But the REAL question is the degree of forkedness!Classic Fan said:
Have you also noticed that Quinto's fingers are slightly longer than that of the real Spock?
As to the new Enterprise, I'd like to see it flying "upside down" or sideways, or any other camera angle than the usual "it's a 2-D travelling naval vessel in space" look. Why is 'standard orbit' always with the port side to planet? Why isn't the ventral side facing the planet? Frankly, if they're not going to make the ship *move* with a 21st century knowledge of how the 23rd century might be, then why even bother changing much from the 1960's design?
Is a massively redesigned Enterprise somehow suddenly more realistic as a FTL-capable ship? I rather think not. So, just stick with what we expect to see. I think we can all accept that GR's view in 1964 of what the 23rd century would be like just isn't going to happen, and all of ST is not our future. However, it's a damned interesting alternate what-if universe.
Reading the Odyssey with my high school freshman daughter again right now, we're still enjoying the story and the characters even though we know there's little to know "realism" in such voyages and gods and goddesses.
Agreed around here that the Lost in Space movie was underrated. I mean, Heather Graham in leather... what's not to enjoy?
I agree it would have helped if they'd managed to get Jonathan Harris onboard in the intended role: but perhaps not having made it such a more trivial cameo: he could have been Dr. Smith's father -- a Reaganesque ruler of the now-fascist and decaying Earth, frequently referred to throughout the film; however, he was 84 at the time. Perhaps that would have convinced him, and Bill Mumy. LiS was another one of those films that could have used another few months of script fine-tuning and production improvement....
