StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/index.php3

So fucking true.
Should invite the guy in here.

I'm howling after reading the "Meet the characters" page

He's getting more and more pissed off with every review. He'd fit right in here.

We really should invite the guy here.

This is what happens when you have a Trek prequel headed up by people who are not fans, don't know the history, have repeatedly tried to downplay the value of TOS, and in the case of Braga, "prides" himself on not having watched the original series. This is also what you end up with when you hire writers of "Robocop 3" or "Baywatch".

WAAAHAHAHAHHA

From the site about the actors:
(http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/cast/index.php3)

Because slut Blalock was "supposed" to be the show's sex symbol, they try to tone down Park's natural beauty by almost always having her hair up in a bun or something. The one time she didn't, a scene in "Civilization", and teenage boys everywhere paused the tape and beat off to it.

There's the old joke: Mary-Ann or Ginger? More boys go with Mary-Ann. Hoshi or T'Pol? Hoshi of course. A simple poll with teenage boys at conventions will verify this for Paramount. Linda Parks is sexier.

But - who are Mary-Ann and Ginger?

Jolene Blalock

Jolene Blalock is not beautiful. She looks like a slut, and dresses like one, too. Blalock was hired because she is a Bimbo who took off her clothes for Maxim, and Braga hired her for that reason in an attempt to lure in the horny teenage boys with short-attention-spans at the expense of a legitimate actress who could have taken the character fairly far. I don't recall Kirstie Alley sporting a pair of BJ lips when she played Saavik in Star Trek 2.

Sadly, in Hollywood, this is what they think sexy is. They don't understand that silicone boobs, collagen lips and "Ally McBeal pouting" (tm) will almost always get beaten out by the girl next door look. To quote one Enterprise watcher on the TrekBBS, "It looks like someone beat the sh*t out of her...and then starved her for three weeks. Poor girl."


Also, Brannon Braga wants a hot model on standby so when his relationship with Jeri Ryan breaks up, he's got another bimbo to stick his dick in to.

If that's really the case. Braga might not be as stupid as we all think.


I also like this one.

Porthos

One of the most talented actors on the show, the dog who plays Porthos is so good, they hired two of them to trade off, just like they did with the Olsen Twins on "Full House".

Outshining the abilities of Bakula and certainly Blalock, it only took one year before Braga broke yet another promise of not doing a Porthos-based episode, as the second season "A Night in Sickbay" focuses on the pooch.

I can occassionally find some niggling thing on which I disagree, but overall he is exceedingly accurate. Especially when it comes to character development (Mayweather in particular).

An ancient technique abandoned centuries ago? And T'Pol just discovers it? Berman and Braga won't stop until these characters have discovered or invented virtually everything that we know and understand about the original series. What's next? T'Pol is Spock's grandmother? Trip invents energy shields? Reed invents Phasers? Archer personally creates the Federation by himself in the two-hour series finale?

Whats even scarier is that a few episodes later, Trip and Reed DO invent energy sheilds.

RedImperator wrote:He's getting more and more pissed off with every review. He'd fit right in here.

For that reason, I actually think we don't need more of his persausion; we already have enough people who hate ENT for all the wrong reasons yet make a point of saying "it SUCKS" at least once daily.

The author of that site is funny, but his overly emotional response to the entire franchise hurts his arguments. And like many who mercilessly rip modern Trek, he's your typical "exaggerate to the sky" type. Even with humor, that gets old.

Now, I think it's fine for someone to bash ENT if they have well-reasoned arguments to back that up...to accept it as "given" because lots of folks trash the thing is no more acceptable than glibly conceiving the world as flat.

There is VERY GOOD reason to give that show a hard time, often. Invariably, though, I see people unduly exaggerating about how bad it is. It's oftentimes hip to be a major critic, to be down on things: witness the way much of Hollywood railed against the last Iraq War, even when most of the actors so doing couldn't even tell you why they were against it.

I get tired of what's "hip." I even get tired of seeing myself say such things on occassion.

