RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,579
Posts: 5,403,180
Members: 24,865
Currently online: 471
Newest member: shyrim

TrekToday headlines

October-November 2014 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Cho Selfie TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

TPTB To Shatner: Shhh!
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Mystery Mini Vinyl Figure Display Box
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

The Red Shirt Diaries Episode Five
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

Shatner In Trek 3? Well Maybe
By: T'Bonz on Sep 28

Retro Review: Shadows and Symbols
By: Michelle on Sep 27

Meyer: Revitalizing Star Trek
By: T'Bonz on Sep 26

Trek Costumes To Be Auctioned
By: T'Bonz on Sep 25

Hulu Snaps up Abrams-Produced Drama
By: T'Bonz on Sep 25


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.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 26 2012, 04:48 PM   #16
J.T.B.
Commodore
 
J.T.B.'s Avatar
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

Grant wrote: View Post
Duncan MacLeod wrote: View Post
Alternately you could leave Kirk as an admiral commanding a squadron, with his old bridge crew as the commanders of the ships making up the squadron.
A squadron implies they are a straight up miltiary force and not exploritory vessels anymore.
Regardless of what it implies, it was established in "The Ultimate Computer".

That's just not Trek. A bunch of ships together in force wouldn't help dramatic storytelling.
TNG and DS9 did it fairly dramatically.

Justin
J.T.B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 01:23 AM   #17
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

sbk1234 wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
Enterprise was turned over to Will Decker
I like that, too. I agree that it seems a bit contrived that the core group stayed together all those years in the same jobs
Not everyone would have needed to be aboard the ship the whole time, Chapel left to become a MD, and then came back. There is conjecture that Chekov left to attend a security school, then returned.

Rand disappeared during TOS itself, returning as a transporter tech, wasn't aboard the ship during TWoK, later she was aboard the Excelsior. Uhura could have been posted to another ship for years. Scotty was there for the year and a half rebuild, but the in-between time?

Both Spock and McCoy left Starfleet altogether. Spock return because of V'ger (and would have joined Decker's crew for the mission). McCoy was pulled back in by Kirk.

I think that originally Sulu was Decker's first officer, either that or Kirk sent that individual into the bowels of the ship, or left them on Earth. Either way someone there got screwed.

How many really stayed with the ship after TMP?


Kirk was off the ship again , and maybe McCoy with him. He (and McCoy?) were aboard for the inspection cruise.

Chekov left again at some point to become the first officer of the Reliant, he wasn't officially reassigned to the Enteprise until the end of TVH.

Sulu, from his own comments, wasn't a part of the Enterprise's regular company during TWoK, he was there temporarily. He rejoined the ship at the end of TVH, and for TFF. He then became Captain of the Excelsior.

Transporter Chief Kyle never returned to the Enterprise after TOS. We saw him briefly (iirc) aboard the Reliant, hopefully he wasn't killed.

Chapel left the ship (after TWoK?) to be next seen working at Starfleet HQ.

So, the core group doesn't seem to have been continuously assigned to the ship.


Last edited by T'Girl; October 27 2012 at 01:36 AM.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 01:53 AM   #18
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

T'Girl wrote: View Post
My personal preference is that after fairly brief refit, command of the Enterprise was turned over to Will Decker and he took her out again. Years and many missions later, Decker brought the Enterprise back to Earth (by this time Kirk is already CoSO) and the rebuild process began.
Except Scotty believed that Decker was untried, which wouldn't be the case if he had already commanded the ship for a lengthy period of time unless it was a very boring mission where nothing really happened.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 03:28 AM   #19
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
My personal preference is that after fairly brief refit, command of the Enterprise was turned over to Will Decker and he took her out again. Years and many missions later, Decker brought the Enterprise back to Earth (by this time Kirk is already CoSO) and the rebuild process began.
Except Scotty believed that Decker was untried, which wouldn't be the case if he had already commanded the ship for a lengthy period of time unless it was a very boring mission where nothing really happened.
This.

I think as much as seven or eight years could've passed between the series and TMP. McCoy may have retired but Kirk and Spock could've went onto other duties within Starfleet. Kirk serving as a Starbase commander and Spock and Scott doing work with Starfleet R&D on all the technological discoveries found during the Enterprise's five-year mission. That work may have lead to the Enterprise we see in TMP. Sulu likely served on another vessel as second officer, Chekov went back to school then served on smaller craft for a time and Uhura worked with Starfleet Intelligence.

The Enterprise was likely handed to another crew after the end of the series and the beginning of her refit prior to TMP. Heck, you could almost fit a second five-year mission in there.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 03:46 AM   #20
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

BillJ wrote: View Post
but Kirk and Spock could've went onto other duties within Starfleet
Spock left Starfleet at some point previous to the movie, McCoy said " ... apparently for good."

Roddenberry's novel said Spock was on Vulcan for 2.8 seasons (however long that is) and that he left basically immediately after the Enterprise returned to Earth after the five year mission. So, Spock either resigned his commission, or he went into the reserves.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 03:52 AM   #21
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

T'Girl wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
but Kirk and Spock could've went onto other duties within Starfleet
Spock left Starfleet at some point previous to the movie, McCoy said " ... apparently for good."

Roddenberry's novel said Spock was on Vulcan for 2.8 seasons (however long that is) and that he left basically immediately after the Enterprise returned to Earth after the five year mission. So, Spock either resigned his commission, or he went into the reserves.

Theoretically, Spock could've continued working with Starfleet in a civilian capacity. But we're not really stuck following the novel and nothing in the film precludes Spock continuing to work after the end of the five-year mission.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 09:25 AM   #22
JRoss
Captain
 
JRoss's Avatar
 
Location: Stain'd-by-the-Sea
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

KeepOnTrekking wrote: View Post
I never cared for the backstory of Saavik as an orphan on Hellgaard. Personally, I liked the idea of her being the daughter of Spock and the Romulan Commander from "Enterprise Incident." The way the Commander spun around in her chair when Kirk and Spock first met her is remarkably similar to how we are introduced to Saavik in STII as she spins around in the Captain's chair. Like mother, like daughter maybe in habits? Kirstie Alley said that she always practiced being like Spock and wanting to play his daughter but playing Saavik was the next best thing. Maybe closer than she thought? I like that idea.
Ever seen Search for Spock? Think about why that is a bad idea.
__________________
Thunderegg Productions, a new indie publisher of RPG supplements
JRoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 02:37 PM   #23
1001001
Putting the F-U Back in FUN!
 
1001001's Avatar
 
Location: People's Gaypublic of Drugafornia
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

JRoss wrote: View Post
KeepOnTrekking wrote: View Post
I never cared for the backstory of Saavik as an orphan on Hellgaard. Personally, I liked the idea of her being the daughter of Spock and the Romulan Commander from "Enterprise Incident." The way the Commander spun around in her chair when Kirk and Spock first met her is remarkably similar to how we are introduced to Saavik in STII as she spins around in the Captain's chair. Like mother, like daughter maybe in habits? Kirstie Alley said that she always practiced being like Spock and wanting to play his daughter but playing Saavik was the next best thing. Maybe closer than she thought? I like that idea.
Ever seen Search for Spock? Think about why that is a bad idea.
__________________
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.” - Isaac Asimov
1001001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27 2012, 11:42 PM   #24
KeepOnTrekking
Commodore
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

1001001 wrote: View Post
JRoss wrote: View Post
KeepOnTrekking wrote: View Post
I never cared for the backstory of Saavik as an orphan on Hellgaard. Personally, I liked the idea of her being the daughter of Spock and the Romulan Commander from "Enterprise Incident." The way the Commander spun around in her chair when Kirk and Spock first met her is remarkably similar to how we are introduced to Saavik in STII as she spins around in the Captain's chair. Like mother, like daughter maybe in habits? Kirstie Alley said that she always practiced being like Spock and wanting to play his daughter but playing Saavik was the next best thing. Maybe closer than she thought? I like that idea.
Ever seen Search for Spock? Think about why that is a bad idea.
That's why Saavik can't look Spock in the eyes at the end and looks down instead! Maybe a little Romulan shame from applying the Vulcan principle of "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one?" Saavik saved Spock's life at the cost of her own shame while doing so? (But, yes, I agree the pon farr thing is hard to explain if Spock was Saavik's father.)
KeepOnTrekking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 28 2012, 01:52 AM   #25
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

JRoss wrote: View Post
Ever seen Search for Spock? Think about why that is a bad idea.
Vulcans may have no cultural prohibition against incest, like those illogical Human do.

I like the idea that Saavik is "only" Spock protege, and that he may have been the one who gave her a recommendation for admissions to Starfleet academy.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2012, 02:03 AM   #26
TREK_GOD_1
Fleet Captain
 
TREK_GOD_1's Avatar
 
Location: Escaped from Delta Vega
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

[QUOTE=T'Girl;7137025]
KingDaniel wrote: View Post
Problem is in canon we don't exactly know when the TOS five year mission took place, which years. That part is loose conjecture.

Between the time the Enterprise returned to Earth and the events of TMP, up to a decade easily could have passed.
Even if the 5-year mission ended in 2270 (by the way, in my personal continuity, TAS was the 5th year in '70), there's no writing on or off screen to explain the physical changes of the characters (actors) from "Turnabout Intruder" to TMP. As in real life, we witnessed the actors grow older throughout the 1970s, on par with the near decade of time between TV and film production, so the only rational explanation cannot have less than six, maybe seven years of time passing to sell the characters' physical appearance.

Still I think canon must be forced into accepting a ten year gap between TV and TMP, as Kirk sets a fixed date in TWOK, when he tells Carol he had not seen Khan in fifteen years, which--considering the real life 1967 airdate of "Space Seed" to the 1982 release date of TWOK--is exactly fifteen years. There's not much phyisical difference between the actors from TMP to TWOK (aside from Doohan gaining a few extra pounds), so we have to assume TMP occured only a few years earlier---probably three.

If that's the case, then any published dates of TMP occuring a mere 2 years after TOS cannot be taken seriously.
__________________
"...to be like God, you have the power to make the world anything you want it to be."
TREK_GOD_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2012, 03:12 AM   #27
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
Still I think canon must be forced into accepting a ten year gap between TV and TMP, as Kirk sets a fixed date in TWOK, when he tells Carol he had not seen Khan in fifteen years, which--considering the real life 1967 airdate of "Space Seed" to the 1982 release date of TWOK--is exactly fifteen years. There's not much phyisical difference between the actors from TMP to TWOK (aside from Doohan gaining a few extra pounds), so we have to assume TMP occured only a few years earlier---probably three.

If that's the case, then any published dates of TMP occuring a mere 2 years after TOS cannot be taken seriously.
I think a shorter gap between TMP and TWOK makes sense. It doesn't require Kirk to be repromoted to Admiral and the Enterprise could have never returned to frontline service. Merely being a testbed vehicle for new technologies and then being demoted to training-ship status.

The theory of a longer gap between TOS and TMP has grown on me over the years. Also, if there's a seven to ten year gap between the two, it makes it easier to explain the radical changes we see in TMP.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2012, 11:10 AM   #28
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
Even if the 5-year mission ended in 2270 (by the way, in my personal continuity, TAS was the 5th year in '70), there's no writing on or off screen to explain the physical changes of the characters (actors) from "Turnabout Intruder" to TMP. As in real life, we witnessed the actors grow older throughout the 1970s, on par with the near decade of time between TV and film production, so the only rational explanation cannot have less than six, maybe seven years of time passing to sell the characters' physical appearance.
Do the actors' physical changes need explaining at all? There is no real justification for the complete change in visual aesthetic between TOS and the movies either, except to say the producers changed and updated how Star Trek looks. An Enterprise refit doesn't cover the complete change in the Klingons, for example. Or that not a single computer console, keyboard layout or screen readout in any way resembles those seen in TOS.
Still I think canon must be forced into accepting a ten year gap between TV and TMP, as Kirk sets a fixed date in TWOK, when he tells Carol he had not seen Khan in fifteen years, which--considering the real life 1967 airdate of "Space Seed" to the 1982 release date of TWOK--is exactly fifteen years. There's not much phyisical difference between the actors from TMP to TWOK (aside from Doohan gaining a few extra pounds), so we have to assume TMP occured only a few years earlier---probably three.

If that's the case, then any published dates of TMP occuring a mere 2 years after TOS cannot be taken seriously.
But in TMP, everyone's active and it ends with them warping off to new adventures (the apocraphyl second 5-year mission - after all, TMP began life as the pilot episode for Star Trek Phase II). Then, in TWOK, the crew are split and those remaining are in the twilight of their careers, training the next generation of Starfleet. They only reunite on the Enterprise for "a little training cruise"

Back in the old Best of Trek books, there were fans who believed TWOK deliberately ignored TMP, and others that felt the movies were incompatible.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2012, 01:05 PM   #29
TREK_GOD_1
Fleet Captain
 
TREK_GOD_1's Avatar
 
Location: Escaped from Delta Vega
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
Do the actors' physical changes need explaining at all? There is no real justification for the complete change in visual aesthetic between TOS and the movies either, except to say the producers changed and updated how Star Trek looks. An Enterprise refit doesn't cover the complete change in the Klingons, for example. Or that not a single computer console, keyboard layout or screen readout in any way resembles those seen in TOS.
...the very reason the only sensible explanation is a ten year gap; in that time, actor/lead characters' physical appearance and technological changes can be easily explained (for example, think of car design in 1959, then jump to 1969, or rocketry in 1947, then think of the advances in use by 1958). Major changes happened in real 20th century decades of growth, so it should not be an impossible feat at all in the fictional late 23rd century.

On top of that, audiences simply cannot forget what is seen in front of their faces, which is why fans in '78 (one year before TMP release) assumed the film was as removed from the series in the same amount of years as real life. The actor and design changes would be plausible in a stretch of ten years.

The Klingon issue is another matter--one so going against a natural explanation of evolution (and at the the time, no one thought of the retconning created decades later in "Trials and Tribble-ations") that it stands as the one issue that cannot be easily explained away. That is, if Roddenberry, et al, did not think of simply saying the species was hit with some form of radiation--even genetic experimentation were responsible for the physical changes. That would have been the easy put-away for the Klingon issue.



But in TMP, everyone's active and it ends with them warping off to new adventures (the apocraphyl second 5-year mission - after all, TMP began life as the pilot episode for Star Trek Phase II). Then, in TWOK, the crew are split and those remaining are in the twilight of their careers, training the next generation of Starfleet. They only reunite on the Enterprise for "a little training cruise"

Back in the old Best of Trek books, there were fans who believed TWOK deliberately ignored TMP, and others that felt the movies were incompatible.
That was their choice, but it was not on screen. At the end of TMP, with Kirk's "thataway" line, I feel that was more for the audience (a "we will be back, fans" tease) than any official, hammered in stone notice of Kirk and company all reassigned to the Enterprise for another 5-year mission. It is not said, and V'Ger was the only reason they were together again.

There's no official post-TMP 5 year mission, so i'm assuming the Enterprise returned to spacedock to complete its renovation, or perhaps it was destined to be what it was in TWOK: a training vessel. After all, one film later in TSFS (same period of time), the Enterprise is considered too old, and is destined for mothballs, which means both details (training ship and its age) probably means it was not used as an exploration ship post TMP.
__________________
"...to be like God, you have the power to make the world anything you want it to be."
TREK_GOD_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2012, 03:14 PM   #30
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The characters and universe post-TOS

In terms of "hard" onscreen facts, there's no particular reason to think that the entire universe underwent a significant change between TOS and TMP. All we really saw change was the Enterprise. And naturally a near-total modernization (from the technological angle) would invite the total total modernization (for sheer aesthetics, or PR purposes, whatever you call it) of insignificant details from intercom buttons to onboard cutlery - there would be no reason to leave something like that unchanged when the very point is to introduce a new thing.

For all we know, Starfleet HQ had looked like that for the past twenty years or so, and it just so happened that the hero ship in TOS was ten years behind the times, and the hero ship in TMP was built (and decorated) to be ten years ahead of them.

On the other hand, "hard" onscreen facts include Voyager 6 being more than three centuries old. That pushes TMP to 2278 at least, considering Voyagers 1 and 2 date back to 1977, and forces an eight-year gap between TOS and the movie. Unless we assume the Voyager program of Star Trek was different from the real one in some details.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.