CBS and Paramount officially back together
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
As long as CBS says it isn’t, it isn’t.
And you can make a list of that for every series in the franchise.
And there is the CBS lipservice. What they say and what they show us is two different things.
In just about every other way, it departs from all history, canon and visuals. Its loosely based on the original series, a few universes adjacent.
I'm not saying this out of hate - I've watched the show and all of the shorts. I get happy when they throw in the easter eggs..... but its too little and too different to integrate into the greater whole.
I head-canon it with a "FC/Ent/TCW rewrote the timeline and this is what it looks like now" and they should just go with it, but to say it is actual original Prime is disingenuous. By extention, TNG should look completely different by the time we get caught up to it, so Picard's aesthetics don't really matter either - IMO, we no longer know anything for "sure" post-Disco S2, other than the fact that it completely wipes out and alters everything that comes afterward. That, to me, is the definition of a reboot. *shrug* YMMV.
In just about every other way, it departs from all history, canon and visuals. Its loosely based on the original series, a few universes adjacent.
I'm not saying this out of hate - I've watched the show and all of the shorts. I get happy when they throw in the easter eggs..... but its too little and too different to integrate into the greater whole.
I head-canon it with a "FC/Ent/TCW rewrote the timeline and this is what it looks like now" and they should just go with it, but to say it is actual original Prime is disingenuous. By extention, TNG should look completely different by the time we get caught up to it, so Picard's aesthetics don't really matter either - IMO, we no longer know anything for "sure" post-Disco S2, other than the fact that it completely wipes out and alters everything that comes afterward. That, to me, is the definition of a reboot. *shrug* YMMV.
Yup.
And I can give you an equally long list of how Bermatrek violated its own canon. Both story-wise and visuals wise. Hell, we can go all way back to the original series violating its own canon on multiple occasions.
I know this will seem like blasphemy to the most die-hard of Star Trek gatekeepers, but canon is truly irrelevant. The only things that really matters are the story and the characters.
Back in the old Best of Trek fanzine in 1980, there was a long diatribe written about how Star Trek the motion picture has to take place in a alternate reality from Star Trek the original series because of the differences in the Klingons. Nothing Discovery has done has been any different than that. The people who said ST: TMP takes place in an alternate timeline were wrong then, just as the Discovery takes place in an alternate timeline people are wrong now.
Last edited:
"Who are those MUNCHKINS?" (Angry fan in "Best of Trek".)
If your list for all of previous Star Trek is as long and covers as serious deviations as Discovery has so far, then you would have just proved my point how in 2 seasons it is worse than the 25 post TOS that came before it. TOS has its own issues, and far less serious ones that just the first Episode of Disovery. Canon is built of of layer upon layer of information from each series. What TOS presented is a bit rocky. TMP didn't quite fit in some ways, but tried to explain itself how it did fit. The rest of the movies continued to build on that foundation and eventually DS9 and Enterprise went back and stabilized the foundation by integrating TOS and TMP to explain the most serious issues (namely the Klingons). So by the time we get to the end of Enterprise, it is a very stable and unified Canon that may have some slight glitches along the way, but overall creates a solid structure. Then along comes Discovery (Abrams Trek doesn't really impact it except for the start of the 2009 film, which is full of hiccoughs, especially when you try to align it with Discovery as well) and it tries to break everything previously assembled apart to rebuild that foundation yet again, but in a clumsy and incoherent manner that has no relation to what was put together before. The one thing the Bermatrek, as you call it, had going for it was the Okudas. They assembled a Star Trek history and canon that the later series tired to stick to to keep canon intact. The worst offenses are from before that and the took those offenses and helped the later series find stories to fill those gaps and explain the worst inconsistencies.
If, like me, you have been a Trekkie since the 80's (I could almost say 70's, but I never enjoyed watching it with my mom, even if I had a lot of the toys) and bought all the concordances and encyclopedias and chronologies and other source books and actually read them cover to cover and compared them to the series to make sure they held up (and I can still point to a few places they didn't or that got reconned later, like Zephram Cochrane), then I would be interested in your opinion of how the first 28 seasons and 10 films has nearly as serious continuity and canon issues as Discovery presents. I would really be interested in how you can come up with that. It is obvious to me that no one on the current series has ever picked up and even glanced through any of those and that few of them have even seen TOS. They definitely didn't consult the Okudas or Memory Alpha (which remember is a Wiki so we can make changes in it). Everything wrong with Discovery is easy to look up and is such an elementary mistake that it feels like Discovey has been made by elementary school children. It serious is that bad and that far off. If you think anything was that far off before, you are sadly mistaken. Discovery got that far off in just the first few episodes. Its basic premise is off and its basic visual style is off. It starts with a mutiny (and they only way they can explain it away is that the Shenzhou doesn't classify as a Starship, yet is called a starship and it gets really messy) when Spock clearly stated in TOS that there had never been mutiny before (and Berman was tried and convicted and Spock's own kinda sister so how would that slip his mind????). Previously you could kind of point to a few things that slipped through the careful eyes trying to keep things in line, but with Discovery there have been too many for me to keep track or or care to keep track of.
It is a reboot. Totally, through and through, a reboot. I know CBS is set on saying it isn't, but the product speaks for itself.
