It’s Captain Chase.
Looks a lot like Kirk, tho, don’t he?
Folks may know that there is currently a Star Trek XI in the works, and since J. J. Abrams is doing it, it may actually be the first exception to the "odd = bad, even = good" rule for Star Trek films, which has thus far been iron clad (at least if you understand it in a slightly more nuanced form of "odd = bad or at least less good than the most recent even, even = better than the most recent odd").
That’s not the only Trek video project under consideration, though, as the illustration on the left shows.
Turns out that, now that Paramount has gritted its teeth and put out the Star Trek Animated Series from the 1970s on DVD (where’s The Star Wars Holiday Special, George?), they’re considering a new one modelled after the successful Star Wars: Clone Wars animations that were released to web/TV/and DVD.
Like Clone Wars, this Trek series is envisioned as being composed of short, more action-oriented chapters that are originally presented on the web but that form a larger story when strung together.
The setting for this story is described like this:
The setting is the year 2528 and the Federation is a different place
after suffering through a devastating war with the Romulans 60 years
earlier. The war was sparked off after a surprise attack of dozens of
‘Omega particle’ detonations throughout the Federation creating vast
areas which become impassible to warp travel and essentially cut off
almost half the Federation from the rest. During the war the Klingon
homeworld was occupied by the Romulans, all of Andoria was destroyed
and the Vulcans, who were negotiating reunification with the Romulans,
pulled out of the Federation.
The article then says:
The setting may seem bleak and not very Trek-like, but that is where the show’s hero Captain Alexander Chase comes in. Relegated to border patrol, Chase is determined to bring the Federation (and a ship called Enterprise) back to the glory days of seeking out new life and new civilizations.
I don’t know that this is distinctively bleak or un-Trek-like. We’ve had bleak Trek visions before, and it’s generally been some of the most interesting things they’ve done with the franchise (e.g., the episode with the alternate timeline where the Federation was losing a war with the Klingons, the whole Dominion War cycle on DS9; and then there’s the Borg). The happy, clappy "Gee whiz! Let’s go explore the galaxy, kids!" material has been the worst and least interesting.
Then the article says something that mystifies me:
The parallels with the real world are obvious.
Huh? What the heck are they talking about?
The view is that to be relevant Trek cannot skirt around issues. Rossi explains: "couching big social issues in allegories so they are more palatable is kind of passé now. Today shows deal with these issues head on, so we decided to make the entire show an allegory. The premise is an allegory for the post-9/11 world we live in. A world of uncertainty and fear."
Excuse me, but when has mankind EVER not lived in a world of uncertainty and fear? 9/11 was not the introduction of original sin into the world. We’ve had division and secession and sneak attacks and invasions and assassinations and genocides and all kinds of nasty stuff like that for thousands of years. You’re going to have to get a lot closer to what’s going on today if you want me to see parallels to the modern world that are distinctive compared to what’s been happening all throughout history.
Unless you’re so George Bush-obsessed that you see every drama through the lens of the global war on terror, or unless you have no awareness of history at all, you’re just not going to be seeing striking parallels to today lurking under every rock.
I suspect the bit about the show being "relevant" to today is just spin on the part of the producers to try and sell the series.
GET THE STORY.
James, you’re putting us on, right?
No self-respecting adult would pay any attention to such rubbish.
John is apparently the same troll who crabbed at Jimmy in the Aquatic Tribbles thread.
Like most trolls, he’s dead wrong in his assertions. There are indeed self-respecting adults who have an interest in Trek related topics.
Jimmy, if by “happy, clappy, let’s go explore the universe,” you’re referring to the original series, then I have a bone to pick with you. (Where do expressions like that come from?)
this John is really starting to hack me off.
I’m not referring to TOS en toto. I’m thinking more, in fact, of episodes in the early seasons of TNG and ENT, as well as much of VOY. Too often the writers would try for inspiring us with a sense of wonder without coming up with a wonderful concept to back it up, and the result came off flat.
Now that I’ve read the link and some of the comments, I have to agree with the poster who hoped the idea dies “at the hands of the Regulan Blood Worms” and his comment that they just want to use the Star Trek name.
Jimmy, you’re right that we’ve always lived in uncertainty and fear. Where I see differently is your comment that the bleak Trek visions were some of the most interesting things done. I would side more with the comments saying that the optimism in TOS is part of what was so good about it. And TOS could be very topical.
I don’t know as much about the other series and so am unfamiliar with the episodes you mentioned. But they were later than the 60s when life had settled to a more even keel.
