Search options (Page 36 of 57)

Even if everyone on the ship is killed, are we supposed to believe that no one else in the galaxy had the idea ever again?  Even if it's immoral, we've seen desperate species or ships use immoral technology for their own advancement (the USS Equinox, for example).

This is a little like the "across the galaxy warp" thing that Star Trek (09) invented.  It's a technology that seems relatively safe, is an absolute game-changer, and something that no one ever uses again centuries later.

I didn't even think of that.  Does Sara even know that Laurel is there?  Wouldn't she want to be in the group that tries to "save" Laurel?  Wouldn't she need to be there for her father after shooting Laurel?

The whole "Ray working as a lowly worker for some bratty kid" thing was funny, but it makes no sense.  Just because Felicity destroyed his company doesn't mean that he wouldn't still be very-much in demand. 

The problem I have is that, since this show is the "Agents of Shield" of the Arrowverse, is any of their *months* back in the real world ever going to be referenced again?  Will the fact that Sara was living in Star City be referenced?  Will Nate's time as Wally's sidekick be referenced (and if he wants to be a superhero, why pick one that has a Flash)?  Are we ever going to get a scene where Felicity has to apologize for, essentially, starting Ray's career over at square one?

I know these shows function better when the "shared" aspect is more used for fun (like Wally showing up), but it ends up being more distracting for me.  Was Wally helping Nate pre-Barry or post-Barry?  Was the six months that Sara was in Star City before or after or during the Arrow that aired last night?

I can't imagine there's any way they'd kill Stein after the Legends premiere.  Let him go home and enjoy his life....he's done enough.

I do think the show needs an older person.  And I'm still trying to figure out what, if anything, their plan is for Rip.  He doesn't seem to have any consistency.  The Time Bureau is a cool idea, but Rip shouldn't be a foil to the Legends.  If anything, in 5 years, someone should've wrestled control of the Bureau and Rip is trying to get the Legends to help him take back control.

And I'm torn on the concept in general because I like the team (for the most part), but I'm very tired of the time travel angle.  I almost wish they'd decide to go into outer space for a year or do something outlandish (settle in some town where supervillains run everything or spend a whole season on Earth 2).  I know the show isn't going to be an anthology show, but it could be an anthology-like show where they change up the concept each year.

**************

I hope the Flash is going through a reboot of the Barry character and not something more devious.  If he's truly passed all the crap from his past and he's ready to just be fun again, I honestly don't care about how they got here.  Getting out of the Speed Force Prison didn't make any sense, and him snapping out of it didn't make any sense.  But I hope it's all real, and Barry is just going to be an optimistic guy from here on out.

I'm assuming MacFarlane was never able to pitch to CBS because of his association/longterm relationship with Fox, but I wonder if he ever thought about it.  He probably wouldn't have been able to do as much humor as he's doing, but he's made it seem like this was a passion project for as long as he can remember.  If that's the case, it probably would've been a dream to put on an actual Starfleet uniform.

And pairing Discovery with something like Star Trek: Orville might've been enough to bring more people to CBS All Access.  One of the problems (mentioned here too) is that, for Trekkies, they're really only paying for one show.  If CBS had made two Star Trek shows (one dark and new, one more traditional) and a handful of other genre shows, it could've been something a lot of people would pay for and stick with.

Now CBS doesn't really care about that.  And they're doubling down on their idea by splitting their season up in two pieces.  So instead of the people who buy HBO for 3 months a year for Game of Thrones and then cancel, you're going to have to either pay for a November/December without Discovery or cancel and then re-upp a couple months later.

Interesting.  I'm enjoying the series so whether it's a prequel or a sequel doesn't really matter to me.  It's just an interesting decision.  I can see them not wanting to ruin humanity's 24th century perfect record, but I think if they established that post-Dominion War, the Federation was in some sort of long-lasting crisis, it could throw humanity out of their good standing....and the series could be about humanity reclaiming what they'd lost.

But I also really like the idea of Starfleet moving from a military operation to an exploratory one.  If we're supposed to see TOS and beyond as a human utopia, then the road to that (especially now, when we're seeing the worst of humanity) is very interesting television fodder.

