Why is one crazy for not interpreting the material the way others do? I've asked this question before, and no one answered. I'm someone that considers TMP, TNG and Enterprise all soft reboots of the franchise.
Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed
- Thread starter captainkirk
- Start date
Why is one crazy for not interpreting the material the way others do? I've asked this question before, and no one answered. I'm someone that considers TMP, TNG and Enterprise all soft reboots of the franchise.
You're inventing new terms.
It's either a reimagining, or a story set in a parallel timeline, that diverged from the prime time line at some point, which they will explain later.
Vulcan life spans.
(I don't go into this forum much. Sorry if this has been brought up.)
Sure, Discovery may be 10 years before Kirk, but... What if Burnham's memories of the Shenzu are from 10 years after Archer?
It's either a reimagining, or a story set in a parallel timeline, that diverged from the prime time line at some point, which they will explain later.
Vulcan life spans.
(I don't go into this forum much. Sorry if this has been brought up.)
Sure, Discovery may be 10 years before Kirk, but... What if Burnham's memories of the Shenzu are from 10 years after Archer?
Oh boy! You missed the great franchise wars of 2001. Lucky you!
As you can see by uniderth's comment[...]
We haven't had Star Trek on TV since 2001. And we haven't had a Star Trek movie since 2002.
NuBSG was 2004.
I know that we are old as dirt, but 13 years ago is hardly a few heart beats... Or is the word older than that?
Oh.
Miriam Webster dates the word's origin st 1825.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reimagine
Well.
I'm put in my place.
Galactica destroyed the Natonalists and Eastern Alliance's atomic arsenals in Experiments in Terra, so what happened 3 months later when the Cylons turned up?
The difference is this is a show set way to close to "TOS." I tell you that those big time gaps between "TOS" to "TNG" and "Enterprise"to "TOS" make a hge difference.
Imagine what fans would have thought if "TNG" had been set 10 years after "TOS."
What this show is doing is kind of similar to what "Baywatch Nights " did when it went from a detective story to a cheesy sci-fi show or "War of the Worlds" went from a contemporary show to a post apocoloptic world in it's second season. To much change in to short of a time to believe.
I think you need at least a 20 year gap between any old show if you want to change things on this level. That way alterations can be accepted as things that changed through the passage of time.
I think the look would easily look like something 20 years after "Enterprise" or 20 years after "Voyager." It's still close enough to look like old Trek might have evolved into this but advanced enough to feel modern to a contemporary audience.
Jason
I agree with TMP and TNG but not Enterprise. Enterprise still felt like Berman Trek to me. I do agree this show should be seen as a reboot. I think the level of how soft or hard it is depends how how they use canon and how many old characters are recasted.
Jason
On a BSG board many moons ago I mentioned how absurd, unrealistic and silly it was that Galactica would really leave Terra for the real "Earth". Why wouldn't this other Earth be just fine to settle on, and we'll look for the other one later. But on the issue of how improvident it was to leave them to the mercy of any random Cylons who pass by and try to exterminate Terra, I was informed that the Pegasus arrives in the nick of time to save the day and agrees to stay with the Terrans indefinitely to upgrade their tech and protect them.
Well did Starbuck and Apollo leave those two busted up Vipers on Paradene?
It wouldn't take too long to reverse engineer those ships, but why would Galactica leave those fighters behind?
It wouldn't take too long to reverse engineer those ships, but why would Galactica leave those fighters behind?
It's funny how Kelvin universe is suddenly became an acceptable alternative (sort of) with DSC. Ah, the good old days when Abrams received death threats and having no Star Trek films was preferable to him continuing on.Oh boy! You missed the great franchise wars of 2001. Lucky you!
As you can see by uniderth's comment the remnants of those days still lurk in the darker corners around here. As are those of the big TOS/TNG-divide before that, although they are slowly dying out. Ignore that. In 7 years everyone will complain how the next series betrays the original vision and cannot be considered true Trek, and the old guard will clamor back for the good old days of Discovery, where the creators truly respected fandom, instead of trampling on everything that has been done before
Star Trek Beyond happened. It proved that a good Trek movie could be made in the Kelvin universe.
Not much - hell a lot of the TNG set interiors WERE reused elements and props originally seen in the TOS era feature films. Hell, a LOT id STIV:TUC was filmed on the TNG sets and you could EASILY tell that was the case.
I figured that Trek 09 showed how much fun all types of audiences could have.
Actually there have been severa- oh I see what you did there!
Oh no, don't get me wrong!
Creating fan theories and alternative interprations is one of the main hobbies of fandom! And it's super fun, I have many own pet theories about the Trek universe.
Crazy would be insisting those theorie overwrite actual canon. Because canon, however broken and unrealistic it might be, is still the unifying kit of the Trek universe. You considering something to be different from canon is perfectly fine! You telling somebody it definetely is, that would be weird.
So what?
TMP is officially set two years after TOS. EVERYTHING in that movie looks different! The sets, uniforms, starships, transporter effects, the klingons, everything. Still, nobody is insisting that one of those isn't the prime universe.
If DIS takes place 10 years before TOS, it is allowed to look at least as different from it as TMP did, which was set only 2,5 years. This has happened before. This is nothing new to the franchise.
I got to admit that 2 year difference is something that has never made much sense. The tech though IMO doesn't really look super advanced to me beyond what we see on "TOS." Maybe that has to do with early 80's tech looking old and obsolete as well. The one added bonus though is it has all the original actors aboard which also helps cover up that illogical 2 year gap.
Jason
I feel the same way. I mean, we didn't get a Star Wars movie until 2009
Similar threads