An interesting distraction for this morning.
Ahem, did neither one of you see my pun about the troll crabbing at Jimmy? Or was it not worth commenting on?
It’s like during the Depression of the
The alt-timeline ep Jimmy cites is kind of a new-BSG prototype in some ways, but DS9, except for a few very dark eps, usually struck me as very TOS-ish in terms of attitude, though not in terms of storytelling style: people are flawed in larger-than-life ways, but the heroes are generally trying to do the right thing as they understand it, and the human race (and broader community of sentients) is seen as having value and being worth saving. Bureaucracy is to be distrusted and ignored whenever possible. People should protect what is theirs, by force if necessary. People should be free from tyranny. Kirk would be pretty much onboard with much of that, I think.
Mr. Akin, Merry Christmas,
Why this interest in make believe cartoon characters?
What does it have to do with the Sacred Deposit of the Faith.
Thank you and God bless you.
Ahem, did neither one of you see my pun about the troll crabbing at Jimmy?
I got it! 😀
Interesting note in First Things about whether any modern science fiction qualifies as literature, or whether any work of science fiction qualifies as a literary masterpiece.
FWIW.
Dan, Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings has nothing to do with the Sacred Deposit of Faith, at least not on the surface. Yet LOTR is one of the most Catholic fiction in existence.
Fiction and Catholicism is an interesting topic that Jimmy has written on before. But since I’m heading out to the library to get an Agatha Christie, my thoughts will have to wait for another time.
(besides, this is Jimmy’s blog and he gets to post on whatever he wants)
God bless,
Mary Kay
I think Captain Kirk and Lady Galadriel hold differing Catholic moral implications as their core representations.
Thank you,though,Mary Kay,and God bless you.
Dan, your first post didn’t differentiate between various stories. You simply mentioned “make believe.”
Okay, you caught me in the trap of the statement so generalized that when the other person makes a valid point, you can say, “oh, but I didn’t mean that. So let me go back to your first post. What did you mean? Why are you questioning what Jimmy posted?
“Excuse me, but when has mankind EVER not lived in a world of uncertainty and fear?”
‘Zacly! I find it interesting that everything these days has to be from a “post-9/11” POV in order to be a dramatically valid one, when it comes to entertainment.
I read an interesting article on Zack Snyder, the latest director linked to the film adaption of the once thought unfilmable classic 1980’s Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons graphic novel Watchmen. He mentions that the studio wanted to make the story about the “war on terror” & change things all around. But the more he & the writer he’s working with on the project got into it, the more they returned to the source material & Moore’s original story & themes. Hopefully, he won’t be made to acquiesce to the studio’s version of the story. Here’s a link to the original article I found through Rotten Tomatoes, for those interested.
http://movies.ign.com/articles/745/745863p1.html
But the recent film version of PD James’ Children of Men, for example, didn’t fare as well. It changes virtually every one of Mrs James’ themes and characters by “completely secularizing” them, per reviews by Right Wing Film Geek Victor Morton & Luther at the Movies, which I found linked on Christian film critic Peter Chattaway’s blog. Those reviews call the film “intellectual rebellion” & “an act of vandalism” against James’ novel that the author, herself, describes as a “Christian fable.” Director Alfonso Cuarón took the basic concept of the book (that women in 2027 can’t have babies, the world is dying, & England is under the rule of a dictator) & has created a film that blames the Bush administration’s war on terror policies for the state of things in 20 years. The Luthor at the Movies critic recalls how, in the 1984 film 2010, “the Reagan White House was retroactively blamed for HAL-9000’s breakdown in 2001” & likens it to Cuarón’s film. Mr Chattaway’s entry on this can be found on his blog:
http://filmchatblog.blogspot.com/
As Mr Morton points out on his blog,
“It’s not simply that Cuarón wasn’t faithful to James (which would be a retarded point to score against a movie). But rather that he was faithless to it, and dragged her novel into a film he already wanted to make, without any need to do so. Find a different premise for the dystopia and retitle the film 2027 or somesuch, and I at least would not object (or at least not in the same way). And what’s even worse is that this film has now become the definitive film text for CHILDREN OF MEN. It’s not the novel I’m concerned about — it will survive (or not) on its own merits as all badly-adapted novels have. But now, CHILDREN OF MEN is off the table as a film. It cannot be made anytime soon by a talented film-director who is more in tune with James. And that is just a crime.”
I agree with Jimmy that the “relevant” tag is spin. But I think there is a relationship between what’s going on with these films & the new ST animated show Jimmy posted about, slight as it may be.
