That depends. If you mean to hang out, then sure! If you mean so that you can help yourself, then no! It's mine! My preciouses!

I have to admit that (a) those photos are a few years old, thus the collection has grown a bit since, and (b) even then, I left a few photos out, as I didn't wish to take up too much room in these comments! (I suppose if you want to see all of the photos, you can look here: http://yotsuyasreviews.weebly.com/classics-g2…

Oh, is the remastered version on Netflix? I agree it sucks balls compared to the original version... but not having seen it in years, I may be curious to take another look... (Morbid curiosity, shall we say.)

Yes, season two had a few minor issues... But none that killed watching the show for me, and CBS nicely responded to it by not using that effects house for future seasons, and making sure that they reviewed any outsourced work on future seasons before approving it.

I know what you mean! I suppose it is part of having a collector's mentality. This:

Yes, but Star Trek was done right. First off, it is still presented in 4:3. Second, there are new-fangled CGI effects, but they are not nearly as revisionist as what Lucas did to the original Star Wars trilogy. And finally and most importantly, the new-fangled CGI effects are entirely optional. The Blu-rays contain…

Things should always be presented in their original aspect ratio! Back when I had a 4:3 TV, I still preferred to watch widescreen films with the black bars on the top and bottom. And now that I have a widescreen TV, please let me have things that were shot 4:3 with black bars to either side! Thanks a bunch!

Sorry if I am spoiling anything for you, and I shall try to be vague just in case, but given the state that SHIELD is in at the moment, I have a hard time seeing how Peter Parker could be a "science boffin" for them. Also, given that SHIELD pretty much is just Coulson and his people right now, tying Spider Man to them…

Well, to be fair, that screen cap is hardly a typical circumstance, and was not the fault of the turbolift itself.

Oh, I agree it'll probably never happen. Probably more of a chance of Frakes. Both are pretty slim chances, though, and as long as we're throwing out wild wishes, why not hope for Meyer?

I know Jonathan Frakes is the popular fan choice, and if Paramount surprised everyone and announced his hiring tomorrow, I will happily get behind it! That being said, I'd still love to see Nicholas Meyer (Star Treks II & VI, Time After Time, and the writer of The Seven Per-Cent Soloution) given a shot.

"The other fella was Connery. It was a tongue in cheek joke for the audience."

I will admit, that does have me a bit worried, too. Yes, I too haven't read the books. (I tried once, couldn't get into them.) So I don't know if maybe Vesper's story played out differently in the book? And in the films, a post-Vesper, more hardened Bond may be difficult to believe as a man who can fall in love and…

Lord, no. The "It's just a code name!" theories piss me off, and if they ever make that official, I will never watch another Bond film. If you want "James Bond" as a code name, go watch the 60's Casino Royale. Such nonsense only belongs in camp films such as that.

I feel much the same. I was dubious towards Casino Royale before it came out. I'd loved the Bond movies all my life, I didn't want to throw all of that continuity away and start fresh! Darn it, what were they doing to my Bond?

Or that detail was just washed out with the intense lighting.

Okay, this shot is just damn freaky:

As far as Jenna Coleman saying, "This is news to me," that means nothing. One could take it at face value, and perhaps it is the truth. But if they were going to reveal that in the episode, she'd hardly blurt it out in an interview beforehand!

That is partly why I said, "It by no means has to be a direct remake, indeed it could have a whole new name and a whole new plot for all I care." But the basic concept of Bond's marriage to Tracy and her very subsequent death which Blofeld is responsible for is an important bit of the character's history that, with…

Oh, bloody hell, I'd almost managed to forget about the Klingons. Was it really necessary to so drastically alter their make-up designs? They looked awful! And also, if they are still holding onto the ridiculous "altered timeline" premise it just makes no sense... Why would an altered timeline change how an entire…