Loose association. Was it not Tilly who said the F-word in a season one DSC/DIS/STD/etc episode? Aren't Tarantino's movies somewhat famous for using lots of F-words and other words? Or am I from a parallel universe where those things didn't happen?
Season 2 Teaser
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Loose association. Was it not Tilly who said the F-word in a season one DSC/DIS/STD/etc episode? Aren't Tarantino's movies somewhat famous for using lots of F-words and other words? Or am I from a parallel universe where those things didn't happen?
Generally, yes I would agree. But it is in us to spread our nastiness from time to time.
Gotta eliminate the weak, after all.
Hmmm....guess we need to make a slight spelling adjustment:
"Saturday night is the loneliest night of the weak...."
Then you've never worked with sick people before.I don't know where you live, but humans in my neck of the woods generally don't sneeze on each other.
In over 40 years of Hospital work, I've been sneezed on, coughed on, puked on, chit on, spit on...
Many Human beings most certainly DO NOT cover/divert their bodily function projections!
Or kids. Work with kids and they'll sneeze and cough in your face or pee or puke on your floor. They're like tiny drunk adults.
It's a pretty huge leap from a single excited f bomb to a Tarantino swearing and violence festLoose association. Was it not Tilly who said the F-word in a season one DSC/DIS/STD/etc episode? Aren't Tarantino's movies somewhat famous for using lots of F-words and other words? Or am I from a parallel universe where those things didn't happen?
It's a pretty huge leap from a single excited f bomb to a Tarantino swearing and violence fest
Not for DSC it ain’t. That fidget spinner was an utter bastard.
Conversational Fuckity. Colourful Metaphors.
Humans of this era can’t pay attention to a character on television unless they use an obscenity at least once a season. Or more. It’s in all the classical works of the era. Kevin Smith. Tarantino. Hugh Grant.
Oh...and show tits. Same three people are tits.
Then you've never worked with sick people before.
In over 40 years of Hospital work, I've been sneezed on, coughed on, puked on, chit on, spit on...
Many Human beings most certainly DO NOT cover/divert their bodily function projections!
Move to Québec, then. We're more polite, here.
It's a pretty huge leap from a single excited f bomb to a Tarantino swearing and violence fest
It's obvious that they'll bring Culbert back as Robocop and there'll be blood and guts in season 2 everywhere... that's why the anomalies are red, they're bleeding.
It almost sounds like Sisko is human.
I rank DS9 as my least favorite Berman-era series, but I found Sisko to be a strong character and probably the most relatable captain of the four.
Well, as human as a half prophet who exists outside of the normal flow of linear time can be...It almost sounds like Sisko is human.
I rank DS9 as my least favorite Berman-era series, but I found Sisko to be a strong character and probably the most relatable captain of the four.
Totally agree that he was relatable. I felt that way about a lot of the DS9 characters actually - they seemed more “real” than the TNG crew. Well, except Barclay. Barclay was awesome - he should have gone to DS9 instead of Voyager.
In our universe Tarantino is known for his quiet, introspective period dramas.Loose association. Was it not Tilly who said the F-word in a season one DSC/DIS/STD/etc episode? Aren't Tarantino's movies somewhat famous for using lots of F-words and other words? Or am I from a parallel universe where those things didn't happen?
I'm often amused by the fact that heroes in TV shows are considered right, no matter what, even if the hero themselves is doubtful of their being right. It's almost like they are supposed to be real people rather than just heroes. I know, I found it strange too.
I really didn't think I needed to say this, but I guess someone has to:
Heroes are shitty characters. Hell, they're not even characters. They're just archetypes. Plot devices. Good characterization and constructing a "hero" directly cut against one another.
I mean, look at the examples of actual good writing through history. Homer's epic poems are arguably tales of "heroism" but involve very flawed characters (Achilles is not presented in a good light, and even Odysseus often makes mistakes due to his hubris). Shakespeare's greatest works are typically considered to be his tragedies like Macbeth and Hamlet. The idea of a "flawed protagonist" is as old as literature.
It’s that last ‘I can live with it’.
Some people are very literal.
It’s astoundingly obvious from everything we know, everything Avery puts into it, that no, no he can’t. But he has to, so he will.
Which is a lot more ‘heroic’ than any other reading really. And makes Sisko a better character, who knows precisely what it’s like to live trapped in a point of their own guilt over something, and who is no doubt wondering if the ambassador had any family etc.
You have to literally ignore everything else about Sisko, never mind the federation or starfleet, to get the idea he now has no problem with what he’s just done. Sisko is explicitly not and ends justifies the means character, and it’s shown over and over again.
It carries into real life. Some people hate Downfall for humanising Hitler. But that way of thinking blinds them. There are no monsters, they don’t spring into bein, they come from humanity. Same is true of heroes. They aren’t just some wondrous click into existence.
If we forget that, we miss the next Hitler, and vainly wait for the next Churchill or whoever. Nuance is everyth8ngl
Similar threads
