I need to rewatch that. That's interesting. what scene is it?
Discovery Showrunners fired; Kurtzman takes over
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
It's all in how you approach Trek's historical events, which is the source of contention for the past several pages.
Yep. And at that point, there was still some fluidity to the time frame Star Trek took place in. Early-23rd century and late-20th century could be rounded to be 200 years apart.
His first scene with Chekov and Captain Terrell, when he's summarizing the events of Space Seed to the Captain.
It distracts me from the fact that my country is fucked right now.
I agree. I've always felt that Star Trek was in our future. That's what made it inspiring to me. So keeping future history in the future is a conceit I'm willing to accept
How is humanity making it in a similar but separate timeline less inspiring?
Thanks. I forgot about that. Think the writers just slipped and the line would have been "three hundred years ago, I was a prince" and "live and die at my command three hundred years before.."
I guarantee NO ONE thought anyone would be talking about it in 2018
I could go either way, but apparently your attitude is completely foreign one from some of the responses I've read. Which, is odd to me, because I thought that was a conceit implicit in TOS and its foundations. Certainly is apart of the BTS foundational work I've read for TOS.
Jinn, you make some good points, but I see this series as a re-imagining or reboot of Trek, as a whole-the redesigns, rewriting of characters, adding new elements: planets, species, technology, etc. I don't think the argument that the series is sticking to canon is valid. On the other hand, canon is subject to revision and always has been in Trek, Star Wars, etc. While I think Rick Berman honestly tried to stick to Star Trek canon, I can't really say the same for Harberts despite his claims.
Or the writer didn't know what year the movie took place.Thanks. I forgot about that. Think the writers just slipped and the line would have been "three hundred years ago, I was a prince" and "live and die at my command three hundred years before.."
I guarantee NO ONE thought anyone would be talking about it in 2018
Cuz, it makes me feel like, as a species, we can do something worthwhile. It keeps me personally invested in the action.
Good point. I think it just vaguely says "the 23rd century" at the beginning of the film. Even that was pretty rare for a pinpointed date the audience could recognize, at the time.
It is still humanity making it.
That really doesn't pinpoint much. It can cover from 2201-2299. If the thought was that Trek took place early in the 23rd century, then the "200 years" is a pretty fair approximation. Khan was being dramatic, after all.
And? It's the meaning they derive from the piece.
Not the same...to me. You have an affinity to the minutae. That seems to be important to you, Fine, I like the idea that it's our future. Are both of us wrong, or right?
Wouldn't that be 2201-2301?
