Why the Engineers began cloning themselves. A hypothesis.

First posted as a comment on YouTube.

One of the possibilities for the Engineers giving up traditional reproduction might have been some kind of a biological accident.

If we assume, that after a series of upgrades comparable in fashion to Weyland-Yutani obsessively wanting to upgrade humanity, perhaps using the synthesized form of Black Goo as a possible active ingredient which the Engineers might have picked up somewhere else — either from the Deacon prototype stuck on the mural, or from the big head set in the urn chamber in the Pyramid on LV-223, or by combining both — biological reproduction then produced something awful (à la the Offspring).

The progenitors could probably no longer be fixed through state reversal, or that there was some other reason precluding any form of going back, and so, they resolved to cloning.

There may be a possibility for future stories, that the Engineer civilisation became dormant somewhere, hoping and waiting until a separate group of Engineers (maybe even that of LV-223) provides a resolution, or someone from the outside might.

Prestige science fiction series

I've posted here first as a comment reply on reddit.

Prestige sci-fi, in order of appearance:

* Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987−1994)

* Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1992−1999) — very much stands the test of time, especially all the episodes featuring Cardassians and Garak (Andrew J. Robinson).

The first American tv show to talk about comfort women in "Wrongs Darker than Death or Night" (1998).

Behind the camera: Ira Steven Behr, Ron D. Moore and Naren Shankar.

* Farscape (1999−2003, 2004) — Made in Australia. Great animatronics and puppeteering, fantastic sci-fi.

Starring: Ben Browder, Claudia Black, Virginia Hey, Lani Tupu, Wayne Pygram (once played Tarkin, btw), Jonathan Hardy (voice), Gigi Edgley, Rebecca Riggs, and many others.

Behind the camera: Brian Henson, Rockne S. O'Bannon and Naren Shankar.

* Star Trek: Enterprise (2001−2005). There was a lot of fan disdain for it, but it seems to have gained a resurgent following. 9/11 changed the world, and took the show with it.

* Battlestar Galactica (2003, 2004−2009) — upped the space physics realism part. Created and ran by Ron D. Moore. Score by Bear McCreary.

* Stargate Universe (2009−2011) — Starring Robert Carlyle, Louis Ferreira, Brian J. Smith, Elyse Levesque, David Blue, Alaina Huffman, Jamil Walker Smith, and Ming-Na Wen (The Mandalorian and The Book of Boba Fett).

SGU features the first LGBT primary character in a space-based sci-fi show, and is one of the earliest to have a gay starring actor in a sci-fi show in Brian J. Smith (not related to the in-show character), though he wasn't out yet at the time. Brian J. Smith has starred in Sense8*, *Treadstone*, *Matrix 4*, and the upcoming series Essex County

Stargate Universe features an awesome score by the late Joel Goldsmith (son of Jerry Goldsmith), comparable in quality to that of Andor, and musical montages with the eclectic music of the day.

Some of the episodes depict in some detail what it's like to live with a family member who has HIV/AIDS, a life-long disability, and separately shows the progression of ALS and explains what it is.

By the time SGU aired, Star Trek: TNG had become dated in terms of style and presentation.

* The Expanse (2015−2022) — upped the space physics realism and greatly raised the standard on that. Shohreh Aghdashloo steals the show.

* Westworld — Season 1 and Season 2 stand out and raise the bar. Seasons 3 and 4 are weaker.

* The Mandalorian — the great space western. The Book of Boba Fett is good, too, once I disregard the inclusion of the teen biker gang. Boba Fett fills the lone ranger genre very nicely.

* The Boys — A very gory anti-superhero show, but worth watching for the gallows humour. Serious issues through and through. Adults only!

* Invincible — A bloody, gory, and messy cartoon, and a very good one at that. If you're an adult, it's worth the watch.

I must add extra caution wrt The Boys and Invincible, because they are so gory, that anyone who has seen bloody deaths, war, and battle trauma, might find these two shows very triggering.

Invincible is like the superhero version of Happy Tree Friends. If you know what that is, you'll get the gist.

* Andor — hugely raises the bar, and is on par with SGU, BSG, Farscape, DS9, and Westworld. (I've lost interest in The Expanse, though.)

Edit:

• Star Trek: Strange New Worlds is great Star Trek and captures some of the classic feel with Captain Pike and Lt. Spock.

• Star Trek: Lower Decks is a lot of fun, captures the TNG feel, and has some lovely moments.

• Star Trek: Prodigy is a great choice for children.

The other Star Trek shows are meh.

Miks esoteerika on Eestis nii popp

minu Redditi-postitusest

Disclaimer/Lahtiütlus: UFO-teema kuulub tänapäevani suuremalt jaolt esoteerika ja konspiratsiooniteooritate valdkonda. Palun ärge uskuge kõike, mis teile sel ja teistel uhhuu-teemadel jahutakse, iseäranis anonüümseid postitusi.

Soovitan tõsiselt lugeda, vaadata ja kuulata tõsiseltvõetavaid ja respektaableid väljaandeid (ERR, Postimees) ja mõelda oma peaga, ning mitte pimesi uskuda (anonüümseid) postitusi ning inimesi (sh poliitikuid, millistest suurem hulk on äärmuslike vaadetega), kes vandeseltslaslikult ja/või salapärasel hääletoonil räägivad asjadest "mida nemad teile ei räägi, ega taha, et teie teaksite...", ning kes avalikult pröökavad "süVaRiiGiSt".

Niisiis...

Eesti raamatupoodides on alati olnud väga kirev esoteerikasektsioon.

Üleminekuajal, peaaegu et vahetult enne iseseisvuse taastamist olid esoteerika-teemalised eestikeelsed ajakirjad ja ajalehed putkades laialdaselt müügil, ning nad oli tolle aja kohta väga huvitava sisuga.

