff. I apologize if any of this has been said before. I've been away from the thread for a while and there's a lot of catching up to do. Most of my arguments are directed at fans on reddit.
  13. The first episode of TNG had McCoy. The first episode of DS9 had Picard (and, well, O'Brien for that matter). The first episode of VOY had Quark. The first episode of ENT had Cochran. I think a more fitting guest star to "send off" the series would be a brief cameo by T'Pol.
  14. My apologies! Being in the gay community myself, I have trans friends and I'm always very careful to use the right terms if I can. When I put "normal female of sorts" it was more me struggling to remember what the alien really was as its been YEARS since I've seen it, hehe. I guess my primary point was they were going to make that episode Star Trek's first "gay situation" but decided against it. No worries! Sorry if I was too preachy. I had just woken up when I wrote that.
  15. I would set it that way as well. Every once in a while, a random person will notice "oh, you're left handed!" It never goes beyond that (how could it?), but I'm always surprised that people would take the time to comment on such a banal habit. That's clearly the way Star Trek, of all franchises, should have went with homosexuality a long time ago. It's my understanding that the TNG episode where Riker falls for the "transgender" alien "female" was going to be the moment where Star Trek finally tackled homosexuality, but they decided it was too risky ( I.e., they got cold feet) and they went ahead and just made her a normal female of sorts. PSA time! The Outcast didn't really explore homosexuality at all, nor would it have if she was presented as less female-passing. Soren identified as a woman, and Riker (presumably) identified as a man. So any semblance of a relationship was heterosexual, until of course she was "cured" of her gender identity. Describing her as she appeared as a "normal female of sorts". I mean, isn't that a little insensitive? What constitutes a "normal female" is entirely cultural, and any other definition seems as archaic as The Outcast. I consider myself to be a "normal female" (well, as normal as a trekkie can be) and I am a trans woman. I understand that there are definitions of "female" that do NOT include trans women, but any such definition is sorely lacking in the year 2016*. A more sensitive/precise term for what people mean when they say "female" and are excluding trans women might be "cisgendered women" or "AFAB (assigned female at birth) women". *And might I remind those who would say that the popular definition of female is a scientific one, and therefore infallible: the beauty of science (and of language!) is that it changes and adapts to our present understanding of the word. To hold up one scientific world view as "god's will" and/or "objective" is antithetical to the scientific process, and is really just another form of dogmatic fundamentalism.