RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 149,581
Posts: 5,947,501
Members: 26,485
Currently online: 296
Newest member: AussieEevee

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 December 29 2008, 06:13 PM   #46
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin

As far as the novels go, there are too many contradictory stories going on. How many different fates for the Romulan Commander from "The Enterprise Incident" have been published? Not fanfic, but officially licensed novels from either Bantam or Pocket? Or backstories for any of the characters? It was just simpler to lob off all of the novels, even Roddenberry's own TMP novelization, than to sort through the literally hundreds of novels and try to pick and choose which one fits, which one is rubbish, etc. And don't even get me started on the various comic books.

And note that Jeri Taylor's Voyager novels ceased to be canon once she left the show.

It's really a very simple rule: Only what made it onscreen counts. And for the writers, don't contradict what came before, with the proviso for the more advanced players, unless you can come up with a really compelling reason to make the previous writer a liar, or you can figure out a way around what came before so that it really isn't a contradiction. And it's really not any more demanding than any other show, so I don't see what the big problem is in sticking to the established record.

Where it gets dicey is when you start trying to toss out stuff that was actually onscreen, which is apparently what was going on when Richard Arnold was doing his master's bidding, and apparently got a little carried away. As has been discussed elsewhere, TAS was never actually decanonized, just put off limits for a while due to the legal issues of the shutdown of Filmation. Once that was resolved, the TAS references came flowing in. As for dumping the third season of TOS and every movie except TMP, I don't think anyone took that seriously, even Roddenberry.

And as far as TFF goes, I still like the notion that the whole thing was a drunken ghost story told around the campfire. It would certainly explain certain bizzare aspects of the story.
Captain Robert April is offline  
Old December 29 2008, 06:47 PM   #47
Rear Admiral
Vektor's Avatar
Location: Spokane, WA, USA
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin

Star Trek canon – The mechanism by which certain people fulfill their desperate need to separate what is “real” from what isn’t in the Star Trek universe while totally ignoring the fact that all of it is made-up.
Vektor is offline  
Old December 29 2008, 06:48 PM   #48
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin

Pegasus wrote: View Post

1. Having a 0 in front of the registry number actaully makes it UNCANNON!
Name 4 canon ships with an 0 as the first number s there registry!
Wrong. Whether something is part of the official "Star Trek" continuity - which folks insist on calling "canon" - has not a thing to do with whether it is consistent with other parts of the official continuity. The only working definition of "canon" is that a thing appears in a live-action "Star Trek" TV series or movie produced by Paramount.

What you mean is that the leading "0" makes it inconsistent with other registries. Well, a lot of things in Trek canon are inconsistent with other things in the canon. This will just be one more.

You opinions are fine, but I see it like this: as the Kelvin is one of the only half decent things in the new fim,(and is liked more then the new Enterprise) it deserves to be canonised.
What is and isn't "canon" is not a matter of my opinion or yours. Paramount is the only entity that can define it, and they define it haphazardly and for their own convenience.

Everything in the new "Star Trek" film will be part of the official Trek canon. People don't have to like that or approve of it for it to be so.

Vektor wrote: View Post
Star Trek canon – The mechanism by which certain people fulfill their desperate need to separate what is “real” from what isn’t in the Star Trek universe while totally ignoring the fact that all of it is made-up.
Star Trek canon - a point for arguments by which certain people attempt to assert authority which they don't actually possess to determine...well, to determine nothing that's really at all important.

After all, no matter how tightly someone feels they've argued in favor of or against including a factoid in whatever they consider to be the "Star Trek universe" any other person is entirely free to ignore their argument - as Samuel T. Cogley's response points out.

There are many things which are canonical parts of Paramount's official "Star Trek" productions, and all that means is that those things will be used or referred to in future by producers and writers and designers to the extent that they have a use for them and/or the extent to which the studio insists that they should be part of a production.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline  
Old December 29 2008, 07:47 PM   #49
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin

just to be clear, I added the 60s style ships to the article on TrekMovie because I thought they were interesting. However, as has been pointed out, the USS Kelvin is as 'real' as a heart attack...just ask Captain Robau (if he doesn't kill you for even asking him).

The irony is that a TOS style Kelvin is actually less canon, since the Kelvin is from a generation before TOS (it was launched, in the Prime canon universe, before Kirk was born). It sits between ENT and TOS, kind of like the Enterprise C sits between the TOS movie era and TNG. So a TOS style Kelvin could only be a successor or refit of the original (and very canon) Kelvin we will see in the Star Trek movie.

So the OP is not 'canonizing' the Kelvin, he is TOSing a Kelvin (a different ship) and 'fanonizing' a history...and that is all
PowderedToastMan is offline  
Old December 29 2008, 07:47 PM   #50
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
M'Sharak's Avatar
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Cannonising the Kelvin

Plain Simple wrote: View Post

And who is Kenneth Thomson Jr.?
Effects guy, perhaps.

Or maybe someone who posts as "Raymar3d" over on the SciFi-Meshes forum.

Maybe a "Bring Back Kirk" guy, at one time.

Or maybe someone else. Whatever the case, I still don't have a clear idea what this thread is really about, but I suspect that if the topic were cleaned up and organized more carefully, it would be a better fit in Trek Tech or Trek Art. Or Fan Fiction. Or I don't know where, but I'm going to close it because it's messy and I'm pretty sure it doesn't go here.
Always acknowledge a fault frankly. This will throw those in authority
off their guard and give you opportunity to commit more.
~ Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline  
Closed Thread


fasa, kelvin, romuan war

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 09:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.