|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#31 | |
|
Commodore
Location: London
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
The NX-01 Enterprise The NX-02 Columbia The NX-01-A Dauntless The NCC-0514 Kelvin There you go... four canon ships with a zero preceeding the registry. The USS Kelvin's registry number is 0514. It is FACT, on screen, and therefore canon. Your drawings mean nothing. Get over it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Captain
Location: Cky
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
__________________
Oh, I'm sorry! I thought this was -- Zombie Jesus? What are you doing here?! |
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Commodore
Location: LA
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
At least, that's my interpretation of this puzzling post (the first time I read it I had no idea what it was about), but I'm sure the OP will correct me if I'm wrong here.
__________________
Now all I want is to warn earth: watch Farscape... and share the wonders I've seen. It's Tolkien, not Tolkein. |
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
Canon is what is onscreen. The Kelvin with a 0 (ZERO) in the registry will be onscreen in May and therefore it is canon. Now get over it . /thread
__________________
www.youtube.com/user/SalvorSeldon Last edited by SalvorHardin; December 29 2008 at 02:53 PM. |
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Lieutenant
Location: England, just next to the post office.
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
Cannon ship with an Andorian captain: The Warshp Kumari! Oh yeah and all the other Andorians ship seen in Enterprise. Well over 4 pal! And there is no NCC - 0 registry in TOS is there? Simplified: Three timelines: 1. Star Trek Chronology Book,and TOS. 2. Prime First Contact/ TCW/Enterprise Alternate Timeline. The one we saw in Enterprise, that simply wet into TOS. 3. Second First Contact/TCW/ Enterprise Alternate Timeline. Enterprise to Star Trek XI. |
|
|
|
|
#37 | |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
__________________
www.blaxxer.de |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
For that matter, the only major starship class we see in TOS is the Constitution class, but does that automatically mean there were no other major classes back then? I think not. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
__________________
www.blaxxer.de |
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Lieutenant
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
I really believe that people who absolutely refuse to accept this movie as established Trek canon (and I'm sorry to say that I know a few of them) should just call a "Highlander 2" on it; in other words, pretend it doesn't exist. Go see it at least (to show your support for the franchise), but when you walk out, just laugh to yourself in amusement, say" Oh, J.J., you fiend! Nice try, but no sale", and be on your way. |
|
|
|
|
#41 | |
|
Commodore
Location: London
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
You asked for four canon ships with a zero preceeding the registry, I gave you 4. Are you ignoring that reply because it doesn't fit in with your argument? |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
![]() ![]() There are a few things I'd do a bit differently with the secondary hull, like shifting those markings on the lower surface to the upper, but otherwise, I could definitely live with this. In fact, I may just kitbash this sucker one of these days.
|
|
|
|
|
#43 | |
|
Lieutenant
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
The wallpapers of the Kelvin posted by Tobias Richter of The Light Works, while still considered just "fan art", are closer to canonical since they more directly reflect the design we'll see in the movie. And, like I said in my last post, I think we've come to the point where people waving the canon flag are just saying "Star Trek is *this*" while another person waving the same flag is saying "No, Star Trek is *that*". It doesn't matter what Mr.'s Abrams, Orci, Nimoy, or anyone else says; fans are going to believe what they want to believe. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
|
|
|
|
|
#45 | |
|
Lieutenant
|
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin
I've always had an issue with the concept of canon. I've read things in the books and the RPG material that make me think, "Man, that's pretty cool stuff. I wish this was considered canon!" But the limitations set by...hmm...actually, come to think of it, I don't remember who set those limits. Can anyone refresh my memory on that? I'm sure it wasn't just us fans; it had to be someone in a position of authority related to Star Trek that decided what is "real" Trek and what isn't. Sometimes I wish Trek "canon" could be done the way Star Wars handles theirs. Their books are officially endorsed by Lucasfilm, making whatever is written in them "official" canon. Sorry; I know I'm off-topic, but since we're talking about "canonizing" the Kelvin, the debate kinda goes hand-in-hand. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| fasa, kelvin, romuan war |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:06 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.



















