The Klingons in the Kelvin reality are more similar to those of Discovery than those of TOS or TMP and TNG!
JB
USS Discovery in TOS?
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
The Klingons in the Kelvin reality are more similar to those of Discovery than those of TOS or TMP and TNG!
JB
There is no way to explain the sleek, advanced, overlook of the technology and uniforms compared to those of The Enterprise and other Starships seen in the series! The producers must be drinking their own bath water if they think we will accept what they tell us without an argument!
JB
This is how the entire Discoververse feels to me.
It's a TV show. I don't require an explanation for it being sleaker or more advanced than another TV show produced 50 years ago.
Not even for the sake of Trek continuity?
JB
JB
Continuity means there is a ship named Enterprise. How that ship looks and what it's captain looks like can vary. It's not important.
Well I'd say it was important! If it ain't Shatner or Nimoy then it isn't the same universal quadrant! The fact that Mark Lenard isn't Sarek in DSC proves that for me!
JB
I wouldn't even go so far as actor casting as an issue. So long as there is an attempt to have them look like the previous actor, since the look is a feature of a character. The look is a feature of what that thing is. Canon is thrown around a lot, but all it means is keeping everything in respect to one another. If you want something to look different, in the many ways Discovery is (despite the doubleplusgood "it's the same" from the production), have it change into looking that way through the progress of time. And a key note is, Star Trek is more special a thing than Bewitched or Gilligan's Island, My Mother the Car and so on. So much other media is ephemeral, even if there is an audience that likes it. But Star Trek, through the strength of what it is, is not ephemeral. Natural trends decided that, because if it were not a more special thing, it would have gone out of view and memory as so many shows did.
By that logic The Menagerie is a different universe because a different actor played Pike for half of it. STIII and IV different universe from TWOK because Robin Curtis isn't Kirstie Alley. I can't even fathom how many universes DS9 takes place in with all the Alexanders and Toras.
Disagree. There's nothing about James Kirk that requires he look like William Shatner. He's a Caucasian male in his early to mid thirties if you're casting for TOS or show set at that time. The character has a history, but nothing in that history requires William Shatner's face.
No, it's not.
I don't disagree.
No its not ephemeral, or no its not more special than My Mother the Car?
The latter .
Disagree with you, mate. Its earned its place. Dickens is better than a dime store novel.
Look I love the franchise. TOS is my favorite TV show, but I've no illusions about it. It's not Dickens.
Fair point! But I'm primarily concerned about the TOS series rather than the films. Pike was played by another actor, true! But under that make up which was supposedly to show radiation injuries and his similarity to Jeffrey Hunter I think we must conclude it's the same man and universe!
JB
Last edited:
I have to go with Norton on this issue. Star Trek might not be Dickens, but it's getting close. There is considerable enough interest that it "airs" in at least four media services available to me (Netflix, Amazon Prime, CBS All-Access, Heroes & Icons). 50 years after a cancelled three seasons that was grandfathered into syndication. And it's still making movies and spin-offs and novels and what-have-you.
The same isn't true for Gilligan's Island (which I've also seen all of), which hasn't aired anything since the last TV movie in the '80s. Gilligan's Island, like Bewitched and Honeymooners and other classics, might get a nostalgiac remake movie or even series someday, but it won't last and continue like Star Trek has.
There's a very good chance that Star Trek will outlive me, even if I die 80 years from now. Like Sherlock Holmes and Ebenezer Scrooge and Batman and Mickey Mouse, Star Trek will never die as a media property. At least, for all intents and purposes.
The same isn't true for Gilligan's Island (which I've also seen all of), which hasn't aired anything since the last TV movie in the '80s. Gilligan's Island, like Bewitched and Honeymooners and other classics, might get a nostalgiac remake movie or even series someday, but it won't last and continue like Star Trek has.
There's a very good chance that Star Trek will outlive me, even if I die 80 years from now. Like Sherlock Holmes and Ebenezer Scrooge and Batman and Mickey Mouse, Star Trek will never die as a media property. At least, for all intents and purposes.
But I wouldn't doubt fans turning pro like the Reeves-Stevens-- and the sort-- to write a book about it actually saying Kirk did--with a sprinkle of an outlandish Earth year--2266/2267??? or something more stupid. There no limits in how far Trekfans will stretch improbability to make things fit with blasphemous Trek shows, they clearly like, because it has Star Trek over the title which slaps TOS in the face.
Last edited:
No other Trek series can slap TOS in the face, believe me!
JB
JB
Similar threads
