Captain Jean-Luc Picard

It's all B&B's fault.

No, it's not.

Thy never catch the stuff.

Then explain all the continuity in the movie.

Too many inconsistancies.....

There's only what, maybe 4 inconsistancies?

It has 24 decks..... period.

It's entirely possible that the line was "Deck 19" and a typo, never caught, resulted in deck 29.

I can't believe people keep making an issue about this!  Have you seen Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.  They fly up a turbo lift shaft that is EIGHTY decks in a STRAIGHT LINE!  The Enterprise A didn't have NEARLY that many and even the ones they had didn't travel in a straight line.  That is significantly worse than that of what happened in Nemesis.  Don't blame B&B because Gene Roddenberry made a BIGGER mistake regarding the number of decks aboard an Enterprise.  Besides it isn't Gene's fault or B and B's... not everything can be correct!  There are just to many things to be mindfull of when it comes to making Trek.  They are, afterall, just minor bloopers and do not detract from the WRITING of the film.  Like a wise kid once said: Don't have a cow man!

Calm down, man. I love discussing bloopers in Trek. They don't bother me nor detract from the quality, but they do make me laugh, especially that whole "Deck 29" thing in NEM. :)

Hi everyone i have a question how many decks are there in the Ent-E? picard says 24 and a crewman says that the borg have taken up to 26... which one should i believe?was it just a script goof?

I wondered the same thing. Pause a scene which shows the "deck chart" at the back of the bridge and you can count 24 decks. Lt. Hawk's, "They've got decks 26 up to 11." is a goof.

The Borg could adapt to high speed projectiles just like the Goa'uld have personal "deflector" shields in SG-1 which prevent high speed energy fire, but allow slower moving objects. I wouldn't take that risk, so I'll take a phaser. :)

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe! :)

I've never seen about of those.  I didn't exist at the time.

That is what reruns are for.

I don't have cable TV.

I think a 2 or 3-year-break would be perfect. Wrap up ENT, then spend 2 or 3 years developing series 6. However long it takes to develope series 6 after ENT ends, I think that's how long Trek should be on a break for.

I've actually thought about writing a script for a VOY movie about an evolved Kes, the Ocampan people, using the Kazon as the villians, and having Q in the story as a mentor to Kes. I know people aren't crazy about the Kazon, but if written right, they could make interresting villians. The "plot" would be Kes asking Janeway to bring Voyager back to Ocampa with their new slipstream drive so that they can help her save her people from the Kazon.

Voyager has my favorite of the 5 TV themes. It gives me a feeling of being in space or on another world, which is why I love it so much.

Information gathering.

I think that censorship should be left to each network. If the producers feel they're beeing too censorred, they can shop for a new network that will allow them to portray what they want. This would work very well as one could say, "Oh, I don't like that (something) network, it's too violent." or, "What channel is (some show) on? Oh, it's on (something) network? Sorry, but that network has naked people in their shows, no thanks." See? You pick a network, then pick the show. Sound like a good idea?

I'm even surprised at CJLP's comment about being all for censoring network TV.  In case you haven't noticed it, there's a little switch on your tv called the on/off switch.  If you don't like what you see, simply turn it off or find another channel or better yet, read a book or two.

The reason why I said that is becuase I watch almost no TV these days becuase it's riddled with sexuallity and graphic violence. Now I only watch the Trek shows & SG-1.

All time favorite time traveler - Mr. Daniels!

Sex Appeal doesn't mean nudity or perversion. Sex Appeal can be as simple as lip stick on a female character or shoulder pads on a male character. The style of shoes used can be sex appeal. The way a woman bats her eyes or the way a man may portray a character is sex appeal. It's all perceptions. You really need to get past the word "Sex" being a "bad" thing.

I don't consider sex a bad thing, I just don't see what any of that has anything to do with sexuallity.

Yes, Scott Bakula could help launch an ENT movie should one be made, but sex appeal might actually hurt the box office.  Most sci-fi fans hate sex appeal.

All of the Sci-Fi fans I personally know would disagree with that assessment. Sex Appeal is involved in almost all aspects of life, some people may choose to ignore it but it is there.

Well, maybe I'm misinterpretting what sex appeal is. How do you define sex appeal, becuase to me, sex appeal equals partial or frontal nudity and sexual suggestive themes. Maybe I've the wrong idea of what sex appeal is?

I'm thinking of doing a Star Trek survey for people on my street. It'd be short, something they could "check off" while at the door. It'd be a "what are you familiar with" type survey. I'll use TNG for example. They could check off the series and the movies saying they're aware of it, which characters they know of by name and/or actor's name, if they're familiar with the ship, that sort of thing. Do you think I should go through with this? If I get positive results, (positive in terms of people participating ) would others do the same?

Every night before bed, I pull the blanket down and my cat, Sugar, expresses her affection my kneeding (spelling?) on my tummy for a few minutes. It's strange, but it's nice to have a tummy massage before bed every night.

Now it's a 3-person conversation.

Assuming we get an 8th series, I'd like to see Captain Wesley Crusher. I know a lot of people didn't like the character, but I feel he had a lot of potentional and still does. I sincerely hope Will Weaton returns as Wesley in the next TNG movie, if there is one, or another Trek movie or episode.

