It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Nyiah
This show isnt made for us and I dont see why I have to pretend its great when its not. Or that I am being hard on the people trying to make money off something they dont even bother to understand.
Orville is the new Trek in every way. Its funnier too.
Section 31 was the name of an officially-nonexistent and autonomous clandestine organization which claimed to protect the security interests of United Earth and, later, the United Federation of Planets. Loosely speaking, it was Starfleet's black-ops division, operating separately from and usually without the knowledge of Starfleet Intelligence (though it often recruited members of Starfleet Intelligence). Section 31 was also somewhat comparable to the Romulan Tal Shiar or Cardassian Obsidian Order – unlike these other organizations, however, Section 31's very existence was a deeply buried secret, known only to a handful of people beyond its own membership. (DS9: "Inquisition")
Perhaps Section 31's darkest aspect was that, while it had existed since the beginning of Starfleet, it was practically autonomous, having operated for over two centuries with no oversight or accountability whatsoever, even free to kill those it deemed a threat to Federation interests at its own discretion. (DS9: "When It Rains...") Some high-ranking Starfleet admirals and intelligence personnel at times seemed to be vaguely aware that Section 31 existed, though giving them only very broad objectives. (DS9: "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges") At other times, Section 31 appeared to be an outright puppet master to Starfleet, directing the actions and even overall political policies of the Federation itself. (DS9: "Extreme Measures")
originally posted by: SpartanStoic
I'm enjoying the new show and have watched all trek since TNG and watched TOS in the 70s and 80s on my local UHF station.
I'm getting tired of all these people attacking the show for continuity changing and questioning the technology vs TOS.
It's the modern era, Trek needed to be modernized. It is now, it's different but still Trek.
Also I'm favoring the fan theory that we are seeing the evolution of Section 13 due to all the hints placed throughout which would explain a lot.
originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: nonspecific
No it makes perfect sense to ignore fans and then try to sell them things they dont like.
0.o
Then argue with them for not having the "Correct" opinion.
originally posted by: nonspecific
It is less "trek" than we are used to but the charecters seem more human, more faults and less utopean idology and that kind of makes sense.
originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: tadaman
Good rant there, on the things you disliked. I can't completely disagree.
I forgot the Klingons ate the dead humans.. I mean wtf was that?
You know something I was terrified of when I first saw Tilly..
PLEASE PLEASE Don't be the great great great+ Grandma of Janeway.
So.... as far as the fan made stuff, I don't think I've ever seen any of it.
Except for that one project that was like TOS and had Grant from Myth Busters in it.
Any suggestions on what to watch or where to begin?
Thanks!
originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: nonspecific
Idk if I like or dislike the eating of humans but it certainly drives home their barbaric less refined selves. It's funny to imagine Klingons in later series sitting in the mess hall. Drinking their bloodwine. Eyeing other patrons and discussing how tasty they look. I bet they all flock to Qwark's for their fill of human meat. Greed is eternal, and dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack.
Tilly, insecure redhead on a journey to be a Captain...
So far I like Janeway a hell of a lot more.
originally posted by: intrepid
Is Star Trek dead? Well 7 pages in 24 hours. I don't think so.
originally posted by: nonspecific
I assumed they were eating the dead more as an affront and to disrespect their vanquished enemy rather than for the taste or sustinance but who knows?