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

3,876 profile views
  1. Didn't the new Kirk cheat to get around the Kobayashi Maru in the first movie. Use an alternate George Kirk, (a shadow kirk or something) as a KM test. JT Kirk's only option to save the Enterprise is to let his dad die again. Yes it mirrors the Spock death scene but the movies are going to copy stuff anyway.
  2. I don't have as much of a problem with George Kirk coming back if it's not the real George Kirk. A shadow Kirk might be a mindless fun episode. Or a George Kirk version of Thomas Riker where he split off from George long before he met JT Kirk"s mother. Or some kind of shapeshifter pretending to be George, especially if the shape shifter doesn't know they are a shapeshifter. James Kirk meets someone who looks, acts and has some of the memories of his dad but isn't really his dad. Maybe the fake dad ends up dying again to save his son.
  3. Discovery and Me

    I agree with you that fans aren't people that mindlessly wolf down anything with ST written on it. But in the comments section of other sites I've read hundreds of comments that ST has always been (sexist, racist, etc.) and people who are calling themselves fans are demanding that the cast should be all white straight males who go around the galaxy killing people who aren't like them. I've read people say that if Kirk was around he would have killed all the gay people as soon as he met them. Comments like that have nothing to do with the core values of ST. People can say they like ST but if they cannot describe what happened in a single episode of any of the series and what they describe has nothing to do with any real episodes, they may call themselves ST fans but they are not. Gus has a firm grasp of what he likes in ST that is based in reality. I've read posts on other sites that describe ST in a way that doesn't even come close to reality.
  4. Discovery and Me

    Gus Your one of the people who have a good reason for not being interested in the new Star Trek. ST has changed because it has to to survive but you want the same old ST, which I believe we can all respect. I liked the old ST's optimistic with outbeing Pollyanna optimistic as well. But unlike you I also like the more gritty but still optimistic type of show when it's the darkness before the light type of thing. With ST I always viewed it that Earth had solved most of its major problems. Famine, disease, prejudice, etc. were all gone but the galaxy was still a dangerous place. But all humans aren't the same. There are a few bad apples in every bunch. Especially one's raised in Earth's colonies that aren't as perfect as the Earth is. So I've always felt that ST has a place for some darker episodes as long as the optimism is still there. There's a difference between someone like Gus who say's I know what I want in ST and this isn't it and someone who demands a straight up clone of TOS except that they must change a couple of thing that are core to the series. Of course, each person wants different things to change and believes that he and only he is the arbitrator of what ST really is. Gus is still a true fan even if he has burned out on ST. I'm not so sure about the people who demand that ST totally change its core values to match some vague vision of what they think it should be.
  5. George Takei knows all about camps for undesirables in the U.S. It's happened before. It might happen again. Some people think if you change what you call it makes it better. It's not torture its enhanced interrogation.
  6. Sometimes there really isn't another side of the story. They're basically telling a story set in an American concentration camp. What could the good side of a concentration camp be? Are there people out there that actually believe that conservatives should be for concentration camps just because liberals are against them? I refuse to believe that all conservatives are pro concentration camps.
  7. Discovery and Me

    I don't even think of Michael as a hidden foster sister. Even 5 years difference in age can make a big difference. She human, he's half human. I can easily see a situation where they didn't have all that much contact even if they lived in the same house. If she moved out when she's 18, it's possible Spock had had little contact with her in close to 30 years by the time TOS started. When would a foster sister you weren't close to and had little contact with in thirty years come up in conversation? There's probably little or no legal relationship between them Pride is an emotion. Bragging about T'Pau wouldn't fit with Spock's personality. She was never officially a member of Star Fleet so it wouldn't be something that would be likely to just come up in conversation.
  8. Discovery and Me

    i don't know if this has been discussed much in other Disc threads, I haven't watched much of the show yet. I will but money's tight. According to google, Spock was born in 2230, TOS was set around 2265 and Disc around 2255. If Michael was around 35 at the time of the start of Disc she was born around 2220 so she's around 10 years older than Spock. If she was sent to a boarding school in her early teens, she would have left home when Spock was 3 or 4. She is officially Sarek's ward, so kind of like a foster child. I can see someone not mentioning that their parents had a foster child living in their house that left when he was very young.
  9. CBS All Access

