• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 1x03 - "Ghosts of Illyria"

Hit it!


  • Total voters
    223
Why did you cut out the rest of the sentence? I said "flawless, or essentially flawless", so as to cover all the bases. I added the second just to avoid any wiggle-room. Some may see it as flawless, other as having flaws not worth mentioning.
Because "flawless[,] or essentially flawless" was exactly what I said, just in different words. The word "or" makes it so. Your allowance of "wiggle-room" reduced what you said to exactly what I said, because it allows the point you were apparently trying to make to be denied; I used an ellipsis to "cut out" that part to demonstrate that. Ironic, isn't it?
 
I don't know if @Lonemagpie has linked his review here, but it's a good 9ne and includes a reference to pantropy that I appreciated having brought to my attention.
Pretty good review, and the "pantropy" concept is one I hadn't heard before. I liked his description of the auxiliary sickbay having a mezzanine level. I guess when there's no medical emergency it could revert to its original role as the ship's mall. or maybe the bowling alley.
 
It means I enjoyed the hell out of it and thought it was a real good show.

All this parsing of .5s and points off or on because some visual image irritated my obsessive-compulsive issues is ridiculously self-serious and beyond tedious to me, and I don't participate. If I don't love or hate it, I can't be bothered to vote.

Honestlt, I could have given all of the episodes a "10" as they're all the best of NuTrek I've seen. This is really what I've wanted to see and elements of the show look/feel like what my imaginary crew/"fan fiction" looks like. I mean, there's problems with it, but overall I'm really, really liking it. I'm just saving that "10" for the ground-breaking, great, episode on the levels of Yesterday's Enterprise, BOBW, The Visitor, Tapestry, etc. Other level type stuff.

But other than some minor things I've not problems with this series yet.
 
Because "flawless[,] or essentially flawless" was exactly what I said, just in different words. The word "or" makes it so. Your allowance of "wiggle-room" reduced what you said to exactly what I said, because it allows the point you were apparently trying to make to be denied; I used an ellipsis to "cut out" that part to demonstrate that. Ironic, isn't it?
What I'm saying is that some people may actually see a piece of fiction as actually flawless, despite you saying that it's not possible. So no, we are not saying the same thing. But it's not important, because in the end the larger point is the same: now I know what Serveaux meant by "10".
 
Humans are incapable of absolute artistic perfection. We can only come subjectively close because as flawed, mortal beings with our own shortcomings our creations will reflect that.

With the exception of a couple of photographs of Emily Ratajkowski's face (;)), I completely agree. I think it was Neil Gaiman who once said that a novel is a long work of prose with something wrong with it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top