Wesley Crusher became a better character after he was no longer in every episode, and they only brought him in when he had something important to do.Here is a controversial opinion. Wesley Crusher was not that bad of a character. His most annoying moments come in season 1 before the show really found itself. He has been the lead in several episodes I like, though two of them I do have to admit happened after he was no longer a series regular.
But a lot of TV is soap operas or police or hospital procedurals. More or less familiar situations, minimal new sets, minimal special effects....By television standards, twelve to fourteen days to do one episode is downright luxurious.
Oh, RUB IT IN.The Bills have lots of Canadians on the team? Poor Josh Allen. Will the Deep State never end it's efforts from keeping them from a Super Bowl victory? This new vertical format offense just isn't going to be enough to get past the Chiefs.![]()
Nomad got its brains all scrambled with the Others... mixed up the two missions.Did someone mention the M-5?
Let's look at the Antares, versus the Enterprise.
The Antares had a crew of twenty.
Attached various points along TOS, various crew sizes were mentioned - 203, 428, 430...why?
The Antares is described as a transport, a survey ship, and a science probe...
The Constitution is described as a space cruiser, a heavy cruiser, and an exploration and research vessel.
Why?
Simple automation should be able to do most jobs. Smart automation, would be able to handle far more. Defining 'smart' as able to make use of sensor data to modify programmed behavior.
Larry Niven, anticipated a set circumstances where smart systems would fail in some unanticipated ways (A Gift From Earth)
So, a level of true Artificial Intelligence is required.
Problem: not the M-5, but Nomad. As is: where did a Nomad type Artificial Intelligence fail?
Answer: it didn't. It just wasn't fast enough to run at the speed required.
Why?
In a moment of time, far, far briefer, than a straight up Nomad could handle, and therefore far simpler in its independent logic, was now permitted. Speed equals simplicity. Smaller required database.
Controversial Trek opinion (since I helped derail the thread): I prefer the SNW theme to the original TOS one.![]()
Oh, RUB IT IN.
I've always thought they would be better as dress uniforms, not working uniforms.A controversial opinion would be the monster maroons look dumb. ( they do)![]()
I agree. In fact, I never knew he was so loathed until the past few years.Here is a controversial opinion. Wesley Crusher was not that bad of a character. His most annoying moments come in season 1 before the show really found itself. He has been the lead in several episodes I like, though two of them I do have to admit happened after he was no longer a series regular.
Finally, this thread lives up to its name.Controversial Trek opinion (since I helped derail the thread): I prefer the SNW theme to the original TOS one.![]()
Precisely why I find the shorter seasons ridiculous. Taking nearly twice as much time to film an episode as the Berman era and making less than half the episodes a season? Even taking time for post production effects, it's still insane it takes so damn long between seasons.By television standards, twelve to fourteen days to do one episode is downright luxurious.
I suspect two factors are largely at play—cost and the desire of the cast/crew to do other things in the year. The latter represents a degree of freedom far less available (or even imagined) in earlier times but something the current and future generations are unlikely to want to abandon. As a viewer I would like more episodes of things I like but I can also understand the desire for variety among performing artists.Precisely why I find the shorter seasons ridiculous. Taking nearly twice as much time to film an episode as the Berman era and making less than half the episodes a season? Even taking time for post production effects, it's still insane it takes so damn long between seasons.
Except they are still working about the same amount of days.I suspect two factors are largely at play—cost and the desire of the cast/crew to do other things in the year. The latter represents a degree of freedom far less available (or even imagined) in earlier times but something the current and future generations are unlikely to want to abandon. As a viewer I would like more episodes of things I like but I can’t also understand the desire for variety among performing artists.
They are working shorter days then the Berman era, getting less over time. Main filming is not the full week. They make fewer episodes. And they don't reliably film annually.Except they are still working about the same amount of days.
Berman era: 26 episodes x 6 day shoots = 156 shooting days
Now: 10 episodes x 14 day shoots = 140 shooting days
I get the flexibility for actors argument, but there is not a huge difference in amount of shooting days between them.
(Cost argument, I can see that.)
That happens when you used to make 26 eps per year and was a annual production for 7 years with a annual cadence.Michelle Hurd basically said that actors are now making a lot less money.
Yeah, I've heard multiple actors say the same thing.My
They are working shorter days then the Berman era, getting less over time. Main filming is not the full week. They make fewer episodes. And they don't reliably film annually.
Michelle Hurd basically said that actors are now making a lot less money.
I agree. In fact, I never knew he was so loathed until the past few years.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.