Personally I think that applying facts from Kelvin Universe to Prime Trek makes about as much sense than applying facts from Gotham TV series to DC Cinematic Universe.The reasonable approach to considering evidence from the abrams films is to ask questions such as: is this evidence likely to have been changed due to the timeline alterations? Is this evidence contradictory to other evidence in the prime universe? Is this evidence supported by other evidence in the prime universe and, if so, to what degree? And to then base your assessment of the evidence on the results of these inquiries.
Personally I think that applying facts from Kelvin Universe to Prime Trek makes about as much sense than applying facts from Gotham TV series to DC Cinematic Universe.
It was just an attempt to avoid fan rage by not calling it full reboot. It's a reboot. Discovery kinda is as well, although this new trailer shows that they might be backpedalling from that. (<-- See! The topic!)I'd be happy to agree if you could point to a single scene from Gotham that purports to exist in even the same multiverse as the DCEU, let alone purports to exist in exactly the same universe and for at least 1 full scene even the same timeline, and for several full scenes featuring a character explicitly from the prime universe.
The connection between the abrams films and the tv shows is not conjecture. It's explicit. Comparing the two obviously leads to circumstantial evidence only, since it is impossible to be 100% certain about the interactions of various changes, but circumstantial evidence is still evidence. And when it concerns things that are also strongly implied in prime sources and are highly unlikely to change in a short period of time, it can be very strong circumstantial evidence.
The interesting thing (for me at least) with Gotham is that it appears (or strongly implies without being explicit) that it is set before the Nolan films. There are no flatscreens or smartphones - but there will be by the time Bruce Wayne grows up to be Christian Bale. Many of the characters seem to have had actors cast who could potentially be portrayals of younger versions of the actors who played those same characters in the Nolan films. John Pertwee’s son is a passably younger version of Michael Caine, for instance.It was just an attempt to avoid fan rage by not calling it full reboot. It's a reboot. Discovery kinda is as well, although this new trailer shows that they might be backpedalling from that.
The interesting thing (for me at least) with Gotham is that it appears (or strongly implies without being explicit) that it is set before the Nolan films. There are no flatscreens or smartphones
I’d not thought about it from that angle. I think I put two and two together with that and the actors seeming like younger versions of the Nolan characters. But that doesn’t mean that my calculations were correctI think the intent there was to give the city itself some character, not necessarily plant in anywhere chronologically.
The setting of Gotham is intentionally anachronistic. It is intended to ewoke sort of noir feel. In that way it is more similar to Burton's Batman films than Nolan's.I think the intent there was to give the city itself some character, not necessarily plant in anywhere chronologically.
There is no variation to suggest that Spock's experience suddenly changed to a positive one because he got older.
I have read Star Trek encyclopedias since I was 8. I have my own head canon of events, characters, creatures and imaginings. Variation is not something to be avoided but to be embraced.
Probably temporaryIt's really strange to see Spock with all that beard! I wonder if it will be permanent or just temporary.
I'm wondering whether the Klingons are investigating a Red Angel in parallel, and taking a different approach, in a similar setup to the film Arrival. Perhaps this is the origin of the little bot things which seem to attack them in the asteroid field (and potentially downed Notaro's ship).The Klingon plot probably has little to do with the rest of the season, but it's there to keep Ash and L'Rell involved
Could be that lazy but well meaning species from TNG that doesn't want to travel and makes people smart so they'll come visit them instead.I'm wondering whether the Klingons are investigating a Red Angel in parallel, and taking a different approach, in a similar setup to the film Arrival. Perhaps this is the origin of the little bot things which seem to attack them in the asteroid field (and potentially downed Notaro's ship).
I'm interested in how the faith/science element plays in though. It raises the possibility that the 'Angels' are benevolent beings primarily, or whether they are presenting a front. Certainly I hope it doesn't end up in a battle.
Stargate did that, too.Could be that lazy but well meaning species from TNG that doesn't want to travel and makes people smart so they'll come visit them instead.
Could just be a background graphic, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is L'Rell's ship for this season.I just wonder how much of that D7 is going to be seen. For all we know it will be just that scene and never again
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.