What is THE Worst continuity error in Trek history..?!

[The Wormhole]

Assuming the planet he was found on was visited by Shinzon where and how did he find the android to scatter those parts and lure our gallant crew to this world? I wonder how he found out about Data and managed to find B4 to set that trap?

Finding out about Data is the easy part, Data is a sort of celebrity in the Federation and Shinzon seemed to have bios on the Enterprise's senior staff anyway.

And why would any of the prototypes been named "B-4?" Before what?

In the original script, the name used was B-9, the idea being that compared to Lore, he's the "benign" one. But it was felt non-fans wouldn't get that so he became B-4, because everyone would catch on that he was created before Data.

Honestly, B-9 wo0uld have made less sense, it implies Lore was meant to be evil.

 

[BillJ]

And nothing can change that. Sorry that you feel like he isn't allowed to have his opinion or that others agree with him, or just find him entertaining.

Whose opinion am I taking as gospel?

 

[fireproof78]

Whose opinion am I taking as gospel?

Apparently Sir SFDebris, who's opinion speaks for all fandom. Or, in his own words:

Who am I? "Why, I am His Grace, Sir SFDebris, Duke of the People Who Don't Give A Rat's Ass and Knight of the Order of Go Fuck Yourself! ...And, of course, a viewer with an opinion."

 

[BillJ]

Apparently Sir SFDebris, who's opinion speaks for all fandom.

Yeah. I didn't need anyone to tell me back in '95 that Voyager simply wasn't a very good show.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah. I didn't need anyone to tell me back in '95 that Voyager simply wasn't a very good show.

Hey, this is 2016, where we must accept all shows, regardless of their quality. "Bad" is a judging word and we should treat all shows with the same tenderness as eggs. Criticism is not allowed and we shouldn't pick on them

 

[Nerys Myk]

Apparently Sir SFDebris, who's opinion speaks for all fandom. Or, in his own words:

I've never read a review for any Star Trek episodes. I just watch them.

 

[fireproof78]

I've never read a review for any Star Trek episodes. I just watch them.

I rarely read them. I listen to them in my sleep

 

[BillJ]

Hey, this is 2016, where we must accept all shows, regardless of their quality. "Bad" is a judging word and we should treat all shows with the same tenderness as eggs. Criticism is not allowed and we shouldn't pick on them

I don't think we're picking on anyone here.

For me, Voyager just wasn't a very good TV show and wasn't very good "Star Trek". Beltran could've easily been mistaken for cardboard, the writers had Janeway all over the place, they went to the Klingon well yet again (though I thought Dawson did well with the material given), Lien had exactly one interesting episode and it was playing a different character ("Warlord"), Wang was one of People's sexiest people alive but couldn't act.

Duncan McNeil was kinda there, sometimes he got something interesting to do, but most times didn't.

Then you had Russ, Picardo, Ryan who were interesting to a degree, but were also let down by the writing.

Voyager, overall, felt very "paint by numbers". There was little there that interested/surprised me during its seven year run.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't think we're picking on anyone here.

For me, Voyager just wasn't a very good TV show and wasn't very good "Star Trek". Beltran could've easily been mistaken for cardboard, the writers had Janeway all over the place, they went to the Klingon well yet again (though I thought Dawson did well with the material given), Lien had exactly one interesting episode and it was playing a different character ("Warlord"), Wang was one of People's sexiest people alive but couldn't act.

Duncan McNeil was kinda there, sometimes he got something interesting to do, but most times didn't.

Then you had Russ, Picardo, Ryan who were interesting to a degree, but were also let down by the writing.

Voyager, overall, felt very "paint by numbers". There was little there that interested/surprised me during its seven year run.

Oh, I agree completely. My post was actually meant as sarcastic, as I think any media can, and should be criticized.

As for VOY, I'm not sure I can disagree. I think VOY was trying super hard to be TNG light, but lacked the writing and character chemistry that led to TNG's success.

 

[eyeresist]

In the original script, the name used was B-9, the idea being that compared to Lore, he's the "benign" one. But it was felt non-fans wouldn't get that so he became B-4, because everyone would catch on that he was created before Data.

According to one of the audio commentaries, the name was changed because B-9 had been used by someone else. B-9 was actually the name of the robot from Lost in Space, so they probably wanted to avoid accusations of ripping off that show.

Assuming the planet he was found on was visited by Shinzon where and how did he find the android to scatter those parts and lure our gallant crew to this world? I wonder how he found out about Data and managed to find B4 to set that trap?

Those Romulans are notoriously sneaky and snoopy.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

And nothing can change that. Sorry that you feel like he isn't allowed to have his opinion or that others agree with him, or just find him entertaining.

Nope. I can find more praise for 8472 than most species. I wish I still had my Star Trek: Magazine discussing what 8472 brought to the table.

So?
So is the venom towards Abrams, TNG, TWOK, ENT, among others. So, no, since we keep discussing this back or forth, it isn't obvious.
VOY isn't a victim. It is an entertainment vehicle that many have found non-entertaining.

Um, no. I mean, I have emailed him my disagreements over his opinion. I don't run around countering his opinion about every show he doesn't like. He's entitled to his opinion.
And, my opinion still stands-if you disagree so much with him (and the other supposed VOY hate) then please feel free to produce your own content (blog, audio, video, etc.) to counter it. That is, after the all, the idea of the internet, is the exchange of ideas, not everyone moving in lockstep.

Strawman argument. This isn't a discussion about Doctor Who and the Doctor has always been an odd ball when it comes to his commentary on human behavior, even in the same episode. I'm not going to react to him the same way I am to Star Trek.

Also, early TNG could come across as rather hypocritical.

It's SO much fun to read one side of a conversation with someone you've put on IGNORE. Especially when it verifies that you made the right decision.

 

[fireproof78]

It's SO much fun to read one side of a conversation with someone you've put on IGNORE. Especially when it verifies that you made the right decision.

I strive to be entertaining

 

[Anwar]

Which would have completely undermined the purpose of that story.

The purpose was for Q to show Picard just how dangerous the other aliens they could encounter could really be. So he sends Picard into the middle of a battle between two such Dangerous Aliens. That way we get two such examples of new dangers beyond the Federations abilities and we also have a built-in failsafe to keep anyone from thinking that these new guys are also invincible. Because invincible enemies are just bad writing.

It's up to the showmakers to produce a quality product that viewers will like.

And what if the viewers are simply unpleasable?

Exactly. That was when I stopped watching VOY. I hated the Sulu episode so much that I realized that I'd been watching a show I didn't enjoy just because it had words "Star Trek" in its title. Since two words in a title are a pretty dumb reason to watch a show you dislike, I stopped cold turkey.

Today, I cut shows a LOT less slack. I gave up on Gotham after five episodes.

Case in point.

And nothing can change that. Sorry that you feel like he isn't allowed to have his opinion or that others agree with him, or just find him entertaining.

I'm sorry he also helps prove that VOY's viewers were clearly far more unpleasable than most other Trek shows' viewers.

Nope. I can find more praise for 8472 than most species.

Maybe along the lines of "They look cool, but I really dislike that they could fight the Borg."

So

Kirk came back because of Shatner's ego. Trip's being alive again was because of the negative reaction to his death.

VOY isn't a victim. It is an entertainment vehicle that many have found non-entertaining.

Which doesn't mean it isn't also a scapegoat.

Also, early TNG could come across as rather hypocritical.

You mean like real people do?

 

[eyeresist]

If you are especially a VOY fan, then it may feel like VOY is singled out. But I like a lot of things in Trek that cop abuse: TFF, GEN and NEM, for instance. And you just try being an ENT fan - the fanbase is smaller than VOY's, and periodically people drop into the sub-forum to "contribute" a screed about how unredeemably execrable it is.

It may help to bear in mind that there are two kinds of critic:
1. Those who are reasonable, who don't resort to blanket condemnation or use abusive language, and who understand that multiple points of view are possible and indeed desirable.
2. Assholes. For critical purposes, you can safely ignore this second group.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm sorry he also helps prove that VOY's viewers were clearly far more unpleasable than most other Trek shows' viewers.

Um, one would think the viewers would be similar across the different shows. And. It's still his opinion. which he can certainly share. Let's not make him a scapegoat for VOY's problems.

Maybe along the lines of "They look cool, but I really dislike that they could fight the Borg."

Nope, didn't see that.

Kirk came back because of Shatner's ego. Trip's being alive again was because of the negative reaction to his death.

Yes, because no one had a negative reaction to Kirk's death. That was not controversial at all

Which doesn't mean it isn't also a scapegoat.

No, it's not. If that were the case then ENT and Abrams Trek would be accepted without a peep, since we already have our whipping show. Since that isn't the case, then it must be that VOY had its downsides too.

You mean like real people do?

Does that mean I have to listen to their preaching or agree with it? Or, do I just have the right to call them on their hypocrisy and not pay to listen to it?

 

[Drone]

I for one also liked 8472. I just wish we had learnt their actual name as a species. I was glad we finally had a tough species that could go toe to toe with the Borg and make them weep.

I just wish we had learnt a lot more about them then we did. I also liked the Hirogen.

They're commonly referred to as the Undine, though that's non-canonical. No species should being exclusively tagged with the Borg's designation for them. That's' truly pitiful.

http://sfdebris.com/

His videos are very entertaining. Even when he rips on an episode I like I still think it's funny. On every review he does of Voyager he has a 'stupid Neelix moment' or a 'burn baby burn award' for the shuttle crashes. I don't take him seriously (I actually don't mind Neelix) because it is after all just his opinion.

He's obviously very knowledgeable about the show (and anything else he covers), but he succumbs to sophomoric instincts to continually tag characters, with no real reflection, as just being completed twinned to their popular and ignorant conception. Facetiousness is all well and good, but not so much when it becomes so heavily relied on for easy, facile, shtick..

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Those Romulans are notoriously sneaky and snoopy.

The Romulans would be best buddies with the NSA

 

[T'Girl]

At least until the NSA tried to break the Romulan's encryption.



+

 

[Kor]

Don't get me wrong, the occasional fun scene like when Data asks Worf to take spot, or scenes with Tribbles are fine. But Star Trek episodes that are never ending fun isn't what I personally want to see.

The fun should be reserved for rare moments, Star Trek shouldn't be "goofy."

+

I think that when some of us say "fun," we mean "highly entertaining" rather than "silly" or "goofy." Something can be compelling, gripping and entertaining without being comedic.

Kor

 

[Longinus]

And why would any of the prototypes been named "B-4?" Before what?

Maybe he was fourth B-type android Soong built? There would have been three unsuccessful ones before him (and maybe some A-type androids as well.) Thus Lore would have been B-5 before he got his name and Data would have been B-6.