Timeline for Worf's trial: why are there duplicate witnesses?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 22, 2021 at 20:40 | history | edited | Valorum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Jan 22, 2021 at 1:24 | vote | accept | Bento | ||
| Jan 22, 2021 at 1:28 | |||||
| Jan 21, 2021 at 22:36 | comment | added | Valorum | @LogicDictates - That being said, the script still refers to the little interplay between the Klingon lawyer and O'Brien as a flashback, even the part where they're hypothesising. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 15:26 | comment | added | Valorum | Oh sure. Once we (the audience) understand that these are flashbacks, the writers start playing with it a little. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 11:13 | comment | added | LogicDictates | When the Klingon prosecutor proposed a scenario where O'Brien was commanding the Defiant, and we saw that scenario on-screen, that clearly wasn't a flashback. It was a visualisation of what he described; a theoretical scenario that never actually happened. Even the other scenes weren't exclusively flashbacks, since they contained deviations from the original events. In that respect, the technique used in this episode is markedly different from that seen in episodes like "In the Pale Moonlight", where they used more conventional flashbacks. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 10:57 | history | edited | Valorum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 488 characters in body
|
| Jan 21, 2021 at 10:48 | history | answered | Valorum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |