|
|
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » WEHT
| WEHT [message #190365] |
Mo, 02 Januar 2006 23:55 |
|
We know where all the TOS folks are...mostly dead...hehe.
But where have all the main cast characters from other shows ended up.
Any really great or sad stories?
If I see any of them at all it's usually on another ScFi TV show.
Neelix was in a forgetable movie this year, some rip of Logans Run.
So if you have stories...post em if you got em.
I love WEHT stories.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #190366 ] |
Di, 03 Januar 2006 00:58 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #190368 ] |
Di, 03 Januar 2006 02:45 |
|
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
wrote:
> I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
Worst. Actress. Ever.
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195083 ] |
Di, 03 Januar 2006 08:56 |
|
"Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> wrote:
>
> > I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> > play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>
> Worst. Actress. Ever.
>
Dude, two words: Kate Mulgrew
'Nuff said.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195085 ] |
Di, 03 Januar 2006 16:08 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195087 ] |
Di, 03 Januar 2006 20:17 |
|
Kate Mulgrew? She makes Shatner look like DeNiro.
"Bo Raxo" <invasions_r_us [at] thepentagon.removethis.com> wrote in message
news:P6quf.2756$Hl6.864 [at] newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
> message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> > On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> > > play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
> >
> > Worst. Actress. Ever.
> >
>
> Dude, two words: Kate Mulgrew
>
> 'Nuff said.
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195103 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 02:36 |
|
--
Numan
"Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> wrote:
>
>> I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
>> play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>
> Worst. Actress. Ever.
I just finished watching all 4 seasons on DVD and have a new
found appreciation for the cast and the show overall. I still don't
think the characters were THAT likeable.
Anyway, I thought she had her moments. She was pretty good on the Vulcan
arc in season four.
Numan
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195104 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 02:37 |
|
--
Numan
<plantagenet47 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1136300938.481800.101120 [at] g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> If you want to see any truly horrific acting, turn on any soap opera
> (or better yet, Passions). It's not like they're even making the
> attempt to do a decent job.
>
> If anything, IMO most modern Trek actors are more guilty of under-acting
"oh, the pain!"
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195105 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 02:49 |
|
"Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> wrote:
>
> > I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> > play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>
> Worst. Actress. Ever.
>
> --
> Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> Promote someone else.
I thought she was terrific and the 3rd best Vulcan ever.
--
"Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195106 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 02:56 |
|
Glassman wrote:
> "Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
> message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
>
>>On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
>>>play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>>
>>Worst. Actress. Ever.
>>
>>--
>>Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
>>Promote someone else.
>
>
>
> I thought she was terrific and the 3rd best Vulcan ever.
I never disliked Blalock's acting. It's the material that she was given
that I have an issue with.
My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too
physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an
actress.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195107 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 03:14 |
|
On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:56:32 -0500, ToolPackinMama wrote:
> My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too
> physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an
> actress.
I thought her portrayal of a Vulcan was a barley subdued version of
the character she plays in Stargate SG-1. (I know which came first,
of course). I don't think she's much of an actor at all (I like
neither portrayal). There were plenty of actors who "got" playing a
vulcan -- The actors who played Sarek, Spock, Savvik (in ST:III), for
example. There were plenty of "good" Vulcans in Enterprise, too. I
just thought Blaylock did a bad job as a Vulcan and always looked like
she was straining to get the part right.
Of course, the material was usually abysmal, too -- that didn't help.
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195108 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 03:29 |
|
"ToolPackinMama" <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:KqqdnU4x3a_atibenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d [at] comcast.com...
> Glassman wrote:
> > "Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
> > message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> >
> >>On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> >>>play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
> >>
> >>Worst. Actress. Ever.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> >>Promote someone else.
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought she was terrific and the 3rd best Vulcan ever.
>
> I never disliked Blalock's acting. It's the material that she was given
> that I have an issue with.
>
> My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too
> physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an
> actress.
Indeed. The material she was given, let alone that wig, was generally awful.
