Disappointed Yet Again

When I am Earth Overlord, it will be a crime to create a TV series without a detailed plan for bringing it to a satisfying conclusion. This decree will be retroactive for Game of Thrones.

Star Trek: Discovery

The Good: Clint Howard's cameo is the highlight of season 1.
The Bad: Clint Howard's cameo is the highlight of season 1.
The Ugly: Midichlorians and Jar Jar Binks.

It’s Bigger on the Inside

Click on the photo and see if you can get inside the TARDIS.

Special My Ass

When I am Earth Overlord, TV shows advertised as a special episode airing on a different night must be called what they are: reruns.

Republican National Convention Summary

Winter is Coming.

Trump Chooses Pence as Running Mate

Why would anyone want to be Kif to Trump's Brannigan?

Poster by Barry Doyon

Jerry's Doom

The Hodor Reveal

I have a bad feeling about this.

During season 6 of Lost, my doubts started growing that the writers could bring the series to a satisfying conclusion. And they didn't.

The show was nonetheless fantastic, but that's part of the reason that the mediocre conclusion in season 7 was all the more disappointing.

We're now in season 6 of Game of Thrones and this weekend's revelation of the origin of Hodor's name has given me that same bad feeling—I seriously doubt the series is going to have a satisfying conclusion.

The problem I've concluded is the series' split personality. On the one hand it's a character driven story in a medieval setting with political intrigue, subterfuge, alliances, and betrayals. On the other hand, it's epic fantasy with magic, dragons, ice zombies, and prophecies. In previous seasons the former has worked much better than the latter, but as season 6 has progressed we're getting more of the latter much to the detriment of the former.

The Hodor reveal is clever and poignant, but I suspect in the end will be completely irrelevant to the overall story.

And it involves time travel.

Seriously. Time travel.

And unless your story is actually about time travel, it's usually a bad idea to casually toss it in.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope at the end of the series I'm writing a blog post about the brilliance of the Hodor reveal and how it laid the groundwork for a satisfying conclusion.

But I have a bad feeling about this.

To Boldly Go Where Everyone Has Gone Before

CBS has announced plans for a new Star Trek TV series that will air in January 2017. The first episode will premiere on the CBS TV network and subsequent episodes will be available on the paid CBS All Access streaming service.

Good luck with that.

If CBS management pulled their collective heads out of their collective rears, they might be able to spot the three mountain size hurdles in their path to success.

First, as I've discussed before, CBS has the most customer hostile streaming policies of any of the major networks.

Missed the last few minutes of your show because the beginning was delayed? Have fun streaming it on demand because there's no way to fast forward. And you're burdened with this streaming restriction even if you're watching it through your cable provider, who presumably you've already paid for the "privilege" of watching CBS.

Looking at the iPhone app reviews for the big three networks shows just how far behind CBS is in customer satisfaction for their streaming service:

People are only going to watch this new Star Trek series if the show is so good that they're willing to endure a horrible viewing experience. And that brings us to the second hurdle.

CBS's recent track record with science fiction is not that good. No one's going to pay for pablum like Extant or Under The Dome. There's plenty of bad science fiction series available for free, but more importantly, there's also plenty of good science fiction series available for free. This new Star Trek series needs to be as good, if not better, than a series like Battlestar Galactica, and that needs to be apparent from the very first episode. Which brings us to the third and final hurdle.

The Star Trek TV franchise is creatively bankrupt. The film franchise reboot achieved success by focusing on the action/adventure aspects of the stories. A weekly TV show is not going to be able to compete with the special effects budget of a film. That means the TV show needs to excel at plot and character development, areas in which each Star Trek TV series in general has been progressively worse than its predecessors.

I've watched every episode of all five live action Star Trek TV series, but the idea of a new series that follows in the creative footsteps of the shows that came before it leaves me completely unexcited. I've had my fill of technobabble and cookie cutter crews.

It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised by the preview episode and watch something that's radically different from what we've seen before while still being familiar as Star Trek, but I'm not holding my breath. And I'm not paying for CBS All Access. If the series ends up being worth watching I'll wait for it on blu-ray.

