RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,648
Posts: 5,428,401
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 531
Newest member: Damix

TrekToday headlines

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15


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 March 28 2013, 11:26 PM   #46
Mysterion
Rear Admiral
 
Mysterion's Avatar
 
Location: SB-31, Daran V
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
I wish I could agree with you, Mysterion. But unless he has had an "inner voice" transplant, Xon just doesn't ring JD to me.
You may be right. However, check out this post:

Xon wrote:
I am just too much of a "purist" to enjoy their fixing-up of TOS. The series was state-of-the-art in the special effects department back in the 60's and survived for decades without anyone's intervention. The more I've watched of these "remastered" episodes the more I dislike them because of all the liberties taken. It's like George Lucas constantly changing scenes in the classic Star Wars trilogy for no freaking good reason. I want to marvel at the original decades afterwards. Some CGI splices cause serious contradictions in our Treknical nit-picking world. Hell, some are just plain un-needed flash which contradict the episode itself. For instance, the asteroid deflector beam fired from the obelisk in "The Paradise Syndrome" was stated as being a blue or green flame by Kirk's injun lover. With the redone effects, the beam being emitted is Red! We also see many ships we had never seen before, added in just to give the starscape more activity, things like a Daedalus class vessel despite it stated on-screen in "Power Play" that these ships were decommissioned around the turn of the 23rd century. Annoying crap like that. They also give us starship NCCs that contradict the classic Franz Joseph registry listings so that the holy Encyclopedia has more merit over Fandom.
At times entire ships are redesigned in CGI: the SS Aurora in "The Way to Eden" looks nothing like it did in the original. The "Doomsday Machine" itself is larger and different in approach. Klingon ships have burning impulse engines (in the Wrong location if you go by Michael McMaster's blueprints). The classic Enterprise has burning red impulse engines, suggesting they are functioning more like they did in ST-TMP which suggests an alteration in TOS technology itself. Had they been simple fusion engines, Matt Jefferies crew would have put a lamp back there, don't ya think? The Enterprise's phasers are also now constantly blue beams as though they are permanently incapable of changing the banks settings, and the more I see of the Enterprise the more CGI-ish, or Cartoony it apears to me. Never being against CGI, I always appreciated it when others were quick to point out how "fake" it looked at times, but having a long-standing love with the old Enterprise, everytime I see this thing in CGI the more I say it looks fake. The old physical model had what the CGI model didn't have: a real Physical existence. All this remaking and replacing of the classic models with computer clicks seems a great disservice to those original creators, in my opinion.

Even the name Remastered is Misleading. Re-Plastered is closer to the mark, as It implies something new being places on something old.
Now the writing style is quite a bit more calmer than JD's stuff tended to be in the past, and the punctuation and capitalization are all of a much more normal style than he used typically. But, this reads to me like something from a Dixon who finally started using prozac. Still raging against the Okuda's of the world, but in a kinder gentler manner.
__________________
USS Galileo Galilei, NCC-8888
Prima Inter Pares
Mysterion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 12:02 AM   #47
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Yeah... maybe. I can see what you mean. The lack of ellipsis, the word choice, all seem a little off. But you might be right. It just may be that he's getting older.

Anyhow, to stay on point, when it comes to subjects like this, his presence is missed. Because canon has a function to those who depend on continuity, not the rest of us. My 1960s-70s Trek is different from somebody elses 1980s-90s Trek is different from the JJTrek of today. It's all good. And it's all different and should not be smashed together in one weird homogenous mass.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 12:43 AM   #48
Myko
Commander
 
Myko's Avatar
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

There are pages out there suggesting James Dixon commited suicide, no idea if they are true.
__________________
Myko
Myko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 01:13 AM   #49
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

I don't agree with a lot of the Okuda chronology nor did I agree with a lot in the Spaceflight Chronology. So if they ever did issue an updated chronology with a nod to JJ's Trek I'd hardly be troubled by it now.

There really is no definitive chronology since the author's themselves essentially admitted as much. In a similar vein there is no definitive Trek technical reference manual either.

And candidly I have a lot more fun with the explanations fans come up with than what the "official" experts settle on.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:13 AM   #50
EliyahuQeoni
Commodore
 
EliyahuQeoni's Avatar
 
Location: Redmond, Oregon, United States of America, North America, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way, Universe
View EliyahuQeoni's Twitter Profile
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
EliyahuQeoni has a quote from Leonard Nimoy in his sig, which sums up the difference between your mindset and his:

Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'
That reads like typical Nimoy being the eternal cheerleader. .
The way I read it, is the idea that too many fans get so wrapped up in canon and what is "real" Star Trek and what isn't that they end up not enjoying certain forms of Trek just because they're not canonical or because they contradict something else. I mean, I enjoy nitpicking and retconning as much as the next geek, but above all Trek is supposed to be entertaining.

Yes, Checkov's age in Trek '09 doesn't mesh with his age in TOS. Can it be reconciled? Yes, because his birth is after Nero's incursion. But even if it couldn't, does that one line of dialogue ruin the entire film? No.

In TOS it is said that Vulcan has no moon. In TMP it has a moon. Yes, it can be "explained" but this discrepancy doesn't change the quality of the movie.

Just my thoughts,
__________________
"Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'." - Leonard Nimoy
EliyahuQeoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:35 AM   #51
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
EliyahuQeoni has a quote from Leonard Nimoy in his sig, which sums up the difference between your mindset and his:

Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'
While filming TOS, Leonard Nimoy was notorious for defending the "integrity" of his character, fighting weekly to ensure that Spock's established traits, values, and history were never contradicted. But apparently his concern didn't extend much beyond his own part in the show.
ZapBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:42 AM   #52
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
The fact is, the voices of these people that so loved Star Trek that they could pick apart every little bit of minutiae and give it some sense of reason and order-- whether that be an Okuda or a James Dixon -- are not to be thrown away so carelessly. JJTrek has roots, and those roots extend back to stuff about which the folks that are buying tickets today often have no clue. We can believe that JJ's nebulous, action-packed blur, divorced from all Gene Roddenberry's talky bits, is what has made Trek big money. Maybe so. But there is some reason this reinvention was done with Trek and not something else like B5 or Buck Rogers. There is a heart that beats at the bottom of Trek that guys like Dixon understand and that those living off today's fat should ill ignore.
Well said! JJ is a STAR WARS fan and that's what he stamped upon STAR TREK, altering its identity and style beyond recognition. I will still go see the new one, but with heavy misgivings.
ZapBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:15 PM   #53
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

ZapBrannigan wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
EliyahuQeoni has a quote from Leonard Nimoy in his sig, which sums up the difference between your mindset and his:

Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'
While filming TOS, Leonard Nimoy was notorious for defending the "integrity" of his character, fighting weekly to ensure that Spock's established traits, values, and history were never contradicted. But apparently his concern didn't extend much beyond his own part in the show.
Yeah, even Doohan said (before TMP came out) that Nimoy was concerned with his character but Shatner was concerned with THE SHOW.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:22 PM   #54
Landru47
Ensign
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

ZapBrannigan wrote: View Post
aridas sofia wrote: View Post
The fact is, the voices of these people that so loved Star Trek that they could pick apart every little bit of minutiae and give it some sense of reason and order-- whether that be an Okuda or a James Dixon -- are not to be thrown away so carelessly. JJTrek has roots, and those roots extend back to stuff about which the folks that are buying tickets today often have no clue. We can believe that JJ's nebulous, action-packed blur, divorced from all Gene Roddenberry's talky bits, is what has made Trek big money. Maybe so. But there is some reason this reinvention was done with Trek and not something else like B5 or Buck Rogers. There is a heart that beats at the bottom of Trek that guys like Dixon understand and that those living off today's fat should ill ignore.
Well said! JJ is a STAR WARS fan and that's what he stamped upon STAR TREK, altering its identity and style beyond recognition. I will still go see the new one, but with heavy misgivings.
Don't, all you're doing by paying to see the movie is giving them your support and encouraging them to produce more. I will never spend money on Abrams-verse.
Landru47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:30 PM   #55
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

ZapBrannigan wrote: View Post
JJ is a STAR WARS fan and that's what he stamped upon STAR TREK, altering its identity and style beyond recognition.
Huh?

I haven't been around since the 60's, but I've been a fan of Trek since 1975. I love Star Trek: The Motion Picture and am lukewarm towards Star Trek 2009 but if you asked me which one was actually closer in spirit to TOS, I'd say it was the 2009 film. Hell, I've often joked the best TNG film was Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

So I have no idea where you're coming from when you say that "JJ is a STAR WARS fan and that's what he stamped upon STAR TREK, altering its identity and style beyond recognition".
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 06:09 PM   #56
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Hell, I've often joked the best TNG film was Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 30 2013, 05:06 AM   #57
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Landru47 wrote: View Post
ZapBrannigan wrote: View Post
aridas sofia wrote: View Post
The fact is, the voices of these people that so loved Star Trek that they could pick apart every little bit of minutiae and give it some sense of reason and order-- whether that be an Okuda or a James Dixon -- are not to be thrown away so carelessly. JJTrek has roots, and those roots extend back to stuff about which the folks that are buying tickets today often have no clue. We can believe that JJ's nebulous, action-packed blur, divorced from all Gene Roddenberry's talky bits, is what has made Trek big money. Maybe so. But there is some reason this reinvention was done with Trek and not something else like B5 or Buck Rogers. There is a heart that beats at the bottom of Trek that guys like Dixon understand and that those living off today's fat should ill ignore.
Well said! JJ is a STAR WARS fan and that's what he stamped upon STAR TREK, altering its identity and style beyond recognition. I will still go see the new one, but with heavy misgivings.
Don't, all you're doing by paying to see the movie is giving them your support and encouraging them to produce more. I will never spend money on Abrams-verse.
This.

And JJ has actually said he felt Trek should be more like Star Wars.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 30 2013, 01:24 PM   #58
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Warped9 wrote: View Post

And JJ has actually said he felt Trek should be more like Star Wars.
And he was right. A Trek feature film needed to be more like Star Wars in order to put butts into theater seats. But upping the action quotient doesn't make it Star Wars, it just makes it more palatable to a wider range of audiences.
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 30 2013, 04:16 PM   #59
TREK_GOD_1
Fleet Captain
 
TREK_GOD_1's Avatar
 
Location: Escaped from Delta Vega
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post

And JJ has actually said he felt Trek should be more like Star Wars.
And he was right. A Trek feature film needed to be more like Star Wars in order to put butts into theater seats. But upping the action quotient doesn't make it Star Wars, it just makes it more palatable to a wider range of audiences.
This could be read as saying you have to dumb down ST by adding the traits of the often story-challenged SW for an audience reared on style over substance.
__________________
"...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 March 30 2013, 05:12 PM   #60
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post

And JJ has actually said he felt Trek should be more like Star Wars.
And he was right. A Trek feature film needed to be more like Star Wars in order to put butts into theater seats. But upping the action quotient doesn't make it Star Wars, it just makes it more palatable to a wider range of audiences.
This could be read as saying you have to dumb down ST by adding the traits of the often story-challenged SW for an audience reared on style over substance.
Yup.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
book, chronology, dates, okuda, timeline

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 06:27 PM.

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