Vähe sellest: rohkelt UFO-jutte oli samal ajal nii "Horisondis" (tõsine teadusajakiri) kui "Põhjanaelas" (noorteajakiri, mis keskendus ulmele ja fantastikale).

Head seletust eestlaste konkreetselt UFO-huvile ei ole. Üleminekuperiood Eestis tekkis XX sajandi kaheksakümnendate lõpul, kui oli glasnost, mis kehtis Nõukogude perioodil Gorbatšovi ajal: kõigest rääkida veel ei saanud, aga osadest asjadest juba sai.

Seega Eesti vabaks-saamine oli perioodikas (ajalehed-ajakirjad) tundlik teema, sest iseseisvus polnud veel saavutatud ja Nõukogude väed veel sees, aga UFOdest sai kirjutada küll ja veel.

Regiooniti oli UFOdest kirjutav perioodika kaootiline, sest näiteks Tallinna putkades ei saanud seda materjali, mida Tartus või Põlvas, ning vastupidi.

Eestlaste esoteerika-huvi algas tegelikult vist juba palju varem, ilmselt vanade eesti muinasjuttudega — igast "Ennemuistsed lood", kus paranormaalsed ja hauatagused ilmingud olid väga levinud.

1980ndatel (sh. 1980ndate lõpp — 1990ndate algus) levisid kvaliteetsed raamatuseeriad eri rahvaste muinasjuttudest. Üks seeria oli väiksematele kooliealistele lastele, kus pealkirjad olid Eesti kalligraafi Villu Tootsi joonistatud. Teine seeria oli siis väiksemas formaadis ja kõlbas lugemiseks vanematele lastele. Kummagi seeria nime ma kahjuks ei mäleta.

"Põhjanaelas" oli mingil perioodil üldse erakordselt hea sisu, kus Eesti noorte enda tehtud Väga Head™ koomiksid maavälisest elust.

Üks koomiks oli puhta värviline ja väga tõsine, ning rääkis tulnukate tsivilisatsioonist Kuu sees (!) ja maalaste katsetest Kuu ära vallutada, ilmselt, et krabada endale sealne tehnoloogia, ning et töösturid saaksid pururikkaks. Sellest tuleks nii hea ideega teha mingi animafilm vms.

Teine koomiks oli mustvalge ja huumor, aga mitte halvem: üks Eesti jõmm saab tulnukaga suureks semuks ja suurem osa ajast möödub (mõlemal) purjus peaga mööda ilmaruumi tuulates; nad teevad pummelungi ja kooserdavad oma laevukesega ringi, kuni ufo-politsei nad ebamäärase lennutrajektoori eest vahele võtab. Lõpuks kui mees koju jõuab, on Eesti jõmmi jaoks paaripäevasest ringuitamisest Maa enda peal möödunud vahepeal mitu aastat (kui mitte paar aastakümmet). Mingi ime läbi oli tal naine ikka veel sama.

Lastele mõeldud perioodika ja ajalehed ei jäänud ka maha: ühes, näiteks, oli Disney koomiksiseeria "Must Auk" (põhines Disney' filmil "The Black Hole"), mis oli täitsa hea.

Süvariigi- ja vandenõude-teema avas hoopis fiktivine telesari "Salatoimikud", mis 1990ndatel oli üks vaadatuimaid telesarju nii Eestis kui ka mujal.

Nõidade kultuse otsa tõmbas lahti TV3 saade "Eesti Nõiad", mis oli täitsa tore. Seejärel tekkis "Nõidade tuleproov" (välismaiste "tõsielu"-meelelahutuse eeskujul).

Siis tuli "Halloo, Kosmos!", mis oma formaadilt oli tegelikult väga professionaalne. Intervjueeritavaid oli nii palju, et sinna sattus ka mõni väga kahtlane tegelane.

Dune the movie and series

I like the Dune movie for its very baroque and steampunk feel, but it seems that the plot was rushed, and that there was not enough world-building. The space-based special effects and the Toto soundtrack in the movie are timeless; compare with Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain.

Whereas the series is much better in terms of worldbuilding, character development, actor work, storytelling, and planetside visual effects. And that unforgettable music by Brian Tyler, which was used in the Star Trek 2009 trailer.

Space-based VFX in the series were very drab, though, and remain so to this day. Ultimately, if a Blu-ray version is ever made of the series, then the space-based effects should be redone entirely, and if Lynch and the movie studio are ever okay, then the space-based effects (especially the heighliners) should be fashioned after those in the movie.

That way, it would be an ideal combination with Lynch's baroque/steampunk elements, and good storytelling.

Unlike Star Trek/Star Wars and other science fiction, a lot of the Dune story happens planetside, and worldbuilt space tech is more like an afterthought.

On the wisdom of marking things down on paper

This was a comment reply discussing a prop on the table of an important Romulan personality (a pro-consul or senator) from Star Trek: TNG's Unification two-parter. The discussion was then about real-life things used in sci-fi as props, and I put the following related memories into that discussion.

I have somewhere the Canadian TV Guide's 1996 "30th Anniversary Star Trek" edition that contains feature articles, production how-tos, and episode guides up to VOY's "Basics", and there was one article, where set design and props people explained, how they'd add funny easter eggs to props that had text on them.

The tv guide was a gift and was supposed to be a collector's item for me, but being a youngish kid and very nearly totally unaware of this, I used pen or pencil (whichever was available) to mark down episodes I'd recently seen as ok/not ok. I wish I'd copied episode titles on separate pieces of paper at least, but back then, this thought never crossed my mind. Poor tv guide collector's edition, I grieve thy former purity :\

Then in the late-1990s/early 2000s I learned of Farscape, and somewhere out on the interwebs there was a website that documented the many bloopers in Farscape, including real-life stuff that was converted into some fantastic sci-fi thingy :-)

A shortlist of composers for SGU

Joel Goldsmith was the score composer for Stargate Universe -- a short-lived, but high-quality science fiction tv series. His music for SGU made a lasting impression on me. The son of Jerry Goldsmith, Joel passed away in 2012, and he left very large shoes to fill.

