Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Jonathan Mock

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Jonathan Mock last won the day on January 8 2013

Jonathan Mock had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

169 Excellent

About Jonathan Mock

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member
  • Birthday 04/22/1967

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

9,013 profile views
  1. The thing about Matchbox was they often tended to get some sniffy reviews as if they were kits somehow not worthy of "serious" modellers - but but a six year old in 1973, Matchbox were about the most exciting kits out there at the time with their exciting and informative artwork, coloured plastic, interesting decals and alternative parts, and they were cheap! Which is why they are my default choice for some stress-off/fun-on modelling.
  2. To which I say thanks god for that! You've just listed all the stuff that was constipating the whole Trek franchise because one slight deviation from "canon" (which in itself is inconsistent and often not logical - ha!) and the writers are living in fear of fan forums treating all this like its real. Its funny how so many things that happened in ST:E were never mentioned or referenced in TOS, TOS movies, TNG, DS9 and STV. The problem with canon is that its pretty much a fan conceit and means damn all outside of the immediate circle of Trekkies, which I think explains why the franchise went down the toilet because for everyone else because it had just become impenetrable tedium frightened of its own shadow. Long story short its a franchise that plays loose with science, time travel, alternative realities and its own history and canon as and when it suits, with people (mostly the fan community) desperate to paper over the cracks and make out its somehow all hangs together as if it had all really happened! Its a TV series that has somehow taken on a quasi-religious cult-like status and is treated way too serious. If anything I'd say JJ Trek aligns itself more with TOS and a semi-grounded sci-fi universe than any of the subsequent shows. Anyway, worst spaceships - I think the Enterprise E gets a big vote here, hideous,
  3. Or how about the flying galleon from the samurai-in-space epic "Message From Space"?
  4. If he was playing as Shatner complete... with... dramatic... pauses... thenspeedingupattheend, I could see your point. Nimoy didn't think Quinto was caricaturing Spock. Total rejection of Trek canon? How does "Enterprise" fit into this, or indeed all the other little modifications and oopsies that the Trek writers on TOS, TNG, DS9 and STV managed over the years? Or indeed then trying to write themselves out of a hole by explaining why the Klingon's in TOS didn't have knobbly heads and said "Ker-Plunk"? TOS I seem to remember still had the death penalty, ST:E didn't but it was supposed to be a prequel! Holy canon mess Batman! You want caricaturing? I give you Star Trek V: The FInal Frontier - or Carry On Trekking as I like to think of it!
  5. Yup! Mostly all from Revell reissues, just great kits to sit down and have some fun with.
  6. No votes for the Alpha 7 from "Barberella"?
  7. Let see. Kirk, check. Spock, check. Enterprise, check. Starfleet, check... What elements made up the best of the TOS and the TOS movies: Kirk/Spock bromance, check. Humour, check. Action, check. I'd like to know what makes Trek "Trek". What has thus far been absent from JJ Trek is the kind deus ex machina technobabble so beloved of Brannon Braga ("if we reverse the polarity of the EPS conduits it may emit a tachyon beam to split the nano particles that will leave the Klingon's quadra spazzed on a life glug..."), Dennis McCarthy's tedious music, Nazis, Nelix, Wesley Crusher, meeting God... What did TOS/TNG movies Trek do which could be considered non-Trek: they gave Kirk a son, they killed off Spock (ish), they travelled back in time to save some whales, they killed off Kirk, they killed off the Enterprise (twice). Even original Trek played fast and loose with its own canon rules, much to the gnashing of Trekkies in their too-tight tunics. Heck, without warring Trekkies on fan forums, we may not even have had an internet! What did JJ do? Came up with an ingenious way of rebooting the Trek franchise from the dead by introducing the conceit of an alternate time line - this in a show that has played hard fast with time travel and alternative universes. Has he replaced TOS? No, all he's done is use the existing "rules" (such as they are) in the Trekiverse to revive Trek for the next generation (sic). As for a "hack" who's going to ruin Star Wars... well I think George Lucas did a pretty good job of that from about "Jedi" onwards!
  8. SIgn me up for JJ Trek as well. The franchise pretty much self-imolated towards the end, "Enterprise" was scraping along before Paramount mercifully gave it both barrels. Trek had become samey, dull and safe within its own whacky-doodle universe (to quote one ex writer) - ironically that's why I liked "Nemesis" because Baird tried to moved the thing into more darker territory but the Trekkie's (and Frakes) hated it! And speaking of Star Trek, I give you: Now that is just fugly! The neck section looks like rubber hose to a vacumm cleaner, the hull pregnant (though clearly influencing the USS Vengeance in STID) and the engine struts/nacelles too angular. About the only thing they could do to make it worse would be some go-faster ridges on the hull - oh wait, they did with the Enterprise B! It makes me appreciate the sleek beauty of the movie-refit Enterprise even more!
  9. Not quite: http://webhome.idirect.com/~cgorman/b7/liberator.htm
  10. I quite liked the 2004 TB2, it seemed to be a reasonable update without changing the shape too much - the movie though... and Frakes' has the gall to say that Stuart Baird killed off Trek over "Nemesis" which I thought was a decent movie!
  11. I think I'd qualify worst as ones - pre CGI of course - where there's not been much though put into modifying or disguising kit parts without them being too obvious kit parts. Now there's Panther hulls on the Millennium Falcon which are there if you know what to look for, but then I give you, from "Saturn 3" (1980): Holy Harrier!
  12. I built the birdcage kit in the mid 90s when it came out, like much of Hobbycraft's output it was perfectly serviceable, few vices, had dropped flaps (a nice touch) and built into a good looking replica straight from the box. The problem was the Tamiya kit came out a few months later which... well its Tamiya. That would be like "Monsters" coming out a few weeks before "Pacific Rim". The HC kits main sin was that it wasn't the Tamiya kit, which is rather stating the bleedin' obvious, but just because its not does not render it "terrible" in my book. But if they have key markets where they have a strong market presence, they won't need to. People do buy stuff other than Tamiya sometimes for various reasons.
  13. According to Ted Hooton K9794 was probably not coded WZ-T, this was also agreed by Neil Robinson. As for pics, the IWM doesn't publish all the photos it has, and there private collections out there also with unpublished photographs (albeit sometimes not of great quality). There's an interesting photo in "Fighting Colours" of a 19 Sqn Spit (apparently WZ-I) where the she still wears the original Dark Green/Dark Earth/Silver scheme with the underwing serials, but has had the fuselage and underwing roundels modified to type "B", prior to the application of the black/white undersides. Across all the early Spitfire squadrons, some aircraft had the underwings roundels painted out when the black/white colours were applied, some didn't (supported by photos). Often its piecing together a timeline of events using whatever photos (if dated), records and any contemporary accounts. Through correspondence I read, it would seem that a Spitfire coded WZ-T was spotted and identified (more than once) with the odd roundel arrangement - I'm not saying it was the norm for all aircraft, but there were variations. I can understand your line of logic with your model, chances are any marking oddities were evened out, but equally they certainly did exist at some stage.
  • Create New...