Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?

[Gonzo]

I thought that was this...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Just getting a 404 error.

Yet in the preview of what you said in this post it shows the clip.

I didn't mind that particular scene, I just don't want it to be a space shows theme tune.

It was horrible and put me off as soon as I heard it.

 

[DaveyNY]

Just getting a 404 error.

Yet in the preview of what you said in this post it shows the clip.

I didn't mind that particular scene, I just don't want it to be a space shows theme tune.

It was horrible and put me off as soon as I heard it.

They are singing Row Your Boat around the campfire...

it was a joke.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

The Original Series

The Kelvin Universe

Discovery

I guess that leaves Brandon Routh without a home.

Really, Superman Returns should by all rights be DSC in this analogy, as it both connects itself directly to the Donner films and considers itself free to take liberties with them, simultaneously.

-MMoM

 

[Lord Garth]

Really, Superman Returns should by all rights be DSC in this analogy, as it both connects itself directly to the Donner films and considers itself free to take liberties with them, simultaneously.

-MMoM

I don't know if King Daniel agrees but, now that you put it that way, I think Superman Returns works better as DSC too.

 

[Tribble puncher]

My ongoing personal theory is the show doesn't START in the prime timeline, but it will END in it.

 

[Red Panda]

Can someone explain to me in a few bulletpoints why fans can't figure this out? Like I think 99% of the audience know it's set before the first show, and everything has been given a new updated look. The fans don't seem to get that concept.

Before anyone says there are hard and fast rules in the Star Trek universe, bish please... Perhaps one of those magic space whales saw the look of TOS and decided it was shite, so in 1986 released some magic whale seeds into the Earth's atmosphere that defy space and time and influence aesthetic design, and so that's why the Star Trek universe looks different now. The seed wave of change is a little slow, so we're only seeing the changes now in 2018, but slowly the entire Prime timeline is changing. Does that work as an explanation?

(Or you can simply accept they've just made it like a modern show.)

 

[CorporalClegg]

Most people get it. It's just that those that don't have that clackiest keyboards.

 

[F. King Daniel]

(Or you can simply accept they've just made it like a modern show.)

But when you make a modern show, totally re-imagining the technology of the era but still insist it's a direct prequel in the same world you run into issues. As detailed elsewhere in this thread and others, technological solutions present themselves which make Kirk and company look foolish.

And then, when you retcon the story to completely change the backstory of Trek's most famous character...

 

[Red Panda]

As detailed elsewhere in this thread and others, technological solutions present themselves which make Kirk and company look foolish.

I would imagine if CBS AA were to hypothetically remake TOS, it would be similarly updated too to not make Kirk and Spock look stupid. In-universe they're obviously not seen as stupid.

In the Prime timeline, this:

and this:

are exactly the same. The characters in the show can't tell them apart, only we can.

I'm absolutely miffed 135 people in the votes can't understand this.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I would imagine if CBS AA were to hypothetically remake TOS, it would be similarly updated too to not make Kirk and Spock look stupid. In-universe they're obviously not seen as stupid.

Well then it's not the prime universe, is it? It's the remade TOS universe where things happened a little differently.

You know, like I've been saying all along.

 

[Red Panda]

Well then it's not the prime universe, is it? It's the remade TOS universe where things happened a little differently.

Things haven't happened different, things just look different. It's the same timeline. Otherwise by your logic the movies (pre-2009) aren't the same timeline as TOS either, because they gave everything a major visual upgrade too. Also Enterprise is its own timeline too, because everything looks more advanced than TOS too.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

But when you make a modern show, totally re-imagining the technology of the era but still insist it's a direct prequel in the same world you run into issues. As detailed elsewhere in this thread and others, technological solutions present themselves which make Kirk and company look foolish.

And then, when you retcon the story to completely change the backstory of Trek's most famous character...

You mean like that time the Enterprise nearly let a landing party freeze to death because they were afraid of a transporter malfunction and literally no one stopped to wonder 'Why don't we send a shuttle down to pick them up?'

If you can reconcile TOS with itself, you can reconcile it with DSC.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Things haven't happened different, things just look different. It's the same timeline. Otherwise by your logic the movies (pre-2009) aren't the same timeline as TOS either, because they gave everything a major visual upgrade too. Also Enterprise is its own timeline too, because everything looks more advanced than TOS too.

No, they have to have happened differently too. For example, in "Balance of Terror" we wouldn't have the conversation where Spock explains cloaking devices to Kirk and nobody would be surprised by them because only 10 years ago they were widely known. "Yesteryear" would have played out somewhat differently because Spock had a human sister he was raised with. "Wrath of Khan" would end differently because starships have big windows out front, negating the visual static issue. Spock starts acting crazy in "Amok Time"? Ring his sister and ask her what's going on. Raised on Vulcan, she'd be Starfleet's foremost expert on a people who were largely mysterious in TOS. She knows all about melding, Katras and many other things the classic crew didn't.

ENT was a century before TOS, and an effort was made to show technology progressing from current-day keyboards and Windows-style GUI's toward jelly beans and blinking coloured squares. Time travel (with 2 or 3 cases where it's explicitly said that history has been altered) excuses the continuity hiccups.

 

[F. King Daniel]

You mean like that time the Enterprise nearly let a landing party freeze to death because they were afraid of a transporter malfunction and literally no one stopped to wonder 'Why don't we send a shuttle down to pick them up?'

If you can reconcile TOS with itself, you can reconcile it with DSC.

Maybe they were out of shuttles? Maybe they were all in use? If they said something to imply shuttles never existed, it would have been a bigger issue.

 

[Red Panda]

Who's to say they won't do some mumbo jumbo shut-the-fans-up comic or something that irons these "plotholes" out? There's clearly a market for it, if you're prepared to accept "the space whales did it" as a valid reason.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Maybe they were out of shuttles? Maybe they were all in use? If they said something to imply shuttles never existed, it would have been a bigger issue.

No, they have to have happened differently too. For example, in "Balance of Terror" we wouldn't have the conversation where Spock explains cloaking devices to Kirk and nobody would be surprised by them because only 10 years ago they were widely known. "Yesteryear" would have played out somewhat differently because Spock had a human sister he was raised with. "Wrath of Khan" would end differently because starships have big windows out front, negating the visual static issue. Spock starts acting crazy in "Amok Time"? Ring his sister and ask her what's going on. Raised on Vulcan, she'd be Starfleet's foremost expert on a people who were largely mysterious in TOS. She knows all about melding, Katras and many other things the classic crew didn't.

ENT was a century before TOS, and an effort was made to show technology progressing from current-day keyboards and Windows-style GUI's toward jelly beans and blinking coloured squares. Time travel (with 2 or 3 cases where it's explicitly said that history has been altered) excuses the continuity hiccups.

Maybe Michael wasn't around during Yesteryear. Maybe Spock never told anyone he had a human sister (he certainly never told anyone he had a human mother or that his father was a famous ambassador until they literally set foot on the ship). Maybe it's not quite so easy to visually track things inside a nebula. Maybe Burnham isn't even still in starfleet ten years from now. Maybe the cloaking device in BoT isn't even comparable to what we're seeing here (because it certainly doesn't match up with any of the other cloaking devices in the history of the franchise).

If you can make these excuses for TOS, you can make them for DSC. It's all the same.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Maybe Michael wasn't around during Yesteryear. Maybe Spock never told anyone he had a human sister (he certainly never told anyone he had a human mother or that his father was a famous ambassador until they literally set foot on the ship). Maybe it's not quite so easy to visually track things inside a nebula. Maybe Burnham isn't even still in starfleet ten years from now. Maybe the cloaking device in BoT isn't even comparable to what we're seeing here (because it certainly doesn't match up with any of the other cloaking devices in the history of the franchise).

If you can make these excuses for TOS, you can make them for DSC. It's all the same.

It's a matter of degree. I don't think excusing shuttles in one episode is anywhere near equal to excusing Spock having an even-more-famous-than-him human sister and the massive changes to his backstory that makes. That's why I say Discovery is it's own thing. Trying to reconcile it with TOS is like trying to reconcile Gotham with Batman Begins - which I'm pretty sure some people here would argue passionately if their powers-that-be tweeted that they're actually the same continuity.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

It's a matter of degree. I don't think excusing shuttles in one episode is anywhere near equal to excusing Spock having an even-more-famous-than-him human sister and the massive changes to his backstory that makes. That's why I say Discovery is it's own thing. Trying to reconcile it with TOS is like trying to reconcile Gotham with Batman Begins - which I'm pretty sure some people here would argue passionately if their powers-that-be tweeted that they're actually the same continuity.

First, it's not just the shuttles in one episode. TOS contradicted itself all the time. James R. Kirk. Space Command. Star Service. 'The only death penalty left on the books' (which was stated about multiple different regulations). The Mind Meld, which was never used in situations where it obviously would make sense, until it was with the excuse that it's very 'private', but then they just use it willy-nilly for the rest of the show. Spock smiling and making jokes (like, a LOT). Etc, etc, etc.

Second, Burnham may be 'famous' as Starfleet's first mutineer, but her connection to Spock obviously isn't widely known so it's ridiculous to call that a problem. And Spock having an adopted sister in his youth (who was not always around, since she had her own life before the attack that killed her parents) is no bigger than every other revelation that's ever been made about Spock's past going straight back to Journey to Babel. The simple truth is, Spock doesn't talk about his past, even with his supposed friends. They didn't know his mother was human. They didn't know his parents were going to be passengers on the ship until they arrived. They didn't know he was engaged/married until Amok Time. They didn't know he had a half-brother who rejected logic. The most enduring truth about Spock is that nobody knows shit about Spock.

 

[Gonzo]

They are singing Row Your Boat around the campfire...

it was a joke.

Yes I know what they are singing I was talking about the Enterprise Theme still.

 

[Lord Garth]

Can someone explain to me in a few bulletpoints why fans can't figure this out? Like I think 99% of the audience know it's set before the first show, and everything has been given a new updated look. The fans don't seem to get that concept.

They get it but they want to keep the argument going for the sake of it. I couldn't care less. What they think doesn't change my opinion of the show, nor should what I think change theirs.