Ask the chief


The Disposition of Ensign Wildman's Baby

:)


Download 126.12 Kb.
Page6/7
Date conversion14.04.2018
Size126.12 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7


The Disposition of Ensign Wildman's Baby


Beginning with Joanna Cravit's comments in the

3/20/98 column






Of The Selling Of Books, There Is No End


Beginning with Murray Leeder's comments in the

3/20/98 column






Television Series Cross-Overs


Beginning with Omer Belsky's comments in the

3/20/98 column

From: "Deeds, Michael A"

Subject: The X-Files/Homicide

To: "'chief@nitcentral.com'"
Phil:
Re:

Omer Belsky, Israel: On a less downbeat note, I have a Question about

Nitpicking - How do you treat cross-overs? The X-Files

just had a Homicide: Life on the Street crossover - can we use that show

to nitpick X-Files? and supposedly, there was a

Law & Order and Homicide crossover - can we use L&O to nitpick X-Files?

and what about `The Simpsons?`
Phil: I personally wouldn't use Homicide to nitpick X-Files but, hey,

it's only television!


I agree that Homicide episodes shouldn't be used to nitpick The

X-Files. However, the nit I sent you concerning whether both shows

exist in the same fictional universe is legitimate in my own humble

opinion. In case you forgot, I will repeat the nit:

Michael Deeds of Philadelphia, PA wrote, "I have a nit for The X-Files

episode 'Unusual Suspects' (11/16/97). This episodes stars Richard

Belzer as Detective Munch from Homicide: Life on the Streets. Thus, it

implies that Homicide and The X-Files exist in the same fictional

universe. However, here comes the nit. In the Homicide episode

'Partners' (1/20/95), a character refers to The X-Files as a fictional

TV show that airs at nine o'clock on Fridays! Can you guess which

character has this line? Yes, it is Munch played by Richard Belzer! So,

this episode implies that these two shows do NOT exist in the same

fictional universe!"

I consider this nit to be legitimate only because of the total

contradiction in the premise of the XF episode.


As for the title to your Star Wars Guide, I think that you

practically HAVE to call it either "The Nitpicker's Guide TO Star Wars"

or "The Nitpicker's Guide FOR Star Wars". As stated before, there

really is NO recognizable slang term for Star Wars fans.


Mike Deeds

From: RTChiDC

Date sent: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:54:16 EST

To: chief@nitcentral.com

Subject: Comment
Ryan Whitney

Evanston, IL


In response to JoAnna's question in the "Ask The Chief" column on 3/20/98:
Yes, that was Kate Mulgrew in "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins". The

year was probably 1985 (plus or minus one year).


In response to Omer Belsky's comments, in the same column:
St. Elsewhere can now be considered in the X-Files universe. In the 3/20/98

episode of Homicide, Alfre Woodard reprises her role from St. Elsewhere.





Of Roddenberry And The Dominion War


Beginning with Brian Straight's comments in the

3/20/98 column

Personally, I never agreed with Gene's "vision" of the future. I never

thought that 400 years of technology would elevate us to the point where

the Earth is

a paradise. In 400 years from now, we will still be greedy, selfish and

self-centered as a society. I also never thought that Star Trek was

about humans

being in a paradise in the future. I also thought Trek was about humans

still being imperfect. For example, in TOS, there are many instances

where

Kirk would act selfishly...like in the episode with Leonoardo Davinci,


where Kirk spends his time trying to get Rayna to leave with him, while

his crew are suffering from a disease.


I think the Dominion is what makes DS9 a more interesting show and to

squash it just because Gene lived in a fantasy world would be a dumb

idea.

I also like the conflict that happens occasionaly between the stars and



guest stars. It's why DS9 is one of the more interesting.
Rene Charbonneau

From: MWilso8660

Date sent: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 20:52:09 EST

To: chief@nitcentral.com

Subject: a few comments and opinions...
In an answer to JoAnna on the 3/20/98 page, yes that was Kate Mulgrew in "Remo

Williams, the adventure begins"....I saw that movie years ago and when Kate

came to Voyager I knew I had seen her somewhere before.

I also read the letter from Brian Straight and it raised an interesting point

in my mind. In the Trek universe, Earth has no hunger, crime, ho,eless,

etc...and no money! They have stated several times that the use of money or

pursuit of material gain is no longer a driving principle...so i really wonder

how all of this "happiness" came along. Remember,there was also a 3rd world

war and the eugenic wars of the nineties that i must have slept through. Its a

nice fantasy, and one we should all be hoping for but its not very realistic.

Unless some profound occurrence takes place we will be who we've always

been...very flawed human beings and we've been fighting, killing and

disagreeing with each other way before recorded history. With the apparent

lack of any earth religion on Trek i find our divine revelation on the show

too hard to swallow...but as I said its only fantasy.

And Fantasy sells on TV mostly because of conflict! Why do people like Star

Wars? The catharthis of watching the death star blow up has got to ring pretty

high on the choices! If the writers of DS9 wanted to tell a story they should

have done a better job with the War with the Dominion. Except for one episode

starrring jake they didn't really show the horror that war is. They could have

made it more than a space shoot 'em up at the end and shown how a war can

strain the emotions and stamina of those that are caught up in it. I could use

this line of reasoning with Voyager also since they don't ever seem

particularly stressed out. it may have been a cheesey show but "Space 1999"

did a better job at showing humans in a really bad situation but striving to

survive. Well, thats just my opinion.



1   2   3   4   5   6   7
:)


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page

:)