Star Wars & Sc-Fi Talk

These amusing blog articles were posted over at CMF.



I wonder when will this guy will declare Jesus Christ a communist if he's so uppity over Star Trek. Maybe he should get some magical Star Trek cosmetic surgery done and become a Ferengi. They seem to be more to his liking. Let me guess some superficial reason why he wouldn't do that...



Ironic that this guy doesn't like the literal enforcement of the Prime Directive yet isn't he following a literal logic where he sees inconsistency of the history of the Federation? First of all the inconsistency is due to the creators of Star Trek trying entertain people for dramatic effect. So consistency is not priority number one. Picard a communist because he enforces the law? There are some that point to Nixon going to China as the reason there's all these problems with China today. That's what happens when you violate the Prime Directive if one existed in the real world. The US's whole headache of problems in the Middle East is a result of an inconsistent policy. That's what the Prime Directive is made to avoid. This guy doesn't want to be a Ferengi like the other guy. He wants to be a good ole fashion original series Klingon.

AssassinsMace said:

These amusing blog articles were posted over at CMF.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I wonder when will this guy will declare Jesus Christ a communist if he's so uppity over Star Trek. Maybe he should get some magical Star Trek cosmetic surgery done and become a Ferengi. They seem to be more to his liking. Let me guess some superficial reason why he wouldn't do that...

Click to expand...

Actually, the Star Trek Earth has always seemed like communism to me. Of course, the author of that article starts from a premise that communism = bad, and stretches credulity trying to find some "dark corners".

First, his point about apartments. He apparently forgets that just a few paragraphs down, he acknowledges ST-Earth as a meritocracy. Well obviously, the more important people get the better apartments.

Second, he tries to equates this meritocracy with the real-world class divisions, except he ignores the fact that knowledge and skill is intrinsically more class neutral than wealth distribution. A smart, dedicated kid born to lazy parents in the ST-Earth can far more easily join the elites than he could if he was born to a poor family in real Earth. If ST-Earth has class divisions, then it's a far more fluid division than any real world examples.

Throughout this article, he keeps trying to bring up real-world concepts that would have absolutely no meaning in ST-Earth. Who needs to be rich when replicators can make anything you want? So what if the state controls all the energy, when that energy is practically limitless? As for property value and "upper Manhattan", he forgets that most of the high-valued properties in the real world are high valued precisely because of our economic system. If no one needs to work for a living, why would upper Manhattan be any more desirable than anywhere else?

In fact, I would argue that on ST-Earth, no piece of real-estate is particularly more desirable than any other. Oh you have an ocean-view apartment and I live in the middle of a desert? Oh well, I'll just have to settle with being instantly transported to the beach every day. No more apartments in Hawaii? There's always New Hawaii on Planet X.

Finally, the author brings up the term "bums". His point is premised on the notion that there exists people who inherently don't want to work. Well, he forgets that on ST-Earth, the only people who really work are Star Fleet and, ostensibly, the government. Everyone else just have hobbies. Furthermore, addiction and mental health problems, the major contributors to homelessness in the real world, are practically non-factors in ST-Earth.

ST-Earth has its own share of problems, but this article's analysis is pretty silly.

Well the universe of the Federation is a utopian one. There's no starvation, no poverty. What those guys in those blogs are doing is complaining about something that is irrelevant. If everyone is taken care of where they have homes to live in and food to eat, why does one care? If you seek power over others, then you would have a problem where everyone is living a comfortable life. If everyone is being take care, who would complain about that. What's being stopped? What's being denied to complain? The only thing left is having power over others. Economic systems are all about how to distribute finite available resources.

e·con·o·my
əˈkänəmē/
noun
noun: economy; plural noun: economies

1. 1.
   the wealth and resources of a country or region, especially in terms of the production and consumption of goods and services.
   synonyms:
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   , (financial) resources;More
   financial system, financial management
   "the nation's economy"
   • a particular system or stage of an economy.
     "a free-market economy"
2. 2.
   careful management of available resources.
   "even heat distribution and fuel economy"
   synonyms:
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   , thriftiness,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   ,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   , careful budgeting, economizing,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   , scrimping,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   ,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   , abstemiousness
   "one can combine good living with economy"

If all the basics are available to everyone, it's not communism. It's everything any civilized culture and economic system wants to achieve. Communism versus capitalism or versus whatever is just the means to an end. If they achieved the utopian ideal and someone is complaining, it's because they want something uncivilized.

This guy seems to dislike the benefits of advanced technology to make the vast majority of human labor irrelevant. Also what this guy calls communism is nothing more than just the an expansion of the social safety net. But I guess this guy believes the state taking care of it's citizens basic needs is evil.

Real ST replicators basically would eradicate 90 percent of manufacturing and production labor along with all the supporting industries. You would in effect put millions if not a billion plus out of work. So if you don't want these newly unemployed to be radicalized providing the basics would be necessary and then becomes the norm. This is kind of the only good idea to solve the problems of a post-industrial society.

The food service industry probably exploded look at youtube today and everybody seems to be putting out there own cooking show.

But earth does seem to an allowance system of some sort because in DS9 Captain Sisko talks about how was using up his transport credits going back home for dinner form the academy.

The Housing Market and vehicle transportation would be dramatically changed by transportors. No more absurd traffic nightmares heck almost no car usage. People would not have to scramble to get a decent home closer to work because transporters would make everything walking distance. We've already seen how the internet allows thousands to work from home on the otherside of the planet.

The entertainment industry is also a perfect place to expand people like to be entertained quality not withstanding.

Star Wars 7 Plot: ‘The Force Awakens’ Will Not Be Epic, Learned a Lesson From Marvel Bloat


Star Wars: Episode 7
The Force Awakens will be streamlined to keep a short running time. This comes as a bit of a surprise from Disney, whose Marvel movies have proven that the shared universe model—with interlocking characters and plot from movie to movie—has far longer legs than many analysts would have supposed. A new with Lawrence Kasdan, the screenwriter behind Star Wars: Episode V The Empire Strikes Back and co-writer of , outlines the streamlined we’re likely to encounter when Star Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens hits its Dec. 18 release date.

Star Wars 7 Plot: What 'The Force Awakens' Runtime Means
With two more Star Wars Episodes to tee up, not to mention opening the floodgates to Star Wars Anthology movies like , it wouldn’t be surprising if Star Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens wound up feeling a little overstuffed. It has a lot of ground to cover in establishing the newStar Wars universe. But Lawrence Kasdan insists that they’ve been thinking aboutStar Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens in quite the opposite terms. Here’s what he told Vanity Fair:

“One of the things that we always refocus on from the get-go was that it not be one of these very long, bloated blockbusters. A lot of very entertaining movies lately are too long. In the last 20 minutes, you think, why isn’t this over? We didn’t want to make a movie like that. I mean, we were really aiming to have it be—when it’s over you’ll say, ‘I wish there’s more.’ Or, ‘Wait, is it over?’Because how rarely you get that feeling nowadays, and I think we’re headed there. But it means that there will be constant critical looking at it from now to the end, saying, ‘Do we need this? Do we need that? Is it better if this comes out, even though we love it? Killing your darlings.’”

Now to me, that suggests a Star Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens runtime closer to 90 minutes than two hours, though I suspect Kasdan’s definition of a “bloated blockbuster” would be more in line with the two hour, 21 minute length of Marvel’sAvengers: Age of Ultron.

Whether this means Star Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens will clock in at under two hours or not, Kasdan and mentality can’t help but have plot implications. It’s our best indication yet that Star Wars: The Force Awakens will be focused on its own conflict, rather than working to build out an expansive universe for novels and comics to play in. It could also mean that frequently rumored Star Wars 7 scenes in The Force Awakens after all.

Link:


Back to bottling my Grenache

Miragedriver said:

Star Wars 7 Plot: ‘The Force Awakens’ Will Not Be Epic, Learned a Lesson From Marvel Bloat

Star Wars: Episode 7
The Force Awakens will be streamlined to keep a short running time. This comes as a bit of a surprise from Disney

“One of the things that we always refocus on from the get-go was that it not be one of these very long, bloated blockbusters. A lot of very entertaining movies lately are too long. In the last 20 minutes, you think, why isn’t this over? We didn’t want to make a movie like that. I mean, we were really aiming to have it be—when it’s over you’ll say, ‘I wish there’s more.’ Or, ‘Wait, is it over?’Because how rarely you get that feeling nowadays, and I think we’re headed there. But it means that there will be constant critical looking at it from now to the end, saying, ‘Do we need this? Do we need that? Is it better if this comes out, even though we love it? Killing your darlings.’”

Now to me, that suggests a Star Wars: Episode 7 The Force Awakens runtime closer to 90 minutes than two hours, though I suspect Kasdan’s definition of a “bloated blockbuster” would be more in line with the two hour, 21 minute length of Marvel’sAvengers: Age of Ultron.

Back to bottling my Grenache

Click to expand...

Well, i disagree.

if it is a really good movie...I like them longer.

I love the Extended versions of the Tolkien LOTR movies...each being close to (or over) three hours.

And they never get boring for me to this day, even after seeing them each four or five times!

Jeff Head said:

Well, i disagree.

if it is a really good movie...I like them longer.

I love the Extended versions of the Tolkien LOTR movies...each being close to (or over) three hours.

And they never get boring for me to this day, even after seeing them each four or five times!

Click to expand...

I am a die-hard Star Wars fan (as some of you know). I even liked , so therefore I will take what I can get!

In regards to the Lord of the Ring movies. Just give me a cold rainy day, a comfortable sofa and a warm fireplace and I’ll watch all 9 hours plus of the first three movies


Back to bottling my Medieval mead

That's doesn't bode well for the movie. The fact is they want a shorter movie so they can cram more showings per day. That's the only reason why for a short runtime. They want to make sure they break records.

Miragedriver said:

I a die-hard Star Wars fan (as some of you know). I even liked

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, so therefore I will take what I can get!

In regards to the Lord of the Ring movies. Just give me a cold rainy day, a comfortable sofa and a warm fireplace and I’ll watch all 9 hours plus of the first three movies


Back to bottling my Medieval mead

Click to expand...

Heheh...wish you and your kids could come by next week, my friend.

I will have three grandsons over on Thursday, Friday and Saturday of next week.

We are planning on at two huge movie marathons:

1st, all three Hobbit movies followed by all three LOTR movies...over 17 hours.
2nd, all six Star Wars movies. almost 15 hours.

We figure that will take up all three days! They will talk about doing this with their Papa for the rest of their lives.

Jeff Head said:

Heheh...wish you and your kids could come by next week, my friend.

I will have three grandsons over on Thursday, Friday and Saturday of next week.

We are planning on at two huge movie marathons:

1st, all three Hobbit movies followed by all three LOTR movies...over 17 hours.
2nd, all six Star Wars movies. almost 15 hours.

We figure that will take up all three days! They will talk about doing this with their Papa for the rest of their lives.

Click to expand...

I have been wanting to do this! But I would recommend getting some exercise in-between movies haha!