--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00003 Date: 09/06/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 08:30am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Best Trek Series Poll The final standings in the Best Trek Series Poll: 1st TOS 62 votes 2nd TNG 58 votes 3rd DSN 52 votes 4th VOY 38 votes - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00004 Date: 09/06/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 08:33am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Best Trek Movie Poll The final standings in the Best Trek Movie Poll: ST:TMP 0 ST2:TWOK 7 ST3:TSFS 1 ST4:TVH 2 ST5:TFF 0 ST6:TUC 4 STG 1 STFC 10 - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00005 Date: 09/07/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 04:37pm \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Trek This is just a rumor: I've heard that the next Trek movie will be the last one featuring TNG crew. Riker realizes that Picard will die in the command chair and that he will never command the Enterprise. He then gets the command of another Sovereign Class vessel called the Nova. Then they're going to start a new Trek series called Star Trek: Nova, which features Captain Riker. Remember, this is just a rumor. - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00006 Date: 09/07/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 06:14pm \/To: RUGGS (Read 0 times) Subj: More trivia: On <28 Aug, 05:08>, Ruggs wrote to All : R> What is the name of the space station in "The trouble with tribbles"? R> Deep space station nine R> Deep space station X-69 R> Deep space station R-12 R> Deep space station K-7 R> If anyone like this, let me know and will continue post this Trivia... R> Answers on every fridays mail.... R> Ruggs K-7. Keep up the trivia, especially TOS. - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00007 Date: 09/07/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 06:17pm \/To: TOMMY (Read 0 times) Subj: the truth TOS last?...I think it is first. I just did a poll on the best Trek series and TOS won (I was surprised). You're right the Treks now are a little to soapy. - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00008 Date: 09/07/97 From: ALAN PRESLEY Time: 06:18pm \/To: TOMMY (Read 0 times) Subj: the truth ST5:TFF below ST:TMP? I've never heard anyone say that. But you are able to form your own opinion. - Pedit Ver 2.5 --- ProBoard v2.16 [Reg] * Origin: Ye Olde Coffee House, Athens, GA, USA (1:370/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00009 Date: 09/10/97 From: BOB KOHL Time: 03:31pm \/To: JAY P. HAILEY (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Trek Writers > BK>Read Bob Justman and Herb Solow's book, they spent a fair amount of > time > BK>discussing the making of that episode. I think you'll find > BK>it's more a case of the realities of production then > BK>anything to do with "the darker side of GR" However if you > BK>want "the darker side", etc.. there is a healthy dose of > BK>reality about the goings on during the TOS era. > I read it right afterwards. I also read the unauthorized > Roddenberry bio. There is some nasty, nasty stuff in there. But I > have this seperation between Trek as a concept and a story telling > arena and Gene Roddenberry whatever his personal faults. A lot of > people don't. That's sad. I agree.. the concept is great to a point although I don't always agree with it.. especially when it went into the TNG phase.. and after 10 years in TV.. I'm well aware of keeping the "personalities" as a seperate issue. ;) > BK>I'd have to qualify this by saying I haven't watched > BK>Voyager that much. It lost me early on.. and when I can > BK>back to watch "Flashback" I quit watching it after. I > BK>really don't consider what I was watching > BK>"Action/adventure". > In each episode, the ship must be in danger. Recently (last > season) they did an episode where people with long range transporters > were taking over the ship. It ended in an "exciting" run and gun > sequence. We never even found out who the hostage takers were or why > they thought beaming people off of starship was a good idea. Captain > janeway got the drop on the leaders with a phaser and earned freedom > for all of their hostages at gun point and then the story was over, > roll credits. Inane. But there was some shooting and some running > involved. That sounds like action adventure to me. Well I didn't see it, but even Action/adventure must be writen well to go over well. This doesn't sound like a good example. :/ > BK>There was a great potential for Voyager.. but it's just plain > flat/mediocre > BK>writing. Do you know that on their scripts.. it's just > BK>dialog.. nothing else. > BK>Do you realise that the writers don't have the capacity to > BK>try and pass along the "concept" of their writings? > I'm not certain what you mean in that paragraph. I have found > few Voyager episodes to be *about* anything, despite some flashing > lights and some exciting motion on the screen. Part of the problem.. you see when a writer puts together a script with a good idea.. they need to use various scripting devices to put forth that idea and NOT leave it to the director to "interprete" the concept. In other words.. *IF* I had an action/adventure script.. part of which included notes for the director or the CGI folks.... it wouldn't work the way they're doing things. > BK>Well, if I had the