RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,568
Posts: 5,514,267
Members: 25,148
Currently online: 399
Newest member: Brian R.W.

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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 Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 27 2010, 07:39 PM   #181
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Charting the Novel-verse

Thanks guys. I still don't see the nuTrek changes as any worse thanTMP, where everything looked different and everyone was out of character

There were some fans back then (before my time!) who were utterly furious at the changes made, that the Enterprise had "Klingon power units" for warp engines, that Spock turned so frosty to everyone without cause...

I remember when Enterprise started, a section of the fanbase went bananas. "Akiraprise" this, "canon" that. At least one of those people has, since the last film, decided in retrospect that Enterprise was actually "pure" Star Trek
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

Last edited by F. King Daniel; May 27 2010 at 07:58 PM.
F. King Daniel is offline  
Old May 27 2010, 08:12 PM   #182
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Double post.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline  
Old May 27 2010, 08:14 PM   #183
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

3D Master wrote: View Post
1. Do you believe Enterprise takes place in the same universe as TOS?

Nope.
And yet the new movie has references to Archer and his fondness for dogs. And Troi and Riker were in that shitty series finale; Troi and Riker being from TNG, which was in the TOS universe.

2. What about TNG? Do you think "Unification" Spock is the same guy from TOS?

Yep.
And yet in "Unification" he acts nothing like his TOS counterpart acts. Of course, we could chalk that up to his character actually evolving, but apparently it's easier to explain changed behavior away by saying the guy's from a different universe

3. Do you believe anything other than utter mindless slavish devotion to the TOS canon is allowed in any Star Trek?

Nope.
Then trying to have a meaningful discussion with someone like you is pointless. I'd rather argue with I-Am-Zim. At least he isn't entirely slavish to TOS.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline  
Old May 27 2010, 08:57 PM   #184
I-Am-Zim
Captain
 
Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
I thought of a few more questions I should have asked...

Round 2:

2.1: Do you accept TOS or TOS-R as the one/canon/true depiction of the five year mission of Kirk and co?
Wooo. That's a toughie. Literally speaking, TOS should be considered the "true" canon. However, I rather like TOS-R and I, personally rather consider it "my" new TOS canon. It's not that different from the original. The Enterprise looks the same, only more realistic looking. The BoP's and Battle Cruisers look the same. I have no problem accepting TOS-R as "my" canon, and TOS as the true canon.

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
2.2: If the TOS-R Enterprise were given visible hull plates, phaser banks, thrusters, weathering and a glowing deflector like the Kelvin, would you accept it?
Visible hull plating? Sure. As long as it was symetrical, clean looking, and understated. The Kelvin's hull plating was random, crappy looking, and looked "patched" together. Phaser banks? Sure. As long as they looked like the ones on Deg3d's and Vektor's versions. Thrusters? Sure. Again if they are similar in appearance to Deg's and Vektor's. Glowing deflector? HELL FRAKKIN NO!!! Now, Deg's original TOS.5 Enterprise had a soft blue glow behind the deflector and that was pretty cool. But absolutely no glowing deflector on the lovely TOS Enterprise.

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
2.3: Which is more important: The visual continuity of Star Trek (i.e. spaceships and control panels) or the character continuity (how the characters act)?
I can't answer that. There's no way to choose. I love the look of TOS. It's futuristic, colorful, simple, understated, and elegant in it's conservativeness. The interaction between the characters and the visuals is what made TOS so fun to watch. I can't choose which I prefer. I love both the characters and the look. I guess that's one reason I despise the look of AbramsTrek so much.

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
2.4: Do you consider any non-canon Trek materials (novels, comics, games etc) to be of any worth?
Well, personally, I've only read a couple of Trek novels and a few comics from the late 1970's. I have tons of reference materials, technical manuals, schematics, blueprints, etc. And I'm not into video games. Never have been. So for me, they have very little value. And I don't consider them canon. Neither does Paramount. But that's another issue. Others, OTOH, may put more stock in such materials than I do. And that's their prerogative.
I-Am-Zim is offline  
Old May 27 2010, 09:08 PM   #185
I-Am-Zim
Captain
 
Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
Then trying to have a meaningful discussion with someone like you is pointless. I'd rather argue with I-Am-Zim. At least he isn't entirely slavish to TOS.
Thanks....I think.
I-Am-Zim is offline  
Old May 27 2010, 09:19 PM   #186
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

I see I'll have to have second thoughts and edit my posts quicker from now on

I didn't want to turn the thread into some sort of interrogation

I think this all comes down to the glowing deflector. I could buy that the TOS deflector "really" glowed all along, and that the TOS Enterprise had ball-turret phaser banks and that these things just weren't quite visible in the old grainy original TOS.

