VaBeachGuy

Doesn't Alterego's new avitar look l.ike the Sandpeople from Star Wars?

To me, there were a lot of things in the movie that reminded me of Star Wars.

 

Yeah, probably a few too many homages to Wars in it. Perhaps Wars will now return the favor and add more plugs for Trek in its TV series.

I'm not saying that it's necessiarily a 'bad' thing. I'd just rather keep the 2 franchises seperate. One is "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away..." while the other is supposed to be our own future. Not a real big deal, subtle little things like a tiny ship in the far off distance to pay tribute to the other franchise can be 'cute'.

I just wouldn't want to see major themes or attitudes merge over.

Doesn't Alterego's new avitar look l.ike the Sandpeople from Star Wars?

To me, there were a lot of things in the movie that reminded me of Star Wars.

I kinda liked News Radio. If Phil Hartman hadn't died it would probably still be on the air.

Yeah, that was a good show.

I'm going to add Enterprise to what I said before.

Well, for everyone else "to date" is meant to be "to this day".

If you get a chance sometime, try to take a few pics of the same exact area when it's not flooded so we can see the difference... at least I'd be interested in seeing them anyway.

Sweat pants and a polo shirt

Wow, sorry to hear about the flood. Did you sustain any damage to your property?

As for why people stay places where things like this happen, I suppose it's the same reason people star in hurricane zones or tornado zones. You live where you like it (if you're lucky) and if you find a place that you love then you learn to cope with the conditions.

The pics are interesting to see though, I'm always interested to see pics of where everyone lives. Please feel free to post more if you feel like it, even if they aren't 'disaster' type pics lol. Just every day pics are interesting to me, I may never visit England, Phoenix, San Diego, Los Angeles or any of the other places that members are from but seeing every day pics helps me imagine how it is there.

Thanks for sharing them.

It might be cool to have them as collectors items, as it stands right now though all of my 'hobby' money goes into keeping STARTREKFANS.NET online. I think if I were to start collecting Star Trek toys though I'd start with the ones I had as a kid (and wish I still had):

It's great to see you on the board, I'm glad you enjoyed the new movie. I think most people agree that it was a fun movie and will go a long way toward putting Star Trek back into the minds of non-Trekkies. Hopefully it won't be a momentary thing though and it''' turn a few of those 'non-Trekkies' into full blown Trekkies.

Over 2 years without a post and this is all we get?

He wrote a personal review.

It's whatever you want it to mean.

I still haven't decided if I want to open a set of my glasses yet. I've keept them exactly as they were when I bought them so far. In fact they're all still in the BK bags that they came in lol.

This is the first of 11 polls to see where each movie ranks among our members.

I'm going to re-post this a little differently to make it a little less of a 'task' to vote and a little easier to see the results.

It's categorized as a fictional movie, specifically a science fiction movie. That's not saying that the existence of the movie is in and of itself fictional but rather that the type of movie category that it falls into is as a fictional movie. Meaning a work of fiction.

I was watching the special features disc for Star Trek II last night and saw this clip from one of the interviews and I think it says it pretty well. The specific part is near the end but I left his whole statement in and I think it goes to the heart of why some fans have an issue with some aspects of the new movie.

When the rules are ignored or arbitrarily changed, that's when people get upset.

I went ahead and voted.

1. Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan

2. Star Trek IV The Voyage Home

3. Star Trek: First Contact

4. Star Trek VI The Undiscovered Country

5. Star Trek III The Search for Spock

6. Star Trek: Generations

7. Star Trek (2009)

8. Star Trek The Motion Picture

9. Star Trek: Insurrection

10. Star Trek V The Final Frontier

11. Star Trek: Nemesis

No, the tapes wouldn't have the commentary. Only the DVD's would. With most, if not all movies that I watch (if I liked them) I'll re-play them with the commentary turned on so I could hear what the director and actors (if they're in it) have to say. It's quite interesting.

I've made my views known now though, so lest I "piss off" too many people that may not appreciate differing opinions I'll let the issues rest.

It is better to be pissed off than pissed on.

It's actually better to not allow yourself to get pissed off over someone elses opinions about a ficitional movie.

Well then, all I can offer is that you put up with it until VBG applies the "makes everyone happy" solution.

 

 

Does VBG still work here???.....

At the time of this thread I was in the middle of working 12 and sometimes 16 hour shifts at the bank so there wasn't a lot of time for much more than sleeping and eating.

You're going against accesibilty rules here! A user should have to alter their settings to view a website! It's like saying only people in red sweaters can enter my store. It's daft. And on Firefox the main links dont show up at all. I am a web developer, and if you did this in a busniess you could get arrest and get heavy fines.

 

Please, test your website, please everyone. It is possible.