time.. I could get into a really good > BK>discussion of the writing with you.. Personally I think > BK>there's far more involved with the problems there. I just > BK>don't have the free time for that involved of a > BK>discussion.. :/ > I'm sorry that you don't. I understand if work takes you away. > We must have our priorities. That and FIdonet.. sigh.. > This sort of discussion is what I view > this sub for. But maybe our little discussion here can be the spark > for a thread. Well I always read this area.. I have to.. it's a question of the time I have at hand when I read it. > BK>It's been my opinion since "T&T" (DS-9) that they still > BK>have the potential.. they could easily do a good TOS era > BK>show and have a ball doing it *IF* they can do it without > BK>the consistent writing problems that they've shown for some > BK>time now.. and *IF* they remember that a big part of TOS > BK>was crew chemistry.. and not Treknobabble. > BK>Get rid of the politics, open up the writing resources.. > BK>and GO for it. Heck they have a good part of a classic > BK>Constitution Class already built and in storage. > I disagree with an assumption you make here. TOS wasn't the > great God of Trek. It wasn't a perfect show and had some flaws and > some dropped balls of it's own. Setting a new series on an old ship > wouldn't solve anything if they were going to a stupid pattern of story > telling to begin with. You misunderstand.. TOS WAS the great spark of TREK for many of us.. it created that hard core fan group that allowed TMP and later movies, it allowed for TNG.. it allowed for the franchise. More then that.. it allowed for all the Sci-fi that came after.. Trek was in a sense.. the grandfather of much of what followed over the years including Star Wars, Alien(s), etc etc. More then that.. it's an example of a show that worked.. if only in the sense of the hard core viewer segment that loved it so. It had writing (as much as practical for those days and production values), it had chemistry, etc etc. Sure it had flaws.. it was years before it's time if only in production values for what they were trying. But could you imagine something like a "TOS" type show with that kind of writing and the current production values? They solved things on a realistic basis without reverting to Treknobable! :) Man what a concept! :) > There would be very few stories that you might tell on the older > ship that you couldn't tell on Voyager, assuming no format > restrictions. To do so would mean revising Voyager. Crew chemistry would have to change, writing has ALWAYS needed to change, etc etc. Besides.. I have a single love for the older class ships.. they were cruder, and the crew had to be more "ceative" in the solutions to the weekly provlems.. :) > BK>Nope, not with the Paramount resorces. Voyager will go on.. > BK>bad ratings and all. > BK> BK > Maybe if they beat the dead horse enough they'll get bored and > lift the writing restrictions. You don't completely understand the structure as it exists and I'm not at liberty to discuss everything I'm aware of. > BTW the big time travel episode of Voyager, I thought was neat > up unit the very end of the show. The ending was useless! Dumb! > Idiotic! They had a nice idea and wrote on it until they reached the > end of their two hours and then had some deux ex machina turn up to > smooth things out in the last five minutes of the episode. Duh! SOP writing these days.. they do NOT understand how to conclude an episode.. and to qualify that.. no, I didn't see it. But this isn't a problem endemic to only Voyager.. BK --- DB A3000sl/001347 * Origin: currentkeeperofthecosmickeystrokeandechokoshspotter (1:102/861) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00010 Date: 09/10/97 From: BOB KOHL Time: 03:33pm \/To: MICHAEL MAREK (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: DS9 Harbinger > BK> There's a good group of people working there to give the viewers the > best > BK> they can within the limits of their working world (with a few > exceptions). > "...the limits of their working world." That is probably the biggest > issue about Star Trek that fans don't understand. > For most of us, Star Trek is, in effect, a hobby interest (bordering on > religion for some.) We each know what we like. > For some people, like Mike Okuda, it is both a fan interest and a source > of a regular paycheck. They generally have a pretty good feel for what > fans like, balanced against the realities of television production and > life at Paramount. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not just Paramount.. it's also life in the franchise which is another issue completely. BK --- DB A3000sl/001347 * Origin: currentkeeperofthecosmickeystrokeandechokoshspotter (1:102/861) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00011 Date: 09/09/97 From: JAY P. HAILEY Time: 07:44am \/To: BOB KOHL (Read 0 times) Subj: Trek Writers BK>Read Bob Justman and Herb Solow's book, they spent a fair amount of time BK>discussing the making of that episode. I think you'll find BK>it's more a case of the realities of production then BK>anything to do with "the darker side of GR" However if you BK>want "the darker side", etc.. there is a healthy dose of BK>reality about the goings on during the TOS era. I read it right afterwards. I also read the unauthorized Roddenberry bio. There is some nasty, nasty stuff in there. But I have this seperation between Trek