What is THE Worst continuity error in Trek history..?!
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
- Status
This is my attitude. I like Voyager. I won't say I always defend it because at points the writer's fell down on the job (as they did with every other series in the franchise) but overall I like it. I don't care what other's think. More often than not I question their tastes about certain episodes and characters so in the end it evens out.
If anyone is looking for a reviewer who gives Voyager a fair shake there is this guy....
His approach is different from the guy at Sci-Fi Debris. He doesn't do traditional 'recaps' but I find his 'ruminations' very interesting. He is quick to point out things that could have been done better but overall I think he's fair in his reactions.
^^
Thank you. Will have to check that out
Thank you. Will have to check that out
Doesn't she mention something about 3 failed attempts before Lore during their conversation in ten forward? it's been a while since I saw the episode.
Doesn't change that the fandom takes his rants as Gospel.
Even most of the one-offs are remembered more fondly than the 8472 aliens.
His egotism is well-recognized, Trineer had nothing to do with Trip's resurrection.
The Venom towards Voyager is much more palpable. And obvious.
Sure, when SFDebris was brought up. You see anyone defending Voyager for the heck of it the way he demolishes Voyager for the heck of it?
It's no different from how the Doctor in Doctor Who is never unwilling to show his disgust at humans he meets up with. I'm sure that if a Black Liberal met up with a xenophobic hardcore Puritan from the Colonial Era they'd wonder how the heck people developed from that.
Didn't the same episode which introduced Juliana, also mention that there were three androids Soong created which predated both Data and Lore? So B-4 would be one of those, then.
Edit: Ninja'd by @UssGlenn.
Damn, that cross your bearing over Voyager must be heavy.
http://sfdebris.com/
His videos are very entertaining. Even when he rips on an episode I like I still think it's funny. On every review he does of Voyager he has a 'stupid Neelix moment' or a 'burn baby burn award' for the shuttle crashes. I don't take him seriously (I actually don't mind Neelix) because it is after all just his opinion.
His videos are very entertaining. Even when he rips on an episode I like I still think it's funny. On every review he does of Voyager he has a 'stupid Neelix moment' or a 'burn baby burn award' for the shuttle crashes. I don't take him seriously (I actually don't mind Neelix) because it is after all just his opinion.
Yeah. I like him too, him and Confused Matthew although it's been awhile since I looked at either of their videos. They're both funny as hell.
Which would have completely undermined the purpose of that story.
And that's where your analogy breaks down--That's not how show business works. It's not up to viewers to unconditionally love a show in the hope that it will somehow magically cause the show to get better. It's up to the showmakers to produce a quality product that viewers will like. If anything, a lot of fans probably did what I did, and gave the show too much of a chance while it was on the air simply because it was "Star Trek," and wouldn't have stuck with it based on its own merits if it had been a standalone series.
Exactly. That was when I stopped watching VOY. I hated the Sulu episode so much that I realized that I'd been watching a show I didn't enjoy just because it had words "Star Trek" in its title. Since two words in a title are a pretty dumb reason to watch a show you dislike, I stopped cold turkey.
Today, I cut shows a LOT less slack. I gave up on Gotham after five episodes.
Well, it's been a while since I saw that episode, too, so good point and B4 could qualify. But then again, does he qualify as a failure? For example, Lal would be a failure, since her positronic brain suffered cascade failure. I'd assume failure would mean the other three had a similar malfunction.
Tainar said: "Your father lost several prototypes before Lore. ... There were three of them."
Although their positronic matrixes were unstable, we could theorise it was possible to reboot them after each failure.
Nope. The El-Aurians were refugees from a Borg attack being transported to Earth. They weren't trying to get into the Nexus. It's there in the script:
"The Lakul is one of two ships transporting El-Aurian refugees to Earth."
"He's [Soran] an El-Aurian, ...over three hundred years old. He lost his entire family when the Borg destroyed his world. Soran escaped with a handful of other refugees aboard a ship called the Lakul. That ship was later destroyed by some kind of energy ribbon, but Soran and forty-six others were rescued by the Enterprise-B."
"He's [Soran] an El-Aurian, ...over three hundred years old. He lost his entire family when the Borg destroyed his world. Soran escaped with a handful of other refugees aboard a ship called the Lakul. That ship was later destroyed by some kind of energy ribbon, but Soran and forty-six others were rescued by the Enterprise-B."
Also, the disruptor that Soran is seen using when he's shooting at Picard, is apparently of Borg origin (it's the same kind from TNG's "Descent").
Another point about B4 which just occurred to me as I was reading the new posts in this thread.
Assuming the planet he was found on was visited by Shinzon where and how did he find the android to scatter those parts and lure our gallant crew to this world? I wonder how he found out about Data and managed to find B4 to set that trap?
Assuming the planet he was found on was visited by Shinzon where and how did he find the android to scatter those parts and lure our gallant crew to this world? I wonder how he found out about Data and managed to find B4 to set that trap?
And nothing can change that. Sorry that you feel like he isn't allowed to have his opinion or that others agree with him, or just find him entertaining.
Nope. I can find more praise for 8472 than most species. I wish I still had my Star Trek: Magazine discussing what 8472 brought to the table.
So?
So is the venom towards Abrams, TNG, TWOK, ENT, among others. So, no, since we keep discussing this back or forth, it isn't obvious.
VOY isn't a victim. It is an entertainment vehicle that many have found non-entertaining.
Um, no. I mean, I have emailed him my disagreements over his opinion. I don't run around countering his opinion about every show he doesn't like. He's entitled to his opinion.
And, my opinion still stands-if you disagree so much with him (and the other supposed VOY hate) then please feel free to produce your own content (blog, audio, video, etc.) to counter it. That is, after the all, the idea of the internet, is the exchange of ideas, not everyone moving in lockstep.
Strawman argument. This isn't a discussion about Doctor Who and the Doctor has always been an odd ball when it comes to his commentary on human behavior, even in the same episode. I'm not going to react to him the same way I am to Star Trek.
Also, early TNG could come across as rather hypocritical.
@Coco Pops 1967, that's a good question. We never found out exactly how Shinzon discovered B-4, or whether (as I strongly suspect) he was working with those aliens on Kolarus III where B-4 was found.
Well, it was specifically mentioned in dialogue that Soong liked "whimsical" names for his androids. So I guess this qualifies. 
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
