ConnorExum

Both Rod Stewart and Russel Watson's verison of that damn song are crap... Because it's a crappy song no way around that fact. What needs to be used to replace is possibly one of the most self indulgent and over the top reworkings of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony ever to be record. Rainbow's "Diffcult To Cure" a high voltage infusion of rock and classical music that is mind blowing. The best verison being the live recording from the final Rainbow album Final Vinyl. Recorded in japan with the japanese national symphony in support of Ritchie Blackmore's brilliant guitar power playing( :) ). This is the song for Enterprise's theme. It's of course 11.05 minutes long to so maybe just one small section should be used.

:)

Later

Fred,

Isn't the trend to gimmicky storyline devices that seem to over look already stated information in the series getting a little annoying to you too? I mean if they don't build on the elements already present in the series then what are they going to do start over after each season? Or is this just when they need more drama? Well the writers/producers can save that drama for their mamas because it's crap! Drama is developed by characters acting and reacting to events in a realistic manner. Not just running around blasting things like some Vin Diesel movie.

It seems to me that Enterprise is really lacking in realism. Every new production information about the new season seems to confirm my worst fears about the show's new direction. Those being that the new direction is more of a gimmick to get more action sequences per episode while neglecting character development and realism in the process. This of course is all done in the name of "drama".

Let's explore a few of the key areas I find fault with maybe some of you agree with them.

1) The Xindi Attack: The lynch pin of the entire new direction is flawed. From a military planner's point of view it's a pointless waste of resources that' potentially could lead the enemy coming to knock on the Xindi's front door.

A) You don't test your weapon on the enemy target unless completely neccessary. The weapon should be first tested completely. Some where safe from view of the enemy. Also considering the enemy, Earth that is, doesn't attack for another 400 years there's no pressure to be hasty about it's development process.

:( Targets, the target should be something of importance. A first strike should attempt to leave the enemy defenseless against the next attack which is the knockout blow which should follow very soon on the heels of the first attack.

C) considering those two facts then why did Berman and Braga go with the implausible attack of a manned probe with a super high energy weapon that attacks then self destructs? It goes against those two basic ideas of a mainting surprise and being striking at vital assets of the enemy's warmachine capablities. I can't tell you that for sure.

2) Daniels' Database: It would seem that Archer would want to confirm some of the details of Shadow Man's claims with an independant source. Considering how Archer and him have been at odds since day one. Plus the advantage that it would give Archer would be imeasurable. Being able to know the exact location of the Xindi home world would negate the quest aspect. Also it would allow Archer to plan a flight path that would avoid certain areas. Also knowlegde about the Xindi's ships and command structure would give him excellent ideas on where to start looking for the most vital information and what sort of opposition to expect. Finally it would even the playing the field giving Archer the need intel on the enemy to upgrade his ship and train his crew to the conditions that would be encountered in the unexplored space of the Expanse. As of yet no such mention is made. It's logically something you do before you enter the expanse. Also it would help to define a clear objective for the Enterprise's mission in the Expanse. Something that was left up in the air for the most part at the end. It wasn't clear if they were on a true military combat mission or just more of the same hype with no action.

3) Technology: Archer has the very advanced Suliban Cell ship at his disposal to examine and retro fit or reverse engineer many useful componets from to the NX-01. Mainly the cloaking device , shields , and weapons would be of primary concern. However the sensor systems and other advanced system shouldn't be over looked either. The writers seemed to have over looked the realistic nature of military thinkers. That is when they find something very advanced like this usually take it apart and see what advantage it can give their ships. But no such thing happened in the season finale episode. It's very curious when one considers the magnitude of the mission's importance. Failure means Earth's destruction that sort of stake usually makes people bend rules...