With awful material, even the best actor can only do so much- let us
remember that Shatner is probably the greatest actor in the world for making
a silk purse out of a sow's ear scriptwise, but even he failed with And The
Children Shall Lead. Blalock had, from what I saw, little to work with but
did her best.
She was excellent when she was given the chance to do something different in
the mirror episodes, and her scene at the end of that one with the Robocop
guy in, mourning the dead baby, that was excellent.
I think really she's taken far too much stick- partly because the series was
crap, partly because some people naturally expect a model-turned-actress to
be crap, and partly because of that fucking awful wig. I mean, Saavik didn't
have a boys' haircut, Valeris didn't have a boys' haircut, T'Pau and T'Prinf
didn't have boys' haircuts. Amanda sure as *feck* didn't have a boys'
haircut. What is it with post-TOS Trek that all the attractive women have to
have terrible hairdos? Was it Bermaga sublimating some kind of mysoginist
impulse or something?
Pon Farr? For women? Sorry? I mean, what was that all about? Are we really
supposed to believe that vulcan children only get conceived the occasional
times mummy and daddy's pon farrs coincide? No wonder there's so few of the
buggers. Are we really supposed to think that T'Pring and Stonn somehow
managed to have an affair without T'Pring being on heat? Anyway, how could
that be? Doesn't it make more sense that Amok Time implies that Pon Farr is
simply the *initiation* of sexual maturity, and if there isn't a handy
female to mate with you lose it and have to wait another 7 years to get the
wood again? What else have Stonn and T'Pring been doing? Three dimensional
chess?
I mean, what was that all about? No wonder nobody liked T'Pol. Pon Farr.
Don't be silly, Bermaga.
Am I ranting again? Be honest.
Ian
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195109 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 03:33 |
|
"Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
message news:mv8edrqekced.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 20:56:32 -0500, ToolPackinMama wrote:
>
> > My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too
> > physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an
> > actress.
>
> I thought her portrayal of a Vulcan was a barley subdued version of
> the character she plays in Stargate SG-1. (I know which came first,
> of course). I don't think she's much of an actor at all (I like
> neither portrayal). There were plenty of actors who "got" playing a
> vulcan -- The actors who played Sarek, Spock, Savvik (in ST:III), for
> example. There were plenty of "good" Vulcans in Enterprise, too. I
> just thought Blaylock did a bad job as a Vulcan and always looked like
> she was straining to get the part right.
>
> Of course, the material was usually abysmal, too -- that didn't help.
The vulcans in the Vulcan episodes- The Forge and stuff, were IMHO
universally diabolically bad. T'Pau and T'Pol's mother out of Blade Runner,
and so forth, were emoting all over the shop. Completely unacceptable. Also,
if memory serves, the girls all had stupid boy vulcan wigs.
I mean, what *is* that all about? Can you imagine Kirk complementing Saavik
on her hair in a turbolift if she'd looked like that? Good grief. For the
wig thing alone, Berman should be flayed alive.
Ian
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195110 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 04:20 |
|
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 02:33:42 -0000, Jaxtraw wrote:
> I mean, what *is* that all about? Can you imagine Kirk complementing Saavik
> on her hair in a turbolift if she'd looked like that? Good grief. For the
> wig thing alone, Berman should be flayed alive.
Agreed.
And I think Robin Curtis played the ultimate female Vulcan (rather
than the too-emotional portrayal by Kirstie Alley). No stupid wig
there.
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195111 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 04:36 |
|
Jaxtraw wrote:
>
> I think really she's taken far too much stick- partly because the series was
> crap, partly because some people naturally expect a model-turned-actress to
> be crap, and partly because of that fucking awful wig. I mean, Saavik didn't
> have a boys' haircut, Valeris didn't have a boys' haircut, T'Pau and T'Prinf
> didn't have boys' haircuts. Amanda sure as *feck* didn't have a boys'
> haircut. What is it with post-TOS Trek that all the attractive women have to
> have terrible hairdos? Was it Bermaga sublimating some kind of mysoginist
> impulse or something?