as a concept and a story telling arena and Gene Roddenberry whatever his personal faults. A lot of people don't. That's sad. BK>I'd have to qualify this by saying I haven't watched BK>Voyager that much. It lost me early on.. and when I can BK>back to watch "Flashback" I quit watching it after. I BK>really don't consider what I was watching BK>"Action/adventure". In each episode, the ship must be in danger. Recently (last season) they did an episode where people with long range transporters were taking over the ship. It ended in an "exciting" run and gun sequence. We never even found out who the hostage takers were or why they thought beaming people off of starship was a good idea. Captain janeway got the drop on the leaders with a phaser and earned freedom for all of their hostages at gun point and then the story was over, roll credits. Inane. But there was some shooting and some running involved. That sounds like action adventure to me. BK>There was a great potential for Voyager.. but it's just plain lat/mediocre BK>writing. Do you know that on their scripts.. it's just BK>dialog.. nothing else. BK>Do you realise that the writers don't have the capacity to BK>try and pass along the "concept" of their writings? I'm not certain what you mean in that paragraph. I have found few Voyager episodes to be *about* anything, despite some flashing lights and some exciting motion on the screen. There was one episode (In the First Season) where the Voyager ran across a technologically advanced world where the Prime directive had to applied to the *Voyager*. What a lovely idea! They ended the episode by shaking the camera, putting red filters on the lights and having people fall out of their chairs. BK>I've got a good Voyager script sitting here and it has been BK>for about 2 years now. I wouldn't bother with it since I BK>feel there are parts of the "Concept" that need to be put BK>forth for the production crew (specifically CGI).. why BK>bother if I can't? I would be interested in reading that BK>Well, if I had the time.. I could get into a really good BK>discussion of the writing with you.. Personally I think BK>there's far more involved with the problems there. I just BK>don't have the free time for that involved of a BK>discussion.. :/ I'm sorry that you don't. I understand if work takes you away. We must have our priorities. This sort of discussion is what I view this sub for. But maybe our little discussion here can be the spark for a thread. BK>It's been my opinion since "T&T" (DS-9) that they still BK>have the potential.. they could easily do a good TOS era BK>show and have a ball doing it *IF* they can do it without BK>the consistent writing problems that they've shown for some BK>time now.. and *IF* they remember that a big part of TOS BK>was crew chemistry.. and not Treknobabble. BK>Get rid of the politics, open up the writing resources.. BK>and GO for it. Heck they have a good part of a classic BK>Constitution Class already built and in storage. I disagree with an assumption you make here. TOS wasn't the great God of Trek. It wasn't a perfect show and had some flaws and some dropped balls of it's own. Setting a new series on an old ship wouldn't solve anything if they were going to a stupid pattern of story telling to begin with. There would be very few stories that you might tell on the older ship that you couldn't tell on Voyager, assuming no format restrictions. BK>Nope, not with the Paramount resorces. Voyager will go on.. BK>bad ratings and all. BK> BK Maybe if they beat the dead horse enough they'll get bored and lift the writing restrictions. BTW the big time travel episode of Voyager, I thought was neat up unit the very end of the show. The ending was useless! Dumb! Idiotic! They had a nice idea and wrote on it until they reached the end of their two hours and then had some deux ex machina turn up to smooth things out in the last five minutes of the episode. Duh! Jay P. Hailey * OLX 2.1 TD * "It's the most advanced Slurpee machine ever built." Tom --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Tesla's Tower 5 BBS (1:346/49) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 108 STAR TREK Ref: EDF00012 Date: 09/09/97 From: MICHAEL MAREK Time: 07:29am \/To: ROBERT MCKAY (Read 0 times) Subj: Transwarp?? MM> LF>> Nope, never saw it, but I read about it, that was in a shuttle, I MM> LF>> thought we were refering to a ship, larger than a shuttle.... MM>> What does the size of a ship have to with the question of whether a MM>> certain speed is impossible to reach? RM> Good question. The USS *Constitution* could sail faster than the larger RM> ships she fought. The fastest surface craft, other than hovercraft, are RM> small power craft which can do 40 or 50 knots compared with the 30+ RM> knots of an aircraft carrier. However, this is not a true analogy. 50 knots cannot be considered to be an "impossible" speed. It *is* possible. It is a "speed limit" that is beaten all the time. I did it just the other day. :-) The Techie Trekie crowd claims that Warp 10 is infinate speed, and thus impossible to reach, regardless of ship size, engine system, etc. Not the kind of thing you are talking about at all. Voyager on-screen continuity, of course, contradicts this theory. Warp ten *can* be reached with warp drive, but it has been found to have undesirable side effects. :-) --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: <<<<<<>>>>>> (1:205/1701.6)