4) Weapons On Enterprise: Archer is taking a ship into the expanse against an unknown enemy of unknown strength with just a modest up grade to the ships weapons systems? Doesn't make much sense does it. Right now Enterprise is barely a self sufficent ship when it comes to offensive and deffsenive capablities. Yet the writers first want us the viewers to believe that A) Archer and Forrest aren't going to consult an intel source with potentially volumes of useful data on tactics , ship design , defenses and other information on the Xindi; the :) Archer isn't going to demand a ship with such a heavy arament that it could take on 5 to 10 ships of greater size with no problem? That's just not realistic. The fate of the planet rests in Archer's hands and he just wants to get the modesty torpedo up grade. No way in reality it would be extra external phase cannon packs on the saucer; mulitple photonic torpedo tubes; retro fitted spacial torpedoe tubes that can fire spacial torpedos and lay a mine field and extra armor protection with possible shields as well. That's what a military commander would demand on this mission and he would need it too.

5) Continuity and Realsim: Basically most of my completes of this new direction are about realism and continuity. How each one effects the show's feel and turns a decent idea into a bubble gum action adventure with no real depth. First off they just ignore useful items Archer has sitting in his ship no less that could make the mission more believable to what build contrived dramatic senairos about a lone ship out gunned? Two by doing thisi the writers/producers reduced the realism factor which in turn tends to lead to flat action orientated shows... The Expanse is a clear example of this. Sure they had lots of action with the Xindi attack the Klingon attack but in the end the realism was lost because the crew lack realistic reactions to the events and the omission laying of a the mission's foundation left the show feeling hasty and implausable.

A big reason was the lack of continuity between the Expanse and the rest fo the season. Vital resources were neglected and not mentioned that would seem to be real military intel assest for some high speed rush to get into only more action.

6) Tactics: Archer and his crew need training. Starfleet has been repesented all season as a peaceful organization that only uses force in the direst of need. Howeer this is a military combat senairo no way Archer's crew would combat ready. Training from some friendly race would be required to get the crew ready for the pressures of war. Something that I think that could have really been an interesting aspect to show in the season finale. Not present I guess it's too boring or not dramatic enough for Berman and Braga to show such developments in the crew.

7) Mission Objective: Clearly the mission's objectives should be one of destroying the enemy's ablity to attack Earth with the Doomsday Weapon. However the means by which to achieve this objective has never been stated. I think that's a big mistake. Archer should have been given direct orders to take the enemy's weapon , scientists , R&D center and all data concerning the weapon out permently. As well as the factation that has been giving the Xindi information about the future. That factation is a direct threat to Earth and needs to be eliminated. All this must be done with extreme force. Yet never stated in season finale so again it let the viewer wondering exactly how Archer is going to save the day. Well for realisms sake let's just cut to the chase and say violence will occur. Drama can be developed in the changes of the characters and so on.

So those are my complaints with the new direction feel free to disagree.. :)

Actually, I've never liked Queensryche all that much to tell the truth; or The Judas Priests... KK Downing and Glen Tipton were okay but I liked Iron Maiden better from that paticular invaison of English metal. Adrian Smith, had some pretty good stuff but again I really don't put them in same list as do my favorite Axe men of all time. Which really isn't that long of a list. Basically I feel there's only been truely one guitarist for the last 25 years or so. That's Eddie Van Halen. While I do think Joe Satriani is much better in many aspects of his playing. It's still Eddie Van Halen that rekindled the fire in the public's imagination to play guitar again back in '78. If you listen to any band from 1980 to present you'll hear his influnce all over the work. Drop #d tuning , the heavy usage of the jett distortation , gonzo whammy bar dips and of course his trade mark the two handed fret board tapping. Still a staple of todays guitar playing. The only things I wish would happen before I'm old and gray are Joe Satriani playing more in the United States and a full reunion of Van Halen. Have you ever seen Yngwie Malmsteen play? I have he's pretty amazing in a limited area however I feel he's all speed no feel... Which is very cool at times but his playing looses focus on the feel which detracts from it. Hence the reason I feel Joe Satriani is so great he encompasses all the best qualities of playing in his songs I feel at least. Plus no words the fastest way to screw up a good guitar song is buy a great guitarist thinking he's a vocalist... Never's work out if you ask me! Personally I hate Jimi Hendrix's vocals...

Sorry bud not a guitarist at all... Can't play to save my life maybe I should sell my soul like Robert Johnson but I'm just a guy who really loves all music and I research it alot... Have fun in your band best of luck. Oh yeah you can just use Connor it's my first name.

You know the title says it all really. I'm always surprised when people over look the classic lines and feel of the Lotus Esprit. For the last 25 years it's been the backbone of the British supercar effort and for good reason too. It's got all the right attributes of a supercar: lightweight , high top end speed( 180mph) , beautiful lines, excellent handling capablities , brilliantly tuned engine and much more. Yet, here in America you never see one of these fine machines on the road to speak of. It's not just a car it's a complete driving experince. It's not over done with electronic traction control , computerized shifting or other gimmicks burrowed from modern F1 race cars. No, it's a simple four wheel indepent suspesion system with just the right attributes for perfect road handling. This isn't a car for the Sunday driver however. Without those electronic enhancements this car is a driver's car. It will let you drive above you ablities. With 350hp and 295 ft-lbs of torque produced from the 3.5liter twin turbocharged V8 that's not hard to do at all. But again it's a drivers car. You have to know what you doing with this machine and not just have a lot money to spend on one. It's about being in control of a machine; not the machine being in control of you. Hence the reason it only comes with a close ratio 5speed manual transmission with short throw linkage. In short, a race car transmission. Not like the newer Porsche's , Acura NSX's and Ferrari's that all come with triptronic transmissions. These aren't transmissions for people that want to be a driver; these are transmissions for people who want a car to drive them. It's the elegance of the manual transmission mated to the perfect size engine with an outstand power to weight ratio that makes this car such an experince to drive. It's flawless attention to detail in steering componets to the hum of the 8 cyclinders directly behind the drive all enhance the over all experince. In short it's a four wheel orgasm for those of us luckily enough to 91,515 dollars and the taste to choose such a fine automobile...

Here's a link to the car of my dreams which by the way just happens to be in my faovorite color too.

http://www.parkplaceltd.com/webinventory/d...ils.asp?id=1164

"Bytsy: i dont even know who joe satriani is. lol. sorry. "

Here's a website to one of the most amazing guitarist in the history of Rock...

http://www.satriani.com/

He's also a fellow New Yorker like myself which also is cool... If like guitar instrumental albums that run the gambit from techno fusion to blues boogie rock fusion he's the man. He also throws in some classic influences too. But just an unbelivable player. He's like an alien who's from another planet when he plays the sounds and tones he can get from his guitar are just fanastic.

Not to put down the Guess Who or Randy Bachman... But I don't think you can put him in the same list as Eddie Van Halen, Joe Satriani , Eric Johnson, Ritchie Blackmore , Jeff Beck , Eric Clapton , Jimmy Page , Hendrix, Randy Rhoads and more... He was good but not the same caliber of player as those above that've mentioned. From Canada I've always liked Rush's Alex Lifeson... Especially from albums like 2112, Fly By Night, Fare Well To Kings. and some of the 80's stuff is cool too. But in the 70's he really just let if all out and jammed on those old solos. Like the one in "Working Man..." Or the complete instrumental "Villa Stange Goto... "check spelling of that don't have the album with that song on it in from me.

Personally I think "The Core" looks like yet another over indulgent special FX movie with no plot at all behind it except for the cliche "saving the earth from destruction plot"... Take a number Core, you're in the same damn pile as any one of a hundred films. But that's just what I think...

Personally I love science fiction but movies like this seem to always turn it into a gaint non-stop fx showcase with no real plot. Maybe I'm just too damn hard to please. Or maybe I'm just too damn critical of modern cinema... But if you ask me there haven't been too many really good science fiction movies besides the ST series movies in years. All of them lack plot and use too many Fx stunts to fill in the cavernous gaps that their weak storylines leave.

