Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About scenario

  • Rank
    Intrepid-Class Starship

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New England U.S.A.
  • Marital Status
  • Favorite Trek Movie
    The Search for Spock
  • Favorite Trek Captain
    Jean-Luc Picard
  • Favorite Trek Series
    The Original Series

Recent Profile Visitors

3,737 profile views
  1. Time problems like this happen all the time in books, TV shows and movies. I was just reading a book where the hero took something like half a day to drive somewhere and a full day to walk back. Even at say 50 km/hr, 10 hours of driving would get you 500 km or a little over 300 miles. You can't walk 300 miles in a day. The needs of the story outweigh the needs of reality sometimes.
  2. I think in the Star Trek world, the pressure to be religious is gone. In some places, in some times, you had be the same religions as the locals to survive in the town. You couldn't get a job, get married etc. In the Star Trek universe many people may be religious but it's their own choice, they're not forced to be religious. Religion would be more deeper and heart felt because it was chosen. More people will actually understand their own religion and not just rote quote things. From a storypoint line, religion is a flash point. Religion tends to bring out trolls of all types. The moderators here get nervous whenever religion is discussed. TV networks don't want to touch the issue. It's difficult to write a really good story about religion that doesn't step on someone's toes, somewhere. So I think they've just assumed that Religion in the Star Trek world is not the significant force as it is in the real world. They avoid the question of whether or not it exists. In TOS, they hinted that it existed in some form by having a chapel on the ship but they deliberately never went into details.
  3. I would kind of like to see them refer to the great schism where a new version of Christianity arose with its own bible (The Orange Catholic Bible perhaps ) along with new versions of most religions. New versions of Christianity/Islam/Hinduism etc. that dumps the violent tendencies and tendency to fetish on the idea that ignorance is a virtue. Star Trek talks about a newer improved humanity. I would think that a new improved religions would go along with a new improved humanity.
  4. The line that lead to homo Sapiens has been fully bipedal for millions of years. The 4.4 million year old species, Adipithecus-ramidus, which may or may not be a direct human ancestor walked upright at least part of the time. The earliest hominid that we are sure walked upright full time was Homo Erectus around 1.89 million years ago. If you take Picard literally, Bajor has been civilized for two million years or more. (Scientists knew Homo Erectus walked upright many years before the show was written.)
  5. Good Bye is short for God be with you. I don't see Good Bye disappearing any time soon. I can see Oh God as one of those sayings that a lot of people use but don't think of or even know what it means.
  6. I think that the type of religion that promotes hatred and ignorance has died out in Star Trek. But the softer more fuzzy personal type of religion is still around. I just can't see there being millions of humans in Star Trek who are being taught to hate Vulcans because they have taken a few quotes from the misc holy book out of context and are using them to encourage StarFleet to kill all Vulcans. I really don't have a problem with someone saying oh god. I would have a problem with a StarFleet crewmember trying to force others to believe in their particular religion.
  7. Congratulations! Its a lot of stress and a lot of fun at the same time.
  8. I hate the idea of a movie with the captains. I kind of like the idea of a movie or miniseries set 15 years after voyager with a mixture of minor characters from NG, DS9 and Voy. Avoid the main characters so no Picard, Data, Sisko, 7 of 9 or Janeway. Also eliminate any character whose dead in the show (Jadzia) or should be (Kes). Then pick one or two characters from each of the show. You could even have a cameo from TOS minor character in the form of a video message.
  9. CBS has three choices with ST. Put it on CBS and have it canceled after one season because it doesn't make enough money for what it costs. Sell or lease the rights to a third party and hope that they can do a better job. Or put it on all access where it doesn't have to make a profit with one or two showings because they can keep making money on it for years. When it comes to the actual show, I'm not making any decisions about it until I see it with my own eyes.