I could see Naomi Wildman, Icheb, and Nog becoming Starfleet Captains in time, but Alexander Rochenko, Jake Sisko, and Molly O'Brien have showed no interrest in Starfleet and Alexander joined the Klingon Imperial Fleet, so that kind'a rules him out.

I think that the next movie could end up being Enterprise because they are the only crew that isn't separated.  Most people on Voyager aren't even starfleet... and DS9 would not appeal to the general audience.  Enterprise however has an established movie actor as a captain, sex appeal for the general audience, and doesn't rely on too much back story.  Also if the series does last 7 years they would still not have reached the forming of the Federation which would take place about 3 years after the series ends which would conincide with a good time to produce and Enterprise movie. 

 

While Voyager is not my favorite series I would like to see how the crew faired after Endgame (I could just read homecoming I guess). 

 

DS9 would also be good but in a way I kind of feel that it the series fullfilled itself so well that no movie could do it justice.

I don't think we'll see an ENT movie before some kind of TNG, DS9, VOY, mixed-crew or new-crew movie. ENT is an awesome SCI-FI show, but I don't see Paramount investing a movie in it any time soon. Maybe after it ends it's 7-year-run it could do a movie, but I don't want to wait that long.

Voyager could easilly do a movie, only Chakotay, B'Elanna, and Seven weren't officially Starfleet, but I'm sure Chakotay would remain in Starfleet, Seven might go to the Acadamy after not being accepted on Earth, and they could find a way to work in B'Elanna some how.

As for DS9, I think the producers ended the show without the intention of doing a movie, but left a few arcs dangling just incase. Sure, half the cast left the station, but they do have two options: bring them back with creative writing or introduce a few new characters.

Yes, Scott Bakula could help launch an ENT movie should one be made, but sex appeal might actually hurt the box office. Most sci-fi fans hate sex appeal. There's nothing wrong with pretty faces, outfits that show off a female's figure, and some kissing, just as long as it doesn't get sexual. I think backstory is important, look what it did for ST:FC! However, they would need a writer who can write a movie to fit into the arc and at the same time work as a stand-alone movie for those who didn't keep up with the series. All the other Trek movies managed this, so I'm sure an ENT movie could too.

I think that if ENT does a movie, it should be a trilogy - an end of Romulan war movie, a founding of the UFP movie, and then a final TCW story movie. Maybe they could tie these three stories together some how?

Well, I don't think a "how the crew faired when they got home" story would work as a movie. A plot dealing with the Delta Quadrant where the crew is "reassembled" to deal with a situation they have experrience with, not neccessarily an over-the-top villian with an uber-weapon ship, might be good for #11.

I kind'a agree with DS9, the story ended in a way that a movie isn't neccessary. I'd like to see one, but I feel the DS9 story is complete while VOY's story was left open.

I've heard that there's a way to freeze someone without the crystalising denaturing their protiens. It was on an episode of Ripley's: Believe it or Not, where this man froze his grandpa in a shead or something with loads of ice and constantly removed the ice crystals to safely preserve the body. It was quite fascinating.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before but I just wanted to check something.  I've just watched Azati Prime again, and something caught my attention.  When Daniels takes Archer into the future, he mentions that the Sphere Builders have technology which allows them to scan the timelines and that they had seen the one that Daniels and Archer were in.  This got me thinking that if the Sphere Builders can do this and decided to trick the Xindi into thinking humans are the enemy, then wouldn't this put Enterprise in a different timeline to the other series.  I also remember something from an earlier episode, Carpenter Street, were Daniels said this conflict was never supposed to happen and was the result of temporal incursions.  This could explain why we havent heard about the Xindi in any of the other series.

I believe that the future in "Azati Prime" was a similar future to the TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY timeline except for the Sphere Builder expanse place. I also think that Daniels's future is an alternate future that will be erased when Archer's timeline comes into play leading to the previous (future for Archer) series we know.

Anyone agree?

I think that if Janeway died, got abducted, vanished, or something to that effect... Chakotay would be promoted to Captain while Tuvok doubles as Executive Officer and Tactical Officer with a someone promoted to Chief of Security.

Does the 500-character-limit include code?

I've four things to say:

 

1. I agree with everything you said, Goose.

 

2. STF.net was fine till ST.com shut down their chatroom, then we got flooded with people who've no idea how to behave on a message board, treating it like a chatroom.  Who invited all those people anyway?  I never did like most ST.comers.

 

3. People are too sensitive these days.  They should be able to read a post without taking it personal unless adressed to them by name.

 

4. We have too many "pointless" posts by people trying to increase their post count.  Stuff like someone saying "I don't know." when someone asks a question.

Thanks i am for the old startrek .com its things like this that make me wanna go back but i am gonna stay just to piss you off

I did not say all ST.comers, I said most, but I guess I should have said some as "most" may make the people here feel as if I'm pointing fingers. I appologise if you feel it was aimed at you, I was talking about the some of the new members, not all. I'm sorry I upset you.