Would you accept a flexible Star Trek timeline?

[BillJ]

If I excluded DSC from the lineage it would be less fun to watch, though. It wouldn’t be part of a legacy, and adding to that legacy.

I guess I'm the opposite. I'd rather them do their own thing and add to the legacy just through the sheer awesomeness of the stories they are telling versus cramming it into a pre-existing continuity.

I'd rather have a show that takes us down an untraveled road (maybe with Spock as Captain of the TOS five year mission, and other changes) than trying to shoehorn him into Nimoy's version of the character.

YMMV.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

If I excluded DSC from the lineage it would be less fun to watch, though. It wouldn’t be part of a legacy, and adding to that legacy.

Of course, but right now it’s a matter of mentally tossifying DSC and discofying TOS, so tie-in publications need to take that into account to avoid discontinuity. After all, it’s Peck’s Spock who would serve with a recast Kirk in a flash-forward on a slightly updated DSC Enterprise, and then you have to keep imagining everything else from TMP onwards (which again wouldn’t look too different from DSC because there is no need for a “big-screen” update).

 

[F. King Daniel]

Of course, but right now it’s a matter of mentally tossifying DSC and discofying TOS, so tie-in publications need to take that into account to avoid discontinuity. After all, it’s Peck’s Spock who would serve with a recast Kirk in a flash-forward on a slightly updated DSC Enterprise, and then you have to keep imagining everything else from TMP onwards (which again wouldn’t look too different from DSC because there is no need for a “big-screen” update).

Just wait until Picard comes out, a rock solid sequel to TNG and Nemesis, featuring a Discofied "All Good Things" badge and Starfleet insignia, and Discovery shuttles flying about in San Francisco 2399...

 

[fireproof78]

The bridge on top might seem like a bad spot for combat situations, but I'm sure most Federation starships go their whole life without getting into a fight, so it might make sense for other reasons, like if the ship is flooded with radiation. Either way, I can make excuses for it. It's also important for giving the audience a sense of scale. The window as the viewscreen is harder to explain.

I disagree. The window gives me a better sense of scale than any other aspect of the ship. The Bridge on top is stupid even if one isn't going in to combat. Things like asteroids, radiation in space, and myriad of other accidents. Traveling in space isn't safe and sticking your leadership at the top of the ship is dumb, no mater how you cut it.

I can make just as many excuses for the window.

Of course, but right now it’s a matter of mentally tossifying DSC and discofying TOS, so tie-in publications need to take that into account to avoid discontinuity.

I don't see the need. It's telling a story about characters that I am more concerned about, than whether the uniform syncs up perfectly right.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

I don't see the need. It's telling a story about characters that I am more concerned about, than whether the uniform syncs up perfectly right.

But suppose you had to release a perfectly reasonable tie-in called The Official Star Trek Uniform Guide? How would you handle the 2250s?

 

[fireproof78]

But suppose you had to release a perfectly reasonable tie-in called The Official Star Trek Uniform Guide? How would you handle the 2250s?

Such a random hypothetical but I'll bite.

Longer term missions had a different uniform style that denoted operational division by a full colored tunic. Other ships would be assigned uniforms based upon mission profile. Some discretion was allowed for commanding officers to determine appropriate uniform.

That's off the top of my head. But, it isn't taking me out of the story because its a different shade of color or cut of uniform.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I guess I'm the opposite. I'd rather them do their own thing and add to the legacy just through the sheer awesomeness of the stories they are telling versus cramming it into a pre-existing continuity.

I'd rather have a show that takes us down an untraveled road (maybe with Spock as Captain of the TOS five year mission, and other changes) than trying to shoehorn him into Nimoy's version of the character.

YMMV.

If it’s the greatest story ever told, great. But there’s a higher standard of writing to be enjoyable for a disconnected show called “Star Trek” than there is for a Star Trek show.

Like, if they do a Star Trek reboot as good as NuBSG, fantastic! It’s a new, great show. But if Voyager or Ent were not in the Star Trek universe, they’d be just another middling syndicated sci-fi show. Like Andromeda or Cleopatra 2525. The same way the last two Avengers movies wouldn’t feel as great without the 20 preceding ones.

To me, just having the amazing worldbuilding that already exists in the collective imaginations of millions of people as a jumping off point gives every little detail of it more gravity. It draws me in just being a new part of the thing that’s been special to me since I was 9.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Such a random hypothetical but I'll bite.

Longer term missions had a different uniform style that denoted operational division by a full colored tunic. Other ships would be assigned uniforms based upon mission profile. Some discretion was allowed for commanding officers to determine appropriate uniform.

That's off the top of my head. But, it isn't taking me out of the story because its a different shade of color or cut of uniform.

It’s not a random hypothetical because we’ve already seen a preview of an Eaglemoss publication where the traditional lineup by size was disrupted by slotting in the scaled-up DSC Enterprise, whereas if DSC had done that in something like “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, they would’ve of course scaled up and discofied all Enterprises to keep the lineup neat.

Likewise, DSC and Short Treks imply that the literal uniforms from “The Cage” never happened, but does it mean that tie-ins can no longer depict the old design for 2254? If not, why not extend that to the second pilot and probably Kirk’s era or beyond? You’re writing in the voice of an in-universe uniform expert, so it can’t be a mishmash. I see this as two tie-ins, one for DSC uniforms which doesn’t depict any others (though it could allude to them in text), and another for the rest (which again could mention DSC uniforms in text).

