Calling all nerds! Star Trek moderator required!

Unknown Soldier · 10-18-2014, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

You'd be perfect. Now all you need do is recite the Klingon death ritual flawlessly (all twenty-four verses of it), from memory, and you're in!

I'm not that much of a Trek nerd.

Quote:

We'll let you know when we're online and we can discuss then how you'd have your input, or how you'd like to participate. I think head of the Klingon High Council sounds about right?

Just let me know exactly what you want me to do, then I can add some ideas etc.

Also no problem with reading all the entries several times a week and participating etc.

The Batlord · 10-18-2014, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

In fairness, Voyager had some good episodes and some good ideas, but surrounding one, maybe two decent actors with planks of wood, giving them the kind of writing often associated with simians operating typewriters, and pretending that what happened last episode didn't happen, or doesn't matter, was not the way to make this a good Trek show.

I think you're remembering the rest of Star Trek with rose-colored glasses. Every Star Trek show ever made was chock full of B-rate actors who probably spent the later part of their careers in SyFy Channel creature features. I mean, come on. I love Warf, but if he wasn't a badass Klingon, would he have been any better than what you're talking about?

Unknown Soldier · 10-18-2014, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

I think you're remembering the rest of Star Trek with rose-colored glasses. Every Star Trek show ever made was chock full of B-rate actors who probably spent the later part of their careers in SyFy Channel creature features. I mean, come on. I love Warf, but if he wasn't a badass Klingon, would he have been any better than what you're talking about?

Exactly, as the actors who played both Sulu and Chekov are prime examples of actors with shocking acting ability. William Shatner was a pretty poor actor as well, but was lucky to have to good actors in Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley either side of him. So........

The Batlord 1 Trollheart 0

.... or doesn't this count as this is not the actual start of the journal yet?

The Batlord · 10-18-2014, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

Exactly, as the actors who played both Sulu and Chekov are prime examples of actors with shocking acting ability. William Shatner was a pretty poor actor as well, but was lucky to have to good actors in Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley either side of him. So........

The Batlord 1 Trollheart 0

.... or doesn't this count as this is not the actual start of the journal yet?

It doesn't, but I'll take the win. And in Shatner's defense, his Shatnerness overcomes his terrible acting ability.

Unknown Soldier · 10-18-2014, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

It doesn't, but I'll take the win. And in Shatner's defense, his Shatnerness overcomes his terrible acting ability.

... and how about his perspiration levels, his forehead was usually full of beads of sweat as soon as the first punch was thrown.

The Batlord · 10-18-2014, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

... and how about his perspiration levels, his forehead was usually full of beads of sweat as soon as the first punch was thrown.

He was clearly still winded after having sex with all the women in your family, along with your fourth-grade teacher, your effeminate mailman, and Michelle Obama. At once.

DwnWthVwls · 10-18-2014, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

He was clearly still winded after having sex with all the women in your family, along with your fourth-grade teacher, your effeminate mailman, and Michelle Obama. At once.

Trollheart · 10-18-2014, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

Exactly, as the actors who played both Sulu and Chekov are prime examples of actors with shocking acting ability. William Shatner was a pretty poor actor as well, but was lucky to have to good actors in Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley either side of him. So........

The Batlord 1 Trollheart 0

.... or doesn't this count as this is not the actual start of the journal yet?

Oh I am NOT having that! Have you not seen Walter Koenig as Bester in Babylon 5?? That man can ACT! Mind you, Shatner now .... Also remember both Sulu and Chekov were yougn actors, and more or less brought in in an "all-racial-inclusive-isn't-the-future-great? bull**** ideal of Roddenberry.

And you're surely not going to diss Picard? You're not, are you? Measuring TOS up against VOY is unfair; that was the sixties, and sci-fi was in its infancy. You were EXPECTED to overact. Even then, TOS had some very decent acting.

Edit: anyway, we're not going Trek v Trek: he's defending Voyager, I'm pouring petrol on its corpse and dancing maniacally around it. Well, as maniacally as a fifty-one-year-old man can dance, that is! Also, don't forget that though ALL the Trek series started out with poor acting, they all improved, particularly Riker and Crusher in NExtGen and of course Odo, Sisko and even Quark in DS9. Voyager? Point to one character --- other than the two mentioned already --- who developed even a little over seven years. And yes, I'm including her Janewayness in that. Cardboard actors in a cardboard series. Pah! Pah I say!

The Batlord · 10-18-2014, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Oh I am NOT having that! Have you not seen Walter Koenig as Bester in Babylon 5?? That man can ACT! Mind you, Shatner now .... Also remember both Sulu and Chekov were yougn actors, and more or less brought in in an "all-racial-inclusive-isn't-the-future-great? bull**** ideal of Roddenberry.

And you're surely not going to diss Picard? You're not, are you? Measuring TOS up against VOY is unfair; that was the sixties, and sci-fi was in its infancy. You were EXPECTED to overact. Even then, TOS had some very decent acting.

Edit: anyway, we're not going Trek v Trek: he's defending Voyager, I'm pouring petrol on its corpse and dancing maniacally around it. Well, as maniacally as a fifty-one-year-old man can dance, that is! Also, don't forget that though ALL the Trek series started out with poor acting, they all improved, particularly Riker and Crusher in NExtGen and of course Odo, Sisko and even Quark in DS9. Voyager? Point to one character --- other than the two mentioned already --- who developed even a little over seven years. And yes, I'm including her Janewayness in that. Cardboard actors in a cardboard series. Pah! Pah I say!

So... you're giving the other series a pass on bad acting because of "reasons", but not Voyager? And Deep Space Nine aside, the majority of the characters in all the series never really developed all that much. I get the feeling that you hate Voyager just because it's generally agreed that you should.

Unknown Soldier · 10-18-2014, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Oh I am NOT having that! Have you not seen Walter Koenig as Bester in Babylon 5?? That man can ACT!

Yes he was great in that, but he's had years to go to acting classes since his Trek days.

Quote:

Sulu and Chekov were yougn actors

Didn't know you spoke Chinese

Quote:

And you're surely not going to diss Picard? You're not, are you? Measuring TOS up against VOY is unfair; that was the sixties, and sci-fi was in its infancy. You were EXPECTED to overact. Even then, TOS had some very decent acting.

Picard's a great actor and his stage ability showed, far better than the one dimensional actor that played Sisko in DS9.