"Anybody"
anywhere-anytime.com> wrote in message
news:270220081928511781%%anybody@anywhere-anytime.com...> In article <47c4e11a$0$10310$815e3792@
news.qwest.net>, "Kevin"
>
hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> "Kweeg" wrote in message
>> news:hjXwj.4024$pM4.1944@pd7urf1no...
>>> "Kevin"
hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:47c38be1$0$507$815e3792@news.qwest.net...>>>>
>>>> "Snake"
optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:47c38684$0$15158$607ed4bc@cv.net...>>> news:6-qdnV3rKs2tGV7anZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@
comcast.com...
>>>>>> The tiny ratio of 50%% time travel episodes simply wasn't enough to
>>> fully
>>>>>> mine the rich lode of absurdity and unbelievability offered by the
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> travel genre. My suspension of disbelief simply wasn't blasted
out of
>>>>>> the atmosphere nearly often enough.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Pardon the sarcasm, I just got done watching "Bloodlines" where
Worf
>>>>>> meets his Son from the Future.)
>>>>>
>>>>> ROFL. Isn't that the truth ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> If B&B's reign ever goes down in history books in some fashion,
this
>>>>> pattern of storytelling would certainly be marked as [the cause of]
the
>>>>> downturn of the franchise.
>>>>
>>>> While I certainly agree that the use of time travel in Star Trek
>>> television
>>>> series and movies was, to put it mildly, overused, I don't believe
that
>>>> it
>>>> is the reason for the demise of the Star Trek franchise. That award
>>> should
>>>> go to Paramount for running two Star Trek series at the same time,
not
>>>> developing a Star Trek movie based on the series Deep Space Nine or
>>> Voyager,
>>>> and rushing the movies they did wind up making to the detriment of
the
>>> film
>>>> in production at the time.
>>>
>>> Movies based on DS9 or Voyager? Didn't DS9 and Voyager "finish?"
>>> or was that just me thinking DS9 (as much as I liked it) ended
>>> satisfactory
>>> with no need to come up with some absurd reason to get the crew that
>>> scattered to the 4 winds back together again .... sorta like Worf
being in
>>> the last 2 TNG movies or all of Voyager's crew, some of them not even
>>> Starfleet, staying together after they got home after 7 years... as
who
>>> can
>>> forget that oh so great finale with the Borg/timetravel/Klingons.
>>
>> There wouldn't be a need to make a "reunion" movie from either DS9 or
>> Voyager. But there could have been a film made that could have taken
>> advantage of some of the great characters from those two series. When
you
>> ask the actors from the two shows about this topic, you will get an
earful.
>>
>> Most, if not all of them are not happy about being basically tossed
after
>> their respective series ended with no chance for a feature film part.
Kate
>> Mulgrew got a tiny part in one of the last movies, but that was really
only
>> about a half minute of screen time, so I discount that.
>>
>> Not getting a feature film deal from Paramount is a really sore point
with
>> these actors who have pretty much faded out of the scene. When was the
last
>> time you saw Nana Visitor in a film?
>
> Very few TV shows become a movie. Any actor taking the role on Voyager
> or Deep Space Nine because they thought there would be a movie is
> simply an idiot ... a greedy idiot at that.
Yep and Anybody knows idiots and wanting to make money makes one gready.
> I have seen Nana Visitor and some of the others in shows since their
> Star Trek ones ended, but then how many actors do you see getting roles
> in multiple shows?? Again very few. The vast majority of actors are
> one-hit-wonders with only a handful ever making it to "the big time".
Yep and Anybody knows TV too, he's always right, he speaks for "All True
Fans."
--
Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