::highfive!:: Why couldn't they give her a beautiful and exotic
*feminine* Vulcan hairstyle? Female Vulcans were previously shown to be
feminine.
BTW, why couldn't she have Vulcan habits, damn their eyes? What's with
the damned chamomile tea, for example? Vulcans don't need to constantly
drink fluids like humans do! Any Vulcophile knows that! And that
nose-numbing shit was completly wrong: any fan who has been a fan from
the start knows that Vulcans have insensitive noses! Humans can smell
things that they can't!
[Refer: Obsession - Kirk can detect the creature's unique odor, but
Spock is oblivious. When the creature invades the ship, Spock asks a
nearby human if HE smells something... as if he doesn't trust his own nose.]
As for Pon Farr... OMG. Don't get me started on ~that~ subject.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195112 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 04:37 |
|
Jaxtraw wrote:
> The vulcans in the Vulcan episodes- The Forge and stuff, were IMHO
> universally diabolically bad. T'Pau and T'Pol's mother out of Blade Runner,
> and so forth, were emoting all over the shop. Completely unacceptable. Also,
> if memory serves, the girls all had stupid boy vulcan wigs.
Yes, and that sucked.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195114 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 06:30 |
|
"Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
message news:po346rfwoeq9$.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 02:33:42 -0000, Jaxtraw wrote:
>
> > I mean, what *is* that all about? Can you imagine Kirk complementing
Saavik
> > on her hair in a turbolift if she'd looked like that? Good grief. For
the
> > wig thing alone, Berman should be flayed alive.
>
> Agreed.
>
> And I think Robin Curtis played the ultimate female Vulcan (rather
> than the too-emotional portrayal by Kirstie Alley). No stupid wig
> there.
>
Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain Kirstie
Alley's more emotional portrayal.
--
--
"I hope you don't object to my badgering the witless!"
EvilBill - http://www.evilbill.org.uk
yahoo: evilbill_agqx
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195119 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 16:37 |
|
> Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain Kirstie
> Alley's more emotional portrayal.
I don't know why people keep saying that. Saavik wasn't portrayed as
half-Romulan. She was never supposed to be anything but a full-blood
Vulcan.
Check her bio on Startrek.com: They call her Vulcan, nothing else but.
Check the Star Trek encyclopedia: "Saavik, a VULCAN, was mentored by
Spock".
She WASN'T supposed to have been half-Romulan. She's Vulcan, simple as
that.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195120 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 16:50 |
|
"ToolPackinMama" <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:oP6dnUlp7vkpdibeRVn-gA [at] comcast.com...
>
> > Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain
Kirstie
> > Alley's more emotional portrayal.
>
> I don't know why people keep saying that. Saavik wasn't portrayed as
> half-Romulan. She was never supposed to be anything but a full-blood
> Vulcan.
>
> Check her bio on Startrek.com: They call her Vulcan, nothing else but.
>
> Check the Star Trek encyclopedia: "Saavik, a VULCAN, was mentored by
> Spock".
>
> She WASN'T supposed to have been half-Romulan. She's Vulcan, simple as
> that.
I don't see how she could be half Romulan. BoT leaves no doubt that there's
been no contact between Vulcan and the Romulan Star Empire for a very long
time, the Vulcans didn't even know that the Romulans are descended from the
same stock. Was there really time and circumstances between then and TWOK
for a Vulcan and a Romulan to meet and have a child and for that child to
get to Saavik's age (over 20, at least)?
Ian
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195121 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 16:55 |
|
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:37:35 -0500, ToolPackinMama wrote:
>> Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain Kirstie
>> Alley's more emotional portrayal.
>
> I don't know why people keep saying that. Saavik wasn't portrayed as
> half-Romulan. She was never supposed to be anything but a full-blood
> Vulcan.
>
> Check her bio on Startrek.com: They call her Vulcan, nothing else but.
