Spoilers How literal is LD in your headcanon?

[JamesRye]

I found them to be far more respectful of what came before

Ok, let’s change that to:

I found them to have design work and other influences that reminded me of what came before.

I regret that Star Trek can’t make shows like The Mandalorian that respect......Sorry, that look and feel like their source material.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Vger23]

I found them to be far more respectful of what came before

Ok, let’s change that to:

I found them to have design work and other influences that reminded me of what came before.

I regret that Star Trek can’t make shows like The Mandalorian that respect. Sorry, that look and feel like their source material.

I get what you're saying, but it's been this way since 1979, with major changes to make-up, production design, costuming, etc etc etc.

Why only start holding them accountable now?

I honestly can't think of any Star Trek element I care less about than "it doesn't look like it used to look." To me, that's vurtually meaningless. As long as it's identifiably Star Trek, which everything since 1969 has been....I'm fine.

If they rolled out something completely different, and had the bridge looking like the CIC from Battlestar Galactica and suddenly the Romulans were sentient eels....ok, then I'd have some questions.

Otherwise, let's roll.....

 

[JamesRye]

I get what you're saying, but it's been this way since 1979, with major changes to make-up, production design, costuming, etc etc etc.

Why only start holding them accountable now?

I honestly can't think of any Star Trek element I care less about than "it doesn't look like it used to look." To me, that's vurtually meaningless. As long as it's identifiably Star Trek, which everything since 1969 has been....I'm fine.

If they rolled out something completely different, and had the bridge looking like the CIC from Battlestar Galactica and suddenly the Romulans were sentient eels....ok, then I'd have some questions.

Otherwise, let's roll.....

I get what you’re saying too

I’d like the modern shows to be a bit more optimistic and hopeful with their outlook, but I get that this argument is subjective.

I’m hopeful that Strange New Worlds will be more up my street! In the meantime, there’s a lot of quality SF out there at the moment.

 

[fireproof78]

I get what you're saying, but it's been this way since 1979, with major changes to make-up, production design, costuming, etc etc etc.

Why only start holding them accountable now?

I honestly can't think of any Star Trek element I care less about than "it doesn't look like it used to look." To me, that's vurtually meaningless. As long as it's identifiably Star Trek, which everything since 1969 has been....I'm fine.

If they rolled out something completely different, and had the bridge looking like the CIC from Battlestar Galactica and suddenly the Romulans were sentient eels....ok, then I'd have some questions.

Otherwise, let's roll.....

My feeling as well. And with the advent of the Mandalorian and Rogue One it has made Star Trek's approach far more apparent. Despite the propaganda Star Trek has updated its look as often as it likes, from TOS to TMP (at Gene's specific direction, especially on the Klingons) to TWOK, to TNG and so on. Star Trek has not held its specific visuals aside from very simple concepts with transporters, phasers, and general starship design. The specifics of those visuals were always allowed to be played with by design.

Star Wars, on the other hand, has not wanted to change, and will continue to hold on to its visuals in the name of familiarity, failing to recognize that Star Wars' biggest claim to fame was designing visuals that had not really been seen before.

Star Trek is not Star Wars and never will be. And, no, ST 09 or Discovery don't count.

 

[Mytran]

The difference is that Star Trek is supposed to be our future - and since our technology keeps on relentlessly changing, so must Star Trek's

Star Wars on the other hand is set in another galaxy a long time ago - it has no connection to our own history and so can appear however it wants!

 

[Nerys Myk]

I get what you're saying, but it's been this way since 1979, with major changes to make-up, production design, costuming, etc etc etc.

Why only start holding them accountable now?

I honestly can't think of any Star Trek element I care less about than "it doesn't look like it used to look." To me, that's vurtually meaningless. As long as it's identifiably Star Trek, which everything since 1969 has been....I'm fine.

If they rolled out something completely different, and had the bridge looking like the CIC from Battlestar Galactica and suddenly the Romulans were sentient eels....ok, then I'd have some questions.

Otherwise, let's roll.....

Warp me!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Star Wars on the other hand is set in another galaxy a long time ago - it has no connection to our own history and so can appear however it wants!

That's debatable, actually.

I mean, a long time ago and a galaxy far, far away...relative to whom? Us? Or some other race in the far future?

 

[cooleddie74]

Us.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's a fairy tale
Once upon time....

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah, it's debatable in so far as fandom likes to debate things. The intent is a fairy tale story.

 

[Mytran]

That's debatable, actually.

I mean, a long time ago and a galaxy far, far away...relative to whom? Us? Or some other race in the far future?

Given that we are the ones reading that title crawl, I would say it's us!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Given that we are the ones reading that title crawl, I would say it's us!

Not necessarily...

