I never claimed that you did. I am pointing out that if the sandwich has something that is bad for you, it is a bad sandwich regardless of how many other things it has, good or bad. Is that something you disagree with? And if so, why?
I disagree with it being reduced to good vs. bad with no hope of being redeemed by an overall quality episode, and I say Balance of Terror supports my claim.
Well, we have been. But it is the context in which you are commenting about the subject and we are reacting to your comment. So hopefully that makes more sense as to how we have been responding to your comment.
Jesus fucking Christ, even with Raoul guiding you in with light-up buoys, you veer away and jump off paranoia falls.
Fair enough. Generally, I appreciate that there is nuance and shades of grey in life. But when you are talking about some things, it does not matter if it's a little or a lot. Just the tiniest presence of an unacceptable thing will define the existence of the overall thing and will make the whole thing unacceptable. I wouldn't say (and I suspect most people wouldn't say), "well there's only a little shit/mold/hair in this otherwise good sandwich, I'll just eat around it." I find it hard to believe that you are open to eating a little shit if the rest of the product is high enough quality or that you wouldn't consider the product a shit sandwich if it has any shit in it. That the overall sandwich is redeemable. But good for you if you are. As you might say, you don't need my approval to eat shit.
Well, what I would infer from that is you do not consider the preachiness to be akin to shit/glass/mold etc. such that its very presence makes the whole thing unacceptable. Which would seemingly be different from the position FF has (as I understand it) taken of the very presence of unsubtle, one-sided preachiness in new-Trek makes the whole thing unacceptable. But if I'm wrong there, feel free to clarify.
You're free to think modern Trek is a crapfest. It's why you think it's a crapfest that I find so amusing.
I just wish I could get a straight answer from anyone who finds something a crapfest why they would bother watching it, given there are a gazillion other options out there, and why they would bother posting about it. I'm not particularly interested in the Chicago PD/Chicago Fire/Chicago Med franchise. Haven't watched a single episode. But you're also not going to find me starting and then going to a message board to post "Man, I just watched the latest episode of Chicago PD and it suuuuuuuucks" and then the next week "I watched another episode and it sucked too!" and then the week after that "Chicago PD stilll sucks...they don't know what they're doing." At some point, I'd just go ahead, call it quits and find one of the infinite other shows that I love, like or at least tolerate. The Internet tells me there are 817,000 TV shows in the world at least. Life is too short to spend time hate-watching one that there's no real hope of it getting better.
100% agreed. UA and FF are clearly watching it still. But why? I still haven't seen Rise of Skywalker. I doubt I ever will. Why would i waste my time on it? I hate wasting my time on something I didn't enjoy. It's why I was so annoyed about The Substance. I can't imagine sitting down week after week to watch something that I think is a crapfest with no redeeming qualities
So did the internet ever figure out why they butchered Picard's famous quote? Was it really because they were too woke to say "chains?"
Technically Picard referenced Aaron Satie, so the quote belongs to Aaron Satie and Picard quoted him.
Some possibilities: 1. Picard botched it and the Doc quoted it correctly. 2. The Doc botched it and Picard quoted it correctly. 3. Satie said it both ways and so they both got it right. 4. Originally Satie said it Picard's way, but then timey-wimey shenanigans happened and that made it so he said it the Doc's way. OR This was a real world goof by the writers/producers that doesn't matter at all, like James R. Kirk where the R apparently stands for "Riberius" with a capital T.
Notice the OR. In this case, I'm going with what happened after the OR: that there likely was a goof, which doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things because for better or worse, that happens from time to time. Seizing on it to be like "this show sucks" strikes me as desperate.
The show doesn't suck because somebody fucked up the line, but doesn't help. The show sucks because of the terrible writing.
Florida Evans's husband is named Henry in "Maude", and James in "Good Times". "Good Times" is a lie, and destroyed television forever. This is not hyperbole, and I'm not ridiculous.
You always go to the most extreme examples ever. Nobody said Star Trek has destroyed television forever. You just can't stand it that someone doesn't like something you like. You act as if it's a personal attack on you.
What the mother trucking hell. Are you seriously going to try to in-universe explain this? This isn't like the time in TNG when the phaser effects came out of the torpedo launcher. The whole damn line makes no sense. I've seen a theory that ChatGPT wrote that part of the script and the AI left out some words to avoid copyright issues (which someone claimed the AI has done with other quotes.) I don't know. That excuse seems far fetched to me. But there's really only two options... Either the writers/directors/actors are all incredibly lazy and so disinterested in Trek that not a single person caught the mistake, or... They decided the phrase "chains us all irrevocably" was just too problematic for such a woke show. I mean, maybe it's going to come out later that Picardo is suffering from dementia and just couldn't remember lines. But at this point, I feel like the director was probably like "whoa, you can't talk about chaining people! We gotta cut that!" There was probably a big fight about how they couldn't drop the whole speech and the compromise was, "well, just don't say chains."
Caught up with the two part season finale, but before I go into that, can I ask that if Hollywood is going to digitally resurrect the dead, they next bring back Jerry Orbach? Just so we can get Star Trek x Law and Order: Briscoe and Reno, Time Agents. I'd watch the shit out of those snark for 40 minutes, plot actually being a bonus rather than a foundation. Berlinghof Rasmuusen, under arrest for trying to steal the phase cloak from the Pegasus to sell to the Venari Rai in the future, and being interrogated in a 1998 NYPD interview room, because why the hell not? *bom-bom* Rasmussen: Oh, two sarcastic cops, I thought the rule was one of you had to play the straight guy? Reno, looking at Briscoe: Well, my shoes certainly don't fit that