So, here's a shortlist of musicians I would consider to compose music for any future iteration of Stargate Universe (hopefully a continuation).

People who have contributed a lot to science fiction and fantasy, and who are now major composers:
* Brian Tyler -- Best-known for his piece from Frank Herbert's Children of Dune, which featured in the first trailer for Star Trek 2009. Tyler also contributed to Star Trek: Enterprise episode "Regeneration". Track here. Tyler is now known for his work on major action movies.
* Steve Jablonsky -- Desperate Housewives (the theme is best-known), The Island, Ender's Game. Major composer, lots of movies.
* Ramin Djawadi -- Thunderbirds (film), Prison Break, Game of Thrones, The Island (additional music).

Other film and television composers:
* Ty Unwin -- BBC's documentary series: Earth, Space, Journey to the Edge of the Universe, The Incredible Human Journey, and several others.
* Leonard J. Paul -- The Corporation (documentary)
* Peter Golub -- Countdown to Zero (documentary)

Musicians who have written scores for films:
* Trent Reznor / Nine Inch Nails -- The Social Network, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (U.S. version)
* Pärt Uusberg -- In the Crosswind (Risttuules)

Musicians who should and would, given the opportunity:
* Front Line Assembly -- pioneering work in Techno-Industrial, soundtrack for the AirMech game
* Mike Foyle & Signalrunners -- Love Theme Dusk, Shipwrecked.

Composers, who generally don't write for film, but whose works have extensively been used in film and television:
* Arvo Pärt

Sexualisation of Women in Star Trek. Then and Now.

This was originally a reply in Google+ to a comment that complained about Uhura's sexualisation in the new Star Trek movies.

With sexualisation I mean a sexualised depiction of women.

The fact, that Uhura never had a long-term on-screen relationship with anyone until 'Trek 2009, meant, that many viewers felt her character not bound to anyone.

Part of the ploy of any exotic production is to get enough non-fans to catch on to a show.

It's possible, that the sexualisation part might have been the reason why Ms. Nichols almost left the show, had Martin Luther King, Jr. not prevented her from actually doing so.

During the TOS era, Uhura wasn't any less sexualised by those days' mores, but visual stimulation did not appear unusual.

But because how Uhura was positioned, it was: "Wow, a black woman is part of the major cast! Fourth-in-command (MLK told Ms. Nichols how important that was)! She can fix radio equipment! Operate a difficult communications console! Play with frequencies!" All this was so huge, that people forgot, that the dress on Ms. Nichols was per fashion still very skimpy.

Now the progressive part of society is desensitised to the fact, that a black person and a woman is just as capable and even more so; cf. Mae Jemison.

Sexualisation of characters is not unusual now either, but as a (Western) society, we appropriate a different value system to it, because our expectations are higher.

ID4/IDR: Economy during the interwar period

This is just a speculation, and mostly a reply to an IMDb thread post about Independence Day: Resurgence.

The first IDR trailer is out since December, but the film won't be out before Summer 2016.

The post started out, that the economy would tank, and the many U.S. carmakers would go bankrupt and would cease to exist.

I think the government(s) would have bailed out any and all carmakers, because they manufacture transport vehicles, which are crucial to rebuilding the infrastructure. Really important manufacturing locations are also kept away from large population centres.

For a short while, the model selection would be either less varied or less luxurious overall, and based on what parts are available at any time. Basically, a logistics's nightmare.

The production emphasis would have reoriented towards making parts for existing cars, and manufacturing transport and military vehicles. Cargo transport is actually more important, as it's responsible for supplies of, like, everything.

Because of petrol shortages, commuter transport in the U.S. would become very widespread. Trams, trolleybuses, trains, etc. would be more prevalent; provided there'd be enough electricity available. I haven't specifically mentioned petrol-based buses, because the military infrastructure would take those off city lines at any time for their own purposes.

Reverse-engineering alien tech can also help. It seems that they did a lot of that presumably under the U.S. aegis, as the world united.

After WWII, the Soviet war loot (aka contributions) from Germany — including a number of German scientists — allowed the Soviet Union to keep up technological parity to some extent until about mid-to-late 1970s, when self-imposed isolation (and some export restrictions) allowed the split between the West and the Soviet sphere to became more visible.

'Common-mold' products would be more widespread. People would certainly splurge less, and concentrate more on essentials, such as food, medicine, clothes and maintentance of creature comforts. Interestingly, lots of manufacturing would not have been moved to China.

Of important note is, that in 1996, many companies that were supposed to rely on redundant tech, had not made any, or had not finished deploying backup contingencies that were done during the onset of Y2K. If the ID4 situation had happened on 9/11 instead, the U.S. and many other countries would have been better-prepared to recover. (As it happened, many companies continued running on 9/11, because their tech infrastructure switched to using backup locations.)

Presumably, there would very likely be a holdout of people who would never use alien-based tech, and they would even try to maintain and improve native technologies. The Amish might probably be an example of that. So I wouldn't be surprised, if many of the common people would have chosen to only keep [consumer] tech from 1996 and somewhat before. Nowadays in the real world, there are people who make this a lifestyle choice to live like people once did in 1950s, 1960s, and 1980s even.

Locations that were not as affected by alien attacks, would be burdened with supplying food and medicine and everything else. There would be rationing until after production rates would have recovered to sufficient levels.

The state of refugees and internally displaced persons would be something akin to what Syrians and Iraqis are experiencing.

And then there's the question of what happened to some of the aliens that crashed. The trailer and the War of 1996 website suggest that some concentrated in Congo.