Mary Kay,
Star Trek characters of their very nature,if they have a nature,are cartoonish ,in the sense that they are grotesque misrepresentations of an intelligible world.
Captain Kirk is a a figment of some writers attempt at co-opting some nerdy individuals sympathy towards escapism and the vapidity of a false mantle of warmth.
All that this ilk of cartoon make believe man does,is provide silver lining for a modernist and secular comic book world.Man,in this sense is paper tomfoolery such as Superman,Batman,The Incredible Hulk,Mr.Spock and so forth.
The characters Tolkein created,although make beleive,were intended to represent a Catholic truth,therefore are grounded in reality.
Thank you and God bless you.
Gene: This is exactly what happened to V for Vendetta, and is exactly why the author of the comic has distanced himself from the film.
But then, I always hold out hope that some day, some film-maker will come along and undo messes like the one you mention. I even find myself praying for funding to one day create “remakes” of such films (some of which have yet to be released which do such a huge disservice to the source material) so that we can do just that.
I know that that last sentence I wrote doesn’t make a whole lot of sense right now but, let’s just say I know of at least one as-yet-unreleased film that is sooo different from the thousand-year-old poem it’s supposedly based on that it’ll make your teeth itch.
Dan: Given that there are many renditions of Batman, et al, I suggest you chill and reexamine before you pronounce them all anathema. A good place to start your reexamination process might be the latest (and really, ONLY) Batman film, Batman Begins. The film’s underlying theme (“It’s not who I am, but what I do that defines me,”) is so Catholic as to make me actually surprised it got produced by a major studio.
I’m not saying the characters are the best we could hope for, but there are glimmers of truth that can be found in all of them. And then, there’s simply the aspect of just plain ol’ good, clean fun. Not everything has to be Tolkein quality (and thank goodness, as very few pieces of fiction would exist if this were required).
Where can one find a comic book written since 1980 that has women dressed modestly?
Andor destroyed? Vulcan pulls out? Sigh. Roddenberry had a vision of, what we would call today, a diverse future. In the last ten years, Trek, under Berman & Brega, has become an earth centered, pro-human future. Wasn’t there a Klingon quote from Trek VI about the Federation being a human only club?
I was irked when Zephram Cocharane became Terran. I was shocked when “Enterprise” made Vulcans into Machiavellians.
I used to be a big Trek fan, now I’m just tired by it all. Catholic history is much more action packed anyways.
“I know that that last sentence I wrote doesn’t make a whole lot of sense right now but, let’s just say I know of at least one as-yet-unreleased film that is sooo different from the thousand-year-old poem it’s supposedly based on that it’ll make your teeth itch.”
So what you’re saying Jared, is that the Beowulf movie is going to suck!
Dan: You have a point on the modesty front. But once again, you maybe should’ve brought that into the conversation earlier.
Rob: Yeah, but Roddenberry was also so anti-capitalist that he did away with any form of currency in TNG (along with introducing the dispicable Ferengi). Luckily, he didn’t have that much control over TOS. And you’ll notice that they brought currency back in later series.
Dang it, Dr. Eric! I’m trying to keep a low profile here.
One never knows who might be reading. And this industry is not forgiving of diverse thought.
“No self-respecting adult would pay any attention to such rubbish.”
Well… so much for my SpongeBob reference on another thread.
I gotta go… Captain Standish is at the door, and I’m afraid he might have heard us singing last night. Looks like it’s the stocks for me!!
OOPS!!!
Sorry Jared, I forgot what they do to guys like you in your town.
Dr. Eric: S’okay. I mean, I could’ve posted anonymously, right?
Tim J: Yeah, and no more Veggie Tales references either.
Tim J, I literally LOL at your mention of SpongBob on the other thread. Our troll would have “self-respecting adults” in a very narrow box indeed.
Dan, how do you manage to walk with both feet so firmly planted in your mouth?
Your comments are so far off the mark that I’ll have to wait to stop laughing before responding.
Thank you for the insult at Christ’s Mass,Mary Kay.Very Christlike of you.
Please explain youself when you say that my comments are so far off the mark.
May you experience The Holy Ghost’s soothing power in your life.
Love Dan
Dan, see this is where your blinders predispose you to not only misread what others say, but get yourself in a tizzy unnecessarily.
Where, oh where, in my post do see an insult to the Mass? In fact, I’m insulted that you think I would insult the Mass. And thank you, but the “soothing power of the Holy Ghost” has already made Himself present in my life.
Seriously Dan, if you want a two way discussion, you need to stop the diversionary tactic of accusing others of insulting the Mass.
Mary Kay,Oh Mary Kay,
I said during Christ’s Mass or Christmas as some call it,you took the opportunity to fill your shaky ego with a non humerous insult.
Christ’s Mass,Christ’s Mass.
I did not say you insulted the mass.
At Christ’s Mass,Christ’s Mass
Read my entry again.
Christs Mass
At Christ’s Mass you chose to airlift a fun lovin insult.
May you experience the Holy Ghosts soothing power at Christ’s Mass,in your life.
Love Danny Wanny
Dan, while it is interesting to know that the phrase “Christ’s Mass” is some variation of “Christmas,” it had nothing to do with the topic and you gave no indication what you referred to. It was just as reasonable a guess that it referred to the liturgy Mass.
Since this is not the first time you’ve thrown non-sequitors into a discussion, I’ll leave you to your view of the world.
Dear Mary Kay.It is a common expresion to wish someone a certain sentiment at Christ’s Mass or at Columbus day or AT St. Swithens day.
It has nothing to do with the realm of the non-sequitor.
Now again Mary Kay,so as I can defend myself,how were my previous comments on the buffoonery of the cartoon world,so off the mark.
Please look again at that posting,slowly,and calmly and breakdown what you find as “off the mark”
We shall play see-saw the whole live long night.
At Christ’s Mass,Christmas.
Love D.P.H
“All that this ilk of cartoon make believe man does,is provide silver lining for a modernist and secular comic book world. Man,in this sense is paper tomfoolery such as Superman,Batman,The Incredible Hulk,Mr.Spock and so forth.
The characters Tolkein created,although make beleive,were intended to represent a Catholic truth,therefore are grounded in reality.”
It might interest you to know, Dan, that a number of articles have been written discussing the messianic aspect of superheroes, especially those created by Jewish artists & writers. Very interesting stuff. When done well, superheroes can be the embodiment of what we are & what we should be, just as any *hero* story is from Miguel de Cervantes to the present. Comics are just a new way of representing that. Because they’re new & have worked their way into pop culture, doesn’t devalue the really good work that’s been done.
Which is why, on a related note, I don’t buy the line that speculative fiction isn’t literature. Of course it is – the best of it. Just as the best of non-SF writing is literature, too. Just because there’s a lot of bad writing out there doesn’t lessen the power of the good writing. Those who believe SF isn’t literature should read A Canticle for Lebowitz or the work of Gene Wolfe or Tim Powers, not to mention Tolkien. There are some works commonly called “comics” that I’d label literature, too. But, as with other genres, there’s a lot of junk, too.
“Where can one find a comic book written since 1980 that has women dressed modestly?”
Dan, have you read many pre-1980 comics? There were plenty of them that had immodestly-dressed women – & men, for that matter! For example, check out Jim Steranko’s work for Marvel in the late 60’s & early 70’s, who pushed so many envelopes in style & content – especially on books like Nick Fury. Or the comics from the pre-Comics Code Authority era, which started in 1954. But it backfired when Stan Lee decided to publish the anti-drug storyline of Amazing Spider-Man #96-98 in 1971 without CCA approval & it went on to become on of the most effective & popular storylines ever in ASM.
“I know that that last sentence I wrote doesn’t make a whole lot of sense right now but, let’s just say I know of at least one as-yet-unreleased film that is sooo different from the thousand-year-old poem it’s supposedly based on that it’ll make your teeth itch.”
But, Jared . . . Neil Gaiman is writing it! Sure, it’ll depart from the story, but . . . it’s Gaiman! 😉
And I was going to include V for Vendetta in my 1st post but it was already long enough! Thanks for mentioning it. (BTW . . . I’m stealing “it’ll make your teeth itch” from you. That’s really funny! I’ll credit you.)
Dan, you overstepped a line tonight.
Your non-sequitur was “Thank you for the insult at Christ’s Mass,Mary Kay.Very Christlike of you.”
In the event that you do not know what a non-sequitur is, I’ve pasted a definition:
non sequitur [(non sek-wuh-tuhr)]
A thought that does not logically follow what has just been said: “We had been discussing plumbing, so her remark about astrology was a real non sequitur.” Non sequitur is Latin for “It does not follow.”
[Chapter:] Conventions of Written English
The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
If you can’t figure it out, get someone to explain it to you.
