Crusher Crushed from Nemesis 460
Ant sent in a link to Wil Wheaton's weblog where he writes a surprisingly heartfelt piece on being cut from ST:Nemesis. Its a strangely bittersweet little entry that really speaks volumes, especially considering Wil's fairly public disagreements with
Rick Berman. Apparently Wil's bit was cut along with 48 whole minutes of the flick- its just the nature of filmaking. But
I guess if nothing else, they've got tons of stuff for the DVD now!
Wait for it (Score:3, Funny)
If I cloned myself, I could say "I'm with stupid" (Score:2, Funny)
1st cut was 3 hours? (Score:2, Funny)
BTW, I saw the trailer before K-19, and it looks pretty good. It appears they've made a return to some good quality action!
Wishful thinking... (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah because if Paramount has shown anything, it just loves to pack extras into their Star Trek DVDs.
Re:Wishful thinking... (Score:2, Funny)
Now, if the Star Trek V dvd had 30 minutes LESS footage, that would be good.
Re:Wishful thinking... (Score:3, Funny)
You can't seem them on the widescreen LD because there isn't enough resolution, but I could clearly see them on a pan & scan TV broadcast.
Re:Wishful thinking... (Score:3, Interesting)
That won't stop them from doing a plain-Jane release now and a director's cut (or whatever) later. (The director's cut of TWOK kicks ass, but I'm guessing that the people who forked over $$$ for the DVD set are a bit miffed that they're not getting the extra goodies. The added scenes improve the movie more than you'd guess.)
Re:Are acronyms (or Star Trek) your life? (Score:2)
Re:Are acronyms (or Star Trek) your life? (Score:3, Funny)
I just thought it was some porn I haven't seen yet.
Re:no, this is even more wishful (Score:2)
I read a rumor that this was going to be the last of the ST:TNG movies, period. If that's the case, then that means there's likely not much of a chance for him to reprise his character ever again (baring temporal anomalies).
Hope that's not the case....
Take it out on Barney, Will! (Score:4, Funny)
"The night features world-class electronic music artists and a special treat: celebrity boxing with Wil Wheaton and Barney! Wil Wheaton, of Star Trek: The Next Generation and Stand By Me fame, will take on Barney in a celebrity boxing matchup for the history books. Watch and see if Wil with his backing from EFF can protect free speech and parody on the Internet and defeat Barney and his team of corporate lawyers."
http://www.eff.org/cafe/2002/
Give that vomitous terrycloth reptile hell, Will!
Stefan Jones
Shut up Wesley! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Shut up Wesley! (Score:2)
Uh, yes. I really feel for the guy, but I kept thinking "Existential angst and epiphanies later, but keep your eyes on the road now."
But hey, no worries. It always happens to some other bozo, right?
Re:Shut up Wesley! (Score:2, Informative)
But I have to say, I'm disapointed for him. I'm not a big trek fan and haven't really watched any star trek since ST:TNG, but it would have been nice to tie him in -- even to a small scene -- in something new.
If there are any current star trek series in production, it'd be interesting to have him return and play a completely different character. Sort of a Tom Paris kind of hero guy... only nerdier and maybe not so good with the girls.
He could be Captain Slashdotticus.
Ticket him! (Score:2)
Driving in New York? While talking on a cell phone? Tsk tsk.
And yes before people scream, I'm aware Wil does not live in New York.
Re:Shut up Wesley! (Score:5, Funny)
The people on the street are lucky Wesley took the news as good as he did
Re:Shut up Wesley! (Score:3, Funny)
[snip]
The dog-walking couple smile and wave to me.
The light changes.
Doesn't this man live the life of danger. Sitting through a full cycle? Suicide!
Re:Shut up Wesley! (Score:4, Funny)
I'll buy that. If the passenger is a nineteen-year old bombshell with huge DD cup breasts and a short miniskirt who is touching herself all the time.
Not distracting at all.
Re:Right. Everyone has the exact same abilities. (Score:4, Informative)
This doesn't even take into account the reality that most people still hold their cell phones with their hands, rather than using the headset.
Your racecar analogy is bogus for reasons that any reasonably intelligent person can see. However, since we're posting on Slashnerd I'll elaborate. A racecar driver has certain commands and phrases that he says to his pit crew that he has said hundreds of times before. There is no conversation and there is no intensive cognitive thought involved. Therefore the portions of the brain which are focused on the road remain focused on the road when these pre-programmed phrases are uttered. Clearly arguing with your girlfriend is more demanding on the brain than "I need gas."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
New Crusherism (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, I tend to not put a whole lot of stock in what I read online...if I did I'd be overwhelmed with the sheer amount of hot teen bitches who want to get naked for me right now, and I'd be rolling in Nigerian money.
Exactly, Will. Most bigshot, part-in-Star-Trek-gettin' movie stars already have those problems.
Re:New Crusherism (Score:2, Offtopic)
not what I would have liked to see (Score:2, Interesting)
But a 3 hour star trek!?! Jeez, talk about long!
Re:not what I would have liked to see (Score:2)
Of course, I think they need to be very careful not to ruin Enterprise, which I think is easily the most entertaining, unique and mature Trek since TOS. I think they do an excellent job of making the crew seem like actual pioneering explorers rather than just another ship in the fleet.
Of course, I also think they could bear to get their asses beaten by the Klingons once or twice, but I'm sure that's around the corner someplace.
Re:not what I would have liked to see (Score:2)
Enterprise is AWFUL (Score:2)
They don't seem like pioneers, AT ALL.
Captain Archer is an awful character. Earth's first mission, and instead of making new friends and allies, hes imposing his morality on those around him. Earth has no new friends because of him, and hes pissed off the one they started with.
WTF?
Alex
Wait a sec... (Score:2, Insightful)
While doing research on perceptions of the World's only superpower (the U.S. -- I'm American) in the eyes of outsiders I found the very same thing. The U.S. goes around (along with some of its western europeann allies) and imposes its morality on others. Many times, that morality is just differing opinion but it leads to a lot of people who get pissed off and say "who the f*** is America to tell me how i live my life?". Maybe that isn't the central theme of Enterprise, maybe its not even intentional but I think it gives it a very real flavor. I would think that humans would act like that if they went to space.
He's *30*?!? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh fuck, I feel old. This is all I needed after finding my first grey hair last week.
Overall, I suppose anything that makes the end film better is a Good Thing. Still, it sucks that it had to happen -- I can't imagine the weirdness of putting, what, 7 years of my life in as a particular character and then having my last chance to play him yanked out.
At least Wil seems very grounded about it. Unless, of course, he just omitted some drinking-drug-and-wife-beatin' binge he went on after the end of the blog.
Re:He's *30*?!? (Score:2)
I suppose. On the other hand, in the final season of ST:TNG, they promoted him to godhood , which might be an ego-rush.
Re:He's *30*?!? (Score:4, Funny)
If Rick Berman had a blog (yea, right), who knows what his version of the story would be...
Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe I'm being horribly naive or stupid or both but I can't understand how they managed to find 40+ minutes of unimportant material to cut out AFTER they've already filmed it! Shouldn't they be trimming stuff out of the story while they're refining the script? Whenever I write something I start by letting my ideas flow onto the paper (actually word processor). Then I make several passes through the story to make the logic and dialogue stronger. I also cut out non-essential stuff if I feel the story is too long. It's not difficult at all. Given how much money it costs to make a movie, shouldn't these guys in Hollywood work hard to make sure the script is really "tight" and there's no fluff in it BEFORE they start the shoot?
As I said, I know nothing about the filmmaking business but the fact that they were able to find 40+ minutes of stuff they could cut out it sounds an awful lot to me like they didn't plan things very well and were just in a rush to get another poorly-thought-out Trek product to market.
