News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

The universe according to MMM

Started by Max Rockatansky, December 21, 2022, 12:08:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Who do you think MMM really is?

Wesley Crusher
George Santos
Peewee Herman
Morshu from the Zelda CDi games
Potara fused FritzOwl and Kernals12 (KernalsOwl)
George Soros
Wesley Santos (Wesley Crusher and George Santos fusion)

MultiMillionMiler

If they can fly faster than light, have gravity plating, thrusters, I'm sure they could. In the "into darkness" movie they were hovering in the atmosphere temporarily. I mean come on, they mastered Interstellar travel they can land.


LilianaUwU

Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 25, 2022, 07:09:50 PM
If they can fly faster than light, have gravity plating, thrusters, I'm sure they could. In the "Into Darkness" movie they were hovering in the atmosphere temporarily. I mean come on, they mastered Interstellar travel they can land.

FTFY
"Volcano with no fire... Not volcano... Just mountain."
—Mr. Thwomp

My pronouns are she/her. Also, I'm an admin on the AARoads Wiki.

Max Rockatansky

Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of Star Trek fans dislike the J.J. Abram's movies?  Aren't they also considered alternate canon given it they all stem from a branch in the original timeline?

LilianaUwU

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 25, 2022, 07:37:45 PM
Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of Star Trek fans dislike the J.J. Abram's movies?  Aren't they also considered alternate canon given it they all stem from a branch in the original timeline?
As a Wikipedian, I don't care as long as it's capitalized right.
"Volcano with no fire... Not volcano... Just mountain."
—Mr. Thwomp

My pronouns are she/her. Also, I'm an admin on the AARoads Wiki.

kkt

Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 25, 2022, 07:09:50 PM
If they can fly faster than light, have gravity plating, thrusters, I'm sure they could. In the "into darkness" movie they were hovering in the atmosphere temporarily. I mean come on, they mastered Interstellar travel they can land.

Hovering is very hard.  Must exactly balance weight and force upward, and any breeze that may come along.  Okay, for a helicopter.  Not so easy for a starship the size of an aircraft carrier.

The Abrams universe is noncanonical.  Fan fiction with an unusually large budget, not part of Star Trek.

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 25, 2022, 07:37:45 PM
Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of Star Trek fans dislike the J.J. Abram's movies?

There's been a long-running undercurrent with Star Trek films that existed before the Abrams films, which is it's very hard to turn the essence of Star Trek into a movie that appeals to both the fans and the non-fan audiences. There are only two films out of the 13 that are generally universally acclaimed; otherwise many of them are criticized for ignoring one side of the coin or the other. The fans' gripe with Abrams is he didn't even try to make a film for them. Ironically, I felt the third Abrams film was the closest to the "essence" of Trek of the three and my favorite, but many consider that one to be the weakest of the Abrams films.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

hobsini2

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 25, 2022, 08:11:34 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 25, 2022, 07:37:45 PM
Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of Star Trek fans dislike the J.J. Abram's movies?

There's been a long-running undercurrent with Star Trek films that existed before the Abrams films, which is it's very hard to turn the essence of Star Trek into a movie that appeals to both the fans and the non-fan audiences. There are only two films out of the 13 that are generally universally acclaimed; otherwise many of them are criticized for ignoring one side of the coin or the other. The fans' gripe with Abrams is he didn't even try to make a film for them. Ironically, I felt the third Abrams film was the closest to the "essence" of Trek of the three and my favorite, but many consider that one to be the weakest of the Abrams films.
While I did not like the "switching of roles" in Into Darkness between Kirk and Spock at the end, the backstory of Khan was really good and I have no problem with Benedict Cumberbatch's portrayal. In general, I love the Abrams series for just the shear look of it. Of the original 6 ST movies, the even numbered ones are the best and 6 really holds up over time. But watching 4 with the going back to 1986-1990 San Francisco, while a fun movie, does not age well.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: hobsini2 on December 26, 2022, 10:41:51 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 25, 2022, 08:11:34 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 25, 2022, 07:37:45 PM
Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of Star Trek fans dislike the J.J. Abram's movies?

There's been a long-running undercurrent with Star Trek films that existed before the Abrams films, which is it's very hard to turn the essence of Star Trek into a movie that appeals to both the fans and the non-fan audiences. There are only two films out of the 13 that are generally universally acclaimed; otherwise many of them are criticized for ignoring one side of the coin or the other. The fans' gripe with Abrams is he didn't even try to make a film for them. Ironically, I felt the third Abrams film was the closest to the "essence" of Trek of the three and my favorite, but many consider that one to be the weakest of the Abrams films.
While I did not like the "switching of roles" in Into Darkness between Kirk and Spock at the end, the backstory of Khan was really good and I have no problem with Benedict Cumberbatch's portrayal. In general, I love the Abrams series for just the shear look of it. Of the original 6 ST movies, the even numbered ones are the best and 6 really holds up over time. But watching 4 with the going back to 1986-1990 San Francisco, while a fun movie, does not age well.

The Next Generation movies came the closest IMO to capturing the time of the source show.  That said, I don't think anyone is listing any of the The Next Generation movies as being favorites.  The original Star Trek: The Motion Picture also was close to the time of the show but was also kind of bland.  What I liked about the Star Trek movies from Wrath of Kahn onwards is that it gave most of the cast room to have more personality.  The Abrams movies more or less do the same thing earlier films like the Voyage Home did.  I can't really think of any Star Trek movies I dislike or I thought were bad.  All the same, I think it's fair to say that Wrath of Kahn is the only classic Star Trek movies out of the bunch.

Scott5114

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 26, 2022, 11:46:58 AM
The Next Generation movies came the closest IMO to capturing the time of the source show.  That said, I don't think anyone is listing any of the The Next Generation movies as being favorites.

First Contact was pretty good.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 26, 2022, 11:40:25 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 26, 2022, 11:46:58 AM
The Next Generation movies came the closest IMO to capturing the time of the source show.  That said, I don't think anyone is listing any of the The Next Generation movies as being favorites.

First Contact was pretty good.

I really liked First Contact also.  I would definitely would rank it in the top quarter of Star Trek movies. 

triplemultiplex

Quote from: kkt on December 25, 2022, 07:49:39 PM
The Abrams universe is noncanonical.  Fan fiction with an unusually large budget, not part of Star Trek.

Well, except that Star Trek Picard has made the destruction of Romulus canon now.  So the jumping off point for those "Kelvin timeline" movies is something we have to accept. :?

re: Voyager landing on planets; it strikes me that weight distribution of that ship is such that it would fall forward on its nose if it was sitting on the ground.  The engines and nacelles must be really, really heavy to offset that large 'saucer' section of the ship.

Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 22, 2022, 07:41:29 PM
After seeing ... 10-12 episodes of DS9 (I despise that one),

To each their own, but oof.  They did a lot of good story telling in DS9.  Yeah they dynamited Roddenberry's futurist utopia, but the grand arc of that series was very well done.  I'd advise giving it another chance.  It gets better and better as it goes along and they build to the Dominion War.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

MultiMillionMiler

@kkt

I don't think 23rd century starships would have the same issues with that stuff as helicopters would. They even have inertial dampners to deal with that. If they can remain stable through ion storms, dense nebulas, subspace rifts, a little wind isn't going to affect them.

@triple plex

I hate the politics in star trek, and DS9 is ground zero for that BS, which is why I hate it. And the fact that it takes place on a station kinda defeats the purpose of star "trekking". And the episode "hard time" did it in for me, like they just casually accept what they did to Obrien and let the people on the planet go on their merry way. I take issue with the prime directive in alot of episodes, but that one was way out of line, and the major just stands there and let's them do it. Janeway did a similar BS in "memorial". When the Kazon stranded them on that planet and I was almost thinking "serves them right".

kkt

O'Brien was on THEIR planet.  It's their laws and their way of enforcing them.  What should Starfleet do about it, get all John Wayne and send in a bunch of commandos to get him out of there?  With only a few actual days to plan and execute the rescue before his virtual sentence is over?

I like that DS9 stays put.  That lets them, or forces them, to revisit the same situation when they didn't really solve it the first time.  They can't just warp off to some other planet that never heard of them before.  More complex problems that can't be solved in 35 minutes.  It gives the characters a chance to grow.


Evan_Th

Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 27, 2022, 12:59:31 PM
@kkt

I don't think 23rd century starships would have the same issues with that stuff as helicopters would. They even have inertial dampners to deal with that. If they can remain stable through ion storms, dense nebulas, subspace rifts, a little wind isn't going to affect them.

Atmospheres are a whole lot thicker than ion storms and nebulas (no idea about subspace rifts), so I can totally believe a starship still wouldn't be able to go into atmospheres.

Admittedly, inertial dampers might be able to help... but I have absolutely no idea how they work, so I can't guess there.

MultiMillionMiler

#64
Quote from: kkt on December 27, 2022, 03:06:41 PM
O'Brien was on THEIR planet.  It's their laws and their way of enforcing them.  What should Starfleet do about it, get all John Wayne and send in a bunch of commandos to get him out of there?  With only a few actual days to plan and execute the rescue before his virtual sentence is over?

I like that DS9 stays put.  That lets them, or forces them, to revisit the same situation when they didn't really solve it the first time.  They can't just warp off to some other planet that never heard of them before.  More complex problems that can't be solved in 35 minutes.  It gives the characters a chance to grow.

Doesn't make the laws just. The way they enforce the prime directive is extremely hypocritical and illogical. In "Justice" one Wesley Crusher was enough to violate the rule, but in "Homeward" the lives of millions of aliens was not apparently. And in that DS9 episode, Obrien wasn't even guilty, they just sneaked the sentence out without even notifying them or giving a trial. In "memorial" Janeway was way out of line. She literally risked the mental welfare of children on her ship, and literally any other unsuspecting ship passing by, just for the principle. What if her stupid warning beacon malfunctioned/aliens couldn't understand the language? You destroy the damn thing. Then Janeway has the nerve to throw Tom in the Brig for a month, for once again trying to save a planet (something grossly forbidden in the supposedly advanced, humane, 24th century society). But then she goes out and screws up the timelines just to get her crew own faster. Destroying a device designed to give permanent PTSD to any traveler passing through? Nah that's too much. But creating time paradoxes left and right that affect hundreds of civilizations just for your own personal gain? Perfectly acceptable! I absolutely love every time the ship gets looted, pirated, and stuff stolen from them, or when Q gives Picard a stern lecture, they deserve it so much for their selfishness and arrogance. Sure, lets not help an alien planet by showing them our technology because it might interfere with their natural progression of worshipping tribunal God images and torturing/killing each other over nonsense like we did in the middleages. Lets contact a near-warp developed society and join them into our beaurocratic federation, but not share any of our scientific information or technology, that makes sense!

MultiMillionMiler

Quote from: Evan_Th on December 27, 2022, 03:09:09 PM
Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 27, 2022, 12:59:31 PM
@kkt

I don't think 23rd century starships would have the same issues with that stuff as helicopters would. They even have inertial dampners to deal with that. If they can remain stable through ion storms, dense nebulas, subspace rifts, a little wind isn't going to affect them.

Atmospheres are a whole lot thicker than ion storms and nebulas (no idea about subspace rifts), so I can totally believe a starship still wouldn't be able to go into atmospheres.

Admittedly, inertial dampers might be able to help... but I have absolutely no idea how they work, so I can't guess there.

Or...put up the shields. If they can take phaser blasts and antimatter torpedoes, they can take a little turbulence. Seriously the writers didn't even try to make it make any sense. It's a starship.

kphoger

Why is this thread still called 'Aviation'?  Keeps throwing me off...
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

abefroman329

I guess it's more fun to discuss Star Trek than to discuss whether there will ever be a train capable of traveling at 1,000 miles per hour.

kphoger

Quote from: abefroman329 on December 27, 2022, 04:22:06 PM
I guess it's more fun to discuss Star Trek than to discuss whether there will ever be a train capable of traveling at 1,000 miles per hour.

Which is fine.  I just wish the thread title would now alert me to the fact that I'll find nothing aviation-related in here.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

abefroman329

You know what's (a) fantastic and (b) aviation-related? The new LaGuardia. I flew into there last month, and I got off the plane, and almost marched over to the nearest gate agent and said "Excuse me, I was supposed to be on a flight to LaGuardia."

kphoger

Those new full-body scanners are fantastic looking enough, that I do wonder how many people shout "Beam me up, Scotty!" upon stepping in.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

triplemultiplex

Quote from: MultiMillionMiler on December 27, 2022, 12:59:31 PM
I hate the politics in star trek, and DS9 is ground zero for that BS, which is why I hate it.

Well "politics" was baked into the franchise from the beginning.  The Original Series was constantly using aliens to comment on contemporary issues in the 60's.  Hell the rivalry between The Federation and the Klingons is a clear Cold War allegory.

To me, complaining about politics in scifi is like complaining about hand-held directed energy weapons in scifi.
Not that one can't be clumsy about it and come off heavy-handed, which Trek occasionally does.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

MultiMillionMiler

Actually those body scanners that move around in a circle look like the disintegration machines in the TOS episode "Armageddon".

kkt

The Enterprise crew are healthy young people.  It's not surprising they were interested in sex.  Okay, Kirk overdoes it, because he's the CO and and shouldn't be getting into relationships with anyone who works for him, which is anyone on the ship, and probably should stay away from the first contact situations also because manners about sex are so tricky and often not discussed candidly.

Scott5114

I mean, by the time TNG rolled around, Starfleet working conditions were good enough that people were only working 8 hour shifts, same as today. Now imagine you've got sixteen hours of downtime and you can't leave to go do anything off the ship. Some people will spend that time screwing.

It's also kind of truth in fiction. Apparently most cruise ship employees end up doing the same thing.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.