It has? Is there canonical proof of that?
I want to see those damn turtleneck sweater uniforms from The Cage & WNMHGB!
- Thread starter bryce
- Start date
It has? Is there canonical proof of that?
Note that I’m going for a “retcon of two hulls” here, which Pike’s command could “wear” like uniforms for that matter. The TMP hull would then become the third under NCC-1701, compromising between the reliable original and the experimental Disco hull. Of course the ship cannot be a Transformer, but why not have two ships if that’s what it takes to wedge DSC in?
Or, as I mentioned before, take CBS's approach and just completely ignore what we see in TOS.
Nope. Something I read in a novel or a book somewhere.
For me, I'm almost glad that DSC took the decision to completely reinvent the TOS aesthetic. If they had tried to imitate the visuals we saw in TOS it would have been a modernised interpretation and thus not matched what we originally saw. Maybe we could have just pretended that it had "always" looked like that, TOS with a bit more polish but if so, why stop there with the pretence? Why not just remake the look altogether?
By setting up a completely new visual look for DSC there's no need to come up with convoluted excuses for how the TOS Enterprise now suddenly had RCS thrusters or why the Bridge is suddenly 50% larger but the uniforms are still the same except for the design of the collars and so on. Instead, EVERYTHING is different, period. New series, new visual lens, (probably) the same characters
By setting up a completely new visual look for DSC there's no need to come up with convoluted excuses for how the TOS Enterprise now suddenly had RCS thrusters or why the Bridge is suddenly 50% larger but the uniforms are still the same except for the design of the collars and so on. Instead, EVERYTHING is different, period. New series, new visual lens, (probably) the same characters
Specifically, the production approach seems to be to treat TOS like a stylized daydream rather than go to minimum trouble and remake a flashback like the one to 2254. The CBS approach in general is more like putting the two side by side and seeing what clicks.
Yes. Paint jobs, refits, the Enterprise War novel proposed a configuration alteration (I forget the name). The movies' Enterprise looked completely different and was still the same ship. We accepted that for decades.
We even have built in explanations in non canon reference guides that were around for years:
According to Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise (p. 14), the deflector shields of the refit-Constitution-class were a similar technology, while only the defense fields protecting the top decks were traditional force fields. The main shield grid was a massive replicator system, projecting an invisible hull layer, molecularly identical to the diburnium-osmium alloy used to build the Kalandan outpost.
A massive automated replicator system deployed to the hull can change the look of a ship fairly easily.
Despite Harry Kim's claims in Voyager (he probably was bad at history) we know that TOS had replicators. Some aliens of the week in Catspaw tried to bribe Kirk with gold and jewels, and he said they could create a ton of them on the Enterprise. The entire red angel suit was also able to be replicated aboard the Enterprise as seen in Discovery.
Last edited:
There's a problem with that theory that the later TMP Enterprise refit doesn't cover: That the Enterprise started out looking like "The Cage" version, then was 'refit' to look like how it looks in DSC, and then refit back to essentially how it looked in "The Cage" (inside and out, no less.) This doesn't make any logical sense. You don't refit a ship inside and out to be more advanced, then re-refit it back to its much lesser-advanced original specs.
CBS's logic is that the DSC version is how the ship always looked, and despite my personal feelings about that decision, it makes far more sense than any convoluted attempts at rationalizing why the two versions look so different.
How do we know it was refit to less advanced specs? The Motorola Razr looks more advanced than a galaxy phone. Which actually has more power?
Tablet slabs are more advanced than laptops 20 years ago. They don't even have keyboards but can do far more. There is no way without understanding the underlying tech you can claim just by cosmetic reasons that TOS tech is less advanced. You can't even do this in the real world.
For what it's worth, I'm a licensed electrical engineer with a Master's degree in real life.
Because we can clearly see in DSC that the ship is more advanced than it was in TOS.
That's a silly comparison. We're talking about an interstellar spacecraft, not a device used to talk to people. And BTW, if you're referring to the original Razr, it does not look at all more advanced than a Samsung Galaxy.
TOS certainly had clothing and industrial fabricators (the scene mentioned plus the speed McCoy received his Nazi uniform are proof of that) but were they proper "replicators" in the way that Harry Kim thinks of them? Doubtful.
In any case, if TOS really had access to the sort of tech that could transform a Cage Enterprise into a DSC Enterprise and then back into a Cage Enterprise for WNMHGB so easily, why would it have taken them 18 months to perform the refit for TMP?
The two-Enterprise theory is looking more and more viable!
I think that's an excellent approach to take with the modern material
And these are devices designed to transport people in real life: https://www.tobeeko.com/these-retro-style-honda-ev-concept-cars-are-adorable-and-smart/ .
The claims I'm making regarding a sci-fi universe are from my own experience as an licensed electrical engineer with a Master's degree. You just can't extrapolate from cosmetics period. At best we can say the TOS engineers had terrible cosmetic design skills, but you can't extrapolate anything about actual functionality.
Because the refit had to do with actual functionality rather than cosmetics. The cosmetics were just the icing on the cake when you're rebuilding the cake with entirely new ingredients.
But it's not just cosmetics that are different. The technology is clearly more advanced.
If you can cite specific episode examples and comparisons, go ahead (as in a Disco tech they used in Disco could have been used in TOS, but wasn't, something like that, specific examples). Actual functionality, not cosmetic. If they prove your point I will say so.
For what it's worth, keep in mind that even in the real world tech loses functionality. Most new laptops have no wired ethernet ports (and those are still vastly more reliable than wifi sometimes). Most don't even have optical drives despite many textbooks etc. still coming with DVDs.
Your saying that my cellphone analogy (newer phones looking more primitive, etc.) is silly doesn't make sense to me. These are devices people may have to use in life or death emergencies (and I have witnessed that myself, unfortunately).
They literally just showed us a DSC variant of the turtleneck uniform in the Short Treks "Trouble with Edward".
I mean....how much more turtleneck can you get?
It can be about more than the "look", yet the look still be important to fans. I've been watching since 1975, when TOS/TAS was all there was. So, for someone like me, that look defined "Star Trek".
This is the corporate line. It is supposed to be all the same, yet different. We have trinkets to sell!
I'm not trying to diminish its importance, but I found the characters and the events more important than the tech. In a show that is imagining humanity's future I feel that tech should not overwhelm the characters.
Though, that perhaps is quite a reflection of current humanity, where technology matters more than people...