Update: The IDR website does get occasional updates, so the story along the timeline evolves.

As with any movie website, The War of 1996 site uses the latest technologies; so, compared to most other sites, it's obviously one of those that have actual system requirements with regard to hardware and sofware. More about that is detailed in a post in my technology-oriented blog.

Recent superhero science fiction movies

This is a comment I wrote on a busy IMDb forum. Posted it first in an IMDb forum, but this is backup, because after a certain threshold, IMDb forum threads get deleted.

Late 1990s was the period of huge disaster movies, starting with "Twister" and "Independence Day" in 1996; then in the one year of 1998 two huge asteroid disaster movies, which were "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon". 1997 gave us "Event Horizon". Of all these, ID4, "Deep Impact" and "Event Horizon" might have aged better, IMO. Though "Armageddon" had a bigger production, more star power (back then), and an awesome theme song.

Now, I think at some point we're going to reach, or have already reached Peak Superhero Movie, aka the point when all recent Superhero movies end up with the one that jumps the shark on them all.

Because Ant-Man is in production.

The current Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles release had extensive advertising, but the problem is that I don't like them all that much, even from the trailers. I think I liked the old Turtles movies better, if only because they were more fun and the turtles' prosthetics seemed to have appeared more natural, even if from a production standpoint they might have looked fake. And I was a kid back then.

I have not seen Iron Man movies. I remember I really liked the 1990s cartoons.

This Summer I saw "Transformers: Age of Extinction". Ugh. But it got huge, because it was one of the few Hollywood flicks this year permitted to be screened in China, to which they paid huge lip service in the very movie.

Man of Steel was allowed the previous year. It also gets extra props for awesome eye candy :9

The Turtles and Transformers are basically kiddie movies. Iron Man is teenage material, and Man of Steel for teenagers and young adults. So are "Star Trek 2009" and "Star Trek Into Darkness", both mindless sci-fi action flicks.

Whereas "Lucy" is rated R (haven't seen it yet).

All in all, I'll give Iron Man the benefit of the doubt. Star Trek reboots were rather successful, and Man of Steel is a very nice Superman reboot (I'll forgive camcorder zoom-ins).

The real science fiction goodies were "Prometheus" and "Gravity", of which I haven't seen either.

Independence Day 2. What might have happened in-between

This was in reply to a similar post in IMDb, a post which speculated on what might have happened in the 15-odd years on Earth since the events set in "Independence Day" (1996). Because IMDb forums for a movie or personality are cleaned up from time to time, I've decided to simultaneously publish this here along with the reply on IMDb.

Disclaimer: This blogpost does not contain spoilers to the movie, because I am not aware of its actual content.

My favourite ideas revolve around relations between humans and surviving aliens from the first war.

Of the surviving party (parties), there would be at least two or three 'factions', put this way:
* Those that want to destroy humanity and much of Earth and reconnect with whatever future mothership comes. These would be fighters and their ilk (the alien hard-liners);
* Those who somehow automagically decide that humans are worth something, too, and the Earth preserving.
* And maybe those that kinda-sorta like Earth, but not humans, only that they can't do much about it. The undecided (?).

It's possible that maybe one of the city-ships somehow survived to the point that it's established a state-like territory on its own, but that the ship itself is unable to become airborne. Maybe there are more than one and each has formed a different faction and attitude towards Earth and humanity.

Then the structure of the alien society: What was it like before, during, and after the invasion?

Then the very serious problems around whether and how to integrate surviving aliens into society (à la "Alien Nation", but it wouldn't work out like that anyway) — Because if we're better than them, then we can't just kill them all off. I'm aware it's very pacifist and stuff.

And then about how humans treat or mistreat the surviving aliens — look at Guantánamo; and would there even be trials? Does the whole species need to be convicted, or just the ones who set the agenda? How do you find out the surviving alien leaders (given that they all seem to look alike), and whether there are any, if the social structure and ways of communication are so different?

It's likely that humans and (former) invaders would mostly feel mutually repelled by one another and keep up some form of segregation ("District 9"). Would be interesting to know if that's in the new movie.

Then all the issues wrt biocontamination. Organic as they all are, there must be observable changes in Earth's nature. Did the first strikes also hit nuclear plants and was there any fallout and thus any possibility of a nuclear winter? Then I'd imagine the use of cars with internal combustion engines has perhaps lessened alot first due to destruction of major population centres and because of new technology.

The idea of a third and fourth species is also very intersting, given that a large explosion in space can be noticed by a civilization with at least similar advancement.

Oh, the "Pocahontas" scenario of two kindred spirits meeting one another would never work. No, no. But I wouldn't rule out several accidental hybrids. There's a possibility that if some alien surviors managed to form a workable faction within the confines of their previous social structure, then they might have made several experiments with human survivors until releasing one or more, or even a group of human-alien hybrids. And I suppose those in turn would have very dangerous properties. Maybe alien-human infiltrators.

Then what has happened to different human societies on Earth. Suppose some states rebuild and develop military technology, but at the cost of freedom. Some countries decide to keep individual freedoms, but maybe or maybe not risk being less secure. Or countries who decide not to adopt alien technologies and develop native technologies (Not Invented Here syndrome), or countries that don't want to sacrifice freedoms and develop slower and on their own pace compared to those that might sacrifice freedoms and might want to adopt all the latest alien tech.

Stargate Universe, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and 2001: The Space Odyssey—A Perspective

This was published first to make sure that the post lasts longer than in IMDb forums.
I've reminisced a bit since first replying in this [IMDb] thread, so got some new ideas in support for TMP.

