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

[fireproof78]

USS Discovery is supposed to be the 1917 model car in comparison to the 2017 model car. But they flipped it in Discovery

That simpler explanation worked much better, thank you. The endless quotes did not.

I still don't agree with your larger point, that Dsicovery is superior technologically in every way. Enterprise D is clearly more comfortable, more powerful in terms of weapons, and capable of going speeds beyond Warp 10 without any damage to the ship. It is a multi-functional platform while Discovery feels like its designed for one thing and that's about it.

So, as much as you won't to go on and on about Discovery shouldn't be able to "X, Y or Z" I see a lot more limits than you give it credit for. And frankly, neither show is less or more because of these differences.

 

[marsh8472]

That simpler explanation worked much better, thank you. The endless quotes did not.

I still don't agree with your larger point, that Dsicovery is superior technologically in every way. Enterprise D is clearly more comfortable, more powerful in terms of weapons, and capable of going speeds beyond Warp 10 without any damage to the ship. It is a multi-functional platform while Discovery feels like its designed for one thing and that's about it.

So, as much as you won't to go on and on about Discovery shouldn't be able to "X, Y or Z" I see a lot more limits than you give it credit for. And frankly, neither show is less or more because of these differences.

The technology shown in Discovery is more stylish and you have to reach pretty far to justify that what they're doing is theoretically possible in that era. As far as continuity goes I think the Kelvin timeline looks closer to the prime timeline than Discovery does.

The uniforms are closer and no spore drive. Maybe the Kelvin timeline is the Prime timeline too with the future erased. Except it looks like Vulcan is still there in Star Trek Discovery so perhaps there is another time travel event that saves Vulcan but still keeps the 23rd century fancy looking. Every other time travel event doesn't create parallel universes as far as we can tell, why should we take Spock at his word when he says this:

SPOCK: You are assuming that Nero knows how events are predicted to unfold. To the contrary, Nero's very presence has altered the flow of history, beginning with the attack on the USS Kelvin, culminating in the events of today, thereby creating an entire new chain of incidents that cannot be anticipated by either party.
UHURA: An alternate reality?
SPOCK: Precisely. Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed. Mr. Sulu, plot a course to the Laurentian system warp factor three.

If we are to weigh evidence equally for every claim, this is baseless evidence because it is dialogue.

 

[Ovation]

Every other time travel event doesn't create parallel universes as far as we can tell,

Actually, logically speaking, they all do (or almost all). The parallels are often so minutely dissimilar (see the TNG episode titled, strangely enough, "Parallels") that "our heroes" simply continue on in the new branch created by the time travel incident. Every time they think they've gone back to "fix the timeline", they've merely created a new one. However, for dramatic purposes, such an approach to time travel stories would likely leave people unsatisfied.

OR

As NO time travel story ever withstands scrutiny, it is best to simply accept the rules of time travel as presented within a particular time travel story by the storytellers (certainly does wonders for one's blood pressure). In the case of Kelvinverse, the clear intent is a parallel branch, and NOT an erasure. Just go with it.

(and spare yourself the effort of a "wall of text" rebuttal--I'm not going to pay it any mind as I've long decided that ALL time-travel stories are best appreciated by accepting authorial intent)

Cheers.

 

[marsh8472]

Actually, logically speaking, they all do (or almost all). The parallels are often so minutely dissimilar (see the TNG episode titled, strangely enough, "Parallels") that "our heroes" simply continue on in the new branch created by the time travel incident. Every time they think they've gone back to "fix the timeline", they've merely created a new one. However, for dramatic purposes, such an approach to time travel stories would likely leave people unsatisfied.

OR

As NO time travel story ever withstands scrutiny, it is best to simply accept the rules of time travel as presented within a particular time travel story by the storytellers (certainly does wonders for one's blood pressure). In the case of Kelvinverse, the clear intent is a parallel branch, and NOT an erasure. Just go with it.

(and spare yourself the effort of a "wall of text" rebuttal--I'm not going to pay it any mind as I've long decided that ALL time-travel stories are best appreciated by accepting authorial intent)

Cheers.

sure we can just go with the author's intent in-universe theory

 

[fireproof78]

The technology shown in Discovery is more stylish and you have to reach pretty far to justify that what they're doing is theoretically possible in that era. As far as continuity goes I think the Kelvin timeline looks closer to the prime timeline than Discovery does.

We reach

Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm willing to reach that far. Authorial intent is that it fits within the timeline, so I'm starting from that base and moving on up. The rest of your timeline explanation is no more and no less complex than any other rationalizations or whatever that fans use, and have used since TMP and TWOK.

I don't care that the uniforms don't match. The TMP uniforms are far, far, more jarring from the TOS ones, than the DISCO ones to TOS. The Discovery is a unique ship, one that might be lost in the multiverse or some other weird event. We don't know yet.

So, I'm willing to accept authorial intent, inconsistencies, incongruities and all. Star Trek has done it before and Star Trek will do it again. If DISCO is to be damned, let it be damned for what it is-Star Trek.

 

[starsuperion]

BSG..STD that's kinda what I see. It may be Star Trek in name, but it's also dark like BSG. Yea, it's star trek, but nothing I've ever really seen in the genre before. Its nice they want to try something different. But the Kelvin timeline did that. The novelty, as with all things JJ Abrams, wore off. The Vaneer was shallow and tho it has its good points due to the creative staff, like STD, it's got that going for it. But on the story, the feel, the fast pace, the slow dead pace, and the relationships that pretty much suck, I'd be going space bonkers on that ship, just waiting to get a starbase gig and get the hell away from all of them.

I think STD should be damned on its mistakes. Sure try something different. It doesn't always workout. Look at the star wars prequels. Sometimes it's an adherence to some formulas that is what people want. Sometimes changing it, can go bad. Sometimes changing it can go so good it actually surpasses the originals. In the case of STD, it's not going good for me at all. I'm hesitant about even wanting to see a season 2, let alone ANY spin offs. This new approach, for me at least. Sucks. I hate almost all the characters. The one I did like is dead. Makes me want the dead captain back and the rest just gone. But sadly, I gotta suffer thru crew pointless arguing after arguing, after arguing, after bitching, after arguing..it goes on and on, every episode. Argument. Argument. Am I watching a soap opera or a Star Trek episode? No wait. Its STD, it's new. It's hip. Its a new approach! (dark like BSG, SG:U, SG:1, dark matter, the expanse, killjoys, Caprica, CW hero series that bore you to death, etc..etc.. )

 

[fireproof78]

BSG..STD that's kinda what I see. It may be Star Trek in name, but it's also dark like BSG. Yea, it's star trek, but nothing I've ever really seen in the genre before. Its nice they want to try something different. But the Kelvin timeline did that. The novelty, as with all things JJ Abrams, wore off. The Vander was shallow and tho it has its good points due to the creative staff, like STD, it's got that going for it. But on the story, the feel, the fast pace, the slow dead pace, and the relationships that pretty much suck, I'd be going space bonkers on that ship, just waiting to get a starbase gig and get the he'll away from

Gah! No. BSG makes me want to slit my wrists while drinking hemlock mixed with cyanide, and that was just in the first episode. I'd rather watch C-SPAN and then then news and would walk away with more hope for humanity than that show.

At least DISCO feels like its going somewhere and the characters are interesting, which is far more than I can say for BSG. I had 0 investment by the end of episode 1 and was consistent-I gave up at "Bastille Day" and declared my own independence from that show.

 

[marsh8472]

BSG..STD that's kinda what I see. It may be Star Trek in name, but it's also dark like BSG. Yea, it's star trek, but nothing I've ever really seen in the genre before. Its nice they want to try something different. But the Kelvin timeline did that. The novelty, as with all things JJ Abrams, wore off. The Vander was shallow and tho it has its good points due to the creative staff, like STD, it's got that going for it. But on the story, the feel, the fast pace, the slow dead pace, and the relationships that pretty much suck, I'd be going space bonkers on that ship, just waiting to get a starbase gig and get the he'll away from

Maybe Benny Russell is more cynical about humanity which you can see in his stories.

 

[cultcross]

We're in Star Trek Canon 101 territory now, are we really going to argue about whether the Enterprise-D is the best ship in the fleet?

Considering we saw a whole bunch of other galaxy class ships, the E-D is, at best, joint best ship.

Occam's razor should make it clear that these should be the only 2 types of star fleet uniforms being worn around this time.

That's not how that works. Occam's razor states that the explanation of a phenomenon which requires the fewest assumptions should be taken as the best, most plausible, explanation in the absence of evidence to the contrary. It does not apply to your reasoning here.

 

[CaptainMurdock]

Re the TMP uniforms. In my headcanon, the bland one tone colored uniforms were temporary starfleet duty tunics while it can be assumed the Enterprise went on more missions post TMP, in my mind they went back to more standard uniforms.

 

[F. King Daniel]

No, pretending the "discrepancies" are deliberate and by design is conspiracy nonsense. Suggesting that CBS and the writers are literally conspiring to hide that fact is conspiracy nonsense. Saying you're being "attacked" when you're the one instigating, acting as though the world's gone mad and only you are clearheaded enough to see through it, calling your fantasy "obvious" and calling us "blind" for not accepting it, these are all hallmarks of conspiracy nonsense. It's irrational, it's insulting, and it's getting old.

No, it's not a conspiracy. I've never said it was a conspiracy. I dont believe I even used the word "attacked" which you quoted above. All it is, is X-Men movieverse level continuity in Star Trek. It doesn't fit with TOS any more than X-Men First Class fits with the 2000 X-Men movie. Does it make it a bad movie? Nope. Does it make DSC worse? Nope.

Remember when Fred Archer gave you that title? Easy to laugh off once, but imagine if he were posting here week after week with his argument. This is what you've become, just in a different flavor.

And what do you sound like? Most people on this thread acknowledge that there are discrepancies and they just don't care. That's fine. Yet you're going on for pages and pages trying to convince everyone that it all lines up perfectly when it clearly doesn't and saying it's an insult to the people behind the show to say anything less. That's silly.

 

[marsh8472]

Considering we saw a whole bunch of other galaxy class ships, the E-D is, at best, joint best ship.

That's fine as long as it establishes the metric of what 24th century ships look like

That's not how that works. Occam's razor states that the explanation of a phenomenon which requires the fewest assumptions should be taken as the best, most plausible, explanation in the absence of evidence to the contrary. It does not apply to your reasoning here.

Sure we have one explanation that the Discovery series is in a different timeline than TOS and that's it. Or starfleet changes uniforms again in TOS, all of the evidence that star fleet uses these new uniforms is hidden from us in all of canon, Spore drive is never heard of because it's classified or something, holographic interfaces is abandoned or hidden from TOS for some reason, (insert every issue paired with every assumption to resolve the issue here), etc...

 

[starsuperion]

Re the TMP uniforms. In my headcanon, the bland one tone colored uniforms were temporary starfleet duty tunics while it can be assumed the Enterprise went on more missions post TMP, in my mind they went back to more standard uniforms.

Oddly enough that looks way better..

 

[starsuperion]

Gah! No. BSG makes me want to slit my wrists while drinking hemlock mixed with cyanide, and that was just in the first episode. I'd rather watch C-SPAN and then then news and would walk away with more hope for humanity than that show.

At least DISCO feels like its going somewhere and the characters are interesting, which is far more than I can say for BSG. I had 0 investment by the end of episode 1 and was consistent-I gave up at "Bastille Day" and declared my own independence from that show.

Yea, BSG was totally depressing. I much rather have watched more Stargate Atlantis, great show full of optimism and wonder.

 

[starsuperion]

Maybe Benny Russell is more cynical about humanity which you can see in his stories.

That's not necessarily a good thing. Negativity about ones own species can't mean a good healthy psyche. Maybe the writer has some humanity issues. People will watch a train wreck, but are tolerant to a point when being shown garbage humans over and over as a commentary on humanity. Beavis and Butthead come to mind. After awhile tho, it gets really old and just annoying. Constant negativity is a turnoff.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You can ignore the aesthetics in the thread title, that is wrong. No one from production said that would happen.
One person on the team did say computer screens would get more colourful, that is about it.

DSC is a visual reboot.

Let's be clear on this point: when the producers say that it's going to reconcile with TOS eventually, what they're actually talking about is the Burnham/Spock connection, the Klingon War, and the Spore Drive. That is pretty much the ENTIRETY of the "reconciliation" they're talking about. There is no intent whatsoever to adjust the look of the technology, the starships, the computer's voice or the holograms so that it could plausibly seem, visually or audibly, like something that you might have seen on TOS. This is mainly because they have fifty times the budget that TOS had and 50 years of science fiction precedent and filmmaking experience to draw from, so they're pretty much just going to do all the awesome things TOS would have done if only it had the chance to do so.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

So the Borg and Spock a Vulcan are lying or mistaken also? And everyone else is wrong? Come on... We're in Star Trek Canon 101 territory now, are we really going to argue about whether the Enterprise-D is the best ship in the fleet?

Enterprise D was the best ship in the fleet for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with its technology.

Put that another way: I'm pretty sure that if I got in a fight with Rhonda Rousy she would thoroughly kick my ass, but I'm just as sure that it has nothing to do with what kind of car she drives.

 

[Jedman67]

Which is all part of the fun, for a lot of us. And whether he meant it facetiously or not, @LottsaGelt is right when he says it's good exercise for the imagination. Heck, some authors of novels and other peripheral media have made entire careers out of playing this game! (Not to mention dedicated hobbyists like @Timo.) There's nothing necessary about it, but it can be stimulating and enjoyable. Not so much if people keep jumping in to say "it's all just a TV show!" (dude, we know that) or "it's all set in a parallel universe, game over!" (where's the fun in that?) though.

IT"S A GODDAMN FUCKING TV SHOW PEOPLE GET A LIFE!!!!!!

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

(it's also a reboot )

 

[marsh8472]

The dialogue indicates that Enterprise-D, Enterprise-E, and Voyager were cutting edge technology for their time. People are being forced to treat the original Enterprise as a floating museum piece in order to accommodate the USS Discovery's more advanced appearance but this doesn't justify doing the same to the Enterprise-D, Enterprise-E, and Voyager. Unlike the original Enterprise the D, E, and Voyager were new just like the USS Discovery.

Unfortunately if we're going to put Discovery in the same timeline as everything else then we're going to have to warp our minds a bit and pretend the 1917 Chevy is superior to the 2017 Chevy despite its visual appearance.

"The same way computers have decreased in size over the years the wheels and overall design of the 1917 Chevy are also more compact. They don't need to compensate for poor performance by making it look shiney and pretty. Shiney causes eye damage so they don't do that anymore." - don't judge a book by its cover mentality.

 

[zar]

No, it's not a conspiracy. I've never said it was a conspiracy. I dont believe I even used the word "attacked" which you quoted above.

You are certainly doing all of the above that I listed. You've used the term as well although as far as I know, Midnight's Edge has never explicitly used the word conspiracy either. The only material difference is that you ostensibly still like the show as you see it, but that doesn't absolve you of your insults and dishonesty. And yes, you used the word "attacked" in this very thread. You are the one attacking people, but you continuously play the victim whenever anyone calls you out.

Most people on this thread acknowledge that there are discrepancies and they just don't care. That's fine. Yet you're going on for pages and pages trying to convince everyone that it all lines up perfectly when it clearly doesn't and saying it's an insult to the people behind the show to say anything less. That's silly.

People like you, I take it? Yet if this is "most" people, I wonder why you're being singled out? Am I just a big meany who doesn't like your username? And MMoM just happened to decide to pick on you too? Is there, dare I say it, a conspiracy against you? Please, grow some self-awareness, stop blaming others and consider the possibility that there is cause for the reactions you provoke - or if you already know and you're purposely trolling for reactions (like Marsh is) then just admit it, and stop.

"Most people" who acknowledge and don't care about discrepancies also know that DSC is a TOS prequel despite being "visually and tonally" different. They know that the set design, props and makeup are all improved as a function of real-world progress and a multimillion-dollar budget, not as deliberately incompatible storytelling. They accept continuity links as a matter of course, not as carefully constructed marketing deception. They speculate about possible connections that haven't yet been written as a fun thought exercise, not as a desperate attempt to convince everyone that their theory must be the case.

The only one doing that is you. You are incessantly attacking the other side and insisting that they are absolutely wrong. You've made it your mission. You've been arguing this page after page since May. Batman, Superman, X-Men, thread after thread after thread. You had a preconception that you stuck to despite increasing evidence to the contrary and by now have lost perspective and become insulting. Your opportunity to claim that you "just don't care" is long gone. So is your failed attempt to prove everyone else cares more than you do. Take a step back, man.

Let's be clear on this point: when the producers say that it's going to reconcile with TOS eventually, what they're actually talking about is the Burnham/Spock connection, the Klingon War, and the Spore Drive. That is pretty much the ENTIRETY of the "reconciliation" they're talking about. There is no intent whatsoever to adjust the look of the technology, the starships, the computer's voice or the holograms so that it could plausibly seem, visually or audibly, like something that you might have seen on TOS. This is mainly because they have fifty times the budget that TOS had and 50 years of science fiction precedent and filmmaking experience to draw from, so they're pretty much just going to do all the awesome things TOS would have done if only it had the chance to do so.

Pretty much this. Those three things probably aren't the entirety, but everything on the list of "nots" is very likely to never be addressed. These only look like things that need to be reconciled to a niche group of nitpickers. Other viewers and the writers themselves are understandably baffled that anyone would consider them as such to begin with.