USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[shapeshifter]

And LOVING it!

 

[ITDUDE]

Nope.
FX people are not the writers, they don't get to decide these things.

Oh, so we want to leave the future of Star Trek to writers?!? Writers !?!?

 

[TrickyDickie]

Someone start a petition to remaster TOS with Discovery updates.

I have no problem with that. The 2004 pre-remaster dvd sets will always be out there. It's not like they're gonna disappear. I see it as a side-by-side thing, where everyone could have what they want.

 

[ITDUDE]

I'm all for calling it "branches".

The Kelvin timeline is a complete different timeline. But the parts of the JJ. movies that do take place in the prime timeline (old Spock, destruction of Vulcan, red matter, the USS Kelvin) are obviously only one branch off of the prime timeline. And the Disco-Verse is another branch. Both are connected to the prime universe ("Enterprise" with Archer took place in BOTH universes), but not two each other.

I like it. Could be used to explain everything.

 

[ITDUDE]

I wish Abrams' films were straight up reboots, as in zero connections to Prime universe. No Nimoy. No time alterations.

Actually I liked how they did it. We KNOW it's alternative universe/time-line/branch. So they can do whatever they want without canon violations. If just for STD they did the same thing, they wouldn't have put themselves in the corner with fan-base judging their every move.
If they acknowledged STD to be in separate reality we would now be discussing "which one did Enterprise best (Original/JJ/STD) instead of now everyone going around with pitchforks and "it doesn't look like TOS, so it's bad" attitude.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I agree, but if most of the events are gonna align with what we know of Prime but the only difference is visual aesthetics then I see little reason to create yet another timeline.

If you're gonna reboot, don't just change the look, change EVERYTHING.

 

[ozzfloyd]

Oh, so we want to leave the future of Star Trek to writers?!? Writers !?!?

Yes! As it has always been. What's your alternative? The fans? You? I'll stick to the writers.

 

[EnderAKH]

Oh, so we want to leave the future of Star Trek to writers?!? Writers !?!?

Son, we watch a show that has words, and those words have to be written by men with word processors. Who's gonna do it? You? The writers have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Star Trek and you curse Discovery. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know; that Discovery's existance, while tragic, probably saved jobs. And the writer's existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves jobs*. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want them writing that show. You need them writing that show. We use words like canon, history, fandom. The writers use these words as the backbone of a life spent creating something. You use them as a punchline. The writers have neither the time nor the inclination to explain themselves to a man who rises and sleeps watching the very show that they provide, and then questions the manner in which they provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way, otherwise, I suggest you pick up a pen and write a shooting script. Either way, I don't give a *damn* what you think you are entitled to!

 

[fireproof78]

Son, we watch a show that has words, and those words have to be written by men with word processors. Who's gonna do it? You? The writers have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Star Trek and you curse Discovery. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know; that Discovery's existance, while tragic, probably saved jobs. And the writer's existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves jobs*. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want them writing that show. You need them writing that show. We use words like canon, history, fandom. The writers use these words as the backbone of a life spent creating something. You use them as a punchline. The writers have neither the time nor the inclination to explain themselves to a man who rises and sleeps watching the very show that they provide, and then questions the manner in which they provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way, otherwise, I suggest you pick up a pen and write a shooting script. Either way, I don't give a *damn* what you think you are entitled to!

Did you order Section 31!

 

[Belz...]

One so big, TOS essentially didn't happen making Discovery it's own seperate world as I've been saying all along and the VFX people agree

What in the blazes are you talking about? RETCON means retroactive continuity, which means you change something in the fictional world that is assumed to apply in past chapters as well. I'm sure you know this, so stop pretending like you don't understand.

That's pretty much the description for the Phase II concept.

The filming model was never completed before they went with TMP, so the Mike Minor artwork and the poster art, that's what we have as far as what they meant to do in the late 70's.

Actually we do have some Jefferies and Probert orthos for the ship, I think.

Why trust either?

Evidence of your eyes, you know.

"STD Reboot," I think, will be the term.

By that logic EVERY single difference or inconsistency in Star Trek was a reboot. Again, stop pretending to not understand just because it serves your bias against Discovery. It is meant to be in the original timeline, differences nonwithstanding. Like this guy said:

My eyes recognize that this all fictional. When I watch THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK and THE VOYAGE HOME, the Klingon bridge is the same bridge even though it looks completely different in the two movies. I don't need to pretend there was some arbitrary redesign that took place between movies because what is that going to really matter?

Now, you don't need to train your brain to see the Discovery Enterprise when watching TOS. It just means that FROM NOW ON it will always have been this way (until they change it again).

 

[Belz...]

Son, we watch a show that has words, and those words have to be written by men with word processors. Who's gonna do it? You? The writers have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Star Trek and you curse Discovery. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know; that Discovery's existance, while tragic, probably saved jobs. And the writer's existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves jobs*. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want them writing that show. You need them writing that show. We use words like canon, history, fandom. The writers use these words as the backbone of a life spent creating something. You use them as a punchline. The writers have neither the time nor the inclination to explain themselves to a man who rises and sleeps watching the very show that they provide, and then questions the manner in which they provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way, otherwise, I suggest you pick up a pen and write a shooting script. Either way, I don't give a *damn* what you think you are entitled to!

Damn, I want to give you a medal for this.

 

[lawman]

Now, you don't need to train your brain to see the Discovery Enterprise when watching TOS. It just means that FROM NOW ON it will always have been this way (until they change it again).

That doesn't give you an uncomfortable Big-Brother-ish vibe of doublethink and the mutability of the past?

 

[MakeshiftPython]

That doesn't give you an uncomfortable Big-Brother-ish vibe of doublethink and the mutability of the past?

It's just fiction. It's very easy to comprehend. When Saavik is played by two different actresses, I don't assume she had plastic surgery in-universe (unless it's explicitly addressed like the 1701 refit in TMP). When I see the Enterprise looking different between DISCO and TOS I don't assume it had some redesign in-universe. They're all the same. They're all canon. I don't find any of this confusing.

 

[EnderAKH]

That doesn't give you an uncomfortable Big-Brother-ish vibe of doublethink and the mutability of the past?

Nope, because I've done it before. TMP Klingons? "Oh, Klingons look like this now." The BoP bridge in The Voyage Home? "Oh, The bridge looks like this now." Qo'nos is now 4 days from Earth at warp 4? "Oh, Qo'nos is closer than we thought now."Tony Stark got injured in Iraq (or was it Afghanistan?) instead of Vietnam in the comic books? "Oh, he got injured like this now." It's just TV, not an actual history. I understand as a functional intelligent person in the world that these are not real events and external issues such as budgets, the ability to film a set well, the needs of a plot can affect what we get on screen. I don't need an internal explanation because I understand the external one and know these are all made up events.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Nope, because I've done it before. TMP Klingons? "Oh, Klingons look like this now." The BoP bridge in The Voyage Home? "Oh, The bridge looks like this now." Qo'nos is now 4 days from Earth at warp 4? "Oh, Qo'nos is closer than we thought now."Tony Stark got injured in Iraq (or was it Afghanistan?) instead of Vietnam in the comic books? "Oh, he got injured like this now." It's just TV, not an actual history. I understand as a functional intelligent person in the world that these are not real events and external issues such as budgets, the ability to film a set well, the needs of a plot can affect what we get on screen. I don't need an internal explanation because I understand the external one and know these are all made up events.

"But! But that's not a sufficient in-universe explanation!!!"

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

That doesn't give you an uncomfortable Big-Brother-ish vibe of doublethink and the mutability of the past?

In all fairness, public schools have been doing that for ages.

But it does happen in fiction for a variety of reasons. Even Arthur C. Clarke retconned Saturn into Jupiter for his Odyssey books.

 

[fireproof78]

It's just fiction. It's very easy to comprehend. When Saavik is played by two different actresses, I don't assume she had plastic surgery in-universe (unless it's explicitly addressed like the 1701 refit in TMP). When I see the Enterprise looking different between DISCO and TOS I don't assume it had some redesign in-universe. They're all the same. They're all canon. I don't find any of this confusing.

Nope, because I've done it before. TMP Klingons? "Oh, Klingons look like this now." The BoP bridge in The Voyage Home? "Oh, The bridge looks like this now." Qo'nos is now 4 days from Earth at warp 4? "Oh, Qo'nos is closer than we thought now."Tony Stark got injured in Iraq (or was it Afghanistan?) instead of Vietnam in the comic books? "Oh, he got injured like this now." It's just TV, not an actual history. I understand as a functional intelligent person in the world that these are not real events and external issues such as budgets, the ability to film a set well, the needs of a plot can affect what we get on screen. I don't need an internal explanation because I understand the external one and know these are all made up events.

I agree with both of these. I largely struggle with the need to have an explanation for everything that changes on screen. Communicators become wrist communicators in TMP? I can figure that out. Oh, and they changed in TNG? Got it. Didn't even need to be told what it was on screen.

Despite all appearances to the contrary, I am a reasonable smart individual who can connect the dots without being told explicitly why things are different. Call it head canon, call it rationalization, or what-have-you, but it's fiction. I use to hate changes in fiction, and didn't accept TNG or DS9 for the longest time. But, now? They sit just fine with me.

 

[ITDUDE]

Yes! As it has always been. What's your alternative? The fans? You? I'll stick to the writers.

Son, we watch a show that has words, and those words have to be written by men with word processors. Who's gonna do it? You?

I knew I should have had my post in <sarcasm> tags
(see mods, I am using multi-quotes )

 

[EnderAKH]

I knew I should have had my post in <sarcasm> tags
(see mods, I am using multi-quotes )

Oh, I got your sarcasm, but I am NOT going to pass up the opportunity to bastardize an A Few Good Men quote!

 

[ISS Enterprise]

Son, we watch a show that has words, and those words have to be written by men with word processors. Who's gonna do it? You? The writers have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Star Trek and you curse Discovery. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know; that Discovery's existance, while tragic, probably saved jobs. And the writer's existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves jobs*. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want them writing that show. You need them writing that show. We use words like canon, history, fandom. The writers use these words as the backbone of a life spent creating something. You use them as a punchline. The writers have neither the time nor the inclination to explain themselves to a man who rises and sleeps watching the very show that they provide, and then questions the manner in which they provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way, otherwise, I suggest you pick up a pen and write a shooting script. Either way, I don't give a *damn* what you think you are entitled to!

Ender.... did you order the Black Altert..... DID YOU?!?!?!.....

LOL - well played Sir