"Star Trek: The Motion Picture" (TMP) was released ten years after "2001: A Space Odyssey" (2001), so it's historically placed within the timeframe of a generation that also had first-hand experience of 2001, which there is a huge fanbase of, and which extensively features elements of observation and contemplation. And, so, this is what the creators of TMP probably leaned on, most likely to offer an intelligent and ethereal view of space, in order, perhaps, to unintentionally counteract the "pew-pew-pew" effect of Star Wars.

So, when I think of Stargate Universe (SGU) and TMP having similarities, then a fair amount of all of that was borne out of 2001. Now that I'd thought of it, 2001 must have provided the people over at SGU quite a bit of influence in how SGU was presented.

When 2001 was initially released, it was lambasted by critics and a rather incredulous public, while only later was the film accepted as a classic. I hope for the same trend to happen with SGU, and, to a certain extent, to have happened already with TMP.

What went wrong with Star Trek: Nemesis

This is in reply to a post on IMDb's Stuart Baird forum thread regarding what his input was to "Star Trek: Nemesis". The advantage to this post here is that threads on IMDb get sometimes deleted as a matter of cleanup, and I can also edit this one here for further comment.

It is soon almost ten years since the film was released, well past the 2009 "Star Trek" movie directed by J.J. Abrams, and I am making my review only now.

The post herein lists some of the things I thought went wrong with making Star Trek: Nemesis and contains an opinion about the stuff that I would have made.

Indeed, it is yet another and one of many posts that list the things that were and went wrong with Nemesis. Many people, of course, do vouch to be the expert storymaker and director after a flop, yet hindsight also gives us the opportunity not to repeat the mistakes and do things better.

So, for starters, I noted a poster there was actally correct in terms of who actually ran the show, and I made a conclusion:

All in all, it was a confluence of bad calls and decisions:

* John Logan is an awesome team writer. With him doing a solo job on Nemesis, the studio should have assigned someone to take a critical look at the script before it was put into production.

The Reman storyline was ok, though fairly one-sided, as it is. I would have never allowed such a terrible name as "Shinzon". Pieces of "B4" on another planet was also a great idea, but I would have certainly scrapped the car chase for better VFX, and perhaps given the non-space-faring planet a greater role in the dispute over Scimitar the ship and weapon of mass destruction.

* Tom Hardy is a really nice actor and played his bit with vengeance. I can't really see how the appearance of his face is in any way similar to that of Patrick Stewart. Hardy also has really luscious lips :-9

* Stuart Baird is an accomplished film editor, but his directorial effort is something right out of "An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn".

The more I thought of it, the more I realized that the Nemesis directing situation was almost exactly out of Burn Hollywood, where an editor by trade becomes the director (I admit I haven't seen Burn Hollywood properly, but I'm sure the situation described has happened aplenty in this industry) and is hostage to the whims of the producer, in addition getting into conflict with the actors and everyone else involved. btw, Burn, Hollywood has Whoopi Goldberg in it <:

And one more thing: "Skyfall" has John Logan as one of the writers and Stuart Baird as the editor. Skyfall has raked in a gross of almost $800 million dollars worldwide.

I believe the TNG cast still deserves another movie, one that has a polished script for starters, and preferably with Denise Crosby in it as the wily Sela. But the clock is ticking.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence. The need to be loved.

This was in reply to a comment on IMDb. I posted it here first, because forums on IMDb sometimes tend to be cleaned up from threads.

I'd assume the makers of androids managed to gather and digitize some amount of brainwaves from humans, which data were then either constricted, or made free within certain baseline contexts (such as love, as in the case of David, or only a simulation of it, as it was with Gigolo Joe).

What you might be asking for is either the level of self-awareness of androids, or the extent to which their programming was free enough to be unpredictable in their actions to explore that self-awareness.

The movie offers what I see to be a dichotomy between the unique David's apparently self-serving and self-aware purpose of [wanting to be] "a real boy, so Mother can love me", that of needing to be loved; and the other less self-aware androids' selfless purpose of service to others. And how all this correlates with the human condition, which can vacillate around variations of these options: Most (well, nearly all) of us want to be loved, but what is the extent of service we are willing to give to others?

The story reveals that several androids became increasingly self-aware and were through various misshaps (intentional or otherwise) forced to become "free agents", but the hardware and programming of the less fortunate ones was limited; imagine people from the autistic spectrum, where their social skills are to some extent or other known to be less adaptive.

Here, Gigolo Joe was one of the few lucky ones to be not just self-aware but also reasonably adaptive. While David was all those things more by an order of magnitude, then the differentiator between David and Joe were experience, skills (both social and practical), heritage, and purpose. What held Joe back were heritage and somewhat constricted social skills which gave him so easily away; while David was aided by the 'more human' fortune of being in these respects a clean slate, and importantly, having an existential and non-materialistic purpose towards the person he related to.

David's primary uniqueness stood in having a (self-aware) purpose, wherein he was not aware of the fact that his being was there to satisfy a very similar (if not exactly the same) human desire — out of which happiness could ultimately be derived. Whereas Gigolo Joe knew precisely what women wanted, and even what would happen to humanity in the longer term.

The juxtaposition of the two shows the differences in how they sought to derive happiness from others. Incidentally, the happiness that either were wired to seek was also different.

While thinking more of it, the future androids in their evolution seemed to have found that very fine balance of satisfying the needs of one (David) and the many, without putting said needs into conflict with one another. This would follow how the early androids' relation to others, despite their being hardwired for service to others, was more, well, binary.

What was lacking in androids, both past and future, was consciousness, or how we humans understand it. Suppose the evolved androids finally managed to reach a level of primary consciousness, but not the subconsciousness, as some cosmological lore has it that in humans this is connected to upper densities of existence. (Not that real-life academics would take seriously or even corroborate, so you can consider it as crackpot science. I might as well add that religion often falls into that same place.)

That is why human consciousness was envied by future androids, so they needed David.

Why Falling Skies is too 'family-friendly'

And why is there little to no swearing.

