It probably isn't.
Sighs...it's not knowing every button. It's having a basic understanding.
Geez. It's Friday. Clearly I cannot communicate today.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
Geez. It's Friday. Clearly I cannot communicate today.
I just don't get it. Magic technology is super cool, aliens cross breeding is great, a machine that takes one apart at the quantum level shoots the data across the universe and puts one back together without even a receiving station is great, a screen using light patterns to relay information (one of the few "real" things that Trek used) is just too fucking far and the audience won't get it.
I have a basic understanding.
It's future tech. Chairs. Consoles. Navigation systems. Weapons. You press controls like you do in real life in the modern world and things happen. It's a combination of practical experience with how things work in the real world when you hit a button and fantasy. Unless Starfleet ships start turning into a floating hologram run on neural interfaces we can't see then I don't think we have much to worry about.
It's future tech. Chairs. Consoles. Navigation systems. Weapons. You press controls like you do in real life in the modern world and things happen. It's a combination of practical experience with how things work in the real world when you hit a button and fantasy. Unless Starfleet ships start turning into a floating hologram run on neural interfaces we can't see then I don't think we have much to worry about.
Of course we don't have to worry about that, it would take imagination from the writers plus an incredibly dumbed down explanation for the audience to get.
All Enterprises look the same. We've built up such a culture of technical manual bollocks that we forget it's not REALLY evolutions of in-universe technology, but artists reinterpreting designs. That's what happened in TMP. That's what the bridge in STV was. That's what happened in 2009 and did again in 2018. The outfit Pike wears in Disco is probably meant to be the same as he wore in 2009 and 1965. Gold top, black pants, arrowhead and stripe on the wrist.
No I'm pretty sure it's evolutions of in-universe technology.
What evolution? If one watches Star Trek, there really isn't much of a difference between the 22nd and 32nd century.
Okay I'll take that back. What I really meant, when it comes to the sets and uniforms, is an evolution of in-universe style. And when you're jumping between shows set in the 23rd, 24th and 32nd centuries, you really need those in-universe differences in style to anchor the audience in each era.
Trek always used to treat these differences in style as a feature, not a problem.
Trek always used to treat these differences in style as a feature, not a problem.
Yup. There is not substantial difference save for out it is employed and how it appears. TOS doesn't feel as futuristic as maybe TNG, but the general outcome is the same.
It's just one piece too far for me.
I don't know, maybe I'm just getting old or apathetic? In my younger days, seeing a redesigned Enterprise or a reimagined 23rd century design aesthetic probably would have triggered me into writing entire walls of text here going on about how utterly wrong it is and that it's a betrayal of the Spirit of Star Trek or something. Hell, I'd have done that as recently as five to ten years ago. Now I accept it as inevitable. Continuity and Canon are malleable concepts and every show, property and franchise, Star Trek or otherwise will make errors and contradictions or even rewrite themselves at some point. You can either get worked up about it and claim the producers are hedonistic fools who