Love Frank Zappa... Have many of his ablums including Joe's Garage all three parts. Love all his work especially stuff like Titties n beer , Sex, Dumb All Over , Tinsel Town Rebellion and so many more. However never saw him in concert because of my age... 22. So I missed out on him before his untimely death but we still can hear the Albums... Actually I had mentioned FZ on a few of the other posts looking for fellow fans. Ironic now to see a whole posting deciated to him now.

Hendrix, I personally feel is a bit over rated for the most part. It's not that he wasn't a brilliant guitarist it's the fact that so many have come after him that evolved the instruments use so much more then he did in the genre. Infact personally I think Jeff Beck was more influencitial at an earlier point then Hendrix however his style was too nonmainstream thus it limited his air play. But he was every bit as creative and talented as Hendrix... I would have Hendrix on my list but not in the top 5 portion of it. He's in the the top ten for sure. The same with Jimmy Page. I love his work but I don't think it's as great as those that I did mention. But it's cool to see replies to my messages... But why only two guitar solos and not a full 5 like I asked everyone about?

Radio friendly heavy metal is dead... Classic rock stations play a so-so mix of music but they usually get hung up on the Stones , Beetles , or Led Zeppelin too much and neglect so many other great bands. They claim not to have a music playlist but I disagree you listen to any Classic Rock station and they play all the standard music from Jounery , Forgnier, Reo Speedwagon , Styx and so on that was popular in '81. Then they claim to have huge libaries of classic rock. Yet you can hear the same song on the radio 2 times or more a day. Not much of a variety when you consider the amount music they claim to have. Not to mention the DJ's on most classic rock stations wouldn't know a good ablum if it them in the head. They never touch staple bands like Montrose which brought out the first heavy metal riffs from an American band. They never play much Rainbow. Play few songs from Black Sabbath , Deep Purple , and so on. Even though they were both instrumental in the genre. They never touch Joe Satriani. However you can listen more of Joe's stuff on Dish Network's Hard Rock station then on the normal radio. You never hear Yngwie Malmsteen from his Raising Force Album. Limited air play of Van Halen's nonsingle hits. They don't even touch Frank Zappa's more mainstream compostions. Steve Vai's work is never showcased. Iron Maiden is a strickly Taboo. Then they call it classic rock and don't even bother to request a song on their request hour because they just won't play it. The way I see it is you need to buy the albums and listen to the cd player... Forget Radio because radio sucks...

Frank Zappa, is great... Songs like Dumb All Over , My Guitar Wants To Kill Your Mama , Zoot Allures, Disco Boy , Valley Girl , Fem Bot In A Wet T-Shirt Contest, and so many more all have great sardonic wit and brilliant compostions too... How anyone couldnt' like him beyond me.

Soong Girl , there are some great guitar players in Heavy Metal... Some guys that really know how to use their guitar in interesting ways that expand the genre then there are 3 chord wonders too. But I was speaking of the later not the former. I guess you're not a fan or aren't fimilar with the artists I mention because if you were you'd know what I was speaking of when I mention names like Blackmore. Vai , Satriani and Van Halen. Guy's that truely redefine the playing style of the electric guitar for generations. Then you have minimalists like Angus Young who's greatest achievement isn't how exactingly he can play but how simple and riffy he can make music in he best traditions of blues. Without albums like AC/DC's Black In Black in 1980 , Van Halen's selftitled debut album in 1978, Deep Purple's Machine Head in 1972, and so many more saved us from becoming either disco or new wave only listening public. Songs that had backbone to them and not just bubble gum pop hooks like The Knack , The Cars and so many more. That's what I talking about when I speak of good Heavy Metal. Not the over rated knock offs in the late 80's that turned Metal into a bubble artform that need three simple elements: a guitar player that sounded like Eddie Van Halen , A Leader Singer that sounded and looked like Robert Plant or Steven Tyler and a wardrobe that looked like rags. That wasn't metal music that was marketting gone overboard like that of bubble gum pop music for teenie boppers. That was a subvert form of the music.

Never Heard of Great Big Sea but if anyone likes unusual music like the stuff of Dr. Demento's radio program then are any of you Frank Zappa fans?

Everyone loves a list except here I guess I should have made this a poll then I would have gotten more replies... Or not?

As a big fan of the heaviest of metal that's actually good. I can't believe what's happened to the genre lately. What passes for good metal music these days is just laughable. Bands like Pantera, Slayer, Linkin Park, Grand Unified Theory and many more can't even hold a candle to the classics. Where are the great guitarist like Ritchie Blackmore , Tony Iommi , Angus Young , Eddie Van Halen, Steve Vai , Jimmy Page , and many more that created such memorable rifts. Now Heavy Metal music is more fused with rap then anything else and it's lost it's edgyness. I doubt anyone for some time will create an Album like AC/DC's Black in Black just a great riffy album from start to finish. Or an Album like Van Halen's Fair Warning that's sublime pefection of just the right amounts of unbelievable guitar pryotechs ; the rock solid rythm section of Micheal Anthony and Alex; All rolled up in the punchy fun lyrics of David Lee Roth's. Where has that gone to now? The fun punchy lyrics of that music has been replaced by the angry screams of people with no talent. If you're like me you love almost anything done by the godfather of Heavy Metal, Tony Iommi. His work is the blue print for the hardest of the even today. His rifts resonate through heavy metal like a supersonic shockwave. The gritty low c# or half step d# tuned guitar combined with the solid bass of Gezzer and the plodding drum beat of Bill Ward created a sound then and now that's completely original. Many have copied it but songs like Paranoid, Iron Man , Sabbath Bloody Sabbath , Snowblind, and so many more great songs. While darker then say Van Halen their music still had a good message protesting war and the ills of the human nature that tramples on others. How I can I even talk about Heavy Metal without mentioning Ritchie Blackmore... A guitarist that's done more for the genre in more diverise ways then most. Using Classical infusion before anyone else even considered it on such classic songs as Highway Star with Deep Purple to his harder edged work with Rainbow. His guitar cut's a gaint path into the next era of rock that helped to spawn greats like Randy Rhoads, Yngwie Malsteem , Eddie Van Halen and Joe Satriani. Without Ritchie Blackmore's use of sweeping appeigo's , gonzo whammy bar drips I doubt we'd have the same Eddie Van Halen we today. Although Van Halen claims his music is based on Eric Clapton's influence it's a hard to miss the similarity to Ritchie Blackmore's style. However Yngwie Malsteem is proud to call Ritchie an influnce and his work dripps of the classical based heavy rock that Ritchie helped to develop. What can one truely say about Randy Rhoads on the other hand? His masterful fusion of Hard Rock, Classical And Blues created an original sound in the late 70's early 80's unlike most others that copied Van Halen's work. It's just a shame he's dead. As for Joe Satriani he's top of the heap. From such experimental albums as Not of this earth , Surfing With Alien , to more surrealistic albums of Engines Of Creation , and Strange Beautiful Music. Satriani show's great prowess with the guitar and the ability to seemlessly fuse mulitple musical styles into one coherent guitar tour de force album. The use of artifical harmonics , rapid two hand finger tapping , gonzo whammy bar dips all bring to mind Van Halen roots but then he goes way beyond into the soulful blues , jazz and classical mixed with his unstoppable speed and capalbities make him one of the truely greatest guitarist still recording. Anyone agree with me that Heavy Metal is taking a death sprial into medicority?

Here's a question for you do you remember the Pentagon papers? The Gulf Of Tonken incendent looked pretty much like a smoking gun of North Vietnam's Aggression too... But then we found out it wasn't after all was it after 10 years of war in Vietnam... At times of war it's nearly impossible for the average person to really be able to truely know anyones side of the story except for those that have been there in the fray. However they're not talking are they because they're too busy trying to stay alive. I wonder if this was a chemical weapons plant or just something we declared as a chemical weapons plant. Seems too convient if you ask me that we couldn't find it with the number of space base survillance system around the area. They would have surely seen the construction of any false structures out in the desert and then there's your smoking gun. Not to mention the UN did us U-2 TR-1 model Spy Planes to serach the area too. Seems like they would have seen something moving in out or something that just didn't seem right ... Probably the Space systems would have had the ablity to see it long before now.

If it was a chemical weapons plant then great if not well that wouldn't really surprise me. This war was never about that anyway. It's not about much really. Oil is a nice spoil of it. Removing Saddam is a nice way to show people that we get what we want. An anti-Islamic-fundementalist government in the region with jump off points into many of the regions more ardent supports of fundementalists is surely nice. Iran, Syria , and many more better look out because they might be next on the hit list. And no way in hell was this ever about or ever will be about the Iraqi people that's just something they say for our benefit so we feel good about it. That's for damn sure. We supported this man in the 80's because he didn't like fundementalists like those in Iran. And in 91 we just let him slaughter the revolters because it didn't fit our agenda then now it does so we'll be buddy buddy again. I wonder if they will want to still be buddy buddy after the country is in ashes with a puppet government in power? Sounds like Iran of the late 40's to the later 70's does it not?

Led Zeppelin is okay ... But if you want mind blowing guitar work check out Joe Satriani!

Okay I've been thinking who played the best Top 5 Guitar Solos of all Time... Here's my list feel free to disagree...

1) Eddie Van Halen, Eurption, Album: Van Halen I released 1978

Does any more have to be said about it ? This is solo redefine guitar playing period.

2) Ritchie Blackmore, Highway Star, Album: Maching Head released 1972

It has the melodic power of a Bach composistion with the raw power of Rock and Roll

3) Joe Satriani, Surfing With The Alien, Album:Surfing With Alien released 1987

Brough to light exactly what one could do with a guitar no solo had been played like that

since Eurption 9 years earlier.

4) Randy Rhoads, Mr. Crowley, Album: Blizzard Oz released 1981

The only true post-eurption solo for years that had it's own feel

not just a well executed copy of Van Halen's work. At least until

Joe Satriani showed up on the scene.

5) Eric Johnson, Cliffs Of Dover , Album: Viva La Musicom released 1990

Soulful yet delicate a brilliant fusion of jazz and rock into a masterpiece

of guitar playing.

Those are my top five what's are your favorites?

I think the theme song misses big time... It's too whishy washy and whinny. It's optmistic but the vocals leave alot to be desired if you ask me. I say go with the clean , edgy instrumental keep the imagery they already have but include some extra stuff... Then use the outrageous guitar pyrotechics of Joe Satriani's guitar style to emphize the imagery's meaning and to give it depth. Much the way that Debusse( check spelling impressionist composer of the late 19th and early 20th centuries) did with his work ... If you listen to songs like Midnight, The Summer Song, Borg Sex and some other others from Satriani's albums you know what I mean. They really do give that impression of what the title says it is.

There have only been three punk bands ever worth talking about. The Ramones , The Sex Pistols and The Clash. The Romones coined it ; The Sex Pistols evovled into the form most often recongized as Punk angry scarstic and bitting; and finally the Clash kept it going and expanded it when it was said to be dead until they no longer could keep it together themsleves. All the rest are walking in the shadows of those three bands. The only modern band to come close to those three with punk formula is Offspring. But they too seem to be slipping into Bubblegum Punk too now. A sad thing to see.

Hey,

I'm a huge fan of Enterprise but I think they need a new theme song. That Warren written piece of junk song has nice thoughts for a pop song but it's not a Trek theme song. Russell Watson has to go too; his vocals are as whinny and cry-baby as the lyrics of that song. I'm trying to start a movement to get the producers to get Joe Satriani to create one of his guitar masterpieces as the theme song. I think he could do an awesome theme song that's all instrumental a concept that's very central to all good Star Trek theme songs. It could be current optmistic and very edgy... Much more so then that rehashed song they have now. I think it would better encompass the trek theme song sprit. Anyone agree with me on this idea? Does anyone else actually even like Joe Satriani or at least heard of him?