www.ditl.org

Mikey wrote:woman: "If you were my husband, I'd put poison in your tea."

Churchill: "If I was your husband, I'd drink it."

That was Nancy Astor - she had a tounge and a wit as sharp as Churchill's, which lead to a few lively exchanges. Another one went:

"Winston, you're drunk"

"Nancy, you're ugly, but in the morning I shall be sober"

He was also a nudist. Truman walked in on him stark naked once and Churchill just said "You can see that the British Prime Minister has nothing to hide from the American President."

Good stuff. And people think that sort of peculiarity is new, or something.

To give the story some context, Churchill had just got out of his bath in the White House, as Roosevelt (not Truman) came in to discuss something with him. The quip was in response to FDRs frantic reversing.

Does the President of the US not knock?

Rochey wrote:Does the President of the US not knock?

Nah, they just send bombers and carrier strike groups.

Or, in case we have another bonehead in office, sends people out with rifles with EMPTY magazines.

IDIOT!!!

What a silly fanboy I am. I'm so excited!



They shot establishing shots of Starfleet Headquarters for STIX at my alma mater! California State University Northridge. I went to that library all the time 8) Does this make me a graduate of Starfleet Academy???

Cool.

It's a cool, stately California-style building (is that an oxymoron?), but not what I would think of as "Trek." I wonder if this new film is going the way of Batman - less comic-book, more realism? I did read they're doing away with technobabble.

Grundig wrote:I did read they're doing away with technobabble.

Well, there's a positive, in any event.

Well it could also be a bad thing. If the movie is crap we cant blame

If a movie's bad I don't blame the technobabble in it exclusively. There's a whole host of other reasons why a movie sucks.

If they're getting rid of the technobabble then that's definitely a good start.

Well, getting rid of it completely may take away from it being Trek. Part of Star Trek is the new technologies, and technobable can enhance a story.
That said, with the amount of changes they seem to have already made, removing the technobabble most likely will not change my opinion of the movie.

stitch626 wrote:Well, getting rid of it completely may take away from it being Trek. Part of Star Trek is the new technologies, and technobable can enhance a story.

Done properly, sure. The problem is that recent Trek has a track record of treating technobabble as incomprehensible gibberish, liberally sprinkled with the words "frequency", "phase" and "quantum", and thinking it improves the episode. It doesn't - it simply uses up screentime while adding no further information whatsoever. Therefore dispensing with said gibberish, and using plain English instead can only be a good thing.