This was in reply to a Falling Skies IMDb thread posing just these questions.

Well, people do swear in real life, but it's probably very difficult to make that balance right on television.

If you'll ever see an episode of "The Borgias" (a historical tv series produced in Canada and filmed mostly in Hungary), then people there don't swear either, but you'll see everything else: death, murder, battles, intrigue, sex, whores, flogging (torture), subterfuge and politics. Even urination.

Most of the time, people don't swear and generally discourage swearing (in public) in a prude, vain, and hopeless attempt to instill polite (aka more 'cultured') language in children, while in real life all it amounts to is just procrastinating the use of such verbiage by young people.

One of the reasons swearing is not used on American tv is that it would turn off many older/prude/conservative viewers, who would then prohibit their children from watching a show. That would result in dismal ratings from those with Nielsen boxes, no matter how flawed that system is (I have a suspicion these boxes aren't distributed all that evenly, either).

On the other hand, Falling Skies seems to be meant for a slightly younger audience than your average teenager who already knows foul language.

So, for example, if you want to know which is the youngest demographic a show is catering to, see who's the youngest major character (babies don't count). In Star Trek: The Next Generation, that was "Wesley Crusher" (played by writer and actor Wil Wheaton, who now has over two million followers on twitter). So, the older the youngest character in a show, the greater likelihood there is to encounter more mature themes.

And if suddenly the characters in "Falling Skies" started swearing as they actually would in real life, then by now it would be very out of character of them to do so. In a way, they should have done that from the outset, but now it's most likely far too late, because we all know now that they are coincidentally a very polite lot.

In conclusion, the only recourse to actual people with children would be not to swear themselves, or at all — just in case them kids accidentally overhear something — and suggest the youth not to use such language in polite company. This would basically ensure the kids learn by example. (Disclaimer: Your mileage may vary.)

Alternate dialogue between Weaver and Tector

Warning: Here be spoilers of some sort regarding the episode "Death March" from "Falling Skies". I wanted to write this as a comment on IMDb in a forum post, but then started having doubts about its policy on publishing fan fiction on its forums, so moved my ideas here.

I found it very disrespectful of Weaver to push Tector like that and so blatantly play on the feelings of a person who's driving a large truck. If I were Tector, I would have asked Weaver if he wanted to take over driving, or I would have stopped the truck and gone to the back just to avoid Weaver asking questions, but maybe that's just me.

I guess Tector couldn't stop driving, because they were low on fuel anyway, and there was no immediate reason to stop driving and unnecessarily spend fuel on slowing down and then later going on again. Weaver, of course, was using the situation. I think then I would have given Weaver "Don't push it. Sir."

We don't really know what was Weaver's reason to start pushing so hard on Tector. One reason could have just been the plain lack of manpower, and perhaps he wanted to find out if Tector has more in him than he has so far let know. Maybe it's that he's looking for someone who would in the future be able to command just in case something happens to Weaver himself.

So here I'm playing around with an alternate exchange between Weaver and Tector:

(Not exactly spoilers, but hey, I had like two options of how this would go, so here's one... I considered adding a Southern accent to Weaver, but might have fumbled it, 'cuz I can't distinct Black Southern and White Southern in writing. And it all may be a cliche of my own, so beware)

Option #1

- T: "Don't push it. Sir."
Here, Weaver would pause to process the Sir, as it alludes to Tector deferring to his command. Weaver now knows that Tector is alot more trustworthy, but realizes that Tector said as much just to avoid Weaver pushing him.

And after a while,
W: So you were a soldier?
Tector is silent and avoids eye contact.

Weaver realizes that his assumptions have been correct, but doesn't feel they've been completely confirmed to stop asking. Out of boredom, and to try to pull more out from Tector, Weaver would start talking about himself, maybe about some ambush he experienced, and some similar stuff, about the deaths, and such and such.

Tector, who is not really as stupid as he lets on, would pre-empt this by cutting off Weaver's speech:

- T: Don't tell me about some ambush, and that you lost people and that you regret it, and that you wished you were the one to go...

Tector's breathing has become heavier, while Weaver stops, realizing he hit one of Tector's sweet spots. Weaver is silent, while Tector tries to keep his calm.

But,
Weaver then explains his realization that what keeps him going are all the people there behind him, which he then calls responsibility, "Ya know?"

- T: I know. I know what it's like to be in a battlefield. And what it's like to lose your mates.
- W: I just wanted to know.
- T: I don't think I want you to know. Yet.

This at least is a second confirmation to Weaver that Tector has had advanced military training of some sort. This would make Weaver want to know more about Tector, but he knows he has to tread gently.

- W: What if somethin' happened to me again?

This makes Tector think.

- T: Tom can take over.
- W: He was on the alien ship.
- T: What, you distrust him now?
- W: No!
- T: Hal?
- W[with doubt]: He's a good boy, but he ain't got long-term experience.
Tector pauses a bit, and then, almost non-chalantly:
- T: Well, Pope's a good shot.
- W: Pope?! Pope's a firebrand! Yer too good to know it yerself!

[A pause ensues.]

Here I thought Tector would start opening up by explaining his two tours of duties in Iraq and Afghanistan. But not the ambush.

- W: So you are a soldier?
Tector tells his rank and where/who he was stationed with.


I relized that the second dialogue option would be even more intersting:

Option #2

- T: "Don't push it!"

Here, Weaver learns that there might be soft spot in Tector.

