|
Post by robp on Oct 27, 2018 11:23:05 GMT -5
Is anyone watching 'The Haunting of Hill House' on Netflix? It's a ten episode season, and honestly one of the best horror shows I've seen. It's legitimately scary with some brilliant twists and surprises. We started but couldn't really get into it. We are enjoying Norsemen, though, Viking comedy!
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Oct 28, 2018 10:21:05 GMT -5
Is anyone watching 'The Haunting of Hill House' on Netflix? It's a ten episode season, and honestly one of the best horror shows I've seen. It's legitimately scary with some brilliant twists and surprises. We started but couldn't really get into it. It's currently at 93% at Rotten Tomatoes with a 92% audience score. I don't know how far you got, but definitely give it another shot.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisLAdams on Oct 29, 2018 10:23:37 GMT -5
We started but couldn't really get into it. We are enjoying Norsemen, though, Viking comedy! Wasn't sure about it at first, but stuck with it and it's growing on me. ...... Watched first episode of Hill House - creepy! Probably will return to watch some more of it.
Another couple of neat Netflix shows I've blundered on recently were The Curious Creations of Christine McConnell and The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina. The Christine show is kind of a hot, Elvira cooking show with other bizarre oddities that go well w/ Halloween. The Egyptian cat character reminds me of Bob the Skull from the Dresden novels. The Chilling adventures of Sabrina is of course based on the Sabrina the Witch comics, but don't let that fool you. If you saw the movie The Witch - this is more like that. It's actually very adult.
|
|
|
Post by Char-Vell on Oct 29, 2018 11:45:23 GMT -5
Recently discovered this 2017 show Knightfall on Netflix and really enjoying it. It involves the Knights Templar in the 14th century, picking up the tale with the fall of Acre and the loss of the holy chalice. Great cinematography -- I especially enjoyed the scenes from inside the knights' helmets! I am about 4 or 5 episodes in on this. I like it okay. I could go for more Saracen skull-smashing and less court intrigue and hymen examination.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Dec 27, 2018 22:10:38 GMT -5
Recently discovered this 2017 show Knightfall on Netflix and really enjoying it. It involves the Knights Templar in the 14th century, picking up the tale with the fall of Acre and the loss of the holy chalice. Great cinematography -- I especially enjoyed the scenes from inside the knights' helmets! I am about 4 or 5 episodes in on this. I like it okay. I could go for more Saracen skull-smashing and less court intrigue and hymen examination.
I like this one too. Well thought out fight scenes. Happy to see someone in production has been reading up a little on western martial arts. Good drama and script/story telling, although watched only season one so far.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Dec 27, 2018 22:13:00 GMT -5
One of my favourite episodes of Forged in Fire so far, the Pipe Tomahawks edition, tomahawks are amongst some of my favourite weapons/tools, very practical, light and deadly. Check out the smoke test at 35 minutes in
|
|
|
Post by andys on Jan 7, 2019 13:14:48 GMT -5
I binge-watched The Orville over my Christmas vacation and came away impressed. Some of the network-mandated humor really doesn't work but it gets better as the show goes along, and the show ultimately feels like pretty good Star Trek. I particularly like the alien designs, since one of my pet peeves about TNG-era ST is the increasing laziness of the alien makeup ("Here you go, just put this tiny little thing on your nose..."). I also approve of using shuttles over transporters. I would never willingly use a transporter in real life Season 2 just started and I'm going to try to keep up with it.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Jan 8, 2019 8:06:16 GMT -5
I was always a little uncomfortable about the transporters myself, haven't seen em used much in other sci fi outside of Star Trek. always seemed like a 50's/60's thing.
One of the main reasons I don't like them is the whole problem about being transported from point A to B. Are you destroyed at point A by the transporter and than a copy of you is made at point B. After that, possible reassembly problems. Hate em, but great plot devises for zipping characters around.