I liked the second episode, and I'm intrigued.  This looks like it's going to be a very different vision of Trek from what we're used to.  I definitely see how this could've potentially been an anthology series, but I think the Michael character could absolutely carry a series.

Ireactions, my friend and I watched it last night, and we had a similar discussion.  And I'm wondering if there's necessarily a reason why this is set when it's set....if it's not, I think they should've set it in the 26th century.  There are things that they could've done to easily set this in a time period we're unfamiliar with and make it feel new and exciting.

New technology is the easiest to write off....there's no explanation needed.  Technology is better because time has passed....things are newer and sleeker.  New uniforms are new because Starfleet is always changing uniforms.  There's even stuff like Saru and the droid (?) on the bridge....these are species that joined the Federation since the TNG era (it's always weird when we get new species on prequel series because I sorta assume they died off or something).

The Klingon stuff is tricky because of the redesign.  But it could be another race of Klingons (like the Remans).  It'd be interesting if they said that the Klingons, after the Dominion War, became isolationist for 100 years.  And now they're back and ready to make their presence known again.

Outside of (character) showing up, there wasn't anything in the Pilot episode that showed that this needs to be a prequel.  The new movies are capitalizing on the reboot phenomenon, and Enterprise was showing a period of Starfleet's history that wasn't covered.  If there isn't a particular reason to show a time that we've semi-seen before, I'd like to see something new.

All in all, I enjoyed it and will be watching the rest of the season.

Did anyone watch Discovery?

Claire brought together Luke and Danny.  Since they're the two that belong together (they're best friends and have a comic together), I thought that made sense (they were also the two people she'd most recently dealt with, and she was closer with Colleen than she was with Jessica or Matt).

That's why I kinda liked it....it felt like they came together organically.  This wasn't a situation where anyone was building a team...they met each other in ways that were true to the character.  Danny and Luke met when they were each following up on leads that they'd follow up on.  Jessica met Matt when Jessica was investigating something and Matt was trying to protect someone legally.

It would've been nice for them to be fighting someone that took all four of them to defeat, but I think Elektra was a pretty decent villain.  And the disposable Hand villains were fine for action sequences.

I enjoyed the Defenders.  I thought the main four had pretty great chemistry, although I felt bad for Matt every single time they got together because he looked so ridiculous in his costume when they're all in street clothes.  They should've had him go back to his season one outfit (maybe mention that he added padding or something) so he didn't stand out so much (and I love the costume).

I thought the plot was kinda meh/blah, but I think it was more about the character interaction.  I also apparently need to rewatch Jessica Jones because I could not, at any point, figure out what her powers were supposed to be (besides just being strong).  Is she bulletproof?  Can she fly?

Really?  Weird.  Especially considering all the shared sets/actors.  I mean, they put in a Worf extended cameo in Star Trek VI.

Star Trek VI establishes that there was peace between the Klingons and the Federation because of the explosion of Praxis and an ecological disaster on Qo'noS.  It's stated in the film that the planet has about "50 years left" on it.

In TNG, the Klingons and Federation are (for the most part) peaceful, and there's tons of references to the idea that Qo'noS is fine.

Is this ever explained?  Did they evacuate Qo'noS and whatever planet they're talking about in the TNG era is a "New Qo'noS?"  Or did Federation/Klingon scientists find a way to save the planet?

I mean it's not even about doom....it's just bizarre.  I think it'd work in-continuity too....just have it be the story of the *real* Joker that Batman faced.  Get Leonardo DiCaprio if that's who you want....show how he became the Joker and how the Batman took him down and he died.

Jared Leto is still the Joker...just a Tim Drake or Jason Todd version that went crazy and became the new Joker.

To spend all this time making a shared universe and then immediately start doing out-of-continuity movies with characters that are in other movies at the same time is going to be super weird.  Why not do a "Heart of Ice" movie about Mr. Freeze?  He's certainly not going to be in the DCEU.  Or a Harvey Dent movie.  Or a Penguin movie.

Batman has tons of cool villains that could be protagonists in their own movie.  The Joker is literally the worst because he's better the less you know about him.

Legends usually does less than a full order, but they could also have someone "kidnap" Stein and force Jackson to be a "hero without his powers" for an extended period.

Or, like they did with Robbie Amell, they could simply transfer the other half of Firestorm to a new character and kill Stein off.