Assuming the TOS Enterprise "existed" exactly as we saw it in TOS and TOS-R I have this theory:
The NX-01 has more in common with the TMP Enterprise than the TOS one. The Kelvin has TOS and ENT/TMP design features. You know what this suggests to me? That if anything, it was the Connies that were deviant ship design - a weird experiment in minimalization hiding phaser banks, thrusters, photon tubes and smoothing everything out that didn't catch on, and was abandoned for whatever reason during the 2270 refit. Inside and out the rest of the entire Trek fleet fits together better without TOS's aesthetics.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 12:03 AM   #187
3D Master
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
3D Master wrote: View Post
1. Do you believe Enterprise takes place in the same universe as TOS?

Nope.
And yet the new movie has references to Archer and his fondness for dogs. And Troi and Riker were in that shitty series finale; Troi and Riker being from TNG, which was in the TOS universe.
Which of course, matters nothing. Hell, TNG characters in the ENT finale only made the shows worse and more idiotic than it already was.

2. What about TNG? Do you think "Unification" Spock is the same guy from TOS?

Yep.
And yet in "Unification" he acts nothing like his TOS counterpart acts.
Except that he didn't, but hey.

Of course, we could chalk that up to his character actually evolving, but apparently it's easier to explain changed behavior away by saying the guy's from a different universe
Oh, and here I thought these questions were about trying to understand different the viewpoints. I guess, you don't care about such things. But here we see you not caring one wit about understanding the viewpoint.

If you had cared and paid attention, you would notice that nowhere was any behavior given as a reason why it's a different universe. Complete gaps in knowledge he should have, that is given as just one reason amongst many with Old Spock did not come from the Prime universe.

3. Do you believe anything other than utter mindless slavish devotion to the TOS canon is allowed in any Star Trek?

Nope.
Then trying to have a meaningful discussion with someone like you is pointless. I'd rather argue with I-Am-Zim. At least he isn't entirely slavish to TOS.
In case you hadn't noticed, the answer 'no' equals not being slavish to TOS. If I was slavish to TOS, TNG wouldn't be considered by me to be in the same universe as TOS.
3D Master is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 12:28 AM   #188
3D Master
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
I see I'll have to have second thoughts and edit my posts quicker from now on

I didn't want to turn the thread into some sort of interrogation

I think this all comes down to the glowing deflector. I could buy that the TOS deflector "really" glowed all along, and that the TOS Enterprise had ball-turret phaser banks and that these things just weren't quite visible in the old grainy original TOS.

Assuming the TOS Enterprise "existed" exactly as we saw it in TOS and TOS-R I have this theory:
The NX-01 has more in common with the TMP Enterprise than the TOS one. The Kelvin has TOS and ENT/TMP design features. You know what this suggests to me? That if anything, it was the Connies that were deviant ship design - a weird experiment in minimalization hiding phaser banks, thrusters, photon tubes and smoothing everything out that didn't catch on, and was abandoned for whatever reason during the 2270 refit. Inside and out the rest of the entire Trek fleet fits together better without TOS's aesthetics.
Except for that annoying problem, that in the TOS Enterprise's nacelle caps are not bussard collectors. They are the warp coils, or the space-time sink as they were called in the designs. The energy production, the anti-matter annihilation (and storage) occurred in the nacelles. Then, with TMP we see a huge leap technologically forward, where instead of there being one forward warp coil and one backward warp coil (the white cap at the end) the entire nacelle gets filled serially linked warp coils and a central warp core.

And guess what? You can see this as the TMP Enterprise, and the Excelsior, the Miranda, all TOS movie ships, have no more nacelle caps, either forward or backward.

Then the Ambassador-class era ships gain nacelle caps again, but these are Bussard collectors, something completely different than the warp coil nacelle caps of the TOS Enterprise. There are three pieces of evidence to support this:

1. The bussard collectors lack the characteristic twirling motion of the warp coil nacelle caps.

2. The ships with Bussard collectors still do not have the white backward nacelle cap.

3. Like Movie ships, the later ships keep the blue strip of energy ready to perform its function along the entire length of the nacelle; which the TOS-Enterprise did not have.

Thus, you see a clear design, and technology lineage; warp coil nacelle caps, serial warp coils and no nacelle caps; thus NO Bussard collectors, to serial warp coils and Bussard collectors.

Until Enterprise mucked it up.

Now, there's a problem with saying the TOS-R caps are just Bussard collectors; why did they remove them apparently no longer needed for the movie-era ships, and then as the ships grew even more advanced, suddenly need the Bussard collectors back? This, is not a clear design lineage.
3D Master is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 02:45 AM   #189
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

3D Master wrote: View Post
Which of course, matters nothing. Hell, TNG characters in the ENT finale only made the shows worse and more idiotic than it already was.
Well, what you really mean is that it matters nothing to you. It matters to Paramount, CBS, and all the fans of ENTERPRISE, which apparently you aren't (but don't think I'm pinging on you, because I hate that show too. I however, accept it as part of the canon ST universe because, well, like it or not, it is.)

Except that he didn't, but hey.
Tell that to Picard. He seemed to think that Spock's "cowboy diplomacy" was completely out of character for the man.

Oh, and here I thought these questions were about trying to understand different the viewpoints. I guess, you don't care about such things. But here we see you not caring one wit about understanding the viewpoint.
Oh, I care. I wouldn't be posting here if I didn't. I just haven't heard any rational explanation as to why a very few amount of people think Spock Prime is not the same guy from TOS. I've heard everyone's arguments, and have yet to be convinced. Don't take that for uncaring.

If you had cared and paid attention, you would notice that nowhere was any behavior given as a reason why it's a different universe. Complete gaps in knowledge he should have, that is given as just one reason amongst many with Old Spock did not come from the Prime universe.
And again, other people have pointed out completely plausible reasons for things like Spock's apparent gap in knowledge.

In case you hadn't noticed, the answer 'no' equals not being slavish to TOS. If I was slavish to TOS, TNG wouldn't be considered by me to be in the same universe as TOS.
I might have sounded a bit harsh to you on this point. For that I apologize.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 03:02 AM   #190
Devon
Fleet Captain
 
Devon's Avatar
 
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

3D Master wrote: View Post
Wrong. The only place it doesn't exist, is in people who refuse to apply any sense of logic.
You're slipping. So why does the mining ship have to look like a bird of prey?

Yes, really.
Still slipping.

It has to look like it comes from the same species, the same culture, at least. Thus similar construction and design philosophies must exist. Then there's the fact that as a totalitarian government, the likelihood of private mining ships are extremely small, which would have given you the only chance at least somewhat different a design and even than it would be extremely small. The Shadow Battle-crab: no.
You're still speculating.

Mining vessel is irrelevant.
So it's supposed to be a "Mining Bird of Prey?" Yes.... keep trucking 3d.

Not really, he looks a whole lot younger.
Not to Spock.

According to simple reasoning. The date was 2233, and according to the movie that is the Prime Universe until Nero's arrival split it up. Therefor in 2233, and given a potential age, it should look like 2230s Prime Universe.
How do you know what they look like?
Devon is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 07:49 AM   #191
3D Master
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
3D Master wrote: View Post
Which of course, matters nothing. Hell, TNG characters in the ENT finale only made the shows worse and more idiotic than it already was.
Well, what you really mean is that it matters nothing to you. It matters to Paramount, CBS, and all the fans of ENTERPRISE, which apparently you aren't (but don't think I'm pinging on you, because I hate that show too. I however, accept it as part of the canon ST universe because, well, like it or not, it is.)
Yeah, I've heard those fans of Enterprise. They spent there time cussing out the finale and who created even harder than I have.

Except that he didn't, but hey.
Tell that to Picard. He seemed to think that Spock's "cowboy diplomacy" was completely out of character for the man.
Right. So a claim of change from a
TNG-character about one method that Spock used, is used to justify the claim of completely different behavior in TOS and the movies.

You do understand this does not compute, right?

If you had cared and paid attention, you would notice that nowhere was any behavior given as a reason why it's a different universe. Complete gaps in knowledge he should have, that is given as just one reason amongst many why Old Spock did not come from the Prime universe.
And again, other people have pointed out completely plausible reasons for things like Spock's apparent gap in knowledge.
They are not plausible reasons. Unless you're blind, you notice a staggering 9 year difference in age; and once he did know the difference he wouldn't be saying Kirk needs to command the Enterprise to set the time right.
3D Master is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 09:45 AM   #192
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

A lunatic in a giant invincible supership has just destroyed a founding member of the Federation. Spock would want Kirk, who he knows is the best captain ever in charge. Who else is proven (albeit in an obsolete alternate timeline) against impossible odds like Kirk? No one.

"Go back below decks, Lt. Kirk" would probably resulted in the destruction of earth and the entire Federation.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 10:14 AM   #193
3D Master
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
A lunatic in a giant invincible supership has just destroyed a founding member of the Federation. Spock would want Kirk, who he knows is the best captain ever in charge. Who else is proven (albeit in an obsolete alternate timeline) against impossible odds like Kirk? No one.

"Go back below decks, Lt. Kirk" would probably resulted in the destruction of earth and the entire Federation.
Sorry, no. James T Kirk, the guy who had a father and mother, that attended the academy as a model student and worked hard, that lived through events on the Faragut and the cloud creature, to finally become the captain of the Enterprise 8-9 years later, after he captained a different ship first, HE is the guy Spock knows that is one of the greatest captains he's served. This unknown copy, fresh out of the academy, that has none these experiences, he knows nothing about.

And no, it wouldn't mean at all it lead to destruction of Earth and the Federation; there's no reason to think so. There are other great captains in the fleet, and indeed during the subsequent events, Kirk barely did anything. The people around him did stuff, and even then, he only "succeeded" because Nero and his crew are complete idiots and buffoons who don't understand that shields block weapons fire and transporters so don't raise them in a fight and more such idiocies.
3D Master is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 10:35 AM   #194
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

We don't know what alternate Kirk did at the Academy in his three years there. We do know he's a genius (they said it twice).

And for the last time it's not 8-9 years! The TOS we saw started in 2264. That's six years after STXI's 2258. Plus travel time to the edge of the galaxy? Who says TOS was Kirk's first Enterprise five-year mission?

And please provide a quote if you can that backs up your assertation that Kirk Prime was captain of anything anywhere before the Enterprise. The writer's guides and Making of Star Trek don't count.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline  
Old May 28 2010, 11:34 AM   #195
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

3D Master wrote: View Post
KingDaniel wrote: View Post
I see I'll have to have second thoughts and edit my posts quicker from now on

I didn't want to turn the thread into some sort of interrogation

I think this all comes down to the glowing deflector. I could buy that the TOS deflector "really" glowed all along, and that the TOS Enterprise had ball-turret phaser banks and that these things just weren't quite visible in the old grainy original TOS.

Assuming the TOS Enterprise "existed" exactly as we saw it in TOS and TOS-R I have this theory:
The NX-01 has more in common with the TMP Enterprise than the TOS one. The Kelvin has TOS and ENT/TMP design features. You know what this suggests to me? That if anything, it was the Connies that were deviant ship design - a weird experiment in minimalization hiding phaser banks, thrusters, photon tubes and smoothing everything out that didn't catch on, and was abandoned for whatever reason during the 2270 refit. Inside and out the rest of the entire Trek fleet fits together better without TOS's aesthetics.
Except for that annoying problem, that in the TOS Enterprise's nacelle caps are not bussard collectors. They are the warp coils, or the space-time sink as they were called in the designs. The energy production, the anti-matter annihilation (and storage) occurred in the nacelles. Then, with TMP we see a huge leap technologically forward, where instead of there being one forward warp coil and one backward warp coil (the white cap at the end) the entire nacelle gets filled serially linked warp coils and a central warp core.

And guess what? You can see this as the TMP Enterprise, and the Excelsior, the Miranda, all TOS movie ships, have no more nacelle caps, either forward or backward.

Then the Ambassador-class era ships gain nacelle caps again, but these are Bussard collectors, something completely different than the warp coil nacelle caps of the TOS Enterprise. There are three pieces of evidence to support this:

1. The bussard collectors lack the characteristic twirling motion of the warp coil nacelle caps.

2. The ships with Bussard collectors still do not have the white backward nacelle cap.

3. Like Movie ships, the later ships keep the blue strip of energy ready to perform its function along the entire length of the nacelle; which the TOS-Enterprise did not have.

Thus, you see a clear design, and technology lineage; warp coil nacelle caps, serial warp coils and no nacelle caps; thus NO Bussard collectors, to serial warp coils and Bussard collectors.

Until Enterprise mucked it up.

Now, there's a problem with saying the TOS-R caps are just Bussard collectors; why did they remove them apparently no longer needed for the movie-era ships, and then as the ships grew even more advanced, suddenly need the Bussard collectors back? This, is not a clear design lineage.
Please tell me you’re joking about nacelle caps being in any way important

You do know that all those technical manuals aren’t canon, right?

About the Nerada not looking like a traditional Romulan ship:
Comparing a warbird and a mining ship would be like comparing a sports car and a combine harvester. Built for different tasks, they (shock!) look different.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:42 AM.

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