|
|
|
TV Shows
Mar 27, 2019 16:56:23 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Jason Aiken on Mar 27, 2019 16:56:23 GMT -5
Anyone catch the Season 2 premiere of Knightfall? Seeing Mark Hamill on tv is nuts, but he's doing a great job. He's basically the co-star now.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisLAdams on Mar 28, 2019 9:51:06 GMT -5
I was always a little uncomfortable about the transporters myself, haven't seen em used much in other sci fi outside of Star Trek. always seemed like a 50's/60's thing. One of the main reasons I don't like them is the whole problem about being transported from point A to B. Are you destroyed at point A by the transporter and than a copy of you is made at point B. After that, possible reassembly problems. Hate em, but great plot devises for zipping characters around. One of the Outer Limits featured a transporter episode (Think Like a Dinosaur) that was really cool. They did exactly what you said - made a copy at the 'destination', then destroyed the copy at the 'source', as I recall. In this instance, the transporter messed up, leaving both copies. This created a conundrum, with the aliens insisting (it was there tech) that the 'source' version must be destroyed--a judgement with which that particular copy disagreed, as one may well imagine. Fantastic episode.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Apr 2, 2019 7:29:24 GMT -5
I looked over and noticed Chris replying to my post on transporters. Liked the Outer Limits episode so thought I would comment.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Apr 2, 2019 7:37:38 GMT -5
I was always a little uncomfortable about the transporters myself, haven't seen em used much in other sci fi outside of Star Trek. always seemed like a 50's/60's thing. One of the main reasons I don't like them is the whole problem about being transported from point A to B. Are you destroyed at point A by the transporter and than a copy of you is made at point B. After that, possible reassembly problems. Hate em, but great plot devises for zipping characters around. One of the Outer Limits featured a transporter episode (Think Like a Dinosaur) that was really cool. They did exactly what you said - made a copy at the 'destination', then destroyed the copy at the 'source', as I recall. In this instance, the transporter messed up, leaving both copies. This created a conundrum, with the aliens insisting (it was there tech) that the 'source' version must be destroyed--a judgement with which that particular copy disagreed, as one may well imagine. Fantastic episode. I read that Gene Roddenberry did not include transporters in his original plans for Star Trek, but that too many sets had to be created for the shuttlecrafts, and that transporters were more convenient with the simple fade out and in, probably a 50’s idea as I have seen them used in a movie or two from that era. My dislike for them comes down from the fear that the transporter might be killing you and making a copy of you at destination. After more reading on the subject, and I looked into it in some detail, I came across an article where someone noted that transporters did not destroy you and reconstruct a copy elsewhere. Essentially, Star Trek transporters don’t create matter, they just move it from one place to another. A transporter converts an existing body of matter into a compressed form and saves a digital blueprint of what that body looks like, then sends the matter to a different location and 'unzips' it using the blueprint. The transporter process is slowed down at multiple points during an episode of Star Trek The Next Generation 'Realm of Fear , making it possible to see what the transport process looks like to the person being transported, in this case Lieutenant Barclay. So Star Trek transporters avoid the copies problem because they store the original matter, and associated consciousness throughout, even if said person is not thinking whilst they are being transported ( sort of like sleep or under anesthesia ). Continuity of consciousness is never broken. The transporter buffers in a transporter beam store the neural energy of the individual: their memories, personality, sense of self, consciousness; the essence of their being. Basically, their brain gets stored, the body gets taken apart and put back together, and their brain then gets reinserted. It is the same person. A copy is not made. Basically cut and paste as opposed to copy and paste to put it in simple terms.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Apr 2, 2019 7:45:33 GMT -5
Of course there was that Next Generation episode where matter duplication occurred when a copy of Riker was created during the transporter accident, but I always thought that one of the Riker’s was the original and the other was the copy that was created during a rare anomaly, although we never get to find out which one it was if that was the case. Some probably look at it like Riker was split in two, like amoeba splitting, but that kind of screws with the science ( science fiction ) of Star Trek transporters. ‘In his book The Physics of Star Trek, after explaining the difference between transporting information and transporting the actual atoms, Krauss notes that "The Star Trek writers seem never to have got it exactly clear what they want the transporter to do. Does the transporter send the atoms and the bits, or just the bits?" He notes that according to the canon definition of the transporter the former seems to be the case, but that that definition is inconsistent with a number of applications, particularly incidents, involving the transporter, which appear to involve only a transport of information, for example the way in which it splits Kirk into two versions in the episode "The Enemy Within" or the way in which Riker is similarly split in the episode "Second Chances". Krauss elaborates that: "If the transporter carries both the matter stream and the information signal, this splitting phenomenon is impossible. The number of atoms you end up with has to be the same as the number you began with. There is no possible way to replicate people in this manner. On the other hand, if only the information were beamed up, one could imagine combining it with atoms that might be stored aboard a starship and making as many copies as you wanted of an individual." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_(Star_Trek)
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Apr 2, 2019 7:56:03 GMT -5
However, any teleporter that is a suicide device is one that's basically a cloning machine with a disintegrator on the input side that destroys the original person. This was perfectly demonstrated in The Outer Limits episode ‘Think Like A Dinosaur’. Thanks Chris. Watched it, and this brought back all my reservations about transporters. You can clearly see when the people are led away to the teleporter that the feeling conveyed is like they are being led to their executions. That was intentional, an unease created by the makers of the episode. I mean the original body is quickly ( maybe not so quickly according to Kamala’s experience ) disintegrated after the copy has been created at destination. They aborted the execution when it was thought that the transfer was unsuccessful, but then we learn that a copy had been ‘sent’ to destination successfully and the source ‘copy’ must be destroyed to ‘balance the equation’ according to those alien dino’s that kind of sound like Daleks. 'Kamala' eventually returns to the station two years later, or the latest copy after the last teleport. There are things that I wish existed, but but I am consoled that the above only exists in sci fi. Myself, I prefer star ships, also temporary worm holes to travel between vast galactic points, kind of like in Stargate. In real life I just wished my trains would run on time more often
|
|
|
Post by ChrisLAdams on Apr 2, 2019 8:23:42 GMT -5
There are things that I wish existed, but but I am consoled that the above only exists in sci fi. Myself, I prefer star ships, also temporary worm holes to travel between vast galactic points, kind of like in Stargate... Kemp, couldn't agree more. Many of my stories involve worm holes or super-fast ships for traveling enormous distances, which often involve time as well. I've never included a transporter device because I can't see subjecting my characters to a science I wouldn't trust myself to. I have one story, The Cosmos of Despair, that involves a worm hole at one point, and a faster-than-light vessel later that they use to go back in time. Fun stuff.
|
|