 "Relativity" |
|
by David E. Sluss |
13 May 1999 |
|
Home >> Voyager Season 5 >> >> Episode Review
Episode Guide:
Other Opinions:
|
THE BOTTOM LINE: It's hard to nitpick a show that's deliberately designed to have continuity errors, but I'll do my best. It's an interesting watch, but hasn't Star Trek's Time Travel Well run dry yet? CYNICS CORNER RATING: 7.0 (C-) QUOTABLE OF THE WEEK: The Doctor, upon learning that temporal anomalies were making the crew (and viewers) sick: "I was beginning to suspect some kind of anomaly." Ha! On that ship, anomalies should always be the prime suspect. On a related note, I had to smile when Doc noticed that the clocks in the mess hall and sickbay showed different times. Normal people would assume that the clocks were simply set differently; Voyager people, naturally, assume a temporal anomaly is to blame. JOYRIDE OF THE WEEK: If the 29th Century Feds can transport people, not just through time, but all the way across the galaxy at will, why do they need a timeship? Couldn't they do all of this from an office on Earth? Or Risa? I conclude that Braxton likes to tool around in his kEwL ship. One problem: the ship wasn't that kEwL, and neither the interior nor exterior of the Relativity seemed to be much more advanced than Voyager. And besides, it had lame sensors, so lame that Braxton had to search for someone with 400-year-old implants (ocular ones that is) to do his dirty work for him. CHEAPO PROP OF THE WEEK: That 29th century time bomb didn't look too impressive as Braxton was shaking it about in the mess hall. It looked like a couple of pinwheels taped together. WRITERS BLOCK OF THE WEEK: In a week of deliberate discontinuities, here's one that probably wasn't. Janeway and Tuvok are able to trap Seven using forcefields. Seven talks her way out, but she should have been able to walk right through the forcefields, as seen in "Hope and Fear." Let the rationalizations begin! FORESHADOWING OF THE WEEK: Crazy Braxton's ravings hint at lots and lots of Voyager time travel in the future. Yippee. QUESTIONABLE DUE PROCESS OF THE WEEK: I love it: arrest and try people for crimes before they commit them. Seems like some "Federation ideals" went to seed after 400 years. On the other hand, no due process should be offered to this plot; it should be executed immediately. Here's one reason: Braxton's first officer, Duquesne, sends Janeway to apprehend "a" Braxton at the Utopia Planitia shipyards, in order to prevent the various temporal incursions by Seven that resulted from his actions. But wait: Duquesne arrested "the" Braxton before he carried out any of his fiendish plot, before he thought of it, even! So why does Janeway's arrest of Braxton, which prevents him from carrying out his dastardly plan, restore the timeline, while Duquesne's arrest of Braxton, which prevents him from carrying out his dastardly plan, does not? Yeah, yeah, paradox, right? But that's no way to tell a story; it let's the writer get away with any illogic he or she wants to. WELFARE RECIPIENT OF THE WEEK: Well, look what Schrodinger's cat dragged in: Josh Clark as Lt. Carey, about four years after his last appearance, playing the role of Mack Daddy trying to get on Seven of Nine. According to IMDB, Clark has had about four acting jobs in the interim, and I guess Star Trek's Welfare Program took the opportunity to help him out. And speaking of old feces -- excuse me -- faces... BLAST FROM THE PAST OF THE WEEK: Boy, I just loved seeing those Kazon mad-cow ships again. It brings back memories of all those great Kazon episodes from Voyager's first two seasons. Now that was Star Trek's golden age... wait a minute, I think my timeline's been corrupted... help m--
404 Not found. The requested URL was not found on this server.
469 Server does not exist in this timeline.
|
| Previous:
"11:59" Next: "Warnead" |
NEXT WEEK: Some people think Voyager is bomb. Others think Voyager is a bomb. Some people are bombed. In any case, for the second week in a row, next week's show features a bomb. Take shelter... |
|
satisfied customers since 31 January 1999 |
This review is copyright
© 1999 David E. Sluss |
