If you don't see my point then feel free to go read my past posts on the subject.
Spoilers Visual continuity - Does Discovery strictly need to show past designs... at all?
- Thread starter INACTIVERedDwarf
- Start date
If you don't see my point then feel free to go read my past posts on the subject.
I wont. I will work on understanding your point, you might even try to make it clear to me. that's how stuff like this usually works
I've made my feelings quite clear in my past postings. If you choose not to read them it's not my problem.
Exactly. Because "The Cage" was not a documentary. We just need to allow for the fact that "The Cage" was made by different people more than half-century ago., so while this show may be set around the same time, it's not obliged look the same just for the sake of "visual continuity." As viewers, we can suspend our disbelief to meet the new show halfway because we understand that, in reality, those aren't actually Starfleet uniforms, they're costumes, that's not actually a bridge, that's a sound stage, etc. It's a show and they're just replaced the old sets and costumes for something newer and fresher. It's as simple as that.
As for calling it a prequel . . . that's a chronological issue. It's about WHEN the show is set, not what it looks like.
The art direction is a whole other issue.
I read them, I just don't understand them on an intellectual level. I'm dumb that way.
If something is set at a specific date in a specific universe that comes before a specific other date in that same universe, I consider it a prequel. If something is produced with timespecific production standards I don't expect other things produced 50 years later with time specific production standards to look the same.
this doesn't contradict itself
If something is set at a specific date in a specific universe that comes before a specific other date in that same universe, I consider it a prequel. If something is produced with timespecific production standards I don't expect other things produced 50 years later with time specific production standards to look the same.
this doesn't contradict itself
It is made 50 years after the original. It is more than just the look, it is the way the show feels. In 2255, Pike isn't use to having women on the bridge, we have women going around saying their frightened and hiding behind men, women referred to as "girls" by military officers. In 2256 (and seven years before), we have a female captain and women all over the bridge. 2256 is the right way to be, but at the same time, it doesn't fit socially with a show made fifty years prior and in no way should or could.
There's a lot right and wrong with the original Star Trek. It had the bravado of westerns of the time, it had the feel that the end of the world could be right around the corner if we don't get a handle on things. Discovery is using the time period yet not understanding the context of the times the original Star Trek was made.
All, in my opinion.
Basically, if it does not look like a cheap fan film reproduction of the 1960's TV show, he does not think it can be prime.
yeah, this is the part I understand. I don't get the reasoning behind that
It just seems like they're asking people to jump through a lot of hoops. They made a ton of money off of suspension of disbelief with TOS, and continue too, to this day. Yet, now we're supposed to suspend our suspension of disbelief and treat TOS as just sets and uniforms so they can start the cycle over of collecting cash from fans.
When they could've simply said it was a reboot, or said nothing at all.
They think its like a historical piece, and that in Star Trek, the 2260's were running around in 1960's mini dresses and resister and vacuum tech. I don't fully grasp the reasoning as it makes zero sense to me.
Man, we still have people that think any moment the show MUST show 1960's Klingons and goofy outfits and such or it has been a grand lie.
I've had SEVERAL people now point out to me that they were more than a little confused by the ending of Star Trek Beyond because they thought it (and STID) were both prequels to TMP and Wrath of Khan. In fact, it seems that they assumed the incident Chekov was referencing in Wrath of Khan literally WAS Into Darkness and interpretted Spock's death as: "Wow, after like 20 years he finally returned the favor!"
Because most people don't actually know what year TOS was set. The series went out of its way NOT to give an exact date in the standard gregorian calendar. TWOK is the first that ever does this, and even then with very little precision (Kirk reads the vintage on the Romulan Ale bottle as "2283" and McCoy says "Well, it takes this stuff a while to ferment" without saying how long "a while" actually is).
It is, IMO deliberately, very similar to Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country, visually and creatively. None of those films were far enough removed from TOS that the same argument doesn't just as easily apply, but we have learned to accept the different visuals and level of technology and we no longer complain about such things.
Why should it have to be? Again it's prequel not a slavish re-creation of a show produced in the 60's.
If its a prequel, one would assume it would line up with what came after both in narrative and visuals (to a degree). The whole point is supposed to be you have a great story that fits well with what came after. As far as quality goes, I'm still undecided on the show. I just can't imagine the Doomsday Machine sized band-aid they will have to come up with to make it line up with a show that takes place in-universe eight years later.
Which doesn't mean you can't do prequel to that show. The stuff that doesn't work should be ignored. That's the way it worked when they were developing Star Trek and how it continues to work today. That every word uttered, every thread of the costumes and every touch of paint is sacred and unalterable is absurd. You have to move forward or you become mired in the past. Take what works and build on that. Leave what does't behind.
Fans of a show about the future shouldn't be so hung up on the past.
wow, imagine a show made in 2017 not only with 60s visuals but also with a 60s mindset on social issues and gender equality.
that show would be cancelled before the opening credits. rightfully so
that show would be cancelled before the opening credits. rightfully so
When it comes to the original series, so much is being ignored that it is a stealth reboot. When I was reading Desperate Hours, trying to have it both ways made the story pretty much unreadable.
I just don't get the Prime universe hangup honestly? You have to ditch so much from TOS that you are basically doing a reboot and lying to your fans to keep them from setting the internet on fire.
There would be no Discovery if fans weren't hung up on the past to begin with. That's why we end up with prequels and sequels to begin with. Name recognition brings in those who have an affection for prior material.
How much of the show that you are supposed to be a prequel to can you cut away before it really is no longer a prequel?
Too late.I just don't get the Prime universe hangup honestly? You have to ditch so much from TOS that you are basically doing a reboot and lying to your fans to keep them from setting the internet on fire.
Similar threads
