Pitfalls the new series should avoid
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
And by that I clearly meant writing anything without it having to be fact checked against 50 years of garbage first. Creative freedom, "do what they want" starts to become a problem when a lot of angry nerds argue about things that ultimately don't matter, in the name of "canon".
Eh, I wouldn't hold them to the minutiae of 50 years. I'd forgive all changes to Star Trek's future history about WWIII and the Clone Wars, er, I mean the Eugenics Wars, for example, to align it with our history so "Prime" can still mean "in our universe." Retcon the heck out of those babies.
I'm curious to see how quickly those who are are adamant about leaving Prime behind fall in and praise the show if: 1) It really is set in Prime, and 2) It really is a good show and all this grief is forgotten. Or vice versa, of course.
Taken to its logical conclusion, ultimately, eventually nothing matters. Saying things like "It's just a game" (or TV show) and calling them "angry nerds" really antagonizes people, and it's not a very constructive thing to say. They'll just say the same things back. People care about it. So, it appears, do you.
I'm curious to see how quickly those who are are adamant about leaving Prime behind fall in and praise the show if: 1) It really is set in Prime, and 2) It really is a good show and all this grief is forgotten. Or vice versa, of course.
Taken to its logical conclusion, ultimately, eventually nothing matters. Saying things like "It's just a game" (or TV show) and calling them "angry nerds" really antagonizes people, and it's not a very constructive thing to say. They'll just say the same things back. People care about it. So, it appears, do you.
Last edited:
The only show that was a slave to canon was Enterprise and only in its 4th season when all else had failed. Canon has never restricted Star Trek from doing anything. TNG barely referenced TOS throughout its run and was a huge success and Voyager was set in another quadrant of the universe far away from "current" events so didn't need to reference them nor was it restricted by them. DS9 pulled together a lot of past canon and ended up being an epic that tied lots of the established races and politics together.
Canon is only an issue for uncreative writers. Very few people expect every little detail to be remembered and kept to. If the writers are having difficulty coming up with new stories in an established universe then they should go ahead and create a brand new series instead of living off Star Trek.
How did you find your way to this forum dedicated to 50 years of garbage?
Canon is only an issue for uncreative writers. Very few people expect every little detail to be remembered and kept to. If the writers are having difficulty coming up with new stories in an established universe then they should go ahead and create a brand new series instead of living off Star Trek.
How did you find your way to this forum dedicated to 50 years of garbage?
I think we're long past Star Trek being OUR universe. I'd rather tell interesting stories in the context of the Star Trek universe rather than trying to shoe horn our history into Star Trek history.
But that is exactly what I'm talking about, you are changing your story because of an irrelevant detail mentioned in a throwaway line in a random TNG episode that was written, filmed and aired decades ago. That really shouldn't matter anymore, at least not for a professional production, fan fiction is different, that's written for nerds, the new series won't be.
How did you find your way to this forum dedicated to 50 years of garbage?
I found the lost map, used the magic candle to light the way, slew the dragons at the gate...and forgot there was a front entrance around the other side.
Long story, but I got these nifty dragon scale shoes.
I am curious as to why? Stories can inform optimism in humanity without it necessarily being connected directly to my history.
I too would prefer Star Trek to be our future, instead of some alternative reality. That's why I'm completely OK with fudging with dates of events like Eugenics Wars (it was stated to have happened 200 years ago in late 20th century, which both can't be correct anyway. Maybe Eugenics Wars and WWIII were one and the same?)
Well, they had Khan, though I don't exactly remember what was said about his backstory.
EDIT:
Apparently it was stated that he had been frozen over 300 years, so nuKhan is from 1950!
"300 years ago" he was someone very bad, who had a lot of power, on Earth. That's it.
Which is 1958 taken literally, 2008 if 250.
Consider Robert Heinlein's book, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls, where each universe was identified by the first man to walk on the moon. Each universe was different. Ours is the Neil Armstrong universe. Where would you rather be? Here? Or somewhere else where you and your family might never have existed? If your universe needs work or you experience some tragedy, but someone else's universe is doing great and another you is fulfilled, is that really enough to satisfy you? Wouldn't you enjoy a story with a positive vision of our own future? Is it a better story when it is someone else's?
I would actually love a properly retro black and white 50's prequel with Khan being the evil scientist. Working in his laboratory of randomly spinning electrical nonsense while he gives the moustache twirling speech about taking over the world.
Only to be stopped by the hero and frozen by his own cryogenic technology, taken into custody and blasted into space.
I guess I just enjoy a story for the story, whether set in my world or another. I don't need a story for me to be optimistic about the future. I can work towards bettering myself and my family as best as I can, and impact the community around me.
That comes from within. That doesn't speak to Star Trek at all. I can understand, however, how that might allow all Trek universes to be equally enjoyable. Star Trek means more to me than entertainment.
Great. I read and enjoyed The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings too, and more. I sense a rebuttal, but I don't see one - just a non sequitur. The discussion was between universes in the Star Trek canon and how one Star Trek universe might be more or less meaningful or relevant than another to us - not the enjoyment of Trek as compared to Middle-earth or anything else. I didn't dislike Tolkien's stories just because they weren't set in the Star Trek Prime, or our, universe. That's ludicrous.
Last edited:
