Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Ultimate Star Trek Collection

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the just-plain-scary dept.

roelbj writes "For those Star Trek fans wondering what to ask for this Christmas, you may wish to consider The Ultimate Star Trek Collection to be released on November 15. For just (cough) $2499.99, you'll get 212, count them, 212 DVDs with everything ever produced under the name, including all seasons of all five telvision series as well as the ten feature films. Before loading up your disc changer and hitting play, remember to get up once in a while."

10 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. No way by JudgeFurious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love Star Trek, hell I grew up watching it. I even love bad Star Trek. I can't justify spending $100+ per season on it though and I never will. Paramount needs to put the crack pipe down and get those seasons in the $49-$59 range. It's not worth what they're asking. At $49 bucks a season I'd probably own most of it by now.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    1. Re:No way by Fallingcow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the other hand, downloading it is not an option for those who want it now

      Yeah, just those who want it in a week or so.

      Like, the time it would take for a purchased set to be delivered.

    2. Re:No way by Fallingcow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed.

      I was so happy when they announced that DS9 was finally coming out on DVD. I hadn't even looked at any of the others, as I wasn't interested (though I've since come to enjoy the original series). It came out, and I was TOTALLY ready to fork out $40 for each season. They might even have gotten $50 or so out of me.

      They were something like $110 the first time I saw them. WTF? Those bastards can go to hell. Now I'm so pissed off at them that I'll likely never buy the seasons at all.

      It was the same thing with the X-Files. I don't know if it's changed, but it was about $100 when it came out. Totally crazy.

  2. worth it? by fredistheking · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seeing that you will be paying more than $10 a disc is this worth it? Shouldn't you get some kind of discount for getting so many discs?

    Wait until it's at least 30% off.

  3. More like Penultimate by ErMaC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's missing The Animated Adventures, which Paramount has said they plan on releasing on DVD at some point next year.

    And I think it's sad that of the Star Trek stories to be posted, this makes the front page where as the passing of Michael Piller doesn't.

    --
    "I want to get more into theory, because everything works in theory." -John Cash
  4. Re:What makes a movie worth watching over again? by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe because Casablanca is the greatest screenplay yet written (so sayeth Brian Cox as Robert McKee in Adaptation.) It's like saying that the only book you can read again and again is Ulysses and not being sure why. Casablanca is so perfect in formula that there are actually several plot holes of which few people notice, realize or care about. I feel the same way about Lawrence of Arabia, the full cut is four hours long, but I've watched it over a dozen times. It's just that good.

    But... the point of this kind of set is not to see something again and again. Hell, as one person pointed out, if you did one episode a day it would take you two years to finish. And when you've gone through the entire set, hell, there will be a new series on TV by then. After that new series finished, begin rewatching your set, after two years, you'll probably have forgotten most of the episodes. This set is about possessing it, having he capacity to watch ANY given episode on a whim at any given moment. To no longer be the slave of the fickle schedules of TV re-runs. All that jazz. It doesn't have to be Casablanca, very little of it ever comes close. All it has to be is A LOT of Star Trek.

    --
    Yup...
  5. Re:Was the link necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps it is this mentality that obesity is some kind of external force acting upon a person that is leading Americans to become so incredibly fat. As long as you can keep denying responsibility for your own disgusting, highly irresponsible and self-destructive lifestyles, the problem will just keep getting worse.

    She was not 'sick', she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives, consuming what the rest of the world produces until they (literally) keel over and die.

    Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ... people don't like hearing the truth.

  6. Im calling your BS out. by rootedgimp · · Score: 3, Insightful
    She was not 'sick', she was a typical member of the parasitic consumer society in which she lives, consuming what the rest of the world produces until they (literally) keel over and die.
    Uh, if that isn't 'sick', what is? Something you can see wiggling around under a microscope? The variation you described does indeed constitute sickness, and I'd say we can at least agree millions of Americans fall into its catagory. As you said, she was a 'typical member of...' -- just because it's commonplace, doesn't mean it isn't 'sick'.

    Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ... people don't like hearing the truth.


    No, actually you posted AC because you know your opinion is wrong, although you are entitled to it. If you look at all the replys to this "Was the link necessary" post, you will notice a strange phenomenon, all 5 of your type posted AC, only 1 posted such under his account. I don't call that watching your mod point karma, I call that being ashamed of your view, which you should be, the sad part is you don't know why you are ashamed of your view, so you try to justify it by your ability to proclaim yourself above it.
  7. Re:Was the link necessary? by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Posted anonymously to avoid being modded as a troll ...

    I love it. You post about personal responsibility, then refuse to be held personally responsible for the comment. Classic!

  8. Re:Was the link necessary? by Retric · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even fat cells need energy. An extra 200lb's needs over 1000 calories each and every day to keep the cells alive. So if somone only eat's 1200 calories there is no way for them to get that fat. (And yes people can make it on 1200 calories they get extreamly thin but by doing so there are less cells to keep alive which help balance that out.)