Gene: You better tell me that that winky-winky smilie means you’re being sarcastic or … or … I don’t know what but, you don’t want to be there if it happens, buddy!
On the itchy teeth comment … I think I stole that from someone (can’t be sure) so feel free.
Now, on to the rest of your topic as to the literative properties of speculative fiction … I’ve had sooo many “creative” writing teachers tell me that “SF ain’t real writin'” (and I write it that way because when they say it, they sound like a bunch of blue-neck hicks … yes, I wrote “blue” as in, “of or from the blue areas”). It’s unbelievable. My last such writing professor in college was so much against it that I thought she was going to start foaming when I asked her for a solid definition of what exactly we were banned from writing about, even on the projects she said would have no limits to them. And then, these are the same folks who lecture others not to be so “narrow” or “rigid.”
Dan: In talking about blue-neck hicks, I’m not talking about you, man. To paraphrase Yukon Cornelius, “You [read] what you like to [read]; I’ll [read] what I like to [read].” And let’s not criticize Jimmy for his TV discussions. As has been said so many times, this blog isn’t just limited to religious studies. It’s one thing to say “Star Trek sucks” and another to say that he shouldn’t have an “interest in make believe cartoon characters.”
It is unseemly to attack the mentally ill such as John/Dan.
JohnDan – I suppose you still have the Family Circus, if that isn’t too radical for you.
May you experience the Grace and Wisdom of Catherine of Bologna
In terms of the general question concerning our interest in popular fiction, I would like to point out that Western culture is a reading culture and that this culture was created by the Catholic Church. In her early years, the Church seized Roman and Greek mythology and firmly planted her flag in Pagan lore making quick use its (useful) allegories to explain the Christian faith and prove its universality.
Then she began to progress with the largest, most widely known and shared literary canon in the history of mankind. This canon is unabashedly Catholic and her brightest stars were all Catholic. In other words, the realm of fiction is thoroughly ours.
Inasmuch as it is still being written and enjoyed on this Earth, we have a duty to remain interested and engage in sincere debate of the modern canon as the owners of sheep would tend to their flock or as royalty tends to their kingdom. This goes even for those works which are the product of non-Catholics, non-Christians, or even non-Deists.
Because no matter the spiritual leanings of the writer, good fiction always reflects Catholic truth and bad fiction is blind to it. Everyone knows this (at least subconsciously) but few in the establishment today want to admit it. Those who try to flaunt this truth end up learning the hard way.
Even in modern times with writers like Chesterton, O’Connor, Tolkein, and Powers the greatest and most earth-shaking writers tend to be those who operate under this un-secret.
The realm of fiction varied and vast and may even be confusing to the uninitiated but do not doubt for a second that at her very center is the great and glorious Cathedral of Catholicism radiating the golden light of fiction, law, civilization, culture, and science for all the world to enjoy.
If you lack the wit to see this, then shame on your teachers for not schooling you properly.
If you refuse to acknowledge this out of simple stubbornness and pride, then you mock the Bride of Christ, Holy Mother Church, and the very world she cultivated as a product of Christ’s blessing through long centuries of toil with blood, sweat and tears. You mock the Sacred Blood He spilled, the blood of countless martyrs, and monks who went blind copying manuscripts by candlelight.
No one said you have to enjoy everything written, but you must at least understand fiction is OUR country and we have a right as sovereigns to walk where ever God pleases us to go.
As far as the political angle on the new Star Trek cartoons are concerned, politics from the La La Land perspective tend to kind of just peeve people off. In fact, it was not so much the hokey “Let’s explore space, kids!” attitude that eventually (and quite permanently) turned me off to Trek, but the constant PC sermons the episodes spewed.
PC worldviews tied the writers up in knots and characters ended up “heroically” acting in the conclusion against the very views they resolutely touted as good in the build-up. The races ended up being hopelessly muddled as different writers played with environment vs heredity themes — witlessly displaying their complete ignorance of free will and the function of culture. Data, the non-sentient thing was “declared” sentient by Star Fleet (apparently the only surviving moral authority). Even the Borg were brought lovingly into the fold.
PC-ism brought any hope of real conflict creating real changes to a complete standstill. At times, it would have been more fun to watch Itchy and Scratchy on the porch sharing lemonade.
Thankfully some people realized you cannot have story without conflict (or as Tolkein says “the Fall”) and war was occasionally brought into the picture.
In this respect, Star Trek did touch on one universal truth: PC-ism cannot survive any kind of real conflict whether it is physical, political, ethical, or psychological.
