I hope they use the stun setting a lot more
- Thread starter T'Cal
- Start date
I couldn't disagree more. I always hated that effect in TOS.
It just screamed "We're low on money for SFX this week." The sound effect would be alright though.
Being that it hasn't been said yet, and someone inevitably will say it, might as well be me...
"Don't stun me bro!"
"Don't stun me bro!"
Just a couple weeks ago someone was killed in Charlotte, North Carolina by a police officer with a Tazer... so I would NOT call it harmless.
^
^^Well, that was sort of my point, but I probably didn't make myself clear enough.
I'm not saying that a Taser is as safe as the "stun" seems to be in Star Trek...What I'm saying is that the "stun" in Star Trek possibly shouldn't be as harmless as they make it out to be, and even our 21st century analogous "Taser" isn't fool-proof either. People have been seriously injured by tasers, and as you pointed out some have even died.
That's what I meant by "Stun setting = Taser".
But I suppose this is fiction, and if the weavers of this fiction ever say the stun setting is will never cause permanat damage, then that would make it so.
^^Well, that was sort of my point, but I probably didn't make myself clear enough.
I'm not saying that a Taser is as safe as the "stun" seems to be in Star Trek...What I'm saying is that the "stun" in Star Trek possibly shouldn't be as harmless as they make it out to be, and even our 21st century analogous "Taser" isn't fool-proof either. People have been seriously injured by tasers, and as you pointed out some have even died.
That's what I meant by "Stun setting = Taser".
But I suppose this is fiction, and if the weavers of this fiction ever say the stun setting is will never cause permanat damage, then that would make it so.
I really like it, because it sort of makes sense. The "stun" effect isn't a laser beam... or anything remotely like one. It's a broad-area (sometimes broader, sometimes narrower, but never "pinpoint") pulsed EM weapon whose function is to induce electrical currents in the nervous system of the target.
The "heat" function is essentially a conventional laser with no significant modulation occurring. The "disrupt" function is a phased "laser beam" which basically plays the energy-level harmonics of the targeted material, causing shared electron affinities to break apart.
Yes, yes, it's all my own personal definition... so shoot me! I can't accept this as being a particle-beam weapon, even if it's some mythical, made-up "rapid nadion" that Okuda and Sternbach came up with.
To me, you're talking about such a dramatically different FUNCTION that I really want the visual effect to be consistent with that as well.
I wouldn't object to the stun effect being more "directional" than what we've seen in the past... I'm not saying that the EXACT FX technique should be used. But I like the idea that there was such a clear, and evidently INTENTIONAL, difference between the "offensive" and "defensive" settings.
Your mileage may vary...
^ Well, I certainly hope he doesn't shoot you! Stun you, perhaps....but definitely not shoot you. 
^ Well, I certainly hope he doesn't shoot you! Stun you, perhaps....but definitely not shoot you.
It's a fair point, one I actually thought about after I posted.
The strobe effect kind of makes sense for a wide angle shot involving multiple targets. However, the strobe effect doesn't work for me when stunning only one person among a group. An example is when Spock needs to be stunned on the bridge of the Ent in Is There In Truth No Beauty?.
Similar threads