Spoiler: Babylon 5

The final episode of B5 revealed that the show was actually a documentary, made by the Rangers, some time in B5's future. So who's viewing THAT?

 

[Mytran]

Not necessarily...

Spoiler: Babylon 5

The final episode of B5 revealed that the show was actually a documentary, made by the Rangers, some time in B5's future. So who's viewing THAT?

We'll know once that particular episode/movie of Star Wars comes out

 

[fireproof78]

You know, in my high school history class I remember reading about monks who simply asks questions that they didn't want answers too, just for the sake of it, like how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. It's nice to know that some aspects of human nature will never change.

 

[Jedman67]

My feeling as well. And with the advent of the Mandalorian and Rogue One it has made Star Trek's approach far more apparent. Despite the propaganda Star Trek has updated its look as often as it likes, from TOS to TMP (at Gene's specific direction, especially on the Klingons) to TWOK, to TNG and so on. Star Trek has not held its specific visuals aside from very simple concepts with transporters, phasers, and general starship design. The specifics of those visuals were always allowed to be played with by design.

Star Wars, on the other hand, has not wanted to change, and will continue to hold on to its visuals in the name of familiarity, failing to recognize that Star Wars' biggest claim to fame was designing visuals that had not really been seen before.

Star Trek is not Star Wars and never will be. And, no, ST 09 or Discovery don't count.

Star Wars changes fairly often. The prequels and sequels had far different looks than the OT, and even Mandalorian plays around with looks a bit.

 

[fireproof78]

Star Wars changes fairly often. The prequels and sequels had far different looks than the OT, and even Mandalorian plays around with looks a bit.

The prequels were probably the biggest shift in terms of visual and storytelling. The Mandalorian largely expands on ideas rather than changes in any substantial way.

 

[jaime]

The difference is that Star Trek is supposed to be our future - and since our technology keeps on relentlessly changing, so must Star Trek's

Star Wars on the other hand is set in another galaxy a long time ago - it has no connection to our own history and so can appear however it wants!

It was *our* future, in the sixties, and to a lesser extent the eighties, by the nineties the divergence was getting obvious. Even then, it’s quite apparent the sixties Kirk went back to wasn’t quite ours, same for the late thirties/forties. Now it’s it’s own continuity that is sort of but not quite our future.
This is fine, and works great when done that way, even in other ‘universes’ like Blade Runner 2049. Even Harry Potter had to zig and zag a bit as to how related it was to ‘our’ world.

In general, yes, we get production design stuff changing it up a bit here and there, but it’s a lot harder to reconcile some of those than others. (And having dedicated a few episodes of ENT to reconciling the Klingons, you would think DSC would think twice.)

 

[bryce]

Voyager had an episode that turned Paris and Janeway in space salamanders. (There was a similarly salamander-ized crewman on the medical ship in an episode of Lower Decks.)

And TNG turned Barkley into a spider-person. (Peter Parker got off easy, in real life he probably would have looked like Barkley!) Also it was never mentioned in that episode, or after, but some...many, probably... mutated crew members, and mutated civilian crew and family members, must have killed and/or eaten others. How many children of crew were eaten...or did the eating themselves? Can you Imagine waking up to find out that you ate a fellow crew member...or friend...or spouse...or child!?)

I bring that up because Lower Decks had a scene about that, with the first officer freaking out and wondering who he ate while he was infected with a zombie pathogen, and it reminded me about that episode.

Voyager had a giant flying virus, which was straight-up ridiculous and impossible. As were a lot of Voyager plotlines. (When they weren't just straight-up purely 100% technobabble-based problems with technobabble-babble solutions.)

Anyway, I could imagine seeing any one of those storylines as an episode of Lower Decks...and thinking "Wow, this is way too ridiculous to be a live-action! No way could *that* have really happened!

 

[dupersuper]

And TNG turned Barkley into a spider-person. (Peter Parker got off easy, in real life he probably would have looked like Barkley!) Also it was never mentioned in that episode, or after, but some...many, probably... mutated crew members, and mutated civilian crew and family members, must have killed and/or eaten others. How many children of crew were eaten...or did the eating themselves? Can you Imagine waking up to find out that you ate a fellow crew member...or friend...or spouse...or child!?)

And then Beverly and Troi just laugh it off at the end. Even if no one else died I seem to recall a dead helmsman, so the incident cost at least one life, and surely traumatized countless others, including children.

 

[fireproof78]

Peter Parker got off easy, in real life he probably would have looked like Barkley!

Someone hasn't seen the Man-Spider arc on the Fox cartoon.

And then Beverly and Troi just laugh it off at the end. Even if no one else died I seem to recall a dead helmsman, so the incident cost at least one life, and surely traumatized countless others, including children.

Trauma doesn't exist in space future unless relevant to the plot.