>
> Check the Star Trek encyclopedia: "Saavik, a VULCAN, was mentored by
> Spock".
>
> She WASN'T supposed to have been half-Romulan. She's Vulcan, simple as
> that.
Besides, what explains her "more emotional portrayal" by Alley was
Meyer's attitude about ST continuity. He didn't care what Vulcans
were supposed to be like, he was only concerned with his movie.
OTOH, Nemoy really "got" Vulcans. I complimented Curtis on her
portrayal of Saavik when I met her once, and she gave all the credit
to Nemoy and his direction.
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195124 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 20:25 |
|
"ToolPackinMama" <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:oP6dnUlp7vkpdibeRVn-gA [at] comcast.com...
>
>> Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain
>> Kirstie
>> Alley's more emotional portrayal.
>
> I don't know why people keep saying that. Saavik wasn't portrayed as
> half-Romulan. She was never supposed to be anything but a full-blood
> Vulcan.
>
> Check her bio on Startrek.com: They call her Vulcan, nothing else but.
>
> Check the Star Trek encyclopedia: "Saavik, a VULCAN, was mentored by
> Spock".
>
> She WASN'T supposed to have been half-Romulan. She's Vulcan, simple as
> that.
Actually, the thoughts come from the novelization, and there may or may not
be deleted scenes from TWOK that support this.
There was even a decent novel based on the premise - I think it was called
"The Pandora Principle"
Now, it's possible it was something considered by TPTB and then rejected,
which would account for the discrepencies. While I think the concept would
be fascinating, I will agree that there is currently no CANONICAL evidence
for it.
--
--
Laura Ware (bookwormlady [at] earthlink.net)
Invalid thought detected. Close all mental processes and restart body.
Visit my blog at http://lauraslook.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195125 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 21:54 |
|
"Laura Ware" <bookwormlady [at] NOBADSTUFearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bjVuf.2172
>
> Actually, the thoughts come from the novelization, and there may or may
not
> be deleted scenes from TWOK that support this.
> There was even a decent novel based on the premise - I think it was called
> "The Pandora Principle"
> Now, it's possible it was something considered by TPTB and then rejected,
> which would account for the discrepencies. While I think the concept
would
> be fascinating, I will agree that there is currently no CANONICAL evidence
> for it.
If memory serves, it was in the original script and then later dropped. I
guess they just didn't rewrite Saavik's scenes to make her more Vulcan.
--
--
"I hope you don't object to my badgering the witless!"
EvilBill - http://www.evilbill.org.uk
yahoo: evilbill_agqx
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195126 ] |
Mi, 04 Januar 2006 22:04 |
|
Here's my spin: the better Trek captains (Picard and Sisko) tried to be
their own men. Picard, for example, was about as unlike Kirk as I think
could have been written (and I think Stewart played him very good). On the
other hand, I think they tried making Archer a little to much like Kirk.
What I would have loved seeing in writing Archer is to go for Bakula's
strengths as an actor and mold the character instead of making a character
and have Bakula play him. What I would have ESPECIALLY loved is maybe have
Archer be (dare I say it?) a bit more like Sam Beckett?
"ken maines" <km666 [at] anonymous.net> wrote in message
news:43b9af62$0$72805$892e7fe2 [at] authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
> We know where all the TOS folks are...mostly dead...hehe.
> But where have all the main cast characters from other shows ended up.
> Any really great or sad stories?
> If I see any of them at all it's usually on another ScFi TV show.
> Neelix was in a forgetable movie this year, some rip of Logans Run.
>
> So if you have stories...post em if you got em.
> I love WEHT stories.
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195130 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 00:06 |
|
>>>I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
>>>>> play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>>
>>>
>>> Worst. Actress. Ever.
>
>
> I just finished watching all 4 seasons on DVD and have a new
> found appreciation for the cast and the show overall. I still don't
> think the characters were THAT likeable.
>
> Anyway, I thought she had her moments. She was pretty good on the Vulcan
> arc in season four.
