T'aral

Welcome back.

Last time it was merely a storage compartment of wheat. This time we shall feast upon the blood of your people!

Welcome: come stay a while, and perhaps indulge in pastry.

Yes - and removing one of the '9's in the second or third place makes it work even better. You get a better progression of numbers. And yes - the blue uniform was bugging me, since I work in Engineering. I hope this looks good enough. ---------------------------------------- And the Sig' immediately jumps in onto everything. I should mention: the Naval Construction Contract # ( NCC-1703 ) is not standard. NCC-1707 is the Contract # according to SFTM, but I see that a different # was chosen ... whatever. Note: This sig' image can be modified for any rank or branch of the service and customized for individual appeal - available on request.

Great Scott! { Cheap TP rolls go flying. } --- On a more serious note - greetings. I hope to pleasantly interact with you as time permits.

Personally I never had much regard for a 'vast array of ship styles'. It's hell to develop a ship configuration in the first place. Is a shipyard going to make every vessel a complete custom design? There should've been one or two standard hull configurations. The innards and weapons configurations can be vastly different, but the hull silouette should be the same. Nuclear aircraft carriers, destroyers, and submarines basically look the same. Weapon mounts and gun types will probably vary, but from a distance you can't tell one from another. In the Vulcan rescue trip, I don't think there were two vessels that looked alike. My preference, I concede, is a preference. PS: Leila - I'm just loving that sig.

Hello Cap'. Definitely change the name - you don't want to miss out on the fun of being an Ensign, after all. :P And Leila; like Kansas said, there's a difference between a primary character and a one-shot presence in a single TOS episode which you haven't even modeled your character after. I wouldn't sweat it.

Or, it could be just an incredibly weak plot device meant simply to let this movie series diverge from prior ST lore. :P

Personally I was more visualizing 'Red Bachetta' by Rush. However, 'Intergalactic' would work well, expecially since two lines before the fateful ST reference the lyrics go ... "... Beastie Boys - don't you let the beat ... ... ... drop!" If the car went over the cliff at right that moment, it would've been perfect.

Each movie should stand on its own. There seems to be a belief in the world that you are either one or the other: either story-driven or action-driven. There seems to be little attempt to find a medium. You can't have a vilian unless he's capable of destroying the entire universe ( even if it's just one piece at a time ). You can't have Spock simply have an emotional attachment - he's got to be having an unethical relationship with one of the cadets. Kirk can't simply be troubled: he's got to be trouble. There's no subtlety to the story; it all has to be over the top. Yes: Star Trek TMP was a snoozer. Yet there's no reason to say that you can't do better than that without re-playing a variant of the 'Bongo' scene from Star Wars TPM, only this time in arctic conditions. :) You're not offending me: you're offending the original designer who did his best with the budget available to produce a believable starship. What he produced became an iconic image for decades. For myself I liked the classic designs, thought the TMP designs were a nice development, though really didn't like TNG engines. I liked the more mechanical look of the older systems. TOS Enterprise had one primary flaw: the engine struts were flimsy. This was illustrated in the old plastic models of the starship, which usually had a sagging engine somewhere. ;) It could've been improved without such massive renovation. All the same - I do agree it is a nice looking vessel; just that it reflects the overall philosophy of the movie ... flash over substance.

It's not Enlightenment, but we like it!

While I hope I haven't offered as much emotionalism as 'sad' has, his ( her? ) post did detail the fundamental flaws with this movie. I agree with all those who said 'thank God they didn't spend ten minutes lovingly looking over the beautiful starship'. A certain level of increased pace is welcome. However: the people who came to this movie wanted to watch 'Star Trek'; not Star Wars or 5th Element or King Kong or any number of other movies which are breakneck on pace but slow on story. And yes: I would also have preferred if the Enterprise looked like the Enterprise - cleaned up a little perhaps, but fundamentally the same. The changes in the bridge were also unwelcome: sure, the gummy-bear colored panels with no indicators needed changing, but a lot could be fixed without making the whole bridge out of transparent plastic. As Sam Kent said: this is a discussion. It is unreasonable to assume that we will all agree on matters. 'Sad' was looking for the original story: instead we got what we got - good in some ways, poor in others. That is my opinion, and I'm content with the fact that it stands apart from others.

Welcome Vulcan - I hope you find your place among us. Live Long and Prosper.

It's a good point, though a bit off. Of these three, only one truly qualifies: The Immunity Syndrome. That one is a prime example of how the Enterprise was supposed to die, yet miraculously survived. The Doomsday Machine was overpowering, yet was fundamentally flawed ( and it only ate one starship ). Get far enough away and it leaves you alone. It would take some time, but someone would've figured out that the best way to kill a dragon is to throw something down its throat. Operation: Annihilate! demonstrated a powerful enemy, yet one which had a very basic flaw: the killer egg-foo-yung paddies always remained in the shade. Then again, they could've always been nuked from orbit and the colony written off: that woud've worked. ( Instead they were simply microwaved. :) ) The Romulan vessel took out how many starships? T.D.M. had the power and the invulnerability, but was too stupid to pursue. Once serious damage was taken ships would've been able to back away. And do you recall the size of the Romulan mining vessel? It had to be about ten times larger then the Ebony-Glass Bugle of Death. Just submitting the arguement: bigger isn't better.

Honestly, though - much of the love pouring out for this movie is based on the glitz & glam. It doesn't have to be Star Trek ... 5th Element had pretty much everything this movie did, though the humor was - in a way - strangely less contrived. What bothers me most of all is the gigantic enemy. It is cliche' these days, but the enemy always has to be gigantic: some overpowering, awe inspiring thing that one cannot possibly overcome yet somehow always does. Was it Star Wars that started that theme with the Death Star? If the threats were less impossible, the solutions could be less unbelievable. After all the crashes & booms, the story is what remains. If there was one good thing that carried through the TOS movie series, it was a minimum of impossible opponents and the fact that the movies didn't attempt to top one after another as the sequels progressed. They told stories: one after another. Maybe not the best stories at times, but worlds didn't have to be destroyed in order for the story to move forward. For the next movie, I'm fully expecting Marvel Comic's Galactus to make an appearance.

Mahoundma Ghandi begins his protest of passive resistance.

On an amusing personal note: if you type in today's date into a Microsoft Spreadsheet, then change the format to a fixed-place number and divide by 10, today's date converts to a Stardate that's right in the middle of TOS - 2nd season. Gawd, I'm such a geek!

Time for Ensign T'Aral's full critique. It stands as an action movie, but that is almost all the positive credit I can give it. Whomever took the reigns of this film wimped out early by *not* choosing to make a film that would stand up to a canonical review. The characters of Kirk, Spock, and the others are not the Adademy versions of the officers we would come to know. 1) Kirk is an emo-punk. The "Kobiashi Maru" solution was pathetic. 2) Uhura and Spock 'getting it on'? Not a bad pairing, but pretty much rushed right into it - didn't they? Not only that, but Uhura was a cadet while Spock was an instructor ... isn't that a walking ethics violation? Also, Spock was far too responsive. 3) The heros rush in but ultimately Vulcan is destroyed. While it's true that such things happen, one misses a greater point. The movie could've spent a lot more time in development if it didn't waste such time in needless action scenes. Bottom line: a far better story with far more character development could have been written if the writers took the basic premise, re-arranged it so that the scope of the thread was smaller, and ultimately arrived at a conclusion where ch'Rihan was *saved* - thus ending on a far more positive note in terms of galactic peace. I could write the outline for such a story given enough time, and there would be far more room for characters to interact. The conflict between Spock and Kirk starting with the 'Maru' senario was good, as was some of the early development of Spock. These, for me, were the good parts of the movie. The over-abundance of action and the emo characters stole worlds away.

Welcome and good day!

I see from the rules that one has to earn their way to GM status. While I understand and respect the rules of the forum, I also have a senario banging about in my head. What's a girl to do?

;) I think we have a winner!

Do not feel bad about being primarily familiar with TOS - that is why I sought to join the Hood. So much happened with all other series that I didn't keep track of - there was no way I would be able to play effectively. TOS is so much better for me; like a warm blanket I can wrap about my shoulders.

Given my preference for tea and whole-grain bagels I expect I will be an oddity, then.

I know ... I'm changing my look again. I got my requested post on board the HOOD, and I felt that a period uniform would be more appropriate.

Oh no ... what I have in mind would work for an Academy senario, perhaps a carry-over to two sessions ( as was done in the Sunday session ), but not more than that. Perhaps an Academy instructor may have some interest. It's a bit more involved than many ( though not all ) of the Academy senarios I encountered, but maybe someone would like that. As for a new sim - well sure that would be fun, but I have a great deal more to learn before I'm ready for that and ( as you noted ), there would be a need for more participants. But then, if I did everything in the world I wanted tomorrow, what would I have to do for next week?