I'm sure you've never tried to have a website with all the features and sections as STF has, it's not as simple as "pleasing everyone" and just "testing your website". I've literally put hundreds if not thousands of hours of work (and multiple thousands of dollars) into STF over the six plus years that it's been online. Is it 100% perfect for every possible browser past, present or future? No, and I apologize to those that don't use the same browsers that 90% of the internet browsing community uses and to those that upgrade to a new version that may display the site differently than it previously had using older versions. When I have the free time to be able to make corrections in those cases I will, but remember there is no membership fee here.

As for getting "arrested" and getting "heavy fines", please provide a few links where Website owners have been arrested and fined because their site didn't support a specific browser. I'd be most interested in reading those articles. I'd also be interested in seeing some of the web sites that you developed. How did you swing getting hired as a "web developer" when you were 16 or 17? Did they allow you to work around your school schedule? Are they still letting you work around your school schedule now?

Oh, and for the record one thing I've learned during the 6 plus years here... it's impossible to do what you say is 'possible' and "please everyone".

More likely Section 31 would pick Spock's ship apart for its secrets.

Well, as Jack pointed out and I had forgotten the ship was destroyed.

Anyway, I've tried to make it clear a couple of times that I like the movie and I've seen it multiple times. I don't believe it's 100% perfect in every single aspect, I have a few issues that I was disappointed in and figured that an open and honest discussion on those issues was proper. I've made my views known now though, so lest I "piss off" too many people that may not appreciate differing opinions I'll let the issues rest.

In each of the above categories, numbered 1 to 11 vote for the movie that you rank in that slot. So if Star Trek The Motion Picture was your #1 favorite then vote for it in the #1 slot, if The Wrath of Khan was your second favorite then vote for it in the #2 slot and so on through all 11 movies.

I'm not sure myself so I'll have to think about it before voting.

I just watched it the other day, I'm re-watching all 10 of the movies. I watched Star Trek II on Saturday and Star Trek III yesterday. When I watch them I try to watch them twice in a row, once to just watch the movie and enjoy it. Then right afterwards I run it again but with the commentary audio track on so I can listen to the director or actors speak about whatever they're talking about.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Phase...ShockwaveII.jpg

 

That's not a turret, that's a cannon (specifically a phase cannon). A turret is an enclosure that contains guns (or cannons) and in most cases their crews that man them. Not all turrets have to contain a turret crew, some turrets on WWII planes were small and were operated by a gunner inside the plane (I'm specifically thinking of the B-29).

 

What you're showing in the link above would be more akin to the cannons being brought out on a Galleon to prepare for battle.

 

I honestly can't think of any Federation ship that has turrets. DS9 had turrets but that's Cardassian in design. I could be mistaken or just forgetting a specific Federation ship that had turrets, but I can't think of any.

 

From the article:

 

The cannons of NX class starships were mounted on retractable turrets which extended from the ship's hull when deployed and rotated as they were being targeted.

 

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Phase_cannon

 

And from wikipedia:

A gun turret is a device that protects the crew or mechanism of a projectile firing weapon and at the same time lets the weapon be aimed and fired in many directions.

 

A turret is a rotating weapon platform.

 

Based on that, I do think both the phase cannons of Enterprise and the phaser turrets (they are referred to as such as a tie-in website, not exactly canon but I haven't seen a different name for them) of the Kelvin qualify as turrets. Even if they are unmanned (which in both cases, I believe they are), they are still capable of rotation, which seems to be the key determinate. This seems to be the way Starfleet went before the invention of the phaser array (or the phaser bank we see on later 23th century vessels, we never really get a fantastic look at them).

It's not what I consider a gun turret, it's a retractable cannon just as the cannons on an ancient Galleon are retractable cannons. As it says at the bottom the word turret comes from the French toroete "diminutive of tor, tower". The Phase cannons aren't a tower.

Either way though the turrets didn't bother me all that much, I took notice of them because we've never seen true gun turrets on Starfleet ships before, and if you want to classify the phase cannons as turrets then we've never seen them on TOS era or later ships before.

I was a bit disappointed in the design of the ships (more the inside than the outsides) but honestly it wasn't THAT big of a deal to me. They had redesigned the sets before for the movies, which I didn't care for aesthetically either but oh well.

http://www.answers.com/topic/turret

 

turret

 

A small tower or tower-shaped projection on a building.

 

A low, heavily armored structure, usually rotating horizontally, containing mounted guns and their gunners or crew, as on a warship or tank.

A domelike gunner's enclosure projecting from the fuselage of a combat aircraft.

A tall wooden structure mounted on wheels and used in ancient warfare by besiegers to scale the walls of an enemy fortress.

An attachment for a lathe consisting of a rotating cylindrical block holding various cutting tools.

A rotating device holding various lenses, as for a microscope, allowing easy switching from one lens to another.

 

[Middle English turet, from Old French torete, diminutive of tor, tower. See tower.]