Star Trek - Space: The Final Frontier

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
She grew up around junkies and moved across the country away from everyone she'd ever known at 19 to become a professional actor - poor soul never stood a chance.
 
ExceptionallyExceptional said:
Neelix was annoying at times (MOST of the time, actually) but he was often a useful fucker. Knew about all sorts of Gamma *Delta* Quadrant shit.
Click to expand...
Did he really though? O-o I guess it's been a while since I've watched early Voyager, but I do vividly remember his "insider knowledge" being wrong more often than not, and his bad advice getting multiple members of the crew killed more than once.

ExceptionallyExceptional said:
*Reads various articles about Lien showing her ass to children*
All I can say is...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=9xPVUOjQgsU
Click to expand...
Excellent reference, 100 points. We would have also accepted:
 
UnKillFill said:
Did he really though? O-o I guess it's been a while since I've watched early Voyager, but I do vividly remember his "insider knowledge" being wrong more often than not, and his bad advice getting multiple members of the crew killed more than once.


Excellent reference, 100 points. We would have also accepted:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Z3sLhnDJJn0
Click to expand...
He was useful enough, but yeah he could be wrong sometimes with disastrous consequences. There were a few times they should have realized his shit was too good to be true.

And I dunno why but I always get the Gamma and Delta quadrants mixed up. I never have that problem with the other quadrants.
 
ExceptionallyExceptional said:
And I dunno why but I always get the Gamma and Delta quadrants mixed up. I never have that problem with the other quadrants.
Click to expand...
I'm a nerd, but I'm not an asshole. It's fine that you mixed up the Delta and Gamma quadrants, I've definitely misspoken worse than that before... I just auto-corrected you because I wanted to make it clear that *that* wasn't the thing in that post I was disagreeing with, haha.
 
The Great Chandler said:
I'm not sure if anyone brought this up, but this was one terrifying ass scene:
Click to expand...

I like to bring this scene up whenever someone gives me shit about Star Trek being "for kids" or its somehow not edgy enough to be real sci-fi. Bonus points to it being part of TMP, which people also complain is boring.

AnOminous said:
Never mind that they just obliterate you from existence, transmit a stream of information that represents you somewhere that might or might not get there, then recreate a copy which for all you know is a soulless simulacrum. You're never getting me into one of those contraptions.
Click to expand...

One of Trek's biggest weaknesses is that the transporter apparently does that until it doesn't. Someone brought up the Scotty episode earlier, Relics, and its a great example of how the transporter doesn't just reduce you to info, instead it somehow puts you into the "beam". If it just made a copy of you, crew members could just be stored permanently in the computer every time they beam. But Scotty had to dick with the system to store his pattern in the computer's RAM, apparently. So does this thing vaporize you or does it just make you into a ghost and laser you at the target location? Its confusing as all hell.

Also don't get me started on the episode where Barclay is somehow conscious during transport, which makes no sense with either theory.
 
Last edited:
L50LasPak said:
If it just made a copy of you, crew members could just be stored permanently in the computer every time they beam.
Click to expand...

Or you could just not delete the original, and send an endless stream of identical copies to the destination.
 
L50LasPak said:
One of Trek's biggest weaknesses is that the transporter apparently does that until it doesn't. Someone brought up the Scotty peisode earlier, Relics, and its a great example of how the transporter doesn't just reduce you to info, instead it somehow puts you into the "beam". If it just made a copy of you, crew members could just be stored permanently in the computer every time they beam. But Scotty had to dick with the system to store his pattern in the computer's RAM, apparently. So does this thing vaporize you or does it just make you into a ghost and laser you at the target location? Its confusing as all hell.

Also don't get me started on the episode where Barclay is somehow conscious during transport, which makes no sense with either theory.
Click to expand...
Probably one of the smartest things Orville did was remove the transporter from the tech options (though originally it was made as a cost-saving measure).

I mean in trek it makes no sense. If it's making copies, then transporter accidents should never happen as if the faxed copy never forms, you just restore the original at the host site - if it does, delete the original. (hm... sounds creepy too - it was an outer limits episode) On the other hand, it does "send" you somewhere, there's a big question of how in the world do you "rematerialize" on an alien world - what the heck is putting you back together?

From a strict story logic perspective, transporting should work like stargates - where you need a sender and receiver at both ends. Ironically this could have helped with the drama of episodes as you would need to send a shuttle down first to set up the "landing platform" for people to beam down onto. Then instead of inventing reasons the ship can't just "auto rescue" the cast, you just have them away from the platform, or the platform gets destroyed, etc etc.
 
AnOminous said:
Or you could just not delete the original, and send an endless stream of identical copies to the destination.
Click to expand...

I have always assumed that the transporter at least partially turns you into energy and then back again at the destination, and even if you had enough power to duplicate someone, the system can't really keep track of what's going on, so even in the best case a clone might have a slightly different personality or something like that.
 
L50LasPak said:
I like to bring this scene up whenever someone gives me shit about Star Trek being "for kids" or its somehow not edgy enough to be real sci-fi. Bonus points to it being part of TMP, which people also complain is boring.
Click to expand...
That's funny considering its juvenile nature right now. Yet, it will never have the balls to pull off moments like these in a sensible fashion.
 
UnKillFill said:
Did he really though? O-o I guess it's been a while since I've watched early Voyager, but I do vividly remember his "insider knowledge" being wrong more often than not, and his bad advice getting multiple members of the crew killed more than once.
Click to expand...

yeah, it was towards the end iirc. although I think it stopped way earlier and that's probably why they dropped the whole angle after some time.
as for knowledge. he was just just a dingy trader/scavenger, things are different when you fly around with the biggest dick in the quadrant. never remember given them outright false info really, just that things turn out differently than expected. and he did get around quite a bit, they only reach his home planet a few seasons later (iirc, it's been a while for me too)

but then I'm one of the few people that don't equate neelix with jarjar binks, so take that as you will.

L50LasPak said:
I like to bring this scene up whenever someone gives me shit about Star Trek being "for kids" or its somehow not edgy enough to be real sci-fi. Bonus points to it being part of TMP, which people also complain is boring.
Click to expand...

wait, what? who would say that after TNG's second (or third depending on the count) episode literally has an orgy so big it kills everyone and ends with a bodysnatcher literally getting exploded slowly on tv?

L50LasPak said:
One of Trek's biggest weaknesses is that the transporter apparently does that until it doesn't. Someone brought up the Scotty episode earlier, Relics, and its a great example of how the transporter doesn't just reduce you to info, instead it somehow puts you into the "beam". If it just made a copy of you, crew members could just be stored permanently in the computer every time they beam. But Scotty had to dick with the system to store his pattern in the computer's RAM, apparently. So does this thing vaporize you or does it just make you into a ghost and laser you at the target location? Its confusing as all hell.

Also don't get me started on the episode where Barclay is somehow conscious during transport, which makes no sense with either theory.
Click to expand...

ram is not permanent, tech-wise rigging a system to store a pattern indefinitely probably requires some tinkering, especially if it's not set up for that. I think some episodes deal with the pattern deteriorating or not complete enough for reconstruction.
it's also used much earlier when they reconstruct picard that way (and use it for drama later when polaski never used the transporter so no pattern).

as for barclay, well, it's a TV series. but I think that even came up in the episode with geordie and data saying "that's not how it works, that's not possible". my headcanon was it was the split second before you're finally de/re-materialized, since the computer needs to handle it in a way you survive, so it can't just do it skin first or something, if you know what I mean.

Flexo said:
Probably one of the smartest things Orville did was remove the transporter from the tech options (though originally it was made as a cost-saving measure).

I mean in trek it makes no sense. If it's making copies, then transporter accidents should never happen as if the faxed copy never forms, you just restore the original at the host site - if it does, delete the original. (hm... sounds creepy too - it was an outer limits episode) On the other hand, it does "send" you somewhere, there's a big question of how in the world do you "rematerialize" on an alien world - what the heck is putting you back together?

From a strict story logic perspective, transporting should work like stargates - where you need a sender and receiver at both ends. Ironically this could have helped with the drama of episodes as you would need to send a shuttle down first to set up the "landing platform" for people to beam down onto. Then instead of inventing reasons the ship can't just "auto rescue" the cast, you just have them away from the platform, or the platform gets destroyed, etc etc.
Click to expand...

at least star trek had the sense to use it in a way it never felt too cheap or a deus-ex machina.

technically the transporter works like a stargate, I think during ENT (and in some episodes in other series) they still need transporter beacons to make sure your (literal) bits don't fly all over the place, by TNG it makes sense to have it improved enough to not need it most of the time (projecting a field for cohesion, reconstruct fast enough, etc.).

in the end it's something that only works if you don't think too hard about it. if you can turn energy into matter (see replicators), there's no reasons you couldn't beam something out of a holodeck (which isn't just "photons" else you couldn't touch it).

yahooligan said:
This is for referring to Kes as "eye candy"
Click to expand...

>implying you wouldn't

p73l4ppnrt1w1lccqo1_1280.jpg
 
Last edited:
Neelix was a manipulator and (probably) a pedophile who grifted his way onto being part of the Voyager's crew.

As for the transporter there was at least one episode of TNG where an interdimensional entity took control of Picard and had him beam himself outside the ship as an energy beam so he could merge with him. "Lonely Among Us," 1st season.
 
TaimuRadiu said:
Neelix was a manipulator and (probably) a pedophile who grifted his way onto being part of the Voyager's crew.
Click to expand...

why tho? convincing isn't manipulation, and liking kids doesn't necessarily mean you want to fuck them. I mean he dropped his spaghetti hard for a klingon, which is pretty much the exact opposite of a submissive and naive frail child.
 
ZMOT said:
why tho? convincing isn't manipulation, and liking kids doesn't necessarily mean you want to fuck them. I mean he dropped his spaghetti hard for a klingon, which is pretty much the exact opposite of a submissive and naive frail child.
Click to expand...
it's more like things that pop up thruout the series, which would matter if I thought voyager cared about continuity
 
ZMOT said:
why tho? convincing isn't manipulation, and liking kids doesn't necessarily mean you want to fuck them. I mean he dropped his spaghetti hard for a klingon, which is pretty much the exact opposite of a submissive and naive frail child.
Click to expand...
I mean, Kes is literally 2 years old at the start of Voyager...
 
I just like how they deride anyone who is scared of using the transporters or thinks something might be wrong with them, like they're being irrationally superstitious. Barclay sees something in the matter stream, so he has to go get counselling immediately. Clearly something is wrong with him, everyone knows the transporters are perfect technology that don't fail, just like the holodeck safety protocols.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom