If the show ends up being a parallel universe or something, It will destroy its re-watch value and credibility as a series. It might as well end 'and it was all just a dream' or 'it was god wot did it'. It would also separate this product for ever from all the other series; Netflix could drop it from its offering and still legitimately say that it has every trek series, Discovery won't count, just like Cushing doesn't count as doctor who.
Poll If they admitted it wasn't PRIME?
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
That's not quite true. Many people expected the show to look like TOS based on CBS's proclamation that it was set in the "prime" universe ten years before TOS. I of course was not one of them, being realistic and all.
I didn't say that DSC couldn't contribute to the lore and ideas of ST. Heck, I think it's already doing that. My point is that it can do that regardless of the pointless "prime" label.
Last edited:
Would it matter if they recast Kirk with an Australian Aborigine instead of a Canadian Jew?
I'm not sure what your point is.
At this point, there's really no reason to care. I don't particularly like what they've done with the Klingons, either in their ship designs or their look, but at the end of the day, I don't care. As I've said dozens of times before, the show is far from perfect, but at this point, I'm entertained by it. I'm certainly not by the whininess of the entitled fanbase. We, as Star Trek fans, have explained away changes and differences before. I really don't understand why this is any different.
ETA: Admittedly, I'm also annoyed by the part of the fanbase that says "This is how it is now! Forget fifty years of history!" No. There is room for both to exist. People complain about small universe syndrome? This is a way (not the only one) to get past it. By not having the Klingon D-7 be the only ship the Federation ever runs into. Or by not having the Excelsior-Class be what the Enterprise-D flies by in the majority of the TNG episodes. You have diversity. Because the same seven effects shot just aren't going to work anymore.
ETA: Admittedly, I'm also annoyed by the part of the fanbase that says "This is how it is now! Forget fifty years of history!" No. There is room for both to exist. People complain about small universe syndrome? This is a way (not the only one) to get past it. By not having the Klingon D-7 be the only ship the Federation ever runs into. Or by not having the Excelsior-Class be what the Enterprise-D flies by in the majority of the TNG episodes. You have diversity. Because the same seven effects shot just aren't going to work anymore.
Last edited:
It would be a significant change in look from TOS, no?
I think very few people had this expectation. It's flatly unreasonable.
I would assume that there would be people who would accept it, and people who wouldn't. Again, that would depend on what the word/connotation "prime" means to them.
I agree. But people had them nonetheless.
I think your avatar gave away your answer.
I agree that suspension of disbelief are the main factor. To me it was pretty easy for all the Berman era stuff because it was all done by people who started with TNG and you had a numerous crossovers. TOS is a little harder to bye but they also crossed over several times with Berman era stuff and you had a big 80 year gap to help make the differences work for me. "Discovery" for me looks completely new but it's also sharing the same time period of "TOS." If your going to do something radical different with the look or even how you change the motivations of Starfleet,Klingons it's easier to do if the new show basically owns the time period it is set in instead of having to share it with something that looks and feels completely different. This look would be much more logical to me if it was set another 20 years in the past or somewhere in the middle of TOS movies and TNG because those are blank slates when it comes to tech and overall look of those periods and the politics are mostly unknown. That is if they wanted a prequel. If they went to the future I could see it being 10 years in the future from TNG's last movies. Even today I still feel the Berman era looks futuristic for the most part and wouldn't look out of place on "Discovery" other than some slight tinkering like dumping those Klingon uniforms that have been around since TMP or having a more modern fashion sense and no more aliens that all wear matching uniforms. Also it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if Vulcans and Romulans didn't all have the same haircuts.
Jason
I'm inclined to be less literal-minded about that stuff, but then again, I also grew up on comic books and old monster movies so the idea that "canon" does not faze me. Yet I'm not convinced that not being certified 100% "Prime" would somehow invalidate a new STAR TREK series or discourage people from rewatching it.
People still watch the classic old James Bond movies, even though that series takes a rather laissez-faire approach to continuity. People still watch the old Hammer "Dracula" movies even though they're barely consistent with each other.
If the shows are fun and entertaining and compelling to watch, being labeled "Prime" or not shouldn't make any difference. And, conversely, just being "Prime" or "canon" doesn't make a Trek story more watchable, all other things being equal.
"Turnabout Intruder" and "The Alternative Factor" are 100% Prime. Doesn't mean I want to watch them anytime soon.
People still watch the classic old James Bond movies, even though that series takes a rather laissez-faire approach to continuity. People still watch the old Hammer "Dracula" movies even though they're barely consistent with each other.
If the shows are fun and entertaining and compelling to watch, being labeled "Prime" or not shouldn't make any difference. And, conversely, just being "Prime" or "canon" doesn't make a Trek story more watchable, all other things being equal.
"Turnabout Intruder" and "The Alternative Factor" are 100% Prime. Doesn't mean I want to watch them anytime soon.
Last edited:
If done well, not really.
Going back to my Superman example, what happened when on the newest Supergirl show they cast the character of Jimmy Olsen, previously a nerdy white guy with red hair, as a suave black guy?
Aside from a tiny amount of complaining from a few angry bigots, not much. People watched, and continue to watch the show.
While I've watched with amusement some from the identity-politics crowd obsess with which races / genders / sexual orientation the new characters are, for most viewers such things really don't matter that much.
Kirk's ethnicity doesn't really matter in pretty much all of the episodes that he is in.
But Discovery isn't a "little artistic license" it represents a complete revamp of what we know about TOS.
But none of them work under the illusion that Supergirl (which I like), is somehow in the same continuity as the Superman films or the 1950's Superman TV show, or any of the comics. It is its own version of the universe, not a continuation.
TLDR
King Daniel Paid CBS Plant's poll left off the voting option of "would make more sense."
Come right out and say that except for a collection of touch points and re-use of names that it's a new "universe" unattached creatively to anything that came before.
https://www.trekbbs.com/members/king-daniel-paid-cbs-plant.14037/
King Daniel Paid CBS Plant's poll left off the voting option of "would make more sense."
Come right out and say that except for a collection of touch points and re-use of names that it's a new "universe" unattached creatively to anything that came before.
https://www.trekbbs.com/members/king-daniel-paid-cbs-plant.14037/
Well, of course DC has its' "multiverse" explanation for differing continuities, so of course fans have that to fall back on.
But even with that, as I stated with the original Superman example, frequently die-hard fanbois of one sort or another will cry about a new version, crying that it isn't the "real" Superman and so on.
But the overwhelming amount of complaints that I've seen on these forums about Discovery haven't been about continuity, they've been because the show doesn't match up with the tone of what the complainer considers "real" Star Trek.
But kind of like with DC's multiverse, if a fan really hates Discovery and likes the version of some other show, they really shouldn't freak out because the likelihood is that eventually a new version they like will show up.
Back with a Supes example, many fans were very upset about Man of Steel's darker tone, including Superman killing a villain. It's a valid complaint, but guess what? Boy Scout Superman showed up again, the people who make these shows will produce what sells.
In this clip, you can see they even made the character use outdated catchphrases as a shout-out to fans that were disappointed by the last movie version of the character.
Well, I'm coming to the end of rewatch of TNG with my lass, (first time round for her, but she watched voyager and ds9 when it aired) and the household consensus is that giant space hands, brain theft, time wars, pink Klingon blood, vger probes and beagles in space are every bit a consistent back story to the Episode Gambit part 1 that we're currently watching, as bald Klingons and oversized tardigrades that rehydrate in a vacuum.
Its not a reboot, that's a hiding to nowhere. Its just star trek, series 6.
Its not a reboot, that's a hiding to nowhere. Its just star trek, series 6.