Zombie Sneak Attacks

Every zombie sneak attack in The Walking Dead reminds me of this scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Fear the Walking Dumb

One of the things I like about Aliens is that the protagonists are cocky going into their first encounter with the xenomorphs ("Is this going to be a standup fight, sir, or another bughunt?"), get schooled ("Maybe you haven't been keeping up on current events; but we just got our asses kicked, pal!"), and then quickly start making intelligent decisions ("I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."). It's a series of events that plausibly place the characters in jeopardy.

So is it too much to ask that the main characters in zombie stories aren't all Darwin Award winner wannabes? I'm not saying that the stories need to directly acknowledge and address the large body of zombie apocalypse tropes from movies, TV, comics, and books (á la Scream or The Cabin in the Woods).

But when a character is repeatedly attacked by mute, slow moving family, friends, and acquaintances, maybe it's time for that character to show some caution and foresight around people who, you know, look dead.

Just saying'.

Leonard Nimoy Tribute

A selfie mosaic from William Shatner and a bunch of Star Trek fans.

Clinton vs. Trump

Holy Kang vs. Kodos!

Enemies of the State

What Battlestar Galactica Can Teach Us About the Militarization of Police

Texas Rising

History Channel’s ‘Texas Rising’ goes beyond Alamo siege:

The landscape in “Texas Rising” mostly looks and feels like Texas, but without all the skyscrapers and air conditioning. It’s hot, dusty and scrubby. At one point, though, Sam Houston, elegantly played by Bill Paxton with some killer sideburns, sets up camp on a mountain with a stunning view — even though there would not have been breathtaking vistas where Houston and the Texas Rangers were plotting to defeat the Mexican army.

“Those early episodes were all shot in Durango, Mexico,” said David Marion Wilkinson, a writer and co-producer on the project. “The settings don’t match. San Jacinto was all piney woods and bayous. Gonzales is flat land and farm land. ... But this is entertainment. I don’t think the geography is going to bother too many people.”

It bothered me.

Keystone Kriminals

The TV show Sons of Anarchy is a cross between Breaking Bad, Jerry Springer, Gilligan’s Island, and Hogan’s Heroes. It’s unintentionally funny in many ways. Apparently the Anarchy in the show’s title doesn’t refer to chaos sowed by the Sons of Anarchy motorcycle gang through their gun running and other illegal activities, but rather the problems caused by their crime-related ineptitude and sociopathic interpersonal relationships. If cookies were illegal, these guys would have problems competing with the Girl Scouts without destroying everyone and everything around them.

Here’s a drinking game you can play while watching Sons. Take a shot when:

A Son’s plan goes wrong.

A Son says you have my guarantee.

A Son says no one’s going to get hurt.

A Son says none of this will blow back on you.

A Son says this will benefit everyone.

A Son says family is everything.

A Son says you’re like family to me.

A Son says I love you.

A Son swears off family or friends.

A Son plots against family or friends.

A Son murders family or friends.

And who smuggles guns into the United States? That’s like smuggling cocaine into Columbia.

Worst. Criminals. Ever.

But still entertaining.

Lavalantula

You only have to watch one of the SyFy channel’s “combo” movies to discover that their awesome titles are ruined by actually watching the movie. Seriously, how could you go wrong with gems like these:

Dinosaur + Crocodile = Dinocroc
Man + Mosquito = Mansquito
Shark + Octopus = Sharktopus
Dinosaur + Shark = Dinoshark
Piranha + Anaconda = Piranhaconda
Shark + Tornado = Sharknado

And now with their latest movie, Lavalantula, they’ve managed to botch the title as well.



How do you combine “lava” and “tarantula”, words containing a total of two ‘l’ letters, and get “Lavalantula”, a word containing three ‘l’ letters? It’s baffling.

And the title needs to evocatively roll off your tongue. Lavalantula sounds too much like Lollapalooza. There’s nothing scary about a movie festival.

So if you’re reading my blog SyFy channel, here’s a million dollar movie title for you:

Tarantula + Avalanche = Tarantulanche

Now that’s scary.

