They want us to think Discovery is part of the universe without doing the legwork to make it actually fit with the rest of it.
Alex Kurtzman on the Fine Line Between Adding to, and Staying True to, Star Trek's Canon
- Thread starter Danja
- Start date
They want us to think Discovery is part of the universe without doing the legwork to make it actually fit with the rest of it.
Trek has never had consistent scale.
Chess. I get maneuvered into a point where one would think I'd reply to this with, "Who cares about canon?" or "Why make such a big deal about canon? Just enjoy the episode!" Short of that I'd be had to say, "You're right! It doesn't fit, who the Hell cares?"
Not the track I'm taking.
A) We never saw the Battle of Wolf 359, except for a brief glimpse in a flashback in DS9.
B) Khan doesn't know shit about drones. He doesn't even know where the override is on the Reliant.
C) TOS, the original movies, and TNG were all made in a time where they couldn't show multiple drones. Just because they weren't shown doesn't mean they didn't have the ability.
D) While we see huge fleets in DS9 and no drones, my argument was that Starfleet would rely on drones less when they had more ships at their disposal. Lack of ships would mean using drones to compensate.
You'll note that when there are large fleets in DSC S1, in "The Vulcan Hello" and "Battle at the Binary Stars", there are no drones in use. When Discovery battles the Klingons in "The Butcher's Knife" and ""Into the Forest I Go", they also don't use drones.
Drones were only deployed against Control-infested Section 31 so that the Enterprise and Discovery would have a fighting chance against their onslaught. They were probably only intended to be used sparingly.
EDIT: And I'm watching "Such Sweet Sorrow" even as we speak. Number One said she had the pods retrofitted anyway. So it's likely not standard operating procedure to have the type of attack drones they did for this specific mission. In a battle to prevent all life from being wiped out of the universe, I think such extra measures are justified. The stakes wouldn't usually be quite so high. And it just shows how adept Number One is to boot.
Your move.
Last edited:
Your move.
Starfleet is doing its people a massive disservice, and risking lives, by not giving them all reasonable tools at their disposal. Obviously these things, drones and robots exist, and aren’t hard to upgrade to work for your people. The tech levels simply don’t mesh between shows. For some folks it doesn’t matter. To me? It throws me completely out of the story.
It is like sending a doctor in to operate on someone without gloves.
The magical unfolding gangway between Discovery and Enterprise got to me. Where was that thing stored?
It used the same magical extending technology as Sulu's sword and the seat belts in the Kelvin universe movies.
But in this case, we’re not talking about all of Trek. We’re talking specifically about the changes between the TOS Enterprise and the DSC Enterprise. And in the context of TOS, we see the interior of the shuttlebay and the shuttle itself for scale on several occasions, and there is simply no way that the TOS Enterprise could be carrying the amount of shuttles/fighters/drones/etc. that the DSC Enterprise has.
The shuttle in the pic of the TOS Enterprise doesn't look to be in scale to me.
http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x10hd/journeytobabelhd0036.jpg
http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/2x18/immunitysyndrome0316.jpg
Here are screencaps of the shuttlebay, pointing out the scale of the shuttlebay door to the actual shuttlecraft. It looks to me like there’s enough storage for at least ten shuttles, with the understanding that the shuttlebay only comprises about a third of the entire secondary hull.
http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/2x18/immunitysyndrome0316.jpg
Here are screencaps of the shuttlebay, pointing out the scale of the shuttlebay door to the actual shuttlecraft. It looks to me like there’s enough storage for at least ten shuttles, with the understanding that the shuttlebay only comprises about a third of the entire secondary hull.
Last edited:
After Starfleet's struggles with the Control AI, as well as the M-5 debacle, I'm going with Starfleet adopting a rather draconian approach to AI units, and not trusting the technology. Similar to the whole genetic engineering prohibition.
I have a tough time imagining an interstellar civilization being that afraid of technology. Even in TNG, the Federation was doing genetic engineering in “Unnatural Selection”.
I don't. I think it will depend greatly on leadership too.
^^^
To be fair - two of the three Kelivin based films are the highest grossing Star Trek theatrical films even after adjusting for inflation, (and the one Kelvin film that did under perform still did better then the final two TNG based theatrical films); so from a business standpoint the answer would be: "Yes, it in fact worked out very well for Paramount." -- Just saying.
So lots of people like it. That's not always a bad thing, nor is it always a good thing. It depends on the criteria not mentioned...
Interesting video. It theorizes the timeline diverged with a Xindi Attack that wasn't supposed to happen and wasn't reset. After the Xindi, Starfleet had more reason to develop defensive technology than it would've if the Xindi had never appeared.
So, according to the video,9/11 the Xindi changed everything.
So, according to the video,
Last edited:
Except then we wouldn't have had that scene from "The Cage" if the timeline changed after the Xindi attack.
It was artistic licence. It happens sometimes with creative types and it was a funny, silly little recap that was intended to be quirky.
No, I'm not shitting you. 'Artistic license' has nothing to do with it. We the audience were supposed to accept that those events from 'The Cage' happened exactly as we saw them on screen. They wouldn't have happened if the Xindi changed the timeline 100 years before.
Then you didn't take the recap in the spirit it was intended in.
It has nothing to do with how I personally feel about the recap. It has to do with proving that video you posted is wrong.
All right. We'll go through the motions. Prove it wasn't artistic licence.
Similar threads
