Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [probe_control] time tunnel decisions

Expand Messages
  • Geoff Willmetts
    Hello John I have a rule when doing these things. I only play with raw cloth that is there. I don’t add to it, only interpret. There are a lot of shows where
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 7, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello John



      I
      have a rule when doing these things. I only play with raw cloth that is there.
      I don�t add to it, only interpret.



      There
      are a lot of shows where people accept continuity jumps without question. Look
      at the changes in Starfleet uniform across Star Trek � Next Generation and
      neither cast or viewer questions it in contrast to Babylon 5: Crusade where the
      characters do but accept the change and the viewer accepts it. The point I�m
      really making is that unless there is something extremely questionable and
      outside of continuity errors that only those interested in wrong button presses
      and hair parted the wrong way which the majority of us don�t notice, then we
      accept what�s on the screen.



      As
      to TV things that are written by committee. I think gestalt. The final result
      is seen as one animal.



      I
      was a bit late coming on-line tonight because I finally got the chance to sit
      down and watch �The Questor Tapes� from a UTube download. The sound is a bit
      out of sync to the pictures but other than that, odd bits I spotted this time
      around. Parts of the background music are earlier drafts of the Kolchak Tapes
      (same composer) and when Questor is in the English base are some of Colossus�
      communication with Guardian.



      Geoff





      ********* GF Willmetts ****************************
      Commissioning Editor: http://www.sfcrowsnest.co.uk or http://www.computercrowsnest.co.uk
      THE SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY MAGAZINE THE E-BOOK PUBLISHER THAT TRIES HARDER
      Between 42-48 million hits a month!!!


      WE DON�T CHOOSE OUR RANK POSITIONS, OTHERS PUT US THERE:-

      AOL AOL ranks SFcrowsnest #1 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://search.aol.com/aolcom/browse?id=906&source=subcats Yahoo Yahoo ranks SFcrowsnest #4 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://dir.yahoo.com/Entertainment/Genres/Science_Fiction_and_Fantasy/ DMOZ DMOZ ranks SFcrowsnest #1 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://dmoz.org/Arts/Literature/Genres/Science_Fiction/ Google Google ranks SFcrowsnest #2 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://directory.google.com/Top/Arts/Genres/Science_Fiction_and_Fantasy/

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

      > To: probe_control@yahoogroups.com
      > From: actingman6@...
      > Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 09:27:12 -0400
      > Subject: Re: [probe_control] time tunnel decisions
      >
      > Which leads me back to the Benny Hill example. You can be reading things
      > into it that simply may not be there. There was nothing on the screen to
      > suggest any of that. All we saw was a sudden change in set, and that was
      > it.
      >
      > Theoretically, you should be able to judge a work by what is there. But my
      > own studies lead me to believe that you usually cannot do that when it
      > comes to these works by committee (film, TV.) And as I said, there are
      > those who believe that you need to know the background of any artist and
      > the times in which they lived to fully understand their work.
      >
      > It is always marvelous when you come across a show that had such unity to
      > it (or lack of outside interference) that you can go by what was on the
      > screen, and not need to know any behind the scenes mechanizations to help
      > explain why something is happening on the screen.
      >
      > Of course, now that I wrote that last sentence, I am not even sure I can
      > name any...but there must be some somewhere.
      >
      >
      > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Geoff Willmetts <gfwillmetts@...>wrote:
      >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Hello John
      > >
      > > I thought we�d discussed the changing d�cor
      > > and number of people in the base team in Search. A cut in World Securities
      > > budget or the
      > > main room was having a refit. Both would work.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Geoff
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • LambuLambu@aol.com
      There was also an episode somewhere in Season 3 of Babylon 5 where the command staff changed their uniforms, and that was explained in the episode. As for
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 9, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        There was also an episode somewhere in Season 3 of 'Babylon 5' where the command staff changed their uniforms, and that was explained in the episode.

        As for the Starfleet uniform changes in TNG, there was a scene cut from the pilot's script where Picard and Riker are in the observation conference room after Riker docks the two halves of ENTERPRISE together, and they're discussing the "new" uniforms. The scene revolved around Picard asking Riker's opinion on the divisional color changed, switching Command to red and Engineering/Support to gold. Riker was supposed to have quipped that at first, knowing the legacy and its accompanying phrase, he was reluctant to put on "a Red Shirt", but that he also hoped to change the luck associated with the color.