“Fairest of Them All” Fan Film

“Mirror, Mirror” is one of my favorite episodes from the original series. Seriously, who doesn’t love a goateed evil twin, whether it's Spock or Eric Cartman?

It’s Just A Dream

When I’m Earth Overlord, all dream sequences in movies and TV shows must be approved by my Ministry for the Eradication of Overused Tropes.

AUTUER: Oh no! Little Johnny fell down a well and can’t get out!

MINISTRY: What?!

AUTUER: Ha ha. I’m kidding. It’s just a dream having little to no importance to the plot, but it made a great clip to put in this week’s preview. Can I interest you in a cat jumping out from an unexpected place?

MINISTRY: Oh no! It’s the dungeons for you!

AUTUER: What?!

MINISTRY: Ha ha. We’re kidding. Your show is cancelled.

Crossing the Time Stream

Crossing the time stream occurs in episodic storytelling when a plot device is introduced that should have far-reaching implications, but is not routinely used after its introduction, even in situations where it would be an ideal solution for the problems faced by the heroes or villains. The most common example is time travel that allows the past to be changed and there is no more egregious crosser of the time stream than Star Trek.

The time stream was first crossed in the original series, but it wasn't until the subsequent movie and TV series that its frequent use snowballed into huge continuity issues. Star Trek II, III, and IV illustrate the problems caused by crossing the time stream. In The Wrath of Khan, Spock and numerous other crew members of the Enterprise and Reliant are killed. In The Search for Spock, Kirk steals the enterprise and in the ensuing adventure Spock is resurrected, but Kirk’s son is murdered and the Enterprise destroyed. In The Voyage Home, Kirk and crew travel back in time using their captured Klingon warbird in order to retrieve whales to save Earth’s future.

Wait, what? You can travel back in time to solve problems?

Uhmm, OK. Hey Kirk, how about this plan? After you’ve kill Khan in the present, why not just travel back in time and kill him in the past instead. Show up the day after you marooned him on Ceti Alpha V and launch a photon torpedo at him from orbit. Khan’s wrath will be incinerated with thermonuclear fury and since no one from Star Fleet has bothered to check on him for the last fifteen years, there's minimal impact to the timeline.

Spock doesn't have to die; your son doesn't have to die; your crew members don't have to die; the Enterprise doesn't have to be destroyed; and you can avoid a court martial for stealing a starship.

Let’s assume, however, that there’s a Federation Temporal Prime Directive and Kirk is only willing to violate it if the Earth is about to be destroyed by an alien space probe that communicates using catastrophic power-draining planetary weather changes and/or whalesong.

That would fill one plot hole, but there’s an adage that says “when time travel is outlawed, only outlaws will use time travel.” In other words, if the Federation has qualms about changing the timeline, most of its enemies would not.

Take the Borg for example. In First Contact they traveled back in time to assimilate Earth and almost succeeded, but that pesky Picard followed them through their temporal vortex and thwarted their plans. If only they could learn to adapt, they’d try it again and travel back in time somewhere the Federation fleet couldn’t observe them before heading toward Earth.

And surely after discovering the secret to time travel, at least one clever Klingon, Romulan, or Cardassian would come to the realization that if you travel back far enough in time, you can easily defeat your enemies with a starship. If there’s one thing that I learned from the Star Trek reboot, it’s that a U.S deep sea drilling platform sent back in time could have defeated the entire British navy in the War of 1812.

There are numerous other examples in the long history of Star Trek where crossing the time stream involves something other than time travel. How It Should Have Ended lampooned the use of transwarp beaming and magic blood in the most recent movie, Star Trek Into Darkness:



I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but after 35 years of watching Star Trek I suppose I’ve been conditioned to accept that its depiction of technology in the science fiction genre follows fewer coherent and consistent rules than the depiction of magic in a typical series from the fantasy genre.

It really is a lost opportunity. When the franchise was rebooted, the creative team could have cast aside decades of continuity baggage. Instead they crossed the time stream right from the start to live on the side where nothing makes sense if you think about it.