I got tired of watching episode after episode devoted to going nowhere ever and eventually embarrassed of the Endarkended writers attempts to grasp the fundamental cultural equivalents of “fire” and “wheel”.
Be lost on your own time, guys! When you are on the clock, you gotta deliver the goods.
Amen, StubbleSpark. You are the man . . . well, the Spark! 😉
Jared, I’m a big Gaiman fan so I’m willing to overlook changes to the project in question for his sake. Now if Bob Z blows it (& I’m not talkin’ ’bout Mr Zimmerman!), I’ll think twice!
And you describe what I call the Cult of the Literati. Those folk in the writing & publishing biz who think nothing of making moolah off populist SF but deriding Tolkien, the grandaddy of modern fantasy. It’s duplicitous at the very least.
Gene: You and I are gonna hafta take this to email.
…
Ugh.
Do you remember the Saturday Night Live were William Shatner (Captain Kirk)tells all the Trekkies at the convention to get a life, but than says he is just imitating the mind takeover episode? I feel like telling you Trekkies including Jimmy to get a life. But I know he likes Sci Fi.
When William Shatner was TJ Hooker (I think the end of the first episode) he said he did not go to Mass anymore (his character think Shatner in real life is Jewish) because he preferred the Latin Mass in a conversation at a bar with Adrian Zmed and the Motley Crue drummers ex can’t remember her name but good looking blonde.
So TJ Hooker was promoting the TLM
Speaking of needing to get a life…
Are Sarcastic statements considered non sequitors?
If the sarcasm is effected how could it be?
This is an example of a non sequitor:
Has anyone come across a book by Dietrich Von Hilldebrand called,”Satan at Work”?I can’t seem to find it anywhere.
It is considered a good follow up to “The Devastated Vineyard,which is an amazingly eye opening and moving book.
Thank you and God bless you.
Are Sarcastic statements considered non sequitors?
If the sarcasm is effected how could it be?
This is an example of a non sequitor:
Has anyone come across a book by Dietrich Von Hilldebrand called,”Satan at Work”?I can’t seem to find it anywhere.
It is considered a good follow up to “The Devastated Vineyard,which is an amazingly eye opening and moving book.
Huh?
Has anyone come across “Satan at Work”,by Dietrich Von Hilldebrand?
It is like burrowing for truffles to find.
Thank you and God bless you.
Dan Hunter:
Look at me
I write so ethereally
People must be impressed
My words are
So properly dressed
When I say
“What’s five by pies?”
Naturally I’m despised
They think it random
But I’m mocking their fandom
What? You disagree?
Then to Hell with thee!
(and by the way
Now you’re mocking ME!)
I’m a Traditional
That means imagination
Is too libidinal!
We can’t have fun
We’re too busy converting
The orthodox to MY religion
So away with you fancy!
Away like clouds!
I’ll be just fine
With my head in the ground
I’ll curse the dark
And I’ll curse the light
And just for good measure
I’ll curse those who are right
I’m too good for my Catechism
And too good for my pope
I won’t quote from either
Unless it’s to joke
Once in a while I try
But should my endeavor die
I know who to blame it on
It’s always those darn Masons!
With my faith in God’s Church
Also went my joy and hope
Now if you’ll excuse me
I’m late for a group-mope!
StubbleSpark, right on the money.
“Gene: You and I are gonna hafta take this to email.”
LOL. Cool.
Bubblespark,
Pluck the beam from thine own eye before removing the splinter from another’s.
Tell me where you live.
I’d just enjoy to meet you face to face.
Genius, StubbleSpark. Pure genius.
Bring it on, fun-fun.
I’ll bring the gloves,you bring the smelling salts.
let’s go muffin. call me at 917-582-4254.
Dan… knock it off. You are behaving like a baby. Are you now resorting to fists because you admit you are losing the battle of the brains?
I would vanquish you with either.
I have a 140 I.Q.
I have wrestled in the 220 lb category at Iowa State University.
I regularly compete in a state sponsered boxing match for the police dept.And though I am not the best in my division,I have registered 15 wins by way of Knouckout.
If bubbleworth boy has the sand,give me a yayho.
Ive posted my number.
We shall have a pow-wow.
God bless you all.
Bye the bye.Ive frequently quoted His Holiness Pope Benedict and have a great love and obeisance towards His Holiness.
Show me otherwise.
Godspeed.
Dan, I live on an island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, if you can believe it. My lair is underground and surrounded by armed guards and various detection devices. I also drive a small sports car which I use to fight for freedom.