- W: Ya know, I've been thinkin' about givin' it all up, too.
- T: Oh yea, tell me abot it! [said dismissively]

Weaver takes it as if Tector is challenging Weaver to humour Tector, so Weaver (perhaps out of feeling insulted about it) starts blathering about his experience of loss from his past military experience and into the post-invasion times; all the while progressing into more and more desolate and macabre descriptions, whilst Tector becomes at first slowly, and then more visibly distraught. As Weaver continues without at first actually looking at Tector, we see Tector breathing more heavily and wiping his left cheek onto the left jacket arm (assuming Weaver doesn't notice from that angle, or intentionally doesn't pay attention), while Weaver goes on and on [insert somewhere Weaver's wish to give it all up and a death wish, too] until Tector audibly sniffs, crying his eyes red while trying to drive a truck, which starts veering off-course. Noticing this, Weaver stops his blather, realizing he's taken it much too far, and helps guide the driver's wheel that Tector somehow holds to turn the truck's course straight.

(This is actually a dangerous situation in another sense, as here Weaver could lose Tector's emotional trust.)

Weaver is silent and keeps his left hand on the wheel of the truck, as Tector tries to regain composure so as to be able to drive the truck on his own.

Weaver just says:
- W: I'm very sorry.
- T: No you're not.

Weaver is very angry (because he did feel really sorry for Tector, knowing that he had experienced a traumatic event before the invasion), but doesn't show it. Weaver eventually becomes really sad himself, looking down, and then forward, but without all the water.

After a minute or so silence:
- W: So you were a soldier?
- T: I was.
- W: Something happened, right?
- T: Yeah. Lots of things.

Weaver finally, but much more shortly, explains his past feelings of despair and then his rationale for going on, and the case for responsibility for the people behind his back.

Tector then says that he knows, like he understands, and starts telling how he was deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, his rank and which group he was deployed with, and about the ambush. Some moisture exits Tector's eyes again, but he maintains composure.

Weaver finally pats Tector on the shoulder:
- W: I honestly didn't know.
- T: I didn't want you to know.
- W [looking at Tector]: We really need people like you.

Here's a pause, to let Tector calm down completely.

- Weaver: So you are a soldier?
- Tector [who is now more determined and looking at Weaver for a moment]:

Yes, Sir, I am.

Weaver feels moved. Maybe he'd say something cliche, like
- W: It is an honor to have you with us.

Tector, though begins explaining his doubts, that his initial plan was only going to take the 2nd Mass to Charleston, until he suddently stops the truck because of the broken bridge.
[spoilers end here]

Tuvix

This was essentially an IMDb forum post reply, but I decided to put that up here first, becuse I thought my ideas are just so compelling :gt; to let them go away, as forum posts sometimes do on IMDb...

Janeway had to choose between not keeping Tuvix alive and not having Tuvok and Neelix around. Essentially her obligation was to her crewmembers Tuvok and Neelix, who she felt she had to save. — Especially Tuvok, who was the only one who Janeway could talk to, because no-one else would listen unless absolutely necessary :>

Chances are that if the writers and producers were willing to have Tuvix alongside Tuvok and Neelix, then it would have been quite a bit more intersting a tv show than what dreck Voyager ended up being. I am not sure how it would have fared budget-wise, but perhaps Tuvix could have been made a regular...

My mind went into overdrive around here:

Neelix would be completely sidelined in his cooking duties much to his chagrin (loss of any culinary status and interaction with crew in the kitchen), and then to add insult to injury, Tuvix could have knocked up Kes in very quick order :9 (I wouldn't have minded that after "Warlord", which was Jennifer Lien's best episode). All that would have given Neelix two very good reasons to be extremely jealous, jealous, jealous!!1 :>

But if Tuvix were kept, then I would have done away with Harry Kim (I'd say he should have been assimilated into Species 8472) and Chakotay (assimilated by the Borg). In the process, "Voyager" could have for some time been a battlefield, and its crew desperately caught between Borg and Species 8472 fighting one another, with the poor ship disparately flying to and fro Borg space and occasionally the Fluidic space.

There should have been some reason for Voyager to be the bone of contention between the two big powers. Maybe the super-important Omega molecule (or even a collection of them) freeflying 'round the ship of its (their) own volition, with neither power being able to get it, because of its rather elusive nature...

For all that time, that would have been very taxing to Janeway, who'd end up having PTSD, making multiple mistakes and judgements of error after Chakotay's assimilation — cuz she was secretly pining for him... And the Borg Queen terrorizing Janeway by privately showing the capt'n not just the first time the Borg actually reproduce themselves (by then, Chakotay would be the sperm donor 1+n times). Because of all that, Janeway would probably end up a poor crazy woman by the end of the show. (Kate Mulgrew's chance at Emmys.)

In the end, Tuvok would have become Commander and Tuvix would have gotten some or all of Tuvok's duties (suppose Tuvok was out of commission for a short while, so Tuvix would have gotten valuable battlefield experience). Once the doctor decided Janeway was no good anymore, Tuvok would be acting captain or something. Torres would be second-in-command, Seven of Nine would do engineering.

Chances are also, that Tuvok's impending mental disease issue would have withered away, given that Tuvix was half-Vulcan and 'family' enough to help with the healing. I wonder how that would have looked like... Anyways, if that wouldn't help right away (since Tuvix is only half-Vulcan and might genetically harbour the same disease, which would perhaps emerge much later than in Tuvok), Torres would get command and Tuvok would give her progressively insane advice (which against all odds ends up working).

Tom Paris would still be the flyboy, maybe even literally after accidentally getting into a transporter accident with some flying bug. (Emmys for makeup or even sfx!)

And attrition would have allowed for some new faces (and perhaps also better actors) to emerge to the fore on the ship to replace lost senior crew. Romulans, anyone?

Star Trek: Voyager episodes that made me emotional

This is a post on an IMDb Forum. Posts on these forums may eventually get lost, so I post here, too, just for the sake of showing which some episodes of Voyager I liked.

I won't say cried, because it's corny and mostly I didn't, but definitely misty-eyed and choked up.

