OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 09:44am
StarDestroyer.Net BBS
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
OVEG: Macrocosm
Page 1 of 2
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 10:10am
Two of the images don't load right for me, right under the tentacle rape. Could be me though.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 10:11am
They work fine for me.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 11:14am
I like the finish where you point out how laughably underwhelming the apocalyptic final detonation was. It looked like the graphic you'd use if you were trying to depict a 24th century prankster's stink bomb.
PS. The fact that the flying blobs had to make buzzing bee sounds was pretty obnoxious. We get it: they're supposed to be like insects or something. Only problem is: they don't have wings! Why would they sound like giant bees? But as you say, the idea that a virus is basically a tiny yet complex lifeform is already hopelessly absurd. A virus is just a piece of protein.
PS. The fact that the flying blobs had to make buzzing bee sounds was pretty obnoxious. We get it: they're supposed to be like insects or something. Only problem is: they don't have wings! Why would they sound like giant bees? But as you say, the idea that a virus is basically a tiny yet complex lifeform is already hopelessly absurd. A virus is just a piece of protein.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 01:07pm
probably stupid question: what is talc?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 01:27pm
Talcum powder. The idiot "Stewart from SDI" claimed that the asteroids in Star Wars were made of "talc" (even though they didn't look like talc, and didn't even break up when TIE fighters smashed to bits against them) in a vain attempt to pretend that the ISD shots which vapourized them were actually no more powerful than a mortar shell.spaceviking wrote:probably stupid question: what is talc?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 01:31pm
Now you have me thinking of Janeway tentacle porn.
Thanks, really. Thanks. Now if you'll excuse me I must inject bleach directly into my brain.
Thanks, really. Thanks. Now if you'll excuse me I must inject bleach directly into my brain.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 05:19pm
I'm getting a Site Unavailable message everytime I try to load.
Also, I just wanted to correct this. You're thinking of a prion. A virus is significantly more complex than a prion (although still so simple that there is debate over whether they are technically alive), in that they contain a bit of genetic material, either DNA or RNA, in a lipid membrane sheathe with some surface proteins for camouflage and occasionally some internal enzymes to get their genetic material used properly by the host cell.A virus is just a piece of protein
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 05:29pm
well it still doesn't change that a macrovirus would just sit there. How could something that is by definition inert move about?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 09:14pm
Thats what I wondered when I first saw the episode as a kid... What the hell is making them fly?Isolder74 wrote:well it still doesn't change that a macrovirus would just sit there. How could something that is by definition inert move about?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 09:15pm
Oh, I'm not arguing that. If nothing else the square-cube relationship that prevents single celled organisms from growing very large would make this mindnumbingly stupid if they went with bacteria, and the fact that they couldn't support their own weight, let alone fly, and somehow they are injecting people with copies of themselves and... yeah... just yeah...
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 09:28pm
Brannon Braga must've flunked every biology class he was ever in.
If indeed he ever attended one.
If indeed he ever attended one.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-15 10:46pm
Seconded. Ack, horrible mental image.Darth Onasi wrote:Now you have me thinking of Janeway tentacle porn.
Thanks, really. Thanks. Now if you'll excuse me I must inject bleach directly into my brain.
And I must've missed this episode during the show's run here, because I don't remember it at all. That said, that might be a good thing. I mean, growing viruses? What the hell? Well, sure, Star Trek's never been hard science in the slightest, but that's tremendously silly even by Voyager's usual standards.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-16 12:08am
MILLIONS OF TINY WINGS, hence buzzing noise[/apologist]Crossroads Inc. wrote:Thats what I wondered when I first saw the episode as a kid... What the hell is making them fly?Isolder74 wrote:well it still doesn't change that a macrovirus would just sit there. How could something that is by definition inert move about?
Also:
New UPF material?This story actually makes just as much sense as me writing one about how I ate high-yield fertilizer, grew to be the size of the sun, flew off at faster than light speeds, and then proceeded to have sex with a black hole.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-16 01:05am
Um, is it just my hasty reading or did you forget the stupid Neelix moment?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-16 01:13am
I'd say that is safely found in the beginning of the episode.
ugh!
ugh!
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-16 10:32am
And to think I'd almost forgotten this piece of dreck. It so completely failed to capture the atmosphere of an action/horror flick that it became bad comedy.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-17 01:30am
All the ridicule over the idea of a macroscopic virus made me wonder: why did Braga describe the monster-of-the-week as a "virus" instead of a "parasite," which might grow to the size of a German Shepherd under a growth hormone's effects, move on its own, actively seek out and infect other hosts, engage in hand-to-tentacle combat with potential hosts, etc.? Or was Paramount (or whoever the hell came up with this macroscopic virus idea) paralyzed by fear that 20th Century Fox would sue their pants off if they call the monster-of-the-week a "parasite"?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-17 08:53am
I don't know whether your a conspiracy idiot or just plain garden variety. Attributing malice where pure stupidity explains it cleaner and more objectively is seen here and only the rabid retard would think there's darker motivations.Sidewinder wrote:All the ridicule over the idea of a macroscopic virus made me wonder: why did Braga describe the monster-of-the-week as a "virus" instead of a "parasite," which might grow to the size of a German Shepherd under a growth hormone's effects, move on its own, actively seek out and infect other hosts, engage in hand-to-tentacle combat with potential hosts, etc.? Or was Paramount (or whoever the hell came up with this macroscopic virus idea) paralyzed by fear that 20th Century Fox would sue their pants off if they call the monster-of-the-week a "parasite"?