Blalock would be so-so as Harrington. I like Blalock, it's just a
question of casting. Harrington should be tall and athletic, with
classic features and a cultured voice. Blalock is a little to
small and frail for Harrington. Plus, I've seen Blalock trying to
do physical moves in "Enterprise" and she just doesn't have much
talent for physical, athletic stuff.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195131 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 00:08 |
|
>>>> I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
>>>> play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
>>>
>>>
>>> Worst. Actress. Ever.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
>>> Promote someone else.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought she was terrific and the 3rd best Vulcan ever.
>
>
> I never disliked Blalock's acting. It's the material that she was given that I have an issue with.
>
> My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an actress.
Exactly! What I said in another post. Blalock is too frail for
Harrington, who is very athletic (Harrington was genetically
modified to thrive on a gravity-heavy planet, so she is stronger
and faster than the average person, man or woman).
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195132 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 00:09 |
|
> I think really she's taken far too much stick- partly because the series was
> crap, partly because some people naturally expect a model-turned-actress to
> be crap, and partly because of that fucking awful wig. I mean, Saavik didn't
> have a boys' haircut, Valeris didn't have a boys' haircut, T'Pau and T'Prinf
> didn't have boys' haircuts. Amanda sure as *feck* didn't have a boys'
> haircut. What is it with post-TOS Trek that all the attractive women have to
> have terrible hairdos? Was it Bermaga sublimating some kind of mysoginist
> impulse or something?
At least they didn't give Blalock the Princess Leya.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195134 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:20 |
|
I just read on Wiki that Weber is against Angelina Jolie playing
Honor Harrington. Is the man mad? Quick! Contain him with a net
before he injures himself. He is clearly unfit to function without
restraints, and his illness has weakened his eyesight.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195135 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:24 |
|
Jaxtraw wrote:
> "ToolPackinMama" <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
> news:oP6dnUlp7vkpdibeRVn-gA [at] comcast.com...
>
>>>Saavik was supposed to be half-Romulan however, which might explain
>
> Kirstie
>
>>>Alley's more emotional portrayal.
>>
>>I don't know why people keep saying that. Saavik wasn't portrayed as
>>half-Romulan. She was never supposed to be anything but a full-blood
>>Vulcan.
>>
>>Check her bio on Startrek.com: They call her Vulcan, nothing else but.
>>
>>Check the Star Trek encyclopedia: "Saavik, a VULCAN, was mentored by
>>Spock".
>>
>>She WASN'T supposed to have been half-Romulan. She's Vulcan, simple as
>>that.
>
>
> I don't see how she could be half Romulan. BoT leaves no doubt that there's
> been no contact between Vulcan and the Romulan Star Empire for a very long
> time, the Vulcans didn't even know that the Romulans are descended from the
> same stock. Was there really time and circumstances between then and TWOK
> for a Vulcan and a Romulan to meet and have a child and for that child to
> get to Saavik's age (over 20, at least)?
Good point!
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195136 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:27 |
|
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz wrote:
> OTOH, Nemoy really "got" Vulcans. I complimented Curtis on her
> portrayal of Saavik when I met her once, and she gave all the credit
> to Nemoy and his direction.
That's interesting. :)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195137 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:29 |
|
Laura Ware wrote:
> Now, it's possible it was something considered by TPTB and then rejected,
> which would account for the discrepencies. While I think the concept would
> be fascinating, I will agree that there is currently no CANONICAL evidence
> for it.
Exactly. Officially she's Vulcan, simple as that.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195138 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:27 |
|
"ToolPackinMama" <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:KqqdnU4x3a_atibenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d [at] comcast.com...
> Glassman wrote:
> > "Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz" <starfist.at.gmail.dot.com> wrote in
> > message news:1xp473qvt2n4u.dlg [at] starfist.thorsfinni...
> >
> >>On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:58:06 -0600, Keeper of the Purple Twilight
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I heard Jolene Blalock's name bandied about as a possible choice to
> >>>play the title role in the Honor Harrington movie.