In no particular order from all the episodes mentioned here:
"Jetrel"
"Tuvix"
"Drone" (Jeri Ryan's best moments)
"Riddles" (Tuvok attacked by mysterious aliens, loses memory)
"Once Upon a Time" (where a shuttle crashes and Ensign Wildman records a farewell message to her daughter)

"Imperfection" is good, but I can't remember the episode very well. (about 7 of 9 getting too emotional and Icheb worrying about it)

"Lifesigns" was poignant (The Doctor getting to be with a Vidiian woman).

"Innocence" (Tuvok stranded on a planet with kids)

"Remember" was really good (Torres getting memories from an older lady about genocide).

"Timeless" is very good in execution, but Garrett Wang's acting wasn't so much, though he tried.

The Eavesdropper is only hearing thoughts

This post is in reply to a post on IMDb.

A typical misconception in entertainment industries — perhaps carried over from older mediums (print and radio), where text and speech was important to communicate ideas — is that people only think in speech, while I prefer to think that there are people who rely on text to think and that there are people who use mental images in their thought processes.

This makes catching someone's thoughts more difficult, if a person observed uses the kind of mental imagery that necessarily does not use that person's own (inner) voice, but that of someone s/he thinks about. The trick, then, is to be able to detect what the person's underpinning thought process is in relation to the image and the activity in that image that is working in their primary consciousness. The difference here is in getting to observe what the person perceives in their thought processes, and actually eavesdrop on what he or she really thinks about. Overlap isn't always guaranteed.

Since I haven't seen the film, I guess the experiment was in getting people (or just the protagonist; see below) to only 'hear' someone's thoughts, but not necessarily see them. This would mean that the ability of perception was probably limited to receiving just one type of sensing faculty.

Given the film's premise of 14 people (out of 15) becoming crazy as a result, then I guess the failed method did not include a filter on these people, and so their minds vere overwhelmed. I remember this issue was once handled in an episode of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", where Buffy's mind-reading sensitivity to read others' minds and sensing radius progressively expanded to the point that it became almost impossible to have a sane mind.

See the Mental image article on Wikipedia for more.

Another point is that even despite filmmakers, of all people, realizing that people also think in images, then it's probably just easier to use the "hearing of thoughts" method than "seeing the thoughts" method, as the former is cheaper, while the latter may sometimes require expensive means of post-production to visualise 'seeing' someone's thoughts. Think "Minority Report" and "Brainstorm" (1983).

P.S.
Saw a poster and that George Takei was in it, so got here.

Women, kids, and Stargate Universe

To refer to a user on GateWorld Forums who contended that the most populous demographic watching Stargate Universe (SGU) were older (white) men who would watch any and all Stargate that was available. He asked if women and kids "killed" SGU — implying those Nielsen viewers who didn't watch Stargate Universe, thereby letting SyFy have low ratings as the official reason as to not renewing SGU.

I haven't seen the Nielsen statistics, but based on information presented here (that mostly men watched), then the conclusion is that not all [i]Nielsen[/i] women could watch the show — preferring "Dancing With The Star(let)s". — And those that could watch couldn't let their kids watch, effectively sacrificing watching it themselves.

Part of SyFy's favoured demographic wasn't adult enough: The young kids who couldn't see (under-14's), and older kids who wouldn't watch (the video game generation not interested in character drama). And assuming those were mostly male. The 'girl' demographic could have been turned off either by the very concept of science fiction, or other interests, such as Dancing With My Two Left Feet and a goth woman scientist secretly infatuated with her father-figure-boss.

There's been another thread over here questioning if any of the women characters could have been or could have become someone like Carter (I haven't read through all the thread yet, but I do have a draft reply for it), or very nearly as perfect as her. You know, these people are very few and far between anyway; the closest real-life examples are women astronauts or someone like Valerie Plame. — I have to admit I dropped my jaw when I first saw her on tv (IIRC :-).

This must probably be a cultural thing that women in nowadays' U.S.-based (or -targeted) television shows are very strong characters, possessing almost superwoman-like capabilities in each show, including NCIS, SG-1, and so on; as if that were something who young American women would strive to be, thereby failing to tolerate characters more fallible than your average superchick.

Truth of the matter is, that most people (including women) just are not as perfect as the 'hero'-type characters presented on popular tv shows. I have to contend that SGU was so realistic in its presentation that it perhaps turned viewers off to the collective dismay of us fans. I remember an unintentionally funny line by an SGU hater who wrote (on IMDb, I think) that tv shows weren't supposed to show real life...

Oh, and the kids that did watch SGU, didn't watch it from a Nielsen box, but I guess, very much on their own terms. I am also considering failures in marketing SGU, but I don't know where did the responsibilities lie as to who was supposed to do exactly what.

Soldier and Outlander

This is in reply to one or more posts in an IMDb forum concerning themselves with intricacies surrounding Outlander (2008), an indie science fiction film.

First off, I didn't know Outlander was an indie science fiction movie.
The indie factor alone is worth alot.

What is most interesting, perhaps, is, that Outlander has a greater IMDb score with 6.3/10 points (from 23,768 votes), than the rather similarly themed Soldier, with just 5.6/10 points and 19,190 votes, despite Soldier being ten years older than Outlander.

Soldier's Rotten Tomatoes score is only 10%, while Outlander has 38%.

Both are box office flops with these numbers:
• Soldier: budget U.S. $75 mil/$15,000,000~ gross worldwide;
• Outlander: budget $47 mil/$6,192,098 worldwide gross.

Unfortunately, Outlander's budget-to-return ratio lesser :(

Nevertheless, I wonder if Outlander has made a greater impact, given the greater number of votes for Outlander for a three-year period and Soldier over a thirteen-year period (or is it because of a greater number of Internet users?), because I think Jim Caviezel still made a really good performance there. I mean, the film is nice for Caviezel alone :)