Worst Season 1 episode....

[Kor]

Does it explain why they still had cars from the 1930s?

Hey, it's the 2010s now, and I still see cars from the 1980s driving around all the time.

Kor

 

[scotpens]

Hey, it's the 2010s now, and I still see cars from the 1980s driving around all the time.

Yeah, but the eras aren't really comparable. When civilian car production resumed following World War II, everyone wanted new cars. I seldom saw a prewar car on the road in the 1960s, unless it was customized or a surfer's woody wagon.

 

[3D ChessMaster]

Perhaps there was a huge leap in technology and engineering usable in cars during the WW2? War is perhaps a stimulus for science and engineering?

 

[Nebusj]

Perhaps there was a huge leap in technology and engineering usable in cars during the WW2? War is perhaps a stimulus for science and engineering?

More, cars from before about 1980 were rubbish by modern standards, in terms of quality control and durability. Getting a prewar car to last would require great luck, ingenuity, and determination.

 

[scotpens]

Perhaps there was a huge leap in technology and engineering usable in cars during the WW2? War is perhaps a stimulus for science and engineering?

It was more a matter of pent-up demand. No civilian cars were produced during the war, so there was a huge demand for new cars when the auto companies started making them again.

In fact, the first postwar cars were warmed-over prewar models, since that was the only tooling available. Studebaker was first with an all-new postwar model in 1947; Ford, GM and Chrysler didn't come out with new models until 1949.

And now we return you to our regularly scheduled topic in progress . . .

 

[Nebusj]

No really, I'm too silly sometimes, but I can sort of see why someone doesn't like COTEF. Maybe they don't like Joan Collins, or that Edith MUST die instead of some alternative, or lovey dovey Captain Kirk, you name it, there are reasons.

I can think of other reasons. For one there's the philosophically objectionable idea of changeable timelines; that's enough to sink an episode if you aren't going to buy the premise. If you don't buy the Kirk/Keeler relationship, too, then the episode's a loss. That much of the episode is Kirk and Spock lost in 20th Century Backlot New York City instead of doing the space-adventure stuff --- punching the leaders of the Planet of the Week until they stop screwing up their world --- also makes it pretty atypical Trek and that's not going to appeal to many. Someone might also hold it against the episode that it's, in some ways, the archetype of the ``time anomaly breaks history and the crew has to fix it so the episode never happened!'' plot that dragged down so many later series and only seems like it was four straight seasons of Voyager.

 

[tim0122]

"Mudd's Women". Though "The Alternative Factor" is a very close second.

Mudd's Women as an episode is nothing to write home about. Carmell is really good in it, though. The episode just doesn't live up to his performance. Thankfully, I, Mudd fixed that.

 

[Kor]

There should have been an episode featuring both Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones working a con together.

Kor

 

[tim0122]

I can see why people wouldn't like Alternate Factor. There were elements of it that felt or off, but that being said, I liked it.

The episode I like the least is This Side of Paradise. I know it's a classic, but it just annoys me. Admittedly, It's not really bad so much as it doesn't appeal to me personally. I just think it's too silly, I don't think the humor works for the most part, the overacting can be too much at times (which is saying something when talking about TOS), and I don't like seeing the whole crew turn against the captain. Again, more personal tastes, I think, then the actual quality of the episode.

 

[kkt]

There should have been an episode featuring both Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones working a con together.

And their con would fall apart in the last scene after Our Heroes fail, because Mudd and Jones are trying to cheat each other.