Wonder Woman: Special Edition - Now featuring NO THIRD ACT!

I'm not worried about whether it will happen or not...I'm talking about prominent Democrats who seem to think that the Republicans should be the one to impeach Trump.  That'd just never ever happen (for either party).

Reeves claims that he was misquoted and it will absolutely be in the DCEU.

That makes sense.  My last dog died a few years ago, and I never replaced her.

Does anyone here watch "The Strain"?  It's in its final season.  It's pretty good....but Zach is the worst character in the history of television.  I literally hate the show every time he's on.

Well, that's the thing.  The show didn't need Doomsday to show up the way he traditionally did.  He could've simply been human-looking with Clark-like strength.  The story was fine...how they decided to use their budget is the problem.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40314 … k#/slide/1

Interesting comments from Affleck.  Sounds like they're revamping Batman a bit following BvS.  Makes sense from a real-world and in-universe perspective.

Well, the whole final season was weirdly planned.  They didn't know if they'd get Michael Rosenbaum back so there was the whole Lex clone storyline that might've gone nowhere.  Since they couldn't legitimately have Darkseid on, Clark ended up fighting Lionel Luthor and then "fighting" a CGI planet.

It actually feels a lot like the Sliders final season where they planned a big CGI finale, ended up blowing their budget on something else, and then ended on a cliffhanger.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40310 … ard-dragon

Arrow has added two pretty great genre actors as villains - Kirk Acevedo and LOST's Michael Emerson.  I'm pretty psyched.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/08/08/smallville- … er_zergnet

Some interesting insight from Tom Welling, including an abandoned idea to have much more Superman in the series finale.

Superhero Hype also wrote that they're changing the tone of Cyborg's character to be "lighter" - http://www.superherohype.com/news/40288 … s#/slide/1

I've also heard a couple people speculate that, while there probably wasn't much (if any) reshot material in the Comic-Con trailer, the jokey scene at the end with Flash and Gordon felt like Whedon.

Had an interesting thought.  I wonder if DC considered having Ben Affleck finish the shooting of Justice League before going with Joss.

Yeah, the toys and merchandise ruins a ton these days.  It sucks.

I'm also a little disappointed because I wanted to get black suit Superman, at least for a little bit.  Maybe we still will but seeing the same suit again made me a little sad.

I don't understand some of the marketing of Justice League.  On one hand, the action looks great, and I think they're nailing a lot of the characters.  The threat looks real, and there seems to be a real need to get all these god-like characters together.

Then there's whatever they're doing with Superman.  I really don't understand where they're going with it.  He was "dead" in BvS...then immediately revived by the sun....then killed again....then the dirt on his grave started to levitate?

No one on Earth thought that Superman was going to stay dead (and the final shot is a clear indication that he might not have been dead at the end or if he was ever dead at all), but the marketing all went with the idea that he was dead.  Superman didn't appear in any of the marketing, despite Henry Cavill making some references to Superman on social media.  The first teaser didn't mention him at all, the first official trailer didn't mention him at all, and the Comic-Con trailer made a couple of references to him and a big tease that he's back.

And now I'm starting to see posters where Superman is just there.  No black suit or mullet or whatever.  He's back and part of the team....which the movie doesn't even seem to reference.

It sorta reminds me of the bizarre marketing for Kingsman: the Golden Circle.  In the first movie, Harry (Colin Firth) died, and the first teaser made a quick reference to him somehow being alive.  Seemed like it was going to be a major plot point.  But the first full trailer just shows Harry like he's part of the gang again.  There's literally no reference to the fact that he's back from the dead or he's a robot or that he was ever dead at all.

I think it's cool that Batman and Wonder Woman are joining forces to start the League to protect the world in Superman's absence.  But one of the big themes of BvS was Superman wondering if he needed to be Superman.  Instead of Death and Return of Superman, couldn't they have sent Superman into space after BvS?  Batman and Wonder Woman would still need to start the League, and there wouldn't need to be this weird cat and mouse with Superman being dead (or the crazy way they're going to have to handle resurrecting Clark Kent, if they do at all).  And him deciding to abandon Earth and then come back and save it would work better with the themes that Snyder is working with.

What do we think?