 

[fireproof78]

It’s not a random hypothetical because we’ve already seen a preview of an Eaglemoss publication where the traditional lineup by size was disrupted by slotting in the scaled-up DSC Enterprise, whereas if DSC had done that in something like “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, they would’ve of course scaled up and discofied all Enterprises to keep the lineup neat.

Likewise, DSC and Short Treks imply that the literal uniforms from “The Cage” never happened, but does it mean that tie-ins can no longer depict the old design for 2254? If not, why not extend that to the second pilot and probably Kirk’s era or beyond? You’re writing in the voice of an in-universe uniform expert, so it can’t be a mishmash. I see this as two tie-ins, one for DSC uniforms which doesn’t depict any others (though it could allude to them in text), and another for the rest (which again could mention DSC uniforms in text).

I see it this way. The pilots and TOS are in universe representations of TOS events, but are not perfectly identical to what happened, for production reasons, security reasons, etc.

I personally don't have an issue with it, because it is not a full history. And, like any history, as more information is added, materials will be updated (see the dinosaurs, among other things). That doesn't render past works moot. It simply adds to known information.

I see it as additive, not destructive. Mileage will vary.

 

[The Wormhole]

The creators of Doctor Who have once said that EVERYTHING has happened in all of Doctor Who's spin-off media, the show, and even contradictory elements.

After reading this thread, I'm going to quote former Doctor Who producer Terrance Dicks. "Continuity is only whatever I can remember." That is an attitude that should be adopted for Star Trek.

 

[Tenacity]

Just wait until Picard comes out, a rock solid sequel to TNG and Nemesis, featuring a Discofied "All Good Things" badge and Starfleet insignia, and Discovery shuttles flying about in San Francisco 2399...

If they (TPTB) choose to place Picard in the Disco universe, this is of course their option.

But then Picard will be in the Disco universe.

 

[BillJ]

To me, just having the amazing worldbuilding that already exists in the collective imaginations of millions of people as a jumping off point gives every little detail of it more gravity.

That worldbuilding doesn't go anywhere because it is spread across multiple timelines. I didn't forget what a Tribble was when I saw one in Star Trek Into Darkness. The same with "The Trouble with Edward". Seeing it as part of an alternate timeline doesn't negate what a Tribble is or the episodes that came before.

Discovery is moving to the 32nd century where it will have little to no impact on the rest of the shows, yet you still have people excitedly picking out all the little things they notice from other versions of Star Trek.

Of course, YMMV. I just don't see the worldbuilding as going anywhere based on it being a multiverse versus a single timeline.

 

[Tim Thomason]

If they (TPTB) choose to place Picard in the Disco universe, this is of course their option.

But then Picard will be in the Disco universe.

What happens when Picard recounts the events of Datalore, with an HD flashback to that episode? Then he helps build a scale model of the USS Shenzhou? Then, Quark gives him the last surviving tribble and is told about the legend of Edward Larkin (with appropriate cereal box for effect).

 

[Tim Thomason]

But suppose you had to release a perfectly reasonable tie-in called The Official Star Trek Uniform Guide? How would you handle the 2250s?

I'd go mad within the week. And that's before I get around to Discovery.

 

[BillJ]

What happens when Picard recounts the events of Datalore, with an HD flashback to that episode? Then he helps build a scale model of the USS Shenzhou? Then, Quark gives him the last surviving tribble and is told about the legend of Edward Larkin (with appropriate cereal box for effect).

Then you just treat it as a spin-off of Discovery if that is what makes you happy. It isn't an exact science and there will always be "what if?" scenarios that don't quite fit. Nor do I expect anyone else to follow my thinking, I expect people to do what makes them happy. I'm only explaining what I do to make myself happy. There are so many real world issues that one doesn't have a choice but to put up with, how we interpret Star Trek isn't and shouldn't be one of them.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

I think tie-ins should try their best to address these issues head-on, since it’s more fun that way. Suppose you had one called The History of Transporters, written as an in-universe technical manual by a famous Starfleet transporter expert? Again, do they depict both “The Cage” and DSC versions of the Connie transporter, or just the former to avoid reimagining everything else? Remember, this would pretend to be an engineering publication, so it couldn’t use inconsistent photos side-by-side without explanation — design continuity is important.

 

[Spot261]

After reading this thread, I'm going to quote former Doctor Who producer Terrance Dicks. "Continuity is only whatever I can remember." That is an attitude that should be adopted for Star Trek.

Yup.

Remember it's fun, something that's an escape from the problems and demands of real life and enjoy it on those terms.

If you enjoy trying to tie it all together, sweet, but let's not see people getting stressed overthinking something that really doesn't require it.

 

[Jayson1]

I would be open to both multiverse shows or where a flexible timeline makes most sense and that is a remake that is it's own thing. At some point you got to create new characters that people love and not just constantly recast old characters. We really don't need a 4th Spock and just gender flipping or casting a POC just won't cut it. We not just great actors but characters. With easter eggs and nods to old stuff. Jason

 

[Boris Skrbic]

After reading this thread, I'm going to quote former Doctor Who producer Terrance Dicks. "Continuity is only whatever I can remember." That is an attitude that should be adopted for Star Trek.

He would’ve been speaking before the age of wikis in relation to a long-running series, and anyway it works for DW, whereas ST at its core is not about timelines.

 

[BillJ]

He would’ve been speaking before the age of wikis in relation to a long-running series, and anyway it works for DW, whereas ST at its core is not about timelines.

I’d rather the writers spend time writing instead of chasing minutiae on Wikipedia.