I think there was a great idea for a movie in there, somewhere. Unfortunately, very little of it made it to the screen.
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
I think there was a great idea for a movie in there, somewhere. Unfortunately, very little of it made it to the screen.
The worst week ever for me (at least in the Top 5, maybe even the Top 3) and a debate about Canon were probably not the best combination.
But the basic arguments against the Discoprise still seem to fall into one of two categories, "It's not the TOS design!" or "That's not how I would've changed it!"
I got "they changed it!" as a vibe, then went with "it must be the it's not the TOS design angle" and it went from there... And the terrible week that keeps getting worse has taken away the filter I normally channel things through.
Sorry about that.
No worries - sorry if my reply was a little combative, I didn’t mean to get soap-boxy. I hope your week improves.
There's not a Star Trek movie been made yet that's as good as the best episodes of the TV series it was based on.
I love the Discoprise, it works perfectly as an update for me. Something I've wondered is why people are willing to suspend their disbelief for a bad planet set (painted backdrop, fake rocks, obvious set dressing, etc.) but not for the TOS Enterprise. In my eyes, if I can say "That planet obviously doesn't look like that in universe, I can pretend it looks more realistic." then I can do the same for the enterprise, interior and exterior. Why is the planet set given a pass but the enterprise isn't? Hope that makes sense, that's just the way I see it. Not my intent to offend anyone if you see it differently 
How is that mutually exclusive with what I said? That you try to appease fans doesn't mean you're targetting them primarily.
It's pretty good, but some of it's writing is sloppy and convoluted. For instance, the idea that Starfleet would be shelved by a peace with the Klingons is laughable; as if the Romulans, Gorn and other Federation enemies would cease to exist. As if the Federation doesn't need a military for anything else.
Agreed on most of this, except TFF. The only good thing about that movie's story was the portrayal of the leads' relationship.
Nope.
Yeah, I kind of agree with you, but that said:Or, and just hear me out here...perhaps instead of coming up with convoluted scenarios to justify what my eyes show me, I'll just assume that DSC is just a reboot. Wow, that was easy!
If Kurtzman and Co. do really 'realign to canon' this season as they say they will - there is the fact that Pike's 1701 had a crew compliment of 203:
From TOS - "The Cage":
Yet, 10 years later the 1701 has over double that crew compliment IE - 430.
So, yeah, you might be able to claim that this version is another refit of the 1701 (smaller in various dimensions and that's why it has a crew of 203) AFTER the events in TOS - "The Cage"; and then after whatever event's we'll see in ST: D S2; either before, or in the early days of Kirk taking command, somehow the vessel was again tpotally refit; and somehow scaled up to it's dimensions as stated in the prime of Kirk's time in command - thus the increase in allowable crew compliment, etc.
I'm all for a good 'canon twist' that makes some sense; but yeah, I agree, they're making too big of a pretzel here with some of the stuff in ST: D.
Maybe Pike had the Enterprise washed, and they put it in a really hot dryer... 
The only ones making a pretzel out of this is those trying to fit everything together.
Mercury is in retrograde, so...
Last I checked, that shrunk things...Maybe Pike had the Enterprise washed, and they put it in a really hot dryer...
Right, since the Enterprise gets smaller again for TOS.Last I checked, that shrunk things...
But, this is after the Cage, when there was only 203 crew members...my head hurts.
I would guess the crew size went up for the war, and Starfleet decided that the Constitutions worked better with the larger crews. Or that they started to assign them more long term missions were having a larger crew was a benefit over a crew less than half the size.
Discovery, for all its size, has a tiny crew. So does Voyager for that matter. The Enterprise-D, with her huge space, had a tiny crew and civilian population for its volume.
Discovery, for all its size, has a tiny crew. So does Voyager for that matter. The Enterprise-D, with her huge space, had a tiny crew and civilian population for its volume.
I've found that when the week kicks your ass, all you have to worry about is Uranus.
Seriously, though, I hope good times roll your way real soon.
This may...be true.
All we know from canon is that at some point between 2254 and 2265 the crew complement of the Enterprise jumped from 203 officers and crew to 430. It could have happened at any point during that eleven-year span so if DSC has the ship already hosting a crew complement of about 430 then there's no problem there.
One good thing about TOS canon and lore is that there is such a wide gap between the first two pilots and then "WNMHGB" and "The Corbomite Maneuver" (a whole year or close to it) that you can play around in that unwritten free zone so long as you don't go bat guano crazy. The crew size never bothers me in any of the TOS-era shows or films.
Alternatively, they just changed the number in the script and that's a retcon.
Welcome to 2018 Star Trek, where NOTHING is set is stone. Visuals? Rebooted. Storyline and lore? Retconned to the point where it's indistinguishable from a reboot. Producers on Twitter? "IT'S PRIME!"
That last point is the problem.Welcome to 2018 Star Trek, where NOTHING is set is stone. Visuals? Rebooted. Storyline and lore? Retconned to the point where it's indistinguishable from a reboot. Producers on Twitter? "IT'S PRIME!"
People here have commented on the pointless nature of trying to make Star Trek “fit” together and suggest things like “it’s just an update” “it’s just a minor change” “it’s just a retcon” as if that’s somehow going to make me invest more in the Trek universe - oh, and anyone who feels the producers could explain what the heck they’re on about when they say “prime” is a “TOS fanboi who thinks DSC should have been STC and is therefore a Pakled”.
If they want to retcon stuff, fine. I have a headcanon explanation for the romulans - that wasn’t as drastic a change as supersizing the Enterprise.
The insistence that DSC is “prime” makes no sense at this point. I’d be happy with it as a reboot.
But - the fact that it IS prime raises more questions than it answers.
Science is the answer here Miles. No more cloak and dagger games.
Prime? Evidence.
Maybe if someone says “end program”...
Similar threads