We see from a great volume of his work that Braga has no fucking clue of what terminology means what and at the time Paramount acceded his demands because he brought in consumers. There's not much else to it.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-17 01:39pm
Yeah, that episode could have been saved if they'd changed 'Virus' to "Parasitic Lifeform' or something.
It starts really small, and just grows.
No need to explain how it flys or anything, but don't make it a virus.
Also, is it wrong of me for thinking that those things are just a mutant strain of Metroid?
It starts really small, and just grows.
No need to explain how it flys or anything, but don't make it a virus.
Also, is it wrong of me for thinking that those things are just a mutant strain of Metroid?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-17 08:16pm
I think the worse part is that someone actually thought it was a good idea to revisit this episode in the one where Janeway meets herself before Voyager got screwed- er, lost.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-17 10:13pm
What? they wanted to do a clip episode without doing a clip episode.Swindle1984 wrote:I think the worse part is that someone actually thought it was a good idea to revisit this episode in the one where Janeway meets herself before Voyager got screwed- er, lost.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-18 09:13am
Actually that 'clip show' episode got me thinking;
Maybe the experimentation the Caretaker did on them fucked over Janeways mind.
I mean, 'pre abduction' Janeway wanted to reset things so they were all 'pre-abduction' so she could avoid the incident all together.
Maybe the experimentation the Caretaker did on them fucked over Janeways mind.
I mean, 'pre abduction' Janeway wanted to reset things so they were all 'pre-abduction' so she could avoid the incident all together.
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-18 09:50am
This will be off topic, but because Sidewinder believes I am being both too harsh on his comment, and him in general. I won't cover the other material because to be honest, I did lay out my reasons and you never retorted to them or fulfilled my demand. But this particular I will detail because you are using a moderator tool that was noted not to be used unless you could not PM a moderator.
Let's take the quote:
But
It assumes that Paramount had any say except giving ST cash to create the episode and further assumes that Paramount feared retribution from Fox for the use of the word PARASITE.
So dumbfuck are you going to back up your assumptions? Or are you again not, and slink away?
Let's take the quote:
The first part is a logical question of general stupidity that Braga utilized.All the ridicule over the idea of a macroscopic virus made me wonder: why did Braga describe the monster-of-the-week as a "virus" instead of a "parasite," which might grow to the size of a German Shepherd under a growth hormone's effects, move on its own, actively seek out and infect other hosts, engage in hand-to-tentacle combat with potential hosts, etc.? Or was Paramount (or whoever the hell came up with this macroscopic virus idea) paralyzed by fear that 20th Century Fox would sue their pants off if they call the monster-of-the-week a "parasite"?
But
is assuming a great many things.Or was Paramount (or whoever the hell came up with this macroscopic virus idea) paralyzed by fear that 20th Century Fox would sue their pants off if they call the monster-of-the-week a "parasite"?[/
It assumes that Paramount had any say except giving ST cash to create the episode and further assumes that Paramount feared retribution from Fox for the use of the word PARASITE.
So dumbfuck are you going to back up your assumptions? Or are you again not, and slink away?
Re: OVEG: Macrocosm
Posted: 2009-04-18 02:08pm
Paramount did have a say in ST, as demonstrated by the change they ordered in the ending of "Dear Doctor".Ghost Rider wrote:But
is assuming a great many things.Or was Paramount (or whoever the hell came up with this macroscopic virus idea) paralyzed by fear that 20th Century Fox would sue their pants off if they call the monster-of-the-week a "parasite"?[/
It assumes that Paramount had any say except giving ST cash to create the episode and further assumes that Paramount feared retribution from Fox for the use of the word PARASITE.
So dumbfuck are you going to back up your assumptions? Or are you again not, and slink away?
Not to mention the fact that, as the copyright holders, they had the authority to order the producers to make changes if they bothered to keep an eye on the production, just as George Lucas had the authority to order Karen Traviss to stop wanking Mandalorians (an authority he exercised when he ordered Anakin Solo's death) if he bothered to proofread any of her works.Memory Alpha wrote:The ending was changed by UPN who wanted Phlox and Archer in total agreement, rather than retain the original ending which left Archer and Phlox in conflict. John Billingsley who plays Phlox had touched on this in an interview. "The ending that had initially been created (for the episode) I was fairly comfortable with. But the head of the studio suggested some revisions on the ending. What do you do? I wasn't as happy with the revisions, but it's not my show, you have to sort of adjust, even if sometimes it does seem a bit of a contradiction in terms for what your character is supposed to be about. In the original ending in this crisis of conscience, the Doctor essentially does something that violates the standard issue hierarchical obligations of a crewmember to his captain. In effect, he makes a decision that's rooted in 'I've got bigger fish to fry', rather than honoring his captain's wishes. The network essentially felt that no, it was important to essentially make sure that everyone was here to support the captain's decisions. Personally, I thought, 'Well, I think you've kind of lost something interesting in this potential tension. But, that's not my call.'"