@yotsuya if I'm a Trek fan like you since the 80s, you say? I'm afraid I can't say that. I've actually been a Trek fan since the 70s. When Kirk was the only captain. I've seen every single Star Trek movie in the theater first run. I've been rolling my eyes at Trek gatekeepers for almost 50 years. If Discovery is a reboot then so is every single spin-off. After all, TNG and DS9 can't possibly be in the same continuity because TNG depicted Trill one way and DS9 depicted them entirely differently. TNG and VOY can't be in the same continuity because in VOY, humanity encountered the Borg before Q Who. I've heard it all before, multiple times. Nitpickery does not make canon. Discovery is Prime universe. Anything else is irrelevant nitpickery put forth by gatekeepers.
Last edited:
Not to mention that the Borg retroactively took on the look that was established from First Contact during the Hanson flashback scenes in Dark Frontier. Those scenes were set specifically BEFORE the Borg were first encountered on TNG and yet they have their zombie-like First Contact appearance. The interior of their ship also resembles what we seen all throughout Voyager. Not to mention all the Okuda-grams on board the USS Raven are exactly as they appear on Voyager, which should not be accurate either.
I knew this watching it but I honestly didn't care. Because, first off, the real world reasoning behind it is just the production crew reusing sets and props, as has been done since day one of Star Trek, and secondly, albeit MORE IMPORTANTLY, it doesn't matter. That's not what I'm watching it for.
First off, no. Canon gatekeepers did nothing but harp all over Enterprise for all four seasons it was on the air with regard to the canon issues they perceived it as raising. Fans were screaming bloody murder when they saw the Klingons did not retain the smooth forehead appearance (and did the same with with Discovery). When the show attempted to explain this, they still weren't having it. It amazes me how the goalpost gets moved on that show now when everyone who was on this board at the time knows fully well that show was accused of violating all of Star Trek's sacred canon texts.
Discovery does nothing of the sort. While I did think it was ridiculous that the events of the first two season be swept under the rug because it was never mentioned on any of the previous (or latter) series, that's only a problem because the viewers of the series want to raise it as a problem. They expect everything to be so interconnected and so black and white that every single character in the franchise needs to be aware of everything that occurred on its sister series with practically fan precision. And if a character doesn't mention something that establishes some sort of connection, or if the look of something deviates ever-so-slightly, then they scream "CANON VIOLATION!" "ALTERNATE UNIVERSE!", which have both now basically become the Star Trek equivalent of "fake news."
Probably better not to try and play the "I've been a Trek fan longer than you" card with anyone, friend. Never a good look.
Discovery is canon, and it's first two seasons take place in the Prime Timeline, ten years or so before TOS. That is fact.
Visually, it looks different. Of course it does. It was made in the late 2010's, whilst TOS was made in the 1960's. Trek has had COUNTLESS visual reboots during its run. If you can't wrap your head around that, you're taking this stuff way too seriously.
The only stuff that matters is the story, and Discovery's story fits nicely in the period they set it, and will look all lovely and cute when we read through Trek's entire history in 10-20 years when they release new books on the Trekverse. Just as ENT's story and events now do, despite that show getting all sorts of sh*t thrown its way during its run. As was said by another person here, ENT took so much heat on this board back during its run (I was here to witness it, first hand), yet it's all largely been forgotten now. And the same will happen with DIS, PIC and everything coming in the next few years, too.
Excellent analysis
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/misc/discovery-faq.htm
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/misc/discovery-faq.htm
No it isn’t. It’s full of bias, hate and narrow mindedness
Indeed, such a shame, it was such a good site in the late 90s
Some nitpicky things about Enterprise that I can recall on this board, just off the top of my head.
While it was ridiculous then, Enterprise is now forgiven for all of this for some reason. And I love the fact that fans tend to just blame the show, outright. The Uncharted Territory doc on the S2 BD of Enterprise was very eye-opening to a lot of this.
- The NX-01 looks way more advanced than the TOS Enterprise (once again, we get into a 2001 v. 1966 argument)
- The Tholian ships look more advanced than the ones seen in TOS (see above)
- Hand phasers make the exact same sound they do in the TNG era
- Archer shouldn't have a ready room because Kirk never had one
- Romulans should not be appearing at all! (For some reason, it was still considered a canon violation that the viewers saw them, even though the characters never did)
- Never heard of the Suliban or Xindi before, so, canon violation
- Enterprise shouldn't have blue warp nacelles because Kirk's Enterprise never did
While it was ridiculous then, Enterprise is now forgiven for all of this for some reason. And I love the fact that fans tend to just blame the show, outright. The Uncharted Territory doc on the S2 BD of Enterprise was very eye-opening to a lot of this.
Last edited:
Probably because of These are the Voyages, which was universally praised by all
I've seen people (the same ones who, ironically, were the first to bash ENT back in the day and demand for Berman and Braga's removal as showrunners and who now demand for them to come back) say "At least they TRIED with Enterprise! Discovery doesn't even TRY anymore and is therefore much worse!".
Enterprise did try and Discovery IS trying. It's just the fact that those accusations of NOT trying were thrown at the shows the moment the first frame of footage was seen; though in Discovery's case, I remember it was already hated when nothing but a press release was out. There was ZERO indication what the premise of the series was going to be. It didn't even have a name yet.
