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

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

DSC is a visual reboot.

If you mean a "reboot" in the sense of a refresh or new direction in portrayal, or in the sense of restarting something that was dormant, sure. If you mean in the sense of "not set in the same continuity" or "ignoring/erasing/cancelling out what we saw previously" then no. Nothing about what they've shown is ultimately incompatible with what's depicted in TOS and the other shows and films set in the so-called "Prime Timeline" any more than ENT was. (Unless you're counting easter eggs and in-jokes in the background that aren't meant to be clearly seen onscreen, like the maps and such...in which case you'll find similarly problematic stuff in just about every series.)

Even showing a Constitution-class ship in a slightly different configuration than seen in TOS would not be out of step, as we don't know what their true "original" configuration at launch was, and we do know that subtle changes to the Enterprise's own configuration occurred between "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the series proper, and that other vessels of the same class (for instance, the Constellation) simultaneously had different details to her as well!

-MMoM

 

[fireproof78]

They did not show this tech on Voyager, The Defiant, Deep Space Nine, or any other ship shown in the shows ever either except in the distant future. And now they show it regularly. It's unusual

So, it goes from "out of place" to "unusual."

Almost like technology can vary.

But DS9 and Voyager each had 7 years of screen time, so the law of averages dictates that most other ships are the same. You don't understand math and logic.

My teachers often complained about this.

It's nice that you choose to imagine all the new stuff alongside the old, but that's not what they're showing us. They rebooted the visuals. It wasn't an accident. And no amount of wishful thinking on your part is going to make it all slot perfectly together.

Isn't that for each person to decide?

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Those other Klingons ships are basically Klingon green ship textures on various boxy arrangements, all intended as noncombatants.

What difference does that make to the point that there is ample room for a wide variety of Klingon ship designs in any era, and just because they don't look like what you might think of as "typical" ones doesn't mean they're inconsistent with some non-existant universal design philosophy of the species? (Besides, that aesthetic itself may well have arisen out of Romulan and/or Orion influences over the centuries, anyway! They do all share borders, after all.)

And the TOS/TAS/TMP era battlecruisers, which BTW are all slightly different from one another rather than the same, weren't green—except for the one from "Trials And Tribble-ations" (DS9), which is again at least subtly different to any of the others if you want to get technical—and neither was the Raptor from ENT nor the Toron-class shuttle from "Gambit" (TNG) nor the transport from "Rules Of Engagement" (DS9).

The DSC Klingon vessels are their frontline battleships, even with the same names as their ENT/TNG/DS9 equivalents but completely different designs.

The ones we've seen in DSC thus far need not in any way constitute all of their frontline battleships, any more than the Starfleet ones need do. We've seen what, a measly two actual battles out of the entire war? And again, multiple disparate designs being called the same thing is nothing new with DSC. Besides, the names Starfleet describes them by are exonyms, and need not be accurate. (Which would indeed be quite appropriate, considering their real-life origin.) To my recollection, the only times we've heard Klingons themselves call them by those designations are on occasions where the conversations are obviously being translated for us.

And won't you feel silly if they ever show the neck extending and the wings unfolding on that "D-7" from "Choose Your Pain" to more closely resemble the classic design? Or if they reveal that the 24 ruling houses at this time are all of a particular caste that arose out of ancient interbreeding with Hur'q, and staged a takeover while the Empire struggled to deal with the Augment virus crisis following ENT, who subjugated others and professed themselves to be the "true" Klingons? (Pardon my Godwin here, but think of how Hitler wasn't actually a blond-haired "Aryan"!) Or whatever they might choose to invent as an explanation.

The idea that there could be multiple "races" of Klingons isn't new. It was in fact one of the earliest theories that sprang up to "explain" the difference between the TOS and movie ones, and IIRC even earlier was to be a focus of the planned "Kitumba" two-parter in the Phase II series that was ultimately scrapped in favor of TMP. And it also figured into John M. Ford's The Final Reflection which we know they're utilizing as inspiration on DSC. Even just in TOS itself, the Klingons in "The Trouble With Tribbles" didn't have the same greasepaint makeup as the ones seen in earlier and later episodes. And there has been a fairly wide variety of skin colors and cranial features and hair patterns across other series and films since. Heck, there is wide-ranging variation among human features just here on Earth. (And there used to be even more, considering the now-extinct Neanderthals, etc., who did interbreed with us back when they were around.)

You see markedly different as "incompatible" but that's a very narrow view, IMO.

-MMoM

P.S.

Isn't that for each person to decide?

To be fair, he did stipulate that:

Whether that's enough to make it a separate real-life continuity to the original is up to the viewer.

 

[fireproof78]

To be fair, he did stipulate that.

Only to then add that what we're seeing is what we're being shown...so, it's confusing at best.

 

[zar]

Only to then add that what we're seeing is what we're being shown

Right, and there is the problem. He isn't here to simply share fanon interpretations, he's here to tell us that we are wrong, that he knows the secret motivations of the creators underneath their lies, that there is "deliberate discontinuity" and deliberate incompatibilities. And we are told that this is "pointing out the obvious". He's so invested in this that he's lost all perspective.

Anyone individually can say that a certain episode, series or movie is too different "tonally and visually" for their sensibilities, and go ahead and imagine that these are alternate stories. But when they're not actually being presented as such, it's madness to expect everyone else to accept this idea as anything more than a personal preference. It didn't even work when Goddenberry himself tried that!

 

[fireproof78]

Right, and there is the problem. He isn't here to simply share fanon interpretations, he's here to tell us that we are wrong, that he knows the secret motivations of the creators underneath their lies, that there is "deliberate discontinuity" and deliberate incompatibilities. And we are told that this is "pointing out the obvious". He's so invested in this that he's lost all perspective.

Anyone individually can say that a certain episode, series or movie is too different "tonally and visually" for their sensibilities, and go ahead and imagine that these are alternate stories. But when they're not actually being presented as such, it's madness to expect everyone else to accept this idea as anything more than a personal preference. It didn't even work when Goddenberry himself tried that!

The larger difficulty, at least in my observation, is that other series have received far greater reception, even if it took a while, while DISCO receives the spewing hatred, and statements that "it can't possibly fit!" with no other explanation accepted. It's frustrating because there are a host of reasons (some would say rationalizing) that fit the two together, just like TOS to TMP. And, rather than explore those possibilities of how they mesh together, it's rubber stamped a failure.

 

[Tuskin38]

If you mean a "reboot" in the sense of a refresh or new direction in portrayal, or in the sense of restarting something that was dormant, sure. If you mean in the sense of "not set in the same continuity" or "ignoring/erasing/cancelling out what we saw previously" then no. Nothing about what they've shown is ultimately incompatible with what's depicted in TOS and the other shows and films set in the so-called "Prime Timeline" any more than ENT was. (Unless you're counting easter eggs and in-jokes in the background that aren't meant to be clearly seen onscreen, like the maps and such...in which case you'll find similarly problematic stuff in just about every series.)

Even showing a Constitution-class ship in a slightly different configuration than seen in TOS would not be out of step, as we don't know what their true "original" configuration at launch was, and we do know that subtle changes to the Enterprise's own configuration occurred between "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the series proper, and that other vessels of the same class (for instance, the Constellation) simultaneously had different details to her as well!

-MMoM

I put visual in front of reboot, that should tell you what I mean.

They updated the visuals for the 21st century, but they didn't change the story.

 

[zar]

The larger difficulty, at least in my observation, is that other series have received far greater reception, even if it took a while, while DISCO receives the spewing hatred, and statements that "it can't possibly fit!" with no other explanation accepted. It's frustrating because there are a host of reasons (some would say rationalizing) that fit the two together, just like TOS to TMP. And, rather than explore those possibilities of how they mesh together, it's rubber stamped a failure.

The internet amplifies this sort of criticism though. In the grand scheme, the rubber stamp from these unimaginative nitpickers isn't going to mean much. The average viewer understands it's a prequel and hardly gives this a second thought. In the end, exploring those possibilities is the job of the writers, which is what they're doing.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

I put visual in front of reboot, that should tell you what I mean.

They updated the visuals for the 21st century, but they didn't change the story.

It just seems we all draw the lines in different places, and ascribe slightly different shades of meaning to that, so it gets a bit murky as to exactly what the other fellow means sometimes. If I'm not mistaken, I've seen you state elsewhere that if a Constitution-class ever shows up, it would necessarily have its design updated (i.e. wouldn't look the same as in TOS). While they could easily do that, and there'd be nothing wrong with it, as it could still nonetheless fit with what we actually see on TOS by virtue of the reasoning I outlined above, they could also just as easily take the same approach as they did with "In A Mirror Darkly" (ENT), where the design really wasn't changed at all, but was merely represented by a new CGI model instead of a physical one, and with higher quality sets to meet the needs of HD, and all with more modern lighting, etc., but essentially with everything being a more or less exact replica of the TOS ship. That could readily work too, if they were careful not to overplay it—as in hindsight I think "Trials and Tribble-ations" (DS9) did a bit, although I certainly enjoyed it at the time—and used it judiciously.

My personal view at this point—not that anyone else's is "wrong" per se—is that while it would in no way be required, there's absolutely nothing shown in DSC that precludes the Enterprise of "The Cage" or one of her sisters showing up at any moment just as seen there. That it would look different from the other DSC ships we've seen, and that they'd be wearing different uniforms, etc., wouldn't be any problem. It would just be a difference. (It could even enhance the sense of it being a "special" sort of ship.) Likewise, DSC-style ships could have at any moment popped up on TOS. Starfleet just has different looking ships (and uniforms too) operating in parallel and simultaneously to each other in different arenas for different purposes.

In other words, as I see it, they can eat their proverbial cake and have it too, as things stand. It's up in the air and can go either way as yet. I'm fine with both. I don't see anything in TOS necessarily needing to be visually altered to fit with DSC or vice versa, although it wouldn't bother me as long as it was subtle and not too drastic. So far, I'm not really buying into the notion that we need to re-imagine everything in TOS as looking significantly more like DSC design-wise, even if we do choose to re-imagine it as being perhaps capable of at least some of the functionality we see on DSC but didn't see used onscreen there. (They had lots of off-screen adventures in between the ones we saw, after all.) We only need to imagine that both coexist alongside each other. And for me, that's not too much a stretch. I simply think of Earth right now at this very moment and how much variety and disparity to things there is in different places here on just this one planet, and it seems to me there's room for more things than are dreamt of in @marsh8472's and @King Daniel Paid CBS Plant's philosophies, so to speak.

But again, that's just me, and I guess I'm pretty easygoing and accepting these days. I'm not going to claim that some things didn't seem at first blush a little jarring, but I long ago learned from postmortem analysis of ENT and the hysterically overblown fan reaction (including my own at the time, guilty as charged) to its alleged "crimes against canon" that such entitled BS is silly and fundamentally misguided. It's not up to them to meet our preconceived expectations of what things "should" look and behave like; it's up to us to accept new revelations and re-evaluate everything else based on them. They own the sandbox and all the toys in it, and they're perfectly right not to let us forget it. And you know what? With just half the first season of DSC gone by—and most enjoyably so—I'm already well used to the differences. And since the hiatus began, I've been re-watching TOS (with the genuine original VFX and all), and having gotten to the third season I don't see much if anything to fret about in terms of consistency. (The warp effect looks different? Don't make me laugh!) So jump on in and enjoy, ladies and gents. The "cool-aid" tastes just fine!

-MMoM

 

[fireproof78]

It's not up to them to meet our preconceived expectations of what things "should" look and behave like; it's up to us to accept new revelations and re-evaluate everything else based on them.

Well put. I like the overall message, but this, to me, stuck out. The only thing fans own is there emotional reactions to a show. Fan films, fan fiction, and the like are just an expressions of that emotion, not ownership of the property.

 

[marsh8472]

So, it goes from "out of place" to "unusual."

Almost like technology can vary.

My teachers often complained about this.


Isn't that for each person to decide?

Compare:
on discovery they can move projections around with their hands as if they are physical objects

This is only seen on Star Trek 2009 which takes 8 years after Star Trek Nemesis

At the time this novel special effect was put there so the audience can get a sense that this is from the future of what we're usually used to seeing since we have never seen this special effect before. Which leads to dialogue like this from Spock on Star Trek 2009 to reflect that "The design of their ship is far more advanced than I had anticipated.". But by placing that same effect on Star Trek Discovery, it breaks the continuity of the plot in the Star Trek 2009 along with the general sense of post-TNG star trek tech.

Now looking at a sick bay that's supposed to be 10 years in Star Trek Discovery's future:

it's not that impressive compared to sick bay shown on "Yesterday's Enterprise"

Combine this with the dialogue from "Yesterday's Enterprise" which makes sense at the time
GARRETT: You must have heard it. From the Klingon outpost, Narendra Three. But you didn't, did you? This Sickbay, I've never seen like it, even on a starbase. And your uniform. What ship is this, Captain?
CRUSHER: Please try to be still.
GARRETT: I must insist. What ship?
PICARD: You are aboard the Enterprise, Captain. One seven oh one D. You have come twenty two years into the future.
GARRETT: Twenty two years. Does my crew know yet?

The uniform and general layout of the sickbay tip off garrett that she's traveled to the future. Which makes sense because we can see how antiquated the original sick bay's looked.

Now go back 10 years earlier on Star Trek Discovery

and everything looks post TNG where tech continuity does not make sense anymore, Garrett's comments make no sense. This part of the plot of "Yesterday's Enterprise" is now ruined just like they ruined Star Trek 2009's "future tech" visuals of their holographic interfaces by putting those same visuals on Star Trek Discovery which is supposed to be 131 years earlier.

 

[fireproof78]

and everything looks post TNG where tech continuity does not make sense anymore, Garrett's comments make no sense. This part of the plot of "Yesterday's Enterprise" is now ruined just like they ruined Star Trek 2009's "future tech" visuals of their holographic interfaces by putting those same visuals on Star Trek Discovery which is supposed to be 131 years earlier.

Make sense to me thus far. Again, story is not done yet.

Also, if DISCO doesn't make sense then TMP doesn't make sense. Let's discard that as well please.

 

[marsh8472]

Make sense to me thus far. Again, story is not done yet.

Also, if DISCO doesn't make sense then TMP doesn't make sense. Let's discard that as well please.

Except they do acknowledge it in dialogue in TMP

KIRK: My experience, five years out there dealing with unknowns like this, my familiarity with the Enterprise, this crew.
DECKER: Admiral, this is an almost totally new Enterprise. You don't know her a tenth as well as I do.
KIRK: That's why you're staying aboard. I'm sorry,

 

[fireproof78]

Except they do acknowledge it in dialogue in TMP

KIRK: My experience, five years out there dealing with unknowns like this, my familiarity with the Enterprise, this crew.
DECKER: Admiral, this is an almost totally new Enterprise. You don't know her a tenth as well as I do.
KIRK: That's why you're staying aboard. I'm sorry,

So? Ten years allowed for those changes. Many have argued, even before DISCO, that TOS era tech was more streamlined, design to be minimalist in design while still functional, i.e. the communicator.

There might also be a change due to the duotronic computer design by Dr. Daystrom.

Again, there are reasons for the differences that I can accept. YMMV.

 

[marsh8472]

So? Ten years allowed for those changes. Many have argued, even before DISCO, that TOS era tech was more streamlined, design to be minimalist in design while still functional, i.e. the communicator.

There might also be a change due to the duotronic computer design by Dr. Daystrom.

Again, there are reasons for the differences that I can accept. YMMV.

This dialogue too

McCOY: Well, Jim, I hear Chapel's an MD now. Well, I'm gonna need a top nurse, not a doctor who'll argue every little diagnosis with me. And ...they've probably redesigned the whole sickbay, too. I know engineers. They love to change things.

Just like when they introduce something novel like the holo communicator in DS9 "For the Uniform" they announced it in dialogue. Which no longer makes sense because they put those in Star Trek Discovery now too. The whole plot of DS9 "For The Uniform" is distorted from that

 

[fireproof78]

This dialogue too

McCOY: Well, Jim, I hear Chapel's an MD now. Well, I'm gonna need a top nurse, not a doctor who'll argue every little diagnosis with me. And ...they've probably redesigned the whole sickbay, too. I know engineers. They love to change things.

Just like when they introduce something novel like the holo communicator in DS9 "For the Uniform" they announced it in dialogue. Which no longer makes sense because they put those in Star Trek Discovery now too. The whole plot of DS9 "For The Uniform" is distorted from that

Asked and answered, counselor.

What is inconsistent about this? The Defiant, a ship originally designed without frills for fighting Borg and not much else, had "a new holo-communicator" installed in "For The Uniform" (DS9). No one said holographic communications were entirely new. Holographic interfaces of various types for various purposes were previously seen in ENT, STIII, TUC, and TNG. Kirk and company seemed already familiar with the concept in "The Return Of The Archons" (TOS). There has been no suggestion in DSC as yet that there are holoemitters throughout the ship that would allow a projection to roam free from one room to another, and no suggestion that the emitters that are present could handle a sentient program of the EMH's complexity.

 

[marsh8472]

Asked and answered, counselor.

Yeah he's trying to change the plot see?

Except they also put the holo communicator on the Malinche,
SANDERS: You appear to be sitting on my bridge. It may take me a while to get used to this. I'm not fond of uninvited guests.

the Eddington got his hands on one and made a big deal about it,
EDDINGTON: Before you waste a lot of time running around trying to restore computer control, let me save you some trouble. You can't. You'll find that your memory cores are completely wiped and will have to be reprogrammed from scratch. These work remarkably well. Glad we were able to procure one.

then they put one on Deep Space Nine which was showed on DS9 "Doctor Bashir, I presume".

If the holographic communicator technology is over a century old, putting it on the Defiant shouldn't be a big deal.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah he's trying to change the plot see?

Except they also put the holo communicator on the Malinche,
SANDERS: You appear to be sitting on my bridge. It may take me a while to get used to this. I'm not fond of uninvited guests.

the Eddington got his hands on one and made a big deal about it,
EDDINGTON: Before you waste a lot of time running around trying to restore computer control, let me save you some trouble. You can't. You'll find that your memory cores are completely wiped and will have to be reprogrammed from scratch. These work remarkably well. Glad we were able to procure one.

then they put one on Deep Space Nine which was showed on DS9 "Doctor Bashir, I presume".

If the holographic communicator technology is over a century old, putting it on the Defiant shouldn't be a big deal.

Given that they are on a frontier post, and the Defiant is a stripped down war machine, it may not be as unusual as you think.

Again, there are reasons, if there is a willingness to explore them.

 

[marsh8472]

Given that they are on a frontier post, and the Defiant is a stripped down war machine, it may not be as unusual as you think.

Again, there are reasons, if there is a willingness to explore them.

Why does the Defiant have a view screen and chairs? Jem'Hadar ships don't

 

[fireproof78]

Why does the Defiant have a view screen and chairs? Jem'Hadar ships don't

It's a warship. Armored bulkheads make sense, especially around the Bridge, which, having it on top, never made sense