Page 10 of 69

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:47 pm
by Eighthours
Ad7 wrote:The mrs is out tonight...which means....

I get to watch that Shatner captains film :fp: :lol:


Let us know what you think of the Avery Brooks segments. Guy be mental, yo.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:49 pm
by SEP
Eighthours wrote:
Ad7 wrote:The mrs is out tonight...which means....

I get to watch that Shatner captains film :fp: :lol:


Let us know what you think of the Avery Brooks segments. Guy be mental, yo.


I saw that a while ago. Guy's completely flipped.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 6:25 pm
by Victor Mildew
strawberry float me Shatnr, let Patrick finish the questions you're asking him ffs :roll:

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 12:01 am
by Cuttooth
If a transporter retains a copy of a person every time they use it, why does anyone need to die on away missions?

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 7:00 pm
by Lagamorph
Cuttooth wrote:If a transporter retains a copy of a person every time they use it, why does anyone need to die on away missions?

Transporters don't work that way.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:16 pm
by Mogster
Lagamorph wrote:
Cuttooth wrote:If a transporter retains a copy of a person every time they use it, why does anyone need to die on away missions?

Transporters don't work that way.

Indeed. There is a pattern buffer that temporarily stores the transported person's, well, pattern, but that buffered pattern becomes the real thing once they're re-materialised. It's not a copy of the person, it actually is the person.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:21 pm
by Lagamorph
Mogster wrote:
Lagamorph wrote:
Cuttooth wrote:If a transporter retains a copy of a person every time they use it, why does anyone need to die on away missions?

Transporters don't work that way.

Indeed. There is a pattern buffer that temporarily stores the transported person's, well, pattern, but that buffered pattern becomes the real thing once they're re-materialised. It's not a copy of the person, it actually is the person.

And if they aren't re-materialised fast enough the pattern quickly degrades and is lost forever. You're talking maybe 1-2 minutes at max that a pattern can be stored safely, after that it starts degrading and if it degrades by anything more than about 15-20% then the person is basically dead as there isn't enough information to reconstruct them.
The only exception to this was Montgomery Scott finding a way to suspend himself in a Transporter buffer for decades.


Can you tell I bought the Star Trek Fact Files when I was a kid? I still have tons of the binders at my parents house.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:25 pm
by Mogster
Lagamorph wrote:Can you tell I bought the Star Trek Fact Files when I was a kid? I still have tons of the binders at my parents house.

I got those! I got bloody loads of the things though, although my brother went one better by sticking it out for the whole lot. They were pretty awesome really.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:31 pm
by Lagamorph
Mogster wrote:
Lagamorph wrote:Can you tell I bought the Star Trek Fact Files when I was a kid? I still have tons of the binders at my parents house.

I got those! I got bloody loads of the things though, although my brother went one better by sticking it out for the whole lot. They were pretty awesome really.

I loved the way they were written as if they were actually from the Star Trek universe and everything in them was real :wub:

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:56 pm
by Mogster
Lagamorph wrote:
Mogster wrote:
Lagamorph wrote:Can you tell I bought the Star Trek Fact Files when I was a kid? I still have tons of the binders at my parents house.

I got those! I got bloody loads of the things though, although my brother went one better by sticking it out for the whole lot. They were pretty awesome really.

I loved the way they were written as if they were actually from the Star Trek universe and everything in them was real :wub:

Yup. I always thought the episode guides were a bit out of place in that respect, although they were great too. :wub:

I was obsessed with the ships at the time, so my favourite bits were always the ship diagrams, bridge layouts and stuff. Thinking back though I think the writers were getting pretty desperate for subjects towards the end, with all sorts of minor characters and tech getting dedicated articles. Can't fault them for being completists I guess!

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Thu May 31, 2012 8:00 pm
by TheTurnipKing
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Eighthours wrote:
Ad7 wrote:The mrs is out tonight...which means....

I get to watch that Shatner captains film :fp: :lol:


Let us know what you think of the Avery Brooks segments. Guy be mental, yo.


I saw that a while ago. Guy's completely flipped.

If someone were to tell me that all the talk of prophets, angels and bullshit that turned up in DS9 were simply Avery Brooks ad-libbing and the normal Trek-writers working around him, I don't think I'd disbelieve it.

It would also go a long way to explaining why Star Trek fell off a cliff after he left.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Thu May 31, 2012 9:19 pm
by Lagamorph
TheTurnipKing wrote:
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Eighthours wrote:
Ad7 wrote:The mrs is out tonight...which means....

I get to watch that Shatner captains film :fp: :lol:


Let us know what you think of the Avery Brooks segments. Guy be mental, yo.


I saw that a while ago. Guy's completely flipped.

If someone were to tell me that all the talk of prophets, angels and bullshit that turned up in DS9 were simply Avery Brooks ad-libbing and the normal Trek-writers working around him, I don't think I'd disbelieve it.

It would also go a long way to explaining why Star Trek fell off a cliff after he left.

By ironically falling off a cliff.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:04 pm
by Hexx


:wub:

It's never going to happen, but a proper DS9 remaster would amazing

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:15 pm
by Lagamorph
DS9 is a lot harder to remaster than TNG unfortunately.
TNG was almost all model shots, whilst DS9 used a lot of CG for space shots, so you would basically have to re-do all of it which would make it cost way more than it was worth to do it.

Voyager has the same issue really.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:12 pm
by Hexx
https://www.cbr.com/rene-auberjonois-obituary/

Veteran actor and singer René Auberjonois has passed away at the age of 79.

Per The Hollywood Reporter, Auberjonois died in his Los Angeles home today -- Sunday, Dec. 8 -- following a battle with metastatic lung cancer. The actor's passing was confirmed by his son, Remy Auberjonois.


Awww :(

Wouldn't go so far as to say the best Star Trek actor - but certainly in the very small top tier.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:19 pm
by Tafdolphin
Noooooo.

That's terrible. I just started following him on insta too.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:39 pm
by SEP
Marina Sirtis' husband passed away in his sleep last night, too.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2019 10:50 pm
by Peter Crisp
Odo was an amazing character and it's impossible to imagine DS9 without him.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:50 am
by Tafdolphin
I've had DS9 on a lot in the background whilst playing Destiny and Odo is undoubtedly the best character, and Auberjonois did an amazing job with him.

Genuinely saddened by this.

Re: The Star Trek Thread

Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:11 am
by Squinty
His relationship with Quark is one of the best things about DS9. And he has a nicely written, long-term storyline.

I was so sad when I heard about Rene passing away. Felt the same about Aron as well.

I've also been watching DS9 episodes in no particular order recently. Watched A Call to Arms the other night, love that whole story arc. Sacrifice of Angels is one of the best episodes.

A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them, to acknowledge your greatness.

Then you kill them?

Only if it's necessary.


Gul Dukat :datass: