so the producers and writers said that discovery will lead into TOS (60's aesthetics and all)...

[Tallguy]

Shots of one of the models was reused in mirror mirror.

One of the shots (the Mirror side) was ONLY used in Mirror, Mirror.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Well, there's this (but it's a slightly older model of Discovery):

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Thanks Zar, very interesting. I'm not sure they jive together but it would be interesting to hear other peoples thoughts.

 

[marsh8472]

ive read interviews from the producers and writers saying to give discovery a chance, and ride it out, and in the end it will lead into TOS aesthetically (meaning somehow, it will look exactly like how TOS did).

 

[marsh8472]

The klingons have cloaking technology in the series but the "canon database" specifically states that Klingons do not receive this technology until 2268, over a decade away:

http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cloaking-device-klingon

Similar to the Romulan cloaking device, the Klingons received this technology from the Romulans circa 2268, when the two civilizations shared a political alliance. The Klingons outfitted many ships, particularly their Bird-of-Prey type vessels with the devices.

In 2293 the Klingons tested an experimental Bird-of-Prey that could operate its weapons while cloaked. Captain Kirk of the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701-A and his crew were able to improvise a method to track the ship, eliminating the tactical edge that the Klingon ship would have otherwise enjoyed in starship combat.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

^The Offical Canon Database?

 

[EnderAKH]

The klingons have cloaking technology in the series but the "canon database" specifically states that Klingons do not receive this technology until 2268, over a decade away:

http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cloaking-device-klingon

.....so?

 

[marsh8472]

.....so?

game over

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

an official contradiction makes contradiction a fact then all of existence itself ceases to exist.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The klingons have cloaking technology in the series but the "canon database" specifically states that Klingons do not receive this technology until 2268, over a decade away:

http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cloaking-device-klingon

Plus according to TOS there as never a mutineer in Starfleet prior to "The Menagerie". Plus cloaking was merely theoretical until "Balance of Terror".

I don't think they're worried about "the canon database", or what any previous incarnation of Star Trek did or didn't do.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Ah, these old canards again...

Plus according to TOS there as never a mutineer in Starfleet prior to "The Menagerie".

No, that was never said. Just that there was no record of one. And guess who said that? The same person who, even in the same breath as he was maintaining the deliberate pretense of it being "no myth" that Vulcans are "incapable of lying" said: "It is not a lie to keep the truth to oneself."

Plus cloaking was merely theoretical until "Balance of Terror".

I just re-watched this one the other day, and for all it looks like it on the page, the way it's played all around suggests no actual mystery or surprise as to what's going on. It's merely nitpicking to emphasize the theoretical in "theoretically possible" instead of the possible. Not only did a less-narrow interpretation already make sense at the time the episode originally aired (thanks to the earlier "Charlie X" [TOS]) and become further reinforced by "The Enterprise Incident" (TOS), but it was well and truly cemented by ENT more than fifteen years ago! If you want to constrain your view to a single line in one episode in isolation, then sure, you can see a contradiction, but if you pull back and look at the broader picture you'll find that DSC isn't actually being inconsistent with overall continuity. What's "merely theoretical"—your words, not Spock's, BTW—is a perfect cloak, one that cannot be detected, which neither the Romulans in "Balance Of Terror" nor the Klingons in DSC prove to actually possess.

I don't think they're worried about "the canon database"

This part, of course, is spot-on. Like the Okudas' Chronology and Encyclopedia, or indeed fandom's Memory Alpha, this database may purport to be based on canon, but isn't itself part of it. So there's nothing to be "worried about" in the first place.

-MMoM

 

[Jinn]

game over

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

an official contradiction makes contradiction a fact then all of existence itself ceases to exist.

Has CBS already reacted to your TAS letter?

Also, should I risk to type "0/0" into my calculator, just for the kicks of it?

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

they could, if they use a loophole (like the time travel idea i mentioned). and im talking about at the very end of the series. in the last episode, in the last scene

Lorca may as well get hit in the head with a golf ball, get knocked out, then wake up on the 1960's enterprise as Captain Kirk in bed with Mister Spock, and Spock telling him DSC was all a dream.

 

[Tuskin38]

Plus according to TOS there as never a mutineer

How many times are people going to have to debate this?

TOS ignored that fact themselves in later episodes.

 

[marsh8472]

Has CBS already reacted to your TAS letter?

Also, should I risk to type "0/0" into my calculator, just for the kicks of it?

No reply, I received an automated email with the case number but nothing since. It probably got circular filed.

 

[Jinn]

No reply, I received an automated email with the case number but nothing since. It probably got circular filed.

I was kind of expecting something like that. It would have been really cool if they responded and cleared up the situation, though.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Forgive me my negativity, but from what I've seen so far, they want to replace existing Star Trek look with something new. I've read so much about "change is what Star Trek is all about". Well, try changing your lunch, eat rocks from now on. It's a change, it's good, right? No, it's not. Not every change is good.

All of the changes so far have been AWESOME, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I gave Discovery a chance and it's just not for me.

Then stop watching it.

I could almost see the Franz Joseph Constitution-class based ships being built as a consequence of this war.

Okay, I gotta be honest: that would be awful, because the FJ designs are terrible.

Not in absolute terms, as in "bad design" or "bad art" or "badly drawn" even. It's just in the context of what Starfleet is capable of building and what realistic starship designs would even look like. The only passable FJ designs are just modifications of the Constitution's lineart, and are not particularly original to boot. Fanon obsession with the old FJ material is understandable because it was the first -- and for a long time, the only one -- of its kind, but wishing to see the FJ designs in actual Star Trek production is like wishing the writers of Discovery would film an episode based on your favorite fanfic. It's not going to happen, and by rights, it probably shouldn't.

 

[zar]

I just re-watched this one the other day, and for all it looks like it on the page, the way it's played all around suggests no actual mystery or surprise as to what's going on. It's merely nitpicking to emphasize the theoretical in "theoretically possible" instead of the possible. Not only did a less-narrow interpretation already make sense at the time the episode originally aired (thanks to the earlier "Charlie X" [TOS]) and become further reinforced by "The Enterprise Incident" (TOS), but it was well and truly cemented by ENT more than fifteen years ago! If you want to constrain your view to a single line in one episode in isolation, then sure, you can see a contradiction, but if you pull back and look at the broader picture you'll find that DSC isn't actually being inconsistent with overall continuity. What's "merely theoretical"—your words, not Spock's, BTW—is a perfect cloak, one that cannot be detected, which neither the Romulans in "Balance Of Terror" nor the Klingons in DSC prove to actually possess.

What I love about this nitpick is the implication that it went over everyone's head in the studio. That fans, armed with a transcript and a few minutes of time, have noticed their oversight. In "Balance of Terror", the one episode that they've been namedropping for over a year now, that shares a major plot element with DSC's entire first season arc.

Of course Daniel will happily ignore all of this and (like he does in every thread) make a Batman comparison and tell us "it's a reboot".

 

[fireproof78]

I just re-watched this one the other day, and for all it looks like it on the page, the way it's played all around suggests no actual mystery or surprise as to what's going on. It's merely nitpicking to emphasize the theoretical in "theoretically possible" instead of the possible. Not only did a less-narrow interpretation already make sense at the time the episode originally aired (thanks to the earlier "Charlie X" [TOS]) and become further reinforced by "The Enterprise Incident" (TOS), but it was well and truly cemented by ENT more than fifteen years ago! If you want to constrain your view to a single line in one episode in isolation, then sure, you can see a contradiction, but if you pull back and look at the broader picture you'll find that DSC isn't actually being inconsistent with overall continuity. What's "merely theoretical"—your words, not Spock's, BTW—is a perfect cloak, one that cannot be detected, which neither the Romulans in "Balance Of Terror" nor the Klingons in DSC prove to actually possess.

So, what you're saying is context is for kings?

 

[GhostLoveScore]

Then stop watching it.

I stopped. I will not renew my netflix subscription for Discovery. I found out better shows for my taste, Star Trek Continues and The Orville.

 

[F. King Daniel]

What I love about this nitpick is the implication that it went over everyone's head in the studio. That fans, armed with a transcript and a few minutes of time, have noticed their oversight. In "Balance of Terror", the one episode that they've been namedropping for over a year now, that shares a major plot element with DSC's entire first season arc.

Nobody's suggesting anything "went over the studio's heads", it's obviously a deliberate retcon.

Silly hair-splitting on par with ENT's "we didn't actually say 'Ferengi' or 'Borg' so it's okay" doesn't make the slightest difference.

Of course Daniel will happily ignore all of this and (like he does in every thread) make a Batman comparison and tell us "it's a reboot".

And you'll keep insisting that even though Star Trek's gone visually and tonally from Adam West to Ben Affleck, the continuity is actually perfect.

 

[Nightowl1701]

Plus according to TOS there as never a mutineer in Starfleet prior to "The Menagerie".

Not a successful one, anyway...