Star Wars Trivia -Super Bonus Question!!!
#31
Posted 05 April 2004 - 11:09 PM
just a hunch as I wait for the detail-laden answers that probably won't mean a lot to me anyway. never been much of a trekker.
Was v'ger in the sandcrawler interior shot?
#32
Posted 06 April 2004 - 02:03 AM
But then when I found out v'ger was a satillite, the fear subsided.
#33
Posted 06 April 2004 - 09:05 AM
Excellent. I'm a sucker for a good V'ger joke.
Yup. That was a pretty lame plot for the first Star Trek movie. Not that Star Trek ISN'T lame in itself. Nothing that scary about Voyager.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#34
Posted 06 April 2004 - 12:06 PM
"And yes, it's a mean-spirited, nasty trick question, just like your own, of course"
No, I don't consider it a trick question at all. It is perfectly right and fair in all regards. And the clues were also fair. Not even mean-spirited in the least.
I amazed that so many people have trouble with actor 1. There are several people who are Star Wars fans who are aware of him and his work. And I know a few Trekkies that are aware of him too.
Actor 2 is really tough. I admit that, yet my clues should have led people in the right direction. And i never said nobody couldn't do research on this question. I had to include this actor because it is the truth.
Not a back in time episode? Depends really on how you view Star Trek physics, don't you think? It also depends on what the motivations of "you know" who were. Remember "he" had messed with time before to achieve his own ambivalent means? When the trivia is over I will get into a detailed argument of this point.
Besides civilian, what do you have against this style of acting, anyway. 1983-1986 would be lame without these type of people. especially with all the shrapnel in the middle east and the kickbacks in our government.
#35
Posted 06 April 2004 - 12:23 PM
I must be the only person on the planet that didn't think Star Trek: the Motion Picture wasn't that bad.
Granted, it was boring in many parts. It failed to capture the TV series feel and it had a bald woman in it as the sex interest. It also had an ending that left you thinking "what the f@#k, just happened here?' But I still it intriguing in many parts and liked the concept of V-ger being Voyager Six. I rank the star trek movies in this order
1. Wrath of Khan {The ESB of the Star Trek Series}
2. First Contact
3. Voyage Home
4. Search for Spock [underrated, two very powerful scenes}
5. Generations {underrated, the problem was the ending was lousy}
6. The Motion Picture
7. Final Fronteir
8. Nemesis
9. Undiscovered Country
10. Insurection {absolutely dreadful}
#39
Posted 06 April 2004 - 03:11 PM
I don't hate refraining from non-use of triple negatives, either
Geez, I need an editor for my posts. . Do you think George Lucas knows any?
I'm sure you could hire Ben Burtt.... cheap.
--FW
#40
Posted 06 April 2004 - 04:22 PM
#41
Posted 06 April 2004 - 04:40 PM
Wow! A rare triple negative!! What I meant to is that I liked the movie. Or does the triple negative imply that already??
Actually, your statement translated to:
-(-(-(Star Trek: TMP))) = -(Star Trek: TMP)
DIDN'T(WASN'T(BAD(ST:TMP))) = BAD(ST:TMP)
--FW
#42
Posted 06 April 2004 - 05:39 PM
The Undiscovered Country:
To me undiscovered country was a very flat movie. I think they tried to hard to tie the real life events of the Communist fall into the movies plot. I mean it was a little too obvious at times. It also had one of the most unconvincing and boring space fights in Star Trek movie history. It was also not very climatic considering it was the swan song of the original cast. I thought Kim Cattrall's character was really unnecessary and gratuitous. I mean if they were going to have a role like that they should at least get someone along the lines of Kristey Alley {This was in Kim Cattrall's pre "Sex in the City" years}.
Generations
You know this was a very good movie in many ways if you remove the Original cast scenes. It had some very great acting from Patrick Stewart and had a very sad scene in Picard's having learned his brother and his family died. It also a surprisingly great battles scenes. I was shocked when the enterprise crashed on that planet. I mean it was really gripping stuff. Generations failed when it got into the Nexus scene. It was a real lame way to end the movie. I like Generations because for the most part the movie is a very good movie intro for the next Generation cast. Also hearing Data say "Oh, Sh#t!!" had me rolling in the theatre.
Final Frontier
Having the Star Trek crew find God is actually a pretty intriguing and bold concept. In many ways it is the logical step for this series. The overall plot and concept of this movie is great, the problem was in the execution. If Sean Connery had starred in this movie as originally thought, it would have really helped. The whole Star Trek commando hostage rescue thing was great!!! Really exciting and probably real as to what a Starship captain would have to do in reality. The main problem of this movie was it's failure to capitalize on what it was offering. I realize that they probably didn't want to create controversy if they depicted god in the wrong way. Making him another alien seemed like a copout to me. It would be intriguing if the thing they found was Satan instead. But that probably would cause problems too. I appreciate Frontier for the boldness of the concept and realize that there were certain things loaded against it's success. The controversial topic, aging stars, production costs, first time director, failure to get Connery, etc..
Insurrection-
Klingon acne??? Plastic surgery freaks as villains? Boring romance between troi and Riker? Picard doing the merengue? Data singing Gilbert and Sullivan :yuck:
BTW, The TNG crew disobeys orders and wrecks Federation policy for one measly planet nd they get not even one reprimand. Captain Kirk, defeats Klingons, rescues Spock, saves the universe countless times and they ready to throw him into the brig{Voyage Home}
Nemesis[B][U]
I kind of like Nemesis for the reason that it was way better than awful Insurrection. It had an intrigueing plot and villain that was interesting. By no means is it great cinematicaly, but it was okay for a Star trek film. i guess my standards were pretty low after Insurrection. Good battle scenes. I will say that this movies has some of the worse use of music I have seen in a long time. I mean some of the music is so damn inappropriate at times. Watch it again and see what I mean. Cinematography was suprisingly strange in many areas. I wonder if the same cinematographer for Traffic was used for this film. The camerawork is very remeniscent of that movie. To me it was not appropriate for this movie.
#43
Posted 06 April 2004 - 09:27 PM
#44
Posted 07 April 2004 - 12:05 AM
SHUT UP! SHUT UP! JUST TELL US WHO THE GODDAMNED ACTORS ARE AND WE CAN ALL GO HOME!!!
please
Also: The Chefelf.com Lord of the Rings | RoBUTZ (a primative webcomic) | KOTOR 1 NPC profiles |
Music: HYPOID (industrial rock) | Spectrox Toxemia (Death Metal) | Cannibalingus (80s style thrash metal) | Wasabi Nose Bleed (Exp.Techno) | DeadfeeD (Exp.Ambient) |||(more to come)
#45
Posted 07 April 2004 - 01:13 AM
SHUT UP! SHUT UP! JUST TELL US WHO THE GODDAMNED ACTORS ARE AND WE CAN ALL GO HOME!!!
please
I think that's the cue. Barend' sanity is at sake . Is everyone alright with the answer being revealed!!!. I want to hear Chef Elf and Civilians answers first.
BTW, is this the longest thread ever on this forum?