> >>
> >>Worst. Actress. Ever.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> >>Promote someone else.
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought she was terrific and the 3rd best Vulcan ever.
>
> I never disliked Blalock's acting. It's the material that she was given
> that I have an issue with.
>
> My only complaint with Blaylock herself is that she seemed too
> physically frail to be a sturdy Vulcan. Generally, I like her as an
> actress.
I thought Blaylock was superior in her role. In the closeups during a
tense situation, you could see her often trying to control her eyes from
flashing, and her throat from gulping. She looked genuinely conflicted and
that was terrific acting. She often was fighting her emotions so hard, that
I was moved by her expressions. Maybe I'm one of the few here that feels
this way, but I need to defend her. I rate her 3rd behind Spock and Tuvoc as
my fav Vulcans of alltime. She's also not too hard to look at and a babe.
--
"Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195139 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:30 |
|
EvilBill wrote:
> "Laura Ware" <bookwormlady [at] NOBADSTUFearthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:bjVuf.2172
>
>>Actually, the thoughts come from the novelization, and there may or may
>
> not
>
>>be deleted scenes from TWOK that support this.
>>There was even a decent novel based on the premise - I think it was called
>>"The Pandora Principle"
>>Now, it's possible it was something considered by TPTB and then rejected,
>>which would account for the discrepencies. While I think the concept
>
> would
>
>>be fascinating, I will agree that there is currently no CANONICAL evidence
>>for it.
>
>
> If memory serves, it was in the original script and then later dropped. I
> guess they just didn't rewrite Saavik's scenes to make her more Vulcan.
I would have preferred for her to be half-Romulan, or something, cos as
a Vulcan she kind of sucked.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195140 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:30 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHTrout [message #195141 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:31 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195142 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:45 |
|
Benjamin Pavsner wrote:
> Here's my spin: the better Trek captains (Picard and Sisko) tried to be
> their own men. Picard, for example, was about as unlike Kirk as I think
> could have been written (and I think Stewart played him very good). On the
> other hand, I think they tried making Archer a little to much like Kirk.
Archer is NOTHING like Kirk.
1) Archer almost never smiles. Kirk smiles easily and frequently.
2) Archer thinks it's OK to torture a prisoner for information. Kirk
doesn't believe in that sort of thing.
3) Archer has chest hair. Kirk doesn't.
4) Archer doesn't apparently have any friends. Kirk forms close,
devoted, fiercely loyal, abiding bonds with several friends.
5) Archer likes sports, particularly water polo. Kirk seems oblivious
to the very existance of team sports: never watches, never plays,
doesn't care who won.
6) Archer has all kinds of daddy issues. Kirk apparently didn't even
have a daddy: never mentions his parents at all!
7) Archer is awkward when dealing with non-human species. Kirk gets
along beautifully with anybody, so long as they don't piss him off.
8) Archer has trouble expressing himself with words. Kirk is
effortlessly glib and he usually has something witty, even eloquent, to say.
9) Archer doesn't seem to know what he feels, most of the time, and has
problems with even naming his emotions. Kirk is freely, openly
emotional, and can name his own emotions (even mixed ones) accurately -
and his emotional responses are usually appropiate. He knows how to
discharge negative emotions harmlessly, for example.
I could go on....
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195143 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:47 |
|
Glassman wrote:
> I thought Blaylock was superior in her role. In the closeups during a
> tense situation, you could see her often trying to control her eyes from
> flashing, and her throat from gulping. She looked genuinely conflicted and
> that was terrific acting. She often was fighting her emotions so hard, that
> I was moved by her expressions.
I agree. I thought she was great in close-ups. Her facial and voice
work was good.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195144 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 04:52 |
|
ToolPackinMama wrote:
> Archer is NOTHING like Kirk.
