I laugh when I have to sit through them because they're so much fun.
Season 4 First Look
- Thread starter Precious Tritium
- Start date
The only Ferengi episode that's an outright disaster is Profit and Lace.
My own take: the Ferengi are funniest when they're bouncing off other cultures, as in "Little Green Men" and "House of Quark."
The all-Ferengi, all-the-time eps can get a bit exhausting, but that may just be a matter of taste.
"Little Green Men, in particular, remains one of my all-time favorite DS9 eps. My girlfriend and I rewatched it just a few weeks ago and laughed the whole way through -- in a good way.
The all-Ferengi, all-the-time eps can get a bit exhausting, but that may just be a matter of taste.
"Little Green Men, in particular, remains one of my all-time favorite DS9 eps. My girlfriend and I rewatched it just a few weeks ago and laughed the whole way through -- in a good way.
I am all in favor of Star Trek doing weird, goofy, dopey, silly, crazy, fun stuff. I want them to try out everything and really blow up the definition of what it means to be a Star Trek show.
I just with they could do it in a more original way. I’m probably a bigger fan of Henson than of Star Trek. I love puppetry. But this just feels like SNW is copying someone else’s homework.
The Emperors New Cloak is pretty terrible as well.
But that's a disaster of a Mirror Universe episode rather than a disaster of a Ferengi episode.
The only three DS9 Ferengi-Centric episodes that were worth watching were House of Quark, Little Green Men, and The Magnificent Ferengi.
The rest of them were a waste of 42 minutes.
Until people actually demonstrated what is ruined or how it takes away from past products then I find the proclamation of ruination greatly overstated.
Were the actors not available for this particular episode?
Speaking in terms of contractual fair payment for the actors input into this potential episode/multi episode story arc, how would this affect their salaries should they only be making cameos? Would they be paid fairly as ‘screen actors’ according to the rules of WGAWG, or as voice artists following the SAGAFTRA regulations and guidelines? Perhaps a hybrid of both?
Would Jim Henson take residuals from repeat broadcasts or streams instead of the actors themselves? Who owns the rights to the puppets and their likeness?
Will @elmo make a cameo as a redshirt?
Speaking in terms of contractual fair payment for the actors input into this potential episode/multi episode story arc, how would this affect their salaries should they only be making cameos? Would they be paid fairly as ‘screen actors’ according to the rules of WGAWG, or as voice artists following the SAGAFTRA regulations and guidelines? Perhaps a hybrid of both?
Would Jim Henson take residuals from repeat broadcasts or streams instead of the actors themselves? Who owns the rights to the puppets and their likeness?
Will @elmo make a cameo as a redshirt?
That might be difficult.
Even in the event they weren't, that wouldn't be the cause for doing a puppet episode, as the logistics of filming such an episode would be more complex then filming with actors. If the actors weren't available, they'd probably instead do an episode centering around guest stars or something, similar to the Doctor Lite episodes of Doctor Who.
Though in the event they take a similar approach to this as Stargate SG-1 did for the marionette skit in their 200th episode, they'd do a "dry run" of filming the actors doing everything the puppets would be doing so as to help the puppeteers by giving them a frame of reference on how to have the puppets moving around. Granted, they not be a practical approach for a fifty minute episode as opposed to the five minute vignette SG-1 did, but if they do do this than it would prove this episode is not being done because the actors are unavailable.
When actors are in a show's main cast, they're paid the same for all episodes regardless of how big or small their role in a particular episode is.Speaking in terms of contractual fair payment for the actors input into this potential episode/multi episode story arc, how would this affect their salaries should they only be making cameos? Would they be paid fairly as ‘screen actors’ according to the rules of WGAWG, or as voice artists following the SAGAFTRA regulations and guidelines? Perhaps a hybrid of both?
Jim Henson did not create puppets.
Last edited:
Is this the future of Star Trek?
Who would be ‘pulling the puppets strings’ so to speak? Surely it would be easier to render actors in CGI, perhaps using new AI tech?
Regardless, Jim Henson should *definitely* get credit even if he does not want to be paid for his involvement in this story arc, otherwise they should do an animated episode, in which case they should hire Disney Pixar artists.
This scene, for example, could be recreated like this:
Well we got 2 good seasons out of 5 anyway.Fixed it for you.
The actors are still doing voiceover dubbing as the characters, work which is very much under SAG's contracts.Were the actors not available for this particular episode?
Speaking in terms of contractual fair payment for the actors input into this potential episode/multi episode story arc, how would this affect their salaries should they only be making cameos? Would they be paid fairly as ‘screen actors’ according to the rules of WGAWG, or as voice artists following the SAGAFTRA regulations and guidelines? Perhaps a hybrid of both?
Would Jim Henson take residuals from repeat broadcasts or streams instead of the actors themselves? Who owns the rights to the puppets and their likeness?
Will @elmo make a cameo as a redshirt?
Beyond that, series regulars are contracted for the series, not by the episode.
Why not have an episode that reveals Una's hair is a tribble. That would explain a lot.
He’s too busy giving child molesters a platform on his show.
Seconded. What the fuck??