I have a real name but when trouble arises I don my mask and become my “altar” ego …
StubbleSpark!
Cue the theme music:
(Chorus)
Dart! Dart! Dart!
He’s the SubbleSpark!
Smart! Smart! Smart!
He’s smarter than a dart!
(Bon Jovi-esque singing)
He fights all the trolls
And is afraid of the bol-
Weeeeevaaaaaaaals!
Living on his island
He’s a guy who can
Do some things
I say he can do some things!
Wooo!
(Chorus repeats while gravelly voice narrator provides exposition for animated montage of StubbleSpark doing things)
StubbleSpark is a highly trained team of himself and no other. He uses his high training to fight for justice sometimes and sometimes to do other things that are not fighting for justice. He knows not to get too bogged down doing the one thing so he does other things in a highly trained fashion. I say he he does other things!
(Cue StubbleSpark title logo. Chorus:)
StubbleSpark!!
Dan – speaking as the son of a cop – it gives me the willies to think that you are a cop.
Dan, like with most Traditionalists, you and I probably agree on 99.9% on all things so I think it is inappropriate that my comments have fomented your anger towards me, your trenchmate in this battle for souls.
I agree that I may have spoken in too mocking a tone (sigh, again) and for that lack of Chris Love in my heart, I am well-rebuked. I apologize.
Let us work together to raise the level of dialogue and, more importantly, crush our enemies to make a footstool for Our Lord.
StubbleSpark, in addition to being brilliant, you show a very generous spirit.
OTOH, Dan has yet to apologize for his rudeness.
Dan makes a big show about “love and obedience” to the Pope, yet Dan’s boasting, bragging and eagerness for fisticuffs prove otherwise.
I wonder how long it will take him to demonstrate even a glimmer of good will and/or humility?
I went out to see Rocky Balboa with my lovely wife Elena,its not a half bad movie.
He makes reference to Jesus at least three times in it,and in a respectful manner cross’s himself before the big fight.He also has a friend read from Ezekiel in his locker room.
I apologize to anyone whom I have offended.
I get very keyed up when I feel justice has been offended.I do not care so much about personal affrontery,but when, I believe, universal truth’s are shot down I get ruffled.
Stubblespark,where is your lair actually located?
God bless you all.
You know I have met Jimmy. I am not claiming to be a friend or even an aquaintance but I spent some time in San Diego and had a chance to talk with him and here him speak on several occasions.
One of the smartest men I have met, I am surely thankful that he is writing in defense of the Catholic Faith – more kean minds like his are needed.
His choice of entertainment reflects a strong imagination and for a man with his mind, that is important. To get online and bash his personal tastes. Well that is just sad.
So when you write:
“No self-respecting adult would pay any attention to such rubbish.”
Funny thing, John, that is actually how I feel about almost EVERYTHING you post.
Quit being a troll and start offering reasoned responses on things with which you disagree. Your snippets are tiresome and that is NOT how adults communicate.
Dan, thank you for saying you apologize to anyone you offended.
The cynical would say that it was simply to defuse getting your own treatment back. For if others treated you the same way you’ve treated Trek fans, they’d rip to shreds any enjoyment you got from last night’s movie, just as you shredded the enjoyment some get from Star Trek.
But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you made a sincere effort.
You say get keyed up when you feel justice has been offended and universal truth shot down. Okay… so what how did a discussion of Star Trek offend your sense of justice. And what universal truth was shot down??
For someone so concerned with justice, you unjustly disparage others. For example:
Star Trek characters .. are grotesque misrepresentations…
Not only have you insulted a generation of people who grew up with Star Trek, you’ve completely missed that the show inspired countless kids to major in science or do well in school. There are a large number of successful people who credit Star Trek with piquing their interest. That includes minorities at a time when not much was open to them.
Which brings me to Kirk is a figment of some writers attempt at co-opting some nerdy individuals sympathy towards escapism and the vapidity of a false mantle of warmth.
That sentence doesn’t even make sense. But I’ll take a guess at what you were trying to say. Kirk as a figment – well, yes, all fictional characters are a figment of someone’s imagination (well, duh).
nerdy individuals Again, you’ve insulted an entire generation. When I was in college, Saturday night didn’t start until after the Star Trek reruns at 7pm. So you can include me in the “nerdy” group. Me and millions of others. Of course, the really nerdy people of that generation have names like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates who I’ll bet don’t spend their time disparaging others in comboxes.
toward escapism And watching Rocky isn’t escapism?
the vapidity of a false mantle of warmth You really had your claws out for that one didn’t you? The Star Trek crew showed it was possible for people with different backgrounds (the ethnic/racial diversity) and different viewpoints (Spock and McCoy anyone?) to work together. It’s a lesson you apparently have not learned yet. At the time the series first aired, it represented hope in a very tense world.
ilk of cartoon make believe… You’ve made it clear that you don’t like animation. Who cares. It’s not about you.