Insightful responses welcome...
GMD
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:2)
One of the guys I went to college with does post-production work. He was working on some effects for a effects-heavy movie (post-production isn't always post, interestingly) when the director and one of the actors sat down and rewrote the script, invalidating not only my friend's work of several months but several scenes that had already been shot.
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:3, Informative)
One movie that didn't quite do this was "Not Another Teen Movie". Apparently they were able to spice up the ending by having Molly Ringwald do an extended cameo. This probably cost a significant chunk of change to reshoot when compared to the rest of the rest of the movie. Unfortunately, it resulted in replacing one crappy ending with a slightly more expensive crappy ending featuring star power.
It's not just this movie (Score:2)
Re:It's not just this movie (Score:2)
Now with this said, some directors are tighter than others - Spielberg storyboards his films, essentially editing before he shoots. Other directors go out into the field and don't even have shot lists, and end up just chewing through raw stock trying to make the film up as they go along.
Would it be cheaper to do it Spielberg's way? Hell yes! Every minute while the crew is standing around waiting for the director to make up his mind about what to shoot and how to shoot it is expensive time. Every can of film represents an investment in time to set up a shot, load and unload the camera, break down and set up, lighting, and prop rentals. Loading and unloading alone can take up to 20 minutes, and even if you're shooting 1000' of film, that's only about 11 minutes of footage that's going to get spent on retakes.
Lucas saved a shitload of time using tape on EP2, though he probably should have spent that extra time rewriting his script and rehearsing his actors. Better technology doesn't necessarily make for better films.
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:5, Informative)
Much of the shape of the final story is worked out in the editing process. Directors typically shoot not only extra scenes that may or may not make it into the final cut, but they might also shoot a half-dozen or so versions of each scene, each acted a bit differently. (Or lit, or with different angles, etc.) With so much raw material to work from, the editor and director can take the film in almost any direction they choose long after shooting is completed and without having to drag the actors back in front of the cameras.
For a good example of what I'm talking about, go get the Big Trouble in Little China [imdb.com] DVD. (As a /. reader you should own a copy of this film anyway, so if you don't have it you should buy it immediately or risk the loss of your nerd credentials.) Check out the deleted scenes, which include a number of alternate versions of scenes that actually appeared in the final cut. The director, John Carpenter, chose to make BTiLC a very fast-paced action-oriented film that almost never gives you a chance to take a breath. However, with the material at his disposal, he could have created a slower more dramatic film that was much more character-oriented.
Part of the reason for this is because very often even an experienced director can't tell how a particular script is going to work until he actually sees it on film. All this extra material allows him to pick and choose among entire scenes and subtle re-interpretations of scenes until the film conveys exactly the effect he's aiming for. Other times, I think it's because the director honestly doesn't know what will work better or what final product he's going for, and all the extra footage allows him to defer that decision until he's in the editing booth.
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:3, Informative)
In most Hollywood productions, the writer usually has little or no control over what finally makes it onto the screen. The producer can add or subtract anything he wants, because he's paying the bills. And producers don't revise for clarity or coherence, they make business decisions. (Well, most. Some break this mold, but they're usually the writer/producer/director auteurs.)Directors and A-list stars also have enough clout to change things around, depending on what their contract says.
Also, stuff that looks good on paper or in the mind's eye might not be practical to shoot (for whatever reasons), or just not look as good when it comes out. Someone might decide that the odd Gilbert & Sullivan reference was just a little too cute to be the crucial clue that solves the puzzle, or that the attacking mushroom people looked cool, but not cool enough to divert the Enterprise to their homeworld.
That's not to say what gets cut just to make it PG-13. Take one exploding head out, and you might have to rewrite every scene that character was in.
So a writer who's aware of that will add stuff that will make a four-hour movie, knowing that not all of it will be shot, and knowing that not all of it that gets shot will make it past the cutting floor. When you get down to it, the plot is almost like the music, in that composers don't write symponies for movies, they write themes and bits that can be inserted into the movie at numerous points. The long and the short of it is, draft screenplays are almost always different, and often radically so, from the final product.
(P.S., didn't I read somewhere that Lucas rewrote the light saber fight between Obi-wan and Vader after shooting had begun? The original had him survive, and Guinness fought against having him sacrifice himself. Of course, George is one who'll rewrite a movie twenty years after releasing it, so maybe that's not the best example.)
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:2, Insightful)
From an aesthetic standpoint, it's impossible to tell beforehand how all the parts of the movie will come together. There has to be a lot of leeway for postproduction to make adjustments. Walter Murch [amazon.com] tells of a scene that he decided at length to omit. Coppola, the director, agreed with the cut but mentioned (with some regret) that the deleted scene was one of the reasons that he made the movie. Coppola didn't think anything more of it, but Murch took this lesson to heart: scenes may serve purposes other than simply "being in the film." In this case, the scene served as context, backstory, and inspiration to the director, and as such it probably influenced every other shot that was filmed.
---
Dum de dum.
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:4, Interesting)
Most directors don't do it that way, though. They film lots and lots of extra footage, even some scenes that have overlapping dialogue and plot exposition. That way, when they get to post-production, they can chose to the clips that came out the best, and dump scenes where the director doesn't like the final product without losing the narrative.
If you watch the deleted scenes in a lot of DVD's, this process becomes a little more obvious.
The Jabba scene that Lucas put back into Star Wars for the "special edition" is a classic example. The conversation is almost word-for-word the same as the one that Han had with Greedo. When it was originally filmed, Jabba was played by a fat guy in a fir coat, and Lucas didn't care for it, so he chose the Greedo showdown instead to reveal the Han Solo subplot (owes money to gangsters for dumping his contraband on a recent job). Personally, I think Lucas never should have put it back in; but having done so, he should have cut the Greedo scene. Instead, he kept both scenes, which slowed down the movie, and ruined the Greedo scene by adding a first shot by Greedo before Han killed him, convincing Star Wars fans everywhere that George Lucas's mind has finally broken.
Re:Can't they catch this sooner? (Score:2, Insightful)
Look at it this way: the post production process is the movie version of revisions. When I write my work tends to get tighter and tighter as I go along, which involves a lot of the delete button. All the scraps which end up in the cutting room floor are the movie version of the delete button.
FYI, rule of thumb for a feature film is to shoot for a 6:1 ratio, which means you shoot six feet of film for every foot you end up using. Some directors (George Lucas comes to mind) are known for shooting 10:1.
Does this mean... (Score:2)
Will you be in any of the movies?
I sure will. Look for me in Star Trek X (Star Trek OSX.1, if youre a Mac user) .
To Will (Score:2)
And I have to admit, with you hanging out amongst the throngs of hardcore geeks I have to respect some of your hobbies also. ;)
You'll always have the jerks that will associate you directly with that character for years to come, but your number one in my book man.
Anyone read further down in the article? (Score:2, Offtopic)
It's too bad. (Score:2)
Do you not think that Trekkers & Trekkies would gladly sit through 3 hours...heck they would probably sit through 4 hours! Look at the first Movie...nothing can be as boring as that...and it made a great deal of money!
Speaking as a Trekker myself, I would gladly sit thorugh 3 hours of good action, story, etc to be in the Trek Universe on a big screen with a super sound system. And I think that I would love to see a resolution of Wil's charactor from the Trek universe...
ttyl
Farrell
Re:It's too bad. (Score:2)
how many non trekkies wont go to a 3-4 hour movie? most of them.
Finally, I'd like to slap the first person who started using 'trekker' to describe trekkies.
sheesh.