FWIW:
http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/kirk10.htm
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195145 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 05:14 |
|
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:45:45 -0500, ToolPackinMama
<laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote:
>Benjamin Pavsner wrote:
>> Here's my spin: the better Trek captains (Picard and Sisko) tried to be
>> their own men. Picard, for example, was about as unlike Kirk as I think
>> could have been written (and I think Stewart played him very good). On the
>> other hand, I think they tried making Archer a little to much like Kirk.
>
>Archer is NOTHING like Kirk.
>
>1) Archer almost never smiles. Kirk smiles easily and frequently.
>2) Archer thinks it's OK to torture a prisoner for information. Kirk
>doesn't believe in that sort of thing.
>3) Archer has chest hair. Kirk doesn't.
>4) Archer doesn't apparently have any friends. Kirk forms close,
>devoted, fiercely loyal, abiding bonds with several friends.
>5) Archer likes sports, particularly water polo. Kirk seems oblivious
>to the very existance of team sports: never watches, never plays,
>doesn't care who won.
>6) Archer has all kinds of daddy issues. Kirk apparently didn't even
>have a daddy: never mentions his parents at all!
>7) Archer is awkward when dealing with non-human species. Kirk gets
>along beautifully with anybody, so long as they don't piss him off.
>8) Archer has trouble expressing himself with words. Kirk is
>effortlessly glib and he usually has something witty, even eloquent, to say.
>9) Archer doesn't seem to know what he feels, most of the time, and has
>problems with even naming his emotions. Kirk is freely, openly
>emotional, and can name his own emotions (even mixed ones) accurately -
>and his emotional responses are usually appropiate. He knows how to
>discharge negative emotions harmlessly, for example.
>
>I could go on....
Please do.
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195147 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 05:47 |
|
MrSpook wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:45:45 -0500, ToolPackinMama
> <laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Benjamin Pavsner wrote:
>>
>>>Here's my spin: the better Trek captains (Picard and Sisko) tried to be
>>>their own men. Picard, for example, was about as unlike Kirk as I think
>>>could have been written (and I think Stewart played him very good). On the
>>>other hand, I think they tried making Archer a little to much like Kirk.
>>
>>Archer is NOTHING like Kirk.
>>
>>1) Archer almost never smiles. Kirk smiles easily and frequently.
>>2) Archer thinks it's OK to torture a prisoner for information. Kirk
>>doesn't believe in that sort of thing.
>>3) Archer has chest hair. Kirk doesn't.
>>4) Archer doesn't apparently have any friends. Kirk forms close,
>>devoted, fiercely loyal, abiding bonds with several friends.
>>5) Archer likes sports, particularly water polo. Kirk seems oblivious
>>to the very existance of team sports: never watches, never plays,
>>doesn't care who won.
>>6) Archer has all kinds of daddy issues. Kirk apparently didn't even
>>have a daddy: never mentions his parents at all!
>>7) Archer is awkward when dealing with non-human species. Kirk gets
>>along beautifully with anybody, so long as they don't piss him off.
>>8) Archer has trouble expressing himself with words. Kirk is
>>effortlessly glib and he usually has something witty, even eloquent, to say.
>>9) Archer doesn't seem to know what he feels, most of the time, and has
>>problems with even naming his emotions. Kirk is freely, openly
>>emotional, and can name his own emotions (even mixed ones) accurately -
>>and his emotional responses are usually appropiate. He knows how to
>>discharge negative emotions harmlessly, for example.
>>
>>I could go on....
>
>
>
> Please do.
OK. :)
10) Archer can't enflame the ladies even when he wants to. Kirk gets
laid even when he doesn't want to! [Refer: Wink Of An Eye)
11) Archer has to keep explaining to his people that he's in charge.
When Kirk walks in the room, everybody knows he's in charge before he
even opens his mouth.
:)
|
|
|
| Re: WEHT [message #195150 ] |
Do, 05 Januar 2006 06:45 |
|
FWIW, Archer always seemed to me to be a Picard in the rough: a
rough-draft Picard. Picard is waaaaay more sophisticated and subtle.
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: So Feb 5 15:42:20 CET 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,11348 Sekunden |