…modernist and secular comic book world And Rocky’s not modernist and secular? Okaaaay.
paper tomfoolery such as Superman, Batman… Boy, you really are a sour old curmudgeon. I hope no children or anyone young at heart has to come into contact with you.
As for Star Trek, the original series (the only one I can really speak about) addressed major topics. In one episode, one of the groups were worshippers of the Son of God. I’ll bet you didn’t know that. So you’ve been disparaging without familiarity with the show. Actually this probably belongs in your “modernist” accusation, whatever you meant by modernist.
Tolkien’s characters wer not intended to represent Catholic truth, not in the beginning. They were simply characters in his attempt to tell a really long story.
There is material for a potential discussion with you. But not when you pull stunts like
Thank you for the insult at Christ’s Mass,Mary Kay. Very Christlike of you.
The only purpose for that was to distract from the discussion. You threw in a non-sequitur to control the discussion and manage to be insulting while doing so.
You succeeded in doing derailing the discussion. This started out as a fun, light topic. You took the fun out of it when you turned it around so that it was all about you. While you’ve made a blanket apology to anyone offended, there’s no assurance that you won’t do the same thing the next time.
The next time you pull something like that, I’ll ignore you but will include an explanation for anyone new that it’s a pattern with you to disrupt the discussion.
Let me paraphrase 1 Corinthians with two of your posts:
If I have an IQ of 140, but have not love, I am a clanging cymbal.
If I wrestled and boxed and knocked others out, but have not love, I am nothing.
If I frequently quote Pope Benedict and profess love and obedience, but speak without love to others, it profits me not.
Something for you to chew on this Saturday.
You don’t have to like Star Trek. Personally, I think movies about boxing are a waste of time and money. But I don’t go in comboxes and wet blanket others’ enjoyment. God made us all different. You don’t have to take on separating the wheat from the chaff. That’s God’s job.
Mary Kay,
You had better lighten your load.
You do not seem to understand what tongue in cheek means.
Don’t take every little thing so seriously.
Laugh just once in a while.
Ha,Ha,Hee,Hee,Ho,Ho,Ho.
May the force be with you.
Dan, you make me laugh, but not in ways you intend.
You had better lighten your load.
Ironic from someone who held Star Trek in contempt as vapid escapism.
If you’ll re-read the posts just on this thread, you’ll find that no one found you funny. Quite the contrary.
This latest response was totally predictable. There’s been quite a lot of work done studying the dynamics of someone who either disrupts or baits, and when gets a reaction, acts innocent. And yes, a frequent response is that the other person needs to “lighten up.”
Forewarned is forearmed as they say. You succeeded in being a wet blanket on this thread, but it won’t work after this.
So, is your use of the “modern and secular” phrase “May the force be with you” a recognition of the place of scifi fiction or is that just another inconsistency?
Mary Kay needs a hearty spanking.
The quote from Star Wars went over somebodys head,not namin any any names here,but it is a reference to sci-fi nerdism.
Bye bye Mrs Freud.
Dude, you went off the deep end, then posted your phone number and a challenge to a boxing match–You challenged the man to a fist fight over an internet combox post ABOUT STAR TREK, claiming that JUSTICE was at stake.— … and now you want someone else to lighten up?
Am I missing something here?
Dude,
No one called me. Why don’t you Dude?
Your curiosity can be sated by a one on one vis-a vis el telephon.
This is fun.Tee Hee Hee.
Mary Kay, Jared: It’s time to ignore the bratty little boy.
“Mary Kay, Jared: It’s time to ignore the bratty little boy.”
He’s like a kid who can’t stay away from the adult’s table at Thanksgiving.
Dan, Mommy and Daddy are trying to have a grown-up conversation right now.
Go to your room.
Dan: I could take up your challenge but I don’t think we fight in the same weight class or fighting style. I’m more an MMA than a boxer. Besides, New York City’s pretty far from L.A. and the stakes in this are pretty low. I mean, seriously, Star Trek?
Sorry, Bill and Tim; I just couldn’t resist. I’m done now.
I’m just glad that the animated Trek series don’t count as Trek Canon. 😛