    I understand why people don't want to sign up for a service to see one show. I have the same problem with sports. I watch American Football. My team is usually on CBS on 1pm on Sunday. Except when it's on at 4:30 pm on Sunday on CBS. Unless they're playing a team from the NFC conference when it may or may not be on Fox. Except if its on Sunday night when its on NBC, or Monday Night when its on ESPN, or Thursday night when its on the NFL Network, unless it's also on CBS. Baseball is worse. Almost all of the 162 games are on a local channel until you get to the playoffs when it switches to the baseball channel for the first game, a channel I never heard of until I tried to watch the game today. The same thing with Hockey. The entire season is on a local sports channel or NBC until the playoffs when its on the NBC sports network, which is a premium channel you have to pay extra for. So unless you are willing to pay extra, you can watch Hockey all year and then its the playoffs where it disappears except for about one game a week for a month and then it comes back to NBC for the finals. When my team doesn't make the playoffs and I don't watch hockey for the last couple of weeks of the season, it can be more than two months from when I stop watching until there's a game that is on a channel I can watch. (If I miss the Saturday afternoon game they show once a week or so on NBC.) If they ran Disc that way, the whole season would be on CBS until the last three episodes of the season where it switches to CBS all access.
  10. "Redemption II" question

    But how many members of congresses houses are in Washington DC and how many are in a nearby state. I could see Duras stronghold being outside the city proper. Just because you can't bomb the city doesn't mean you can't bomb a house 1 mile outside the city limits.
  11. CBS All Access

    Keep in mind that some of the people reviewing it have never seen it and aren't star trek fans. They're making a political point. They hate any show that doesn't have a cast of mostly white men. Count me in as well.
  12. CBS All Access

    I see CBS taking the long view. You're not going to get 10's of millions of people to sign up right away. You keep the channel as an alternative distribution channel. It could be kind of a minor league for shows that are not quite popular enough to make it on the parent network. That doesn't mean the shows aren't good. Many very high quality shows don''t have high ratings. Many of the best shows end up on cable where they can make a good profit for their network with lower ratings than the major networks would allow. Its also a good way to catch up with shows you missed. It's also a good place to put edgy shows that wouldn't fit on the network. CBS moved Supergirl from CBS to CW. I can see them using the channel for shows that are very popular but don't have quite enough viewers to keep them on CBS or fit in with CW. Say they have a set a floor rating of 1 to keep a show on the air (making the numbers up). They get a show that is a new cult classic that is very popular with a certain group but only has a rating of .7. The show is also not especially expensive to produce. It doesn't fit with CW's programing. Rather than canceling it, move it to CBS all access. Or have more spinoffs. Rather than have 17 NCIS spinoffs on CBS, keep it to two or three and put the rest on all access. I think it's initial popularity will be with cable cutters. Someone whose cut their cable bill from $150 a month to $50 a month by cutting cable won't be as worried about another $6 or $10.
  13. CBS All Access

    They may be treating this almost as a loss leader. They need to have a few high profile shows to brag about. If they can break even or make a small profit, I think they'll be happy. If they want to sell the channel they need it. Plus, they don't need to pay it off in one or two showings. 10 years from now its going to still be there drawing in new customers. I could see Discovery lasting for 7 seasons and having a spinoff after the first 3 years. In ten years, there could be two or three new Star Trek shows, some finished and some active. Who bought Netflix before they had high profile shows like Orange is the New Black, House of Cards and the Marvel shows? The idea is to get people in with the big shows and keep them with the rest of the content. With Roku, its really easy. I can see where one person gets CBS all access for Star Trek and their grandparents end up getting it so they can watch Perry Mason.
  14. Ok, variation on yours. The Devil in the Dark scenario. The Binars know when a nova will occur and take precautions. It's been going on for many years. They put the main computer on safe mode which allows enough to keep them alive but not much more. They need another much smaller computer to reboot the main computer. They have 5 much smaller reboot computers, 1 and 4 spares. It's a routine. "Next monday, at 6pm, everyone must be at home or at another appropriate location for a flare shutdown." At 6:05, they give a warning and start an organized shut down. All but a few binars go to sleep. Flare hits. No damage. Reboot and by 10:00, every ones awake. But the star flares unexpectedly at the worst possible time. The main computer crashes and all other computers on the planet including the reboot computers are used to keep the people alive but they're failing. There are only a handful of binars still awake. They have the reboot program but they need a powerful computer to run it. The awake Binars are just ordinary technicians. They're not politicians. They haven't dealt with aliens all that much. Since they are the only ones awake, they're authorized by the remaining computer systems to call themselves whatever they want. They call the Enterprise with all the appropriate codes. They get on the ship and determine that its computer may be powerful enough to act as a reboot device. But with the survival of their entire species at stake, they're not going to take a chance.
  15. Bootleged DISCOVERY ???

    LoTR is more high fantasy. To me, based on my reading of the first book, it's more like Conan the Barbarian or King Arthur with politics and dragons. I've been reading Science Fiction and Fantasy since I was a kid. And because I read used books a lot of the books I read were from the 40's and 50's. There has been since the 40's a whole genera of fantasy about worlds set in an era vaguely like the middle ages with horses and castles and dragons and wizards and stuff. King Arthur with more dragons. The original Game of Thrones novel was a throwback to a 50's style book with more sex. I found it to be an average book of its type. But because I've read hundreds of similar type books over the years, I found it quite boring. The only thing that it had was sex and trying to guess who gets killed next but don't get attached to any character.