His presence was felt.
Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed
- Thread starter captainkirk
- Start date
I was in a Star Trek fanfiction writing group, roleplaying with email, nearly 20 years ago, where half way through a campaign, I posted 8 lines I thought were interesting to veer the story into new fields, which is when this Irish fuck starts screaming in all caps "NO! NO! DISREGARD GUY GARDENER'S LAST EMAIL!!! I HAVE 15 PAGES OF PRE-WRITTEN STORY I CAN'T POST ANY MORE IF WE ACCEPT WHAT HE JUST WROTE AS CANON!"
###k him.
###k him.
I love TOS. I think Khan was played fairly silly in "Space Seed". A Mexican in black face who ended up getting taken down with a pipe, after he showed over and over just how strong he was to anyone who cared.
I tend to think "Space Seed" is now fondly remembered because of its connection to TWOK.
Why do you care or judge how others spend their time?
Says the overzealous Star Trek fan on a Star Trek message board.
You know all of you are just quite simply raping my childhood! I hope you're HAPPY!!!
Canon is probably the least interesting thing about Star Trek, yet it generates a disproportionate amount of debate and frustration in the fandom relative to its importance. imho, canon only matters when it does become fun and interesting (i.e. The Way of the Warrior) but sucks like nothing else when it becomes The Thing That Matters Most and drowns out whatever else might actually be interesting about a story.
"Space Seed" was always one of the most popular episodes of Star Trek, right back to the beginning. I imagine that was due partly to Montalban's performance, partly to the story concept which was pretty science-fictiony back in the day, and maybe a little to the fact that it filled in a bit of historical context to the era in which the show was set.
Of the two, TWOK really seems a bit dumber and more trivial.
Of the two, TWOK really seems a bit dumber and more trivial.
I think GR felt the same way.
Heh, that last part reads like a Trump tweet.
If you have no canon, it can never be used for the fun and interesting. On balance, I would rather have it and get those fun and interesting moments.
Right, I do think a set of events described as "canon" can be valuable so that a) we're all generally talking about the same thing and b) so writers can have some fun with continuity when it suits them. My whole thing though is canon should always be subordinate to story. If a tidbit of canon gets in the way of a good story, get it outta here. Too much stock in canon is a dangerously dull thing.
I'm talking about a spectrum here. Think of it like going from The Simpsons on one end where nothing matters all the way to ENT explaining Klingon foreheads for no reason on the other. I think Trek should occupy the space between those extremes. Use canon when it's fun and interesting, discard it when it obstructs interesting and fun things.
The Simpsons get it right. The character and background broadstrokes remain in place, while everything else is done for the best story possible.
Canon can be fun. But it can just as easily be a straitjacket that fans force writers to wear. The Way of the Warrior = fun and interesting. Worrying about whether DSC is Kelvin or Prime or complaining that DSC doesn't look like TOS = meaningless and dull.
The Simpsons is also an example of how continuity becomes absurdly impossible when a property runs this long.
Trek is the similar. Did we follow Kirk's career from Captain to Admiral to retiree and mentor? No we watched them find new ways to stick him back in that captain's chair complete with his rank restored up until he was a bloated old man. Then they rebooted HIM. Whey would we want that preserved?
Continuity really only matters within the production itself.
Discovery will hopefully be true to itself and use, alter or discard past Trek references as they see fit.
Similar threads