Personally, when it comes on DVD... (Score:2)
Get Anti-trust (Score:3, Interesting)
The storyline didn't make any sense. Watched the deleted scenes, where a MAJOR part of the plot was cut. Makes more sense.
Some of the deleted scenes from Dogma gave a LOT more insight into the characters.
Alex
Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back Style Revenge (Score:2)
Youz guys are in so much trouble now.
Re:Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back Style Revenge (Score:2, Funny)
That's way, way harsh (Score:2)
He had one scene. They cut it.
I mean, that's pretty much a cameo. It's not as though there's never been one shoehorned into a Trek film for any other actor [imdb.com] before, right?
Was this decision taken by someone who actually gives a damn about what Trek fans want, who understands that we love to be thrown a little treat every so often? Or was it taken by a self important accountant-slash-IP-lawyer wearing a straggly pony tail and trying to pass himself off as one of the creative crew?
It's not as though they couldn't read the script and do some basic storyboarding to work out how long the thing was going to be. Harsh, harsh cut.
ST:N will suck. (Score:5, Interesting)
First, the trailer makes it out to have wanna-be horror elements. It's too dark for StarTrek; even First Contact and other encounters with the Borg (by far, the most powerful enemy the Federation knows) are nowhere near as intense. If it hadn't been for familiar characters, I would have said that the trailer was for a budget-hyped Babylon5 episode from the Shadows series.
Second, it seems too action oriented. Yes, we all love the StarTrek blow-up-the-other-ship action. If done well, battles are good and add a lot to the story (DS9 had a few episodes with epic battle scenes with Cards - incredibly cool). This movie just seems to have lots of fighting action without meaningful substance. There's also this ATV with guns driving around on rough terrain, then later jumping into another vehicle much better suited for transportation. That makes little sense to me (I can see arguments, but why?)
My third reason will get me flamed by all the horny geeks out there. The movie appears to have an explicit sex scene. While sex between two characters had been implied frequently in the past, it was never explicitly shown. This destroys an element of the StarTrek universe that I've always found charming: it's always had a childish innocence. A fun element. This kind of subject matter seems to turn ST into a different animal. (This reason is purely subjective.)
Fourth and last, all this spooky, "don't fear..." nonsense that just seems way to ominous to be believable (and quite cheesy - I laught when that bald guy says that in the trailer). This sort of ties into part of reason one. Again, the movie is trying to be something StarTrek isn't.
Overall, I get the strong impression that Rick Berman is not targeting geeks, but rather, the mainstream gun/sex/action oriented entertainment. "Blow stuff up and fuck the girl!" That seems great in a lot of ways, but I've always turned to ST for entertainment of a more intellectual sort.
Rick Berman is pulling a Lucas and not staying loyal to the fans.
Re:ST:N will suck. (Score:3, Informative)
Anyone who has watched TOS back when Gene was running things knows that he considered Star Trek a "Space Western" and he went on-record in multiple interviews as saying that he hated the TV censors and tried to sneak past them as much material as possible. Original fans will also note Kirk's green bellydancer lovefest, and the harem girls he slept with (all of them?) and so on. TOS was violent, sexual, and campy. Gene chafed against the restrictions. I'm tired of the Johnny-come-lately's suggesting that Gene would hate foul language or sex or action scenes. Ugh.
It is all a marketing ploy (Score:2)
No way, it'll be the annoying little punk with phenominal cosmic powers (as taught by the Traveller).
Re:It is all a marketing ploy (Score:2)
there (Score:2)
When Did We Become So Cynical? (Score:5, Insightful)
When did it happen? Or is it just the usual array of socially inept geeks, snickering behind the cuffs on their black trenchcoats that make it seem that way? This guy poured his guts into this essay of his. He was obviously stunned by the news, disappointed, hurt even, though he denied it in his story. He had to know it was coming, but it sounds like that knowing didn't help. I was sincerely touched by this.
I was just as annoyed as anybody at Wesley Crusher, but I think Wil Wheaton did the best he could when he was handed what were, frankly, pretty insipid lines. I grew more and more fond of the character as the show and character matured, most particularly the last show he was in regularly.."Final Mission" I think it was. And his character grew even more intriguing with his guest appearances, like the fascinating "The First Duty." At any rate, I looked forward to seeing him in Nemesis. I wish he could have been more a part of it. I wish him the best in finding a successful adult career, and I hope that he puts the unfortunate image that Wesley Crusher has given him through no fault of his own, behind him.
Letter-writing campaign (Score:3, Insightful)
We know Nemesis is probably gonna be weak, and we know it'll be the last TNG film -- of which not one to date has lived up to the Trek movie franchise. Why can't they leave in the few things that might make it a really special gift to the fans??
I mean really -- Christian Slater gets his cameo but Wil-fucking-Wheaton gets chopped? This breaks my heart. Even ten seconds of Wesley Crusher dying in a space-battle -- even a glimpse of Wesley in the background as an inside joke -- would delight the fan in me.
Case in point: Tasha Yar. How popular was that? 'Nuf said.
- Sean
Re:Letter-writing campaign (Score:5, Funny)
Ahhh, you kids don't know nuthin! How do you young whippersnappers think us old folks who grew up with ST:TOS felt, huh? Waitin' ten gol-dang years from the time the series was cancelled to the release of the first movie. And what did we get? ST:TMP [imdb.com]. A pastel-colored bridge! Everyone wearing dental assistant's uniforms! Kirk with an obvious girdle holding his gut in and an alien hairpiece of some kind! Now that's pain! BUT WE WERE THANKFUL FOR IT!!!
Re:Letter-writing campaign (Score:2)
Re:Letter-writing campaign (Score:4, Funny)
Well I did learn one thing... (Score:2, Insightful)
Wesley's Powers (Score:2, Insightful)
That would be a GREAT story line for a movie -- Wesley ending up in super-secret Starfleet intelligence and dabbling in deep 23rd century metaphysics, but something going wrong which required the attention of the Enterprise and maybe more Vulcan philosophy....
It's too bad they just turned him into a Starfleet Academy throw-away and left that whole great plot line. If anyone has any more details about the plot line, I'd be curious to learn them.
All you newbies should read this about Wil Wheaton (Score:4, Informative)
He's actually a pretty cool guy. It's a shame to hear that he got cut, but it happens.
I have a feeling that was his last chance to be part of Star Trek and I'm sure he'll miss it.
Bad character, great guy (Score:2)
"pigs-in-a-blanket-fiasco" ? (Score:2)
But I couldn't find out what this was...can anyone enlighten as to 1) what this guy did at Waffle House, and 2) What was the supposed fiasco ?
the reason for the cut (Score:2)
The one good thing about this movie that I can tell from the trailer - they seem to have discovered 'cinematography'. Finally. But how many movies did it take?
Another character I'd like revisited: Guinan. (yeah, good luck)
he should think hard about his acting future (Score:2)
So why is he still trying to be some space guy? If he still wants to act, why doesn't he get into something dramatic, or family-oriented, etc.? Something that says a lot more about his ideals, etc.
Wil, I know you're reading this article... whaddya say?
Final ST:TNG, No Wesley? (Score:2, Insightful)
I have extremely low expectations for this movie. Berman and Bragga(sp) have continously shown us that they don't know what ST is.
Wil Switched to Linux (Score:4, Interesting)
Let's not take any chances now... (Score:4, Interesting)
A good example and everybodies favorite here on Slash-- Lord of the Rings. Damn near 3 half hours and I loved every single minute of it . I didn't get bored. I didn't wince at the complex plot. I was thrilled that a director actually broke from the pack and lengthened the movie, ultimately making it a par excellent experience. I can't imagine how a two hour Cambells condensed soup version would have added up. Makes you wonder what how the extended edit will fair if the movie is this good now...
Back to the point, I've been waiting for a decent Trek series/movie for years. TNG? Booorrrring... They were the UN of outer space. DS9? Better. It depicted the edgier side of the Trek universe, but it was still pretty damn sanitized. Personnally, it only got good when large quantities of ships began blowing up... Anyway, Voyager? It had it's moments. Too bad they were far and few between. The movies? Wrath of Kahn. Hands down. Undiscovered Country? It was OK filler until the next great movie... Which was... Umm... Sorry, but I wasn't inspired by any of the TNG movies, though First Contact and Insurrection were OK. It wasn't anything that you hadn't seen in the series before. It comes down to this- I'd be willing to bet an extra hour would do the new movie a world of good. The Trek universe is rich and full of plot and the fans want to see it. It's the reason it's been kept going all these years. For once, I wish they'd take break the mold and create an experience, not just a movie.
On Wil Wheaton, it is kinda too bad. Just a hunch, but I'm betting he'd actually be good in something other than that "annoying naive teen" roll he was cast in for 90% of the series. It's a misjustice all the way around....
Re:Who cares... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who cares... (Score:5, Funny)
Trekkies.
Nobody else cares.
Re:Who cares... (Score:5, Funny)
No way. I've got two words for you, buddy. Well, actually it's one word, but it's so annoying that you actually have to say it twice:
Dang. I could only bring myself to type it once, and my fingers are already blistering, like I dipped them in acid or something.Re:Who cares... (Score:2)
Re:Who cares... (Score:2)
Re:Who cares... (Score:2)
Yes I am. She doesn't sound like Steve Urkel in real life.
Re:Who cares... (Score:2)
Re:Who cares... (Score:2, Funny)
Or, if you assume ^ is a binary XOR operation then Jar^2 evaluates to Jah
Re:Who cares... (Score:3, Insightful)
Dude, I hate to burn karma on an idiot like you, but you are obviously one of these fucking morons who can tell us exactly why Wolverine's Adamantium skeleton is affected by magentic fields in current Volume 4 Issues 8-12, but not in previous Volumes 1-3, while explaining to everyone that you were "before we were punk", why you are more of a fan of band X because you bought their first album before they were popular, etc etc etc. Maybe you're one of those real nutcases who has himself convinced that he can speak Klingon, or perhaps you learned to speak Japanese from watching Anime.
Kids, the moral of the story is this. Being a "nerd", reading comics, loving fantasy and sci-fi stuff, etc, is all fine. Seriously. But trying to be the expert of one little thing and correcting people based on irrelevent semantics, exposes that you are not merely a nerd, but a FUCKING INSECURE MORON. You're about as impressive as those guys who run around spouting about the advantages of the v-tec system in their 10 year old 4 cyl stock Honda (which they senselessly red-line daily).
In short: Being an idiotic expert in the semantics of something no one cares about, makes you look like a jackass.
Re:Beaten by Fark Once Again (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Beaten by Fark Once Again (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Beaten by Fark Once Again (Score:3, Funny)
another difference... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How will this affect Enterprise? (Score:2)
So what you're really asking is 'How will the change of plot affect it's sequal?'.
You're a Star Wars fan, arentcha?
Patterns (Score:3, Funny)
Star Trek II: ugly space skanks (what happened to those hot chicks from "Space Seed"?)
Star Trek III: better looking Savek
Star Trek IV: cute but annoying whale-lovin' chick
Star Trek V: sexy muscular Klingon chick
Star Trek VI: boring, regal chick in charge of conference
Star Trek VII: Whoopi Goldberg, ugh
Star Trek VIII: creepy-looking overconfident Borg chick
Star Trek IX: beautiful mature quail who says one too many "live life to its fullist"-style quotes.
I dunno, I'm not seeing much of a pattern here....
GMDRe:What a fine role model (Score:4, Funny)
MOD PARENT UP, PLEASE (Score:2, Funny)
If he'd crashed in to one of those trees and died, I bet that 48 minutes would have been reinserted. It's about time talking on phones when driving was made illegal.
Not only would his footage have been restored (although the entire 48 minutes wasn't about him), the movie would have been dedicated to him as well. And we'd have to sit and listen to the other cast members praise/remember him on talk shows.
I second your call for making driving while phoning illegal. You need to make a cell-phone call? Pull off to the side of the road and talk. When you're ready to dedicate your attention to driving, come back and join the rest of us on the roads!
GMD
Re:MOD PARENT UP, PLEASE (Score:2)
that would be funny.
Premier night he shows up.. hehe
Re: Off topic (Score:2)
Actually, listening to music while driving keeps you from sleeping when you are driving long distances.
"...lay off phone users, many of whom are very careful and attentive drivers."
Them are not the ones I'm worried about.
How about we just band cell-phones from the uncarefull, unattentive drivers...
Citation? (Score:3, Funny)
talking, putting on makeup, reaching around to take care of a baby/kids, getting dressed, drinking a soda/coffee and eating food have been statistically proven to be many *many* times more dangerous than simply talking on a cellphone.
Please provide a URL link to the statistic that shows that more accidents are caused by people getting dressed while driving than from people using cell phones while driving. I'd be interested in seeing it.
Now, accidents being caused because some hot chick is getting undressed while driving I can understand... :)
GMD
Be nice. (Score:5, Insightful)
And Wil Wheaton isn't Wesley Crusher. He's a seemingly levelheaded, decent guy. I wish people could get past their hangups and insecurities and be nice people.
Re:Be nice. (Score:2)
The smile never left his face.
Re:Be nice. (Score:4, Informative)
It's unfortunate the writers for ST:TNG were idiots and did a lot of stupid things with his character, but that wasn't under his control. He had basically two choices, live with it or quit. Would you quit a high paying job on Star Trek because you didn't like the direction your character was going? Hell no! I would have been happy to play any sort of character just to get on Star Trek.
Re:I am a trekkie. (trekker, whatever) (Score:2)
Hey, I watched Weakest Link. What was that all about?
Heh. Well, see, Weakest Link is all about making people look bad, and making Anne Robinson look good. I thought that I'd have fun with her, by being even ruder and more offensive than she is. I thought the best way to accomplish this, would be to play a condescending A-hole.
Mission. Accomplished. >:-)
Re:I am a trekkie. (trekker, whatever) (Score:4, Funny)
I don't know. Is anal-retentive?
Re:"I'm feel happy and proud" (Score:2, Funny)
Re:More tales of woe (Score:2)
Strangely enough, I never thought of his audition tale as a tale of woe... I found it rather inspirational, myself.
Re:Wow... (Score:3, Insightful)
Fame is fleeting - family lasts forever...
It's gotta be twice as difficult to be an actor with a wife and kids and keep everything together. Wil seems to be doing just fine.
N.
Nerds vs Geeks (Score:4, Funny)
But, fool, you are only a nerd. The truly productive members of our technological society who runs his GCC and puts strange Paul Graham quotes in his slashdot signiture. Yet you ask who Will Wheaten is.
Posting here on Slashdot is only a sign of True Geekiness. But I must ask you, do you have a Geek Code? If you are over 16, do still own any action figures? models?
Do you watch cartoons?
These too are only signs of True Geekiness. But your True Nerd may kill the Geek within. You may spend the rest of your miserable life learning about the workings of the Universe, building vast technological systems, and watching reruns of Gilligan's Island.
But one day you become old and gray, and you suddenly discover what you believe to be the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything; and you bring forth this information to the Council of True Geekdom. And they laugh. And Geeks throughout the world learn of your pitiful endeaver and they, too, laugh.
To reconcile, you will be forced to stand on your knees and beg: "Thou art geekier than I."
And then, for the first time, you may learn what we already Just Know.
There is no Spoon.