I know you don't care for DS9, but she was great on that show, too. Among other things, she delivered one of the funnier and more naturally human bits of dialogue ever on Star Trek:It's true, as has been said, that Jerald is the MVP of this series.
Exactly. The fault of In Theory is how disposable they make the human, & by that, I mean she really has no investment, so much so that she actually kind of undercuts a lot of Data's development in her remarks about what she perceives are his limitations. He actually gets short changed as a character, because she needs to be written off so easily, & the episode falls a little flat because of it. They write her as almost delusional for even considering itThe thing about "In Theory" was that it had to be from Data's point of view, it involved a disposable character we would never see again, and it had to be buttoned up by the end of the episode.
About twenty minutes into this show I realized how much more interesting it was that both of the characters are people we already know and will keep seeing, and that the story of the human being trying to make it work with this machine was far more intriguing than the other way around.
It's true, as has been said, that Jerald is the MVP of this series.
I wouldn't agree nothing significant happened. I guess it depends upon what you're looking for in the show. For me, these interpersonal developments are the bread and butter of any show, and I loved how effectively the dynamic was used here. Were there galaxy altering events? Not really, but I'm an old romantic, and so for me what conspired was nothing short of beautiful. This is my favorite episode of the series.So Bortus is now a moustache man. How manly of him.
I really enjoyed this episode, even if nothing significant happened. Some really good lines in it.
The rain thing was odd at the end. I’m sure things on the bridge are water proof.
I don't watch much network tv. Are these REALLY "limited" commercial breaks like the show claims at the top?
But by having shorter breaks, they then need to have them more often, no? Ultimately it's more disruptive imho. Hell, I'd rather watch a show that does a 15 minute mid-show intermission, but that's never going to happen, because we'd stop watching until they came back. Shorter breaks, that happen more often is a tactic to keep you stuck watching them, am I right? How is disclaiming that they do that, at the top of the show, qualify as a bragging right?They're much shorter than the normal network commercial breaks.
Most of them are under 2 minutes.
In the UK it’s like that. A hour long show is split into three commercial breaks every 15 minutes. A half hour show only has one.But by having shorter breaks, they then need to have them more often, no? Ultimately it's more disruptive imho. Hell, I'd rather watch a show that does a 15 minute mid-show intermission, but that's never going to happen, because we'd stop watching until they came back. Shorter breaks, that happen more often is a tactic to keep you stuck watching them, am I right? How is disclaiming that they do that, at the top of the show, qualify as a bragging right?![]()
But by having shorter breaks, they then need to have them more often, no? Ultimately it's more disruptive imho. Hell, I'd rather watch a show that does a 15 minute mid-show intermission, but that's never going to happen, because we'd stop watching until they came back. Shorter breaks, that happen more often is a tactic to keep you stuck watching them, am I right? How is disclaiming that they do that, at the top of the show, qualify as a bragging right?![]()
Wasn't that wonderful?I agree with all....
and dang, imagine TNG doing an orchestra in the main shuttlebay instead of twelve people including the main characters watching Data tell a poem about Spot in Ten Forward. Talk about an missed opportunity.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.