  10. CBSAA is available as an internet-based service right now. My point is that it's looking like all TV service other than local broadcast could be internet based in a few years. The cable company's business model is that they have a local monopoly and they get 75% of the people in their area using their service and they buy channels and set prices based on volume. About 20% of people never got cable. So they had around 80% of people signed up and they charged them through the nose. People now can get a much cheaper service. The industry as a whole is losing customers. If the percentage of people using the service get's too low, they'll get into a death cycle of raising rates/losing more customers or cutting channels/losing customers. It may take 20 years but CBS wants to keep their options open if cable companies start going out of the tv business.
  11. The business model of cable TV as it stands now is unsustainable. More and more people are cutting the cord on cable. As more people use internet TV like Roku and less use traditional cable, the cable companies will be forced to either raise their price,(creating more cable cutters) or drop expensive channels, (Like ESPN, creating more cable cutters) or totally change their business practices. What happens to the people who Don't want to or can't subscribe to CBS All Access when their cable company decides to go out of the TV business and concentrate exclusively on their internet providing business? CBS is taking a risk but the alternatives are being attached to a dying platform, or joining another platform like Hulu and lose their individuality and name or being just an over the air channel and lose most of their customer base or do what they did and create their own platform. To create a new platform they need programs. Star Trek fits the bill. It has a solid fan base. It is a show that doesn't quite fit on a regular network. It's a show that is better off on a network that can afford to care as much about quality than ratings. A really good show that they own outright can draw new fans to the new platform for years. A crappy, flash in the pan, high rating success is great for regular TV but terrible for an internet based TV.(How many people would subscribe to CBS All Access to see reruns of one of the many reality shows.) Smaller more steady paying viewership with high quality shows is the way to go. The show doesn't half to pay for itself with one or two showings when you're going to be showing it for decades. CBS is taking a long view. Discovery is not by itself going to make the network. It's a start. Discovery, American Football and a couple of other new shows make the channel legitimate. I cut the cord a few months ago and my monthly bill went from $100 to $25. I have a difficult time getting CBS over the air. Even if I spend another $7.00 for all access, I'm still saving a lot of money over the old system.
  12. I liked the show. I only like around 5 shows on TV now so I feel the loss. But I'm not super unhappy. The BBC used it as an experiment and showed it in unusual times and places so it's not that surprising that it failed. It's a lot like Firefly that way. Put it on odd times and places and then act surprised when it doesn't make a lot of money. The show itself was good not great but it showed a lot of promise. It killed off several characters and as an ensemble show no one character was crucial to the show so there was a real feeling of danger for the characters since they could really die in the show.
  13. A communicator on a planet has more in common with a satellite phone than a cell phone. It's easy to imagine that it has to be bigger and bulkier because it's signal has to go hundreds or even thousands of miles instead of just a few miles to the nearest tower. It also has to be tough enough to work in a lot of different conditions from very cold to very hot. It won't work in a vacuum (no sound waves) but it has to be able to survive there if necessary. It's easy to make up a decent reason why the communicator looks so bulky. Especially if they're using the equivalent of an i-pad on the bridge. They had a bulky version of an i-pad in the early TOS episodes that Yeoman Rand had Kirk sign. If you have both it looks more like there is a reason for the communicators to be so bulky. Thank you for using my warp 75 example.
  14. It seems to make sense to have a thread for people who aren't interested in Discovery and want to say why they aren't. Or people who want to assume that the new Star Trek is going to be bad because of 2 seconds of a promo seemed wrong to them. I really don't have a problem with that because I do the same thing with other programs that I'm only slightly interested in. It makes sense to me to have two main threads. The optimistic thread where there is concern about the way the show is going but hopes it will work out. And the pessimistic thread for people who've basically burned out on Trek and just assume the new show will be a disaster.
  15. I actually think that the B&W episodes in lost and space were the best ones. Later ones became almost a parody of science fiction. I brought this up because the primitive looking Enterprise is basically the same thing as it being shot in B&W. We don't expect that new shows be shot in B&W. We don't expect them to use the same type 50 year old cameras so it will look the same. We shouldn't expect shows shot in 2017 to look like shows shot in 1964.