        It would have been fun to see how that scene actually played out, but the pages came out of the script and the scene was never filmed. Fans immediately noticed the color switcheroo, (after all, how could you not?) and many of us just took it in stride: new era, new crew, new ships, new uniforms. However, being considered a Trekkie as I was amongst all who knew me throughout the Coast Guard, I was besieged by many Trekkie "stitch Nazis" who, as Geoff points out, make note of any wrong button being pushed, and they just could not understand "why the uniform color changes?" and just couldn't (or wouldn't) let it rest.


        On the other hand, there are some people who would (and have) seen unexplained things as simple as the uniform color change go unexplained, and then become so angry over it that they just refuse to watch the show. So, while some of us diehard fans saw the major change in Probe Control after the first 15 episodes and just went with it, possibly wondering on the reasons why, there were also (possibly) many others who saw it come without explanation and refused to accept it, and stopped watching. (There are probably none of them in our Group here, but there were no doubt viewers who did tune out after that 16th episode.) I even know many 'Torchwood' fans who simply refused to watch the "Miracle Day" series because in "Children of Earth", the character Ianto was killed off; they showed how and why, but no one could understand the reasoning behind killing off one of the remaining popular characters, so they refuse to watch any further 'Torchwood'.


        And I would like to say that it is very refreshing to see so many people joining in on this discussion. It has been very lively!


        Dino.


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Geoff Willmetts <gfwillmetts@...>
        To: chat search <probe_control@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tue, Aug 7, 2012 4:44 pm
        Subject: RE: [probe_control] time tunnel decisions


        There
        are a lot of shows where people accept continuity jumps without question. Look
        at the changes in Starfleet uniform across Star Trek � Next Generation and
        neither cast or viewer questions it in contrast to Babylon 5: Crusade where the
        characters do but accept the change and the viewer accepts it. The point I�m
        really making is that unless there is something extremely questionable and
        outside of continuity errors that only those interested in wrong button presses
        and hair parted the wrong way which the majority of us don�t notice, then we
        accept what�s on the screen.

        Geoff

        ********* GF Willmetts ****************************
        Commissioning Editor: http://www.sfcrowsnest.co.uk or http://www.computercrowsnest.co.uk

        THE SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY MAGAZINE THE E-BOOK PUBLISHER THAT TRIES HARDER
        Between 42-48 million hits a month!!!


        WE DON�T CHOOSE OUR RANK POSITIONS, OTHERS PUT US THERE:-

        AOL AOL ranks SFcrowsnest #1 most popular SFF site on the Internet
        http://search.aol.com/aolcom/browse?id=906&source=subcats Yahoo Yahoo ranks
        SFcrowsnest #4 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://dir.yahoo.com/Entertainment/Genres/Science_Fiction_and_Fantasy/
        DMOZ DMOZ ranks SFcrowsnest #1 most popular SFF site on the Internet
        http://dmoz.org/Arts/Literature/Genres/Science_Fiction/ Google Google ranks
        SFcrowsnest #2 most popular SFF site on the Internet http://directory.google.com/Top/Arts/Genres/Science_Fiction_and_Fantasy/


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

        > To: probe_control@yahoogroups.com
        > From: actingman6@...
        > Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 09:27:12 -0400
        > Subject: Re: [probe_control] time tunnel decisions
        >
        > Which leads me back to the Benny Hill example. You can be reading things
        > into it that simply may not be there. There was nothing on the screen to
        > suggest any of that. All we saw was a sudden change in set, and that was
        > it.
        >
        > Theoretically, you should be able to judge a work by what is there. But my
        > own studies lead me to believe that you usually cannot do that when it
        > comes to these works by committee (film, TV.) And as I said, there are
        > those who believe that you need to know the background of any artist and
        > the times in which they lived to fully understand their work.
        >
        > It is always marvelous when you come across a show that had such unity to
        > it (or lack of outside interference) that you can go by what was on the
        > screen, and not need to know any behind the scenes mechanizations to help
        > explain why something is happening on the screen.
        >
        > Of course, now that I wrote that last sentence, I am not even sure I can
        > name any...but there must be some somewhere.
        >
        >
        > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Geoff Willmetts <gfwillmetts@...>wrote:
        >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Hello John
        > >
        > > I thought we�d discussed the changing d�cor
        > > and number of people in the base team in Search. A cut in World Securities
        > > budget or the
        > > main room was having a refit. Both would work.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Geoff
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



        ------------------------------------

        Yahoo! Groups Links







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.