As such, I will certainly point out when someone else is exaggerating and bashing to an extent that's bullshit. Saying ENT is the "worst TV show," that the dog is the best actor, and some such things come to mind as stridently unsubstantatied, even stupid claims with little comedic value as we've heard it all before. Besides, that is unconstructive, and I guarantee you that if the subject matter was somewhat different, that same kind of bandwagon-driven hyperbole would be smacked down with a vengeance. (Try exaggerating a lot about, oh, say, TWOK or TESB and see what happens .)

Oh well.

Like I said, the guy's reviews ARE pretty funny when he doesn't just beat a dead horse; e.g., "the best actor is a cute little dog" bullshit. And I don't think he's necessarily saying all those things because, like many others, he's just a parrot that repeats what he/she believes will please everyone else.

But he quickly goes down that track, and you can see it upon examining no more than two pages of his site. Notice how he goes on about how he thinks Linda Park is much better-looking than Jolene Blalock. This time, we DO have a clear-cut case of being contrary as a means to being "cool."

Do not misunderstand me. I think Park is real cute. But I've seen lots of photos of the girl, publicity shots that had her all made-up, sexy to the hilt. Looking at those photos, it is clear no one is trying to make her plainer such that Blalock, in contrast, can look even sexier. (The fact that Blalock is wearing a little boy's bowl cut and acts like she has a 7' stick permanently lodged up her ass makes this claim almost incredible...wouldn't it simply be easier to let Jolene's hair down, figuratively AND literally, if Blalock's sexiness was the impression they wanted to leave you with?)

And let's face it...the basis of this knee-jerk is quite transparent. In addition to being different than the norm--for many, itself a kind of psuedo-intellect virtue--we know what's going on here. Your typical Star Trek fan isn't often some perfectly formed hunk who has to beat the women off with a stick.

No...having watched footage of Trek conventions, and having stood in large crowds outside ST (AND Star Wars, among others) movie premieres, I do not think it is a BAD generalization to note that the typical die-hard ST fans are a physically rather unfit bunch. They love a TV series, so this isn't much of a surprise...they spend a lot of time sitting around watching TV when they could be active!

There is nothing wrong with being skinny, fat, or skinny AND fat/softish. HOWEVER, people have to live in their own skins. This is inescapable even with tons of LSD or some kind of major delusion!

And though I think someone's body is a relatively low priority inasmuch as nabbing a chick is concerned--handsome face is usually more than enough where looks go; talking bullshit is by far the no. one requirement--the simple fact of the matter is, most fat guys will NOT typically feel as if they'll have a shot at the Blalocks of the world. Some skinny kid with buck-teeth and thick glasses will feel the same way.

At some level, these guys, like everyone else, are attracted by that to which they can relate. They can't relate to some small-waisted girl with an ass from Heaven and big silicone tits, because all of the girls they've EVER known that are remotely like that never gave them the time of day, let alone be in a relationship with them.

These guys understand, deep down, that they'd have a potential shot with a wallflower, a pretty girl like Park that isn't just striking in every conceivable way. That is, I should say, they believe they'd have a potentially BETTER chance...it's still a long shot, they realize, but the Linda Parks of the world are something a little closer to ground level for them. A wild party girl with perfect tits and ass like Blalock is so far removed from their reality that she might as WELL be a fucking Vulcan.

So they nitpick Blalock's lips (which I think are nice, fake or not) and they bash her in every way they can. Subconsciously, they are trying to save face, preemptively turning down the dance with the prom queen who, they believe, would never notice them in the first place. All this has very little to do with Jolene beyond the fact that she's real hot and a convenient target for such projections.

You know it is true in LOTS of cases. It's just like the old jokes about how the sexiest women go ignored because men are too intimidated by them. Hoshi gets so much attention in spite of herself, for the most part at least, IMO.

Why am I raising so much hell about this? Because the reviewer at that website does.

Upon closer inspection, he raises LOTS of these bandwagon/kneejerk contentions, to the point that much of his angry website is predicated on them. He does this so much that I submit many of his observations, while funny and oftentimes accurate, are misleading and flawed. As is likely the case with the Blalock bashing, the guy doesn't even mean what he says!

For instance, he claimed he refused to see "Nemesis" on the basis that it would put money, however little, in B&B's pockets (nevermind "supporting" all the other Trek people that we've known and liked since '87, I guess).

Well...what the fuck? A principle-driven boycott is fine, but why single out "Nemesis"? Why not the boycott the previous three films as well?

I'll tell you why: because only after DS9 went off the air did we really hear people going apeshit on Blowjob and Buttplug.

They'd been there all along, but the majority of fans didn't get too riled up about the pair. With DS9 waning, it simply became far more popular to bash those two to pieces. This has increased to fever pitch in the last two years.

The trouble is, the two guys deserve almost 90% of the flak they get, so most people think they are justified in slamming everything those two cook up. Indeed, I myself am very disappointed with the way they have conducted the Trek franchise. But will I bash them simply because everyone else does all the sudden?

Fuck, no. If I was to bash them, I'd slam them for arguably the cheapest death of a hero--KIRK!--of recent cinema in "Generations." I'd nitpick many of the weaknesses in DS9 to death. I'd shit all over VGR and some of their "work" on TNG. I'd go nuts about some picayune shit in "First Contact," and foam at the mouth over "Insurrection."

It is inconsistent to suddenly come out and boycott those guys' work; so, either this website guy is admittedly inconsistent (he DID go to see "Insurrection," which is arguably MUCH worse than "Nemesis")--and therefore, not terribly reliable to begin with--or he's done as many have and jumped on the anti-B&B bandwagon.

For that matter, when DID it become cool to angrily voice all sorts of opposition to something just for the sake thereof? (I would imagine it's always been around, but of late might be symptomatic of the grunge/nihilist/"life sucks" influence from the 90's as well.)

Like Tom Wolfe said shortly after _A Man In Full_ came out, many young writers today pen some book all about their "angst," then they burn out. Similarly, I think too many people have become comfortable with just blowing off steam all the time rather than trying to arrive at some kernel of truth.

If the fellow at that website would calm down a bit he might be able to do just that. He could be funny AND consistently insightful instead of copping out and going into "mindless bash" mode, after all.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:From the site about the actors:
(http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/cast/index.php3)

Because slut Blalock was "supposed" to be the show's sex symbol, they try to tone down Park's natural beauty by almost always having her hair up in a bun or something. The one time she didn't, a scene in "Civilization", and teenage boys everywhere paused the tape and beat off to it.

There's the old joke: Mary-Ann or Ginger? More boys go with Mary-Ann. Hoshi or T'Pol? Hoshi of course. A simple poll with teenage boys at conventions will verify this for Paramount. Linda Parks is sexier.

But - who are Mary-Ann and Ginger?

That is a joke right??? please tell me you know who Mary-Ann and Ginger from Gilligan's Island are.
BTW I'd prefer Mary-Ann to Ginger.

Death from the Sea wrote: BTW I'd prefer Mary-Ann to Ginger.

I would prefer...

BOTH

Death from the Sea wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote:From the site about the actors:
(http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/cast/index.php3)

Because slut Blalock was "supposed" to be the show's sex symbol, they try to tone down Park's natural beauty by almost always having her hair up in a bun or something. The one time she didn't, a scene in "Civilization", and teenage boys everywhere paused the tape and beat off to it.

There's the old joke: Mary-Ann or Ginger? More boys go with Mary-Ann. Hoshi or T'Pol? Hoshi of course. A simple poll with teenage boys at conventions will verify this for Paramount. Linda Parks is sexier.

But - who are Mary-Ann and Ginger?

That is a joke right??? please tell me you know who Mary-Ann and Ginger from Gilligan's Island are.
BTW I'd prefer Mary-Ann to Ginger.

I barely even knows what Gilligan's Island is. I guess it's probably not well-known outside USA.

Simon H.Johansen wrote: I barely even knows what Gilligan's Island is. I guess it's probably not well-known outside USA.

Then you are lucky

Other than two pretty women on the show, it was horrible--just a stupid sitcom about people stranded on an island.

The reason people bring it up is because those two girls represented extremes in what men consider desirable women. One was a sexpot, very hot and striking; the other was more wholesome and didn't get as much attention, though she was also really pretty in her own right.

ENT reproduces this "Mary-Ann or Ginger?" question with Hoshi and T'Pol. Though I just talked a lot about why Jolene Blalock seems to catch a hard time (e.g., the reviewer that unfairly dismissed her as a bimbo, a vacuous type who tends to be a gold-digger), there ARE lots of guys who would prefer Hoshi for good reasons. Some of us like the understated beauties.

As I said, I like BOTH Why some guys force such a dichotomy on us, I don't know...haven't they heard of threesomes?

Is it possible to give this guy an honorary SD.net membership?

seanrobertson wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote: I barely even knows what Gilligan's Island is. I guess it's probably not well-known outside USA.

Then you are lucky

Other than two pretty women on the show, it was horrible--just a stupid sitcom about people stranded on an island.

Oh come on that show is a classic! Besides the weekly failed kooky attempt to get off the island, we got the whole Mary-Ann and Ginger thing. Plus the Profesor showed us that you can make anything from cocoanuts, palm trees and any mineral he could find. My favorits of course was the radio he made .

Wicked Pilot wrote:Is it possible to give this guy an honorary SD.net membership?

Like I said, I don't really see the reason we "need" this guy here or should commend him for an MO that would be heavily criticized were the source material different. Substitute AOTC for ENT or "Nemesis," for instance, and see if similar wild-ass exaggerations get very far here.

Nope: I promise you, a number of intelligent posters--yourself included no doubt--would reign hell down on him. He'd be branded a troll like all the others before him before a prompt banning.

I don't see that SD.net is about ENT-bashing or for voicing a dislike of everything the Trek franchise does of late. People already use the BBS as too much of a knee-jerk reaction against other, more Trekkie-dominated forums.

It's getting old. We all already know the show and its producers are lame.

There's no reason to keep on about it ad nauseum. And there are, in fact, good reasons to discourage *mindless* ENT-bashing and the like. For one, that practice DOES enhance SD.net's reputation as being "biased."

You might think, "Ah, who cares what they think." I tend to agree, but I consider Michael a friend. SD.net is his baby. I stick up for friends AND their babies.

So I frequently find myself in the position of defending SD.net's integrity at other sites, like at my other major stomping ground of starshipmodeler dot com.

Michael's work is very easily defensible. I see nothing in his conclusions that reflects ANY bias. Defending it is SO easy.

However, when you have guys at the BBS seriously comparing a dog to veteran actors (and a guy like that reviewer is heralded as someone really special), we ARE undeniably dealing with bias. That makes a difficult job of convincing starshipmodelers that they're totally wrong about SD.net. They get the main site confused with the BBS, especially after I've told them that the BBS is, by and large, easily one of THE best discussion forums I've EVER encountered, one in which posters are held to pretty high standards and are proud to be a part of it all.

For that selfish reason alone, we need less people getting all their kicks out of shitting on ENT, not to mention the fact that it's simply a DEAD HORSE!

Death from the Sea wrote: Oh come on that show is a classic! Besides the weekly failed kooky attempt to get off the island, we got the whole Mary-Ann and Ginger thing. Plus the Profesor showed us that you can make anything from cocoanuts, palm trees and any mineral he could find. My favorits of course was the radio he made .

But...but...it had GILLIGAN!

AH!!!! *incinerates*

It was funny in a campy kinda way I guess, but five minutes of it in one sitting was usually enough for me

seanrobertson wrote:ENT reproduces this "Mary-Ann or Ginger?" question with Hoshi and T'Pol. Though I just talked a lot about why Jolene Blalock seems to catch a hard time (e.g., the reviewer that unfairly dismissed her as a bimbo, a vacuous type who tends to be a gold-digger), there ARE lots of guys who would prefer Hoshi for good reasons. Some of us like the understated beauties.

This reminds me of RayCav's "Is Isard Hot?" thread, where a surprising number of SW fans turned out to prefer the rather modest Admiral Daala over the somewhat modelesque Isard.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

seanrobertson wrote:ENT reproduces this "Mary-Ann or Ginger?" question with Hoshi and T'Pol. Though I just talked a lot about why Jolene Blalock seems to catch a hard time (e.g., the reviewer that unfairly dismissed her as a bimbo, a vacuous type who tends to be a gold-digger), there ARE lots of guys who would prefer Hoshi for good reasons. Some of us like the understated beauties.

This reminds me of RayCav's "Is Isard Hot?" thread, where a surprising number of SW fans turned out to prefer the rather modest Admiral Daala over the somewhat modelesque Isard.

Interesante.

As with my "Unattainable Theory," I believe even many well-to-do, handsome men sometimes seek out the more conservative-looking woman because they think she might be:

A--easier to catch
B--easier to "keep," as she knows she's not a model and will "work hard" to keep her man "interested."

That is oftentimes not the case, but I've heard countless guys say similar things over the years; e.g., "She's cute, but she doesn't act like she knows it, you know? I bet she doesn't date much and is a little insecure around men. She'd probably be thrilled that I would ask her out."

It's kinda sickening and predatory, but such is the MO of many who are going all-out just to get laid.

Vis-a-vis imaginary relationships or "rating" women on the internet, I think this is still kinda in the back of many guys' minds when they choose the plainer girl. They are threatened by the model-type, who will be hit from all directions by guys who want to be with them.

Even imaginary uncertainty in a relationship with a stone-cold fox is far more unnerving than a stable coupling with a pretty-but-otherwise "imperfect" gal. People ultimately want security, certainty. They fear the unknown.

Hehehee.

The reviews I post here isn't to show what they did right, but to show what they did wrong and where they messed up. Because if I can see so many great potential scenes that were lost or never filmed, or so many badly written scenes that were put on film, then that is proof that I can do a good show of my own.

He's bashing a show just to promote his. Man I love this guy.

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:Hehehee.

The reviews I post here isn't to show what they did right, but to show what they did wrong and where they messed up. Because if I can see so many great potential scenes that were lost or never filmed, or so many badly written scenes that were put on film, then that is proof that I can do a good show of my own.

He's bashing a show just to promote his. Man I love this guy.

Oh, crud. You too?



I think some of his reviews are funny enough, but I've made my case why he's waaaaay over-the-top. I also think there's a certain comedic value in what you noted, but it seems rather bullyish and under-handed...

I mean, if he's gotta crash on ENT to promote the show he wants to do, how much better could his work possibly be? You don't become a heavyweight boxing champ by beating up cripples and whinos! You fight real contenders and earn your status.

If he is too foolish to recognize that, my claims are validated. If he does regard ENT as a contender, so to speak, then it's even worse than what I said: he's a liar.

Besides, I don't think generating one's own product should be based solely on avoiding the weaknesses of others' work.

Honestly, I don't think that his shows are necessarily all that great.

Ender wrote:I'm howling after reading the "Meet the characters" page

I agree with what Sean has been saying, as I seem to do alot of the time, strange... *shrug*
Anyway, the character page is absolutely hilarious, well the Archer's Suit sectio anyway, and the very last entry, that is is gut-wrenchingly funny.
http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/ ... index.php3

C'mon, who IS that guy at the bottom? Huh, huh?
LMAO!

Death from the Sea wrote:Plus the Profesor showed us that you can make anything from cocoanuts, palm trees and any mineral he could find. My favorits of course was the radio he made .

Yeah, anything except a patch for the hole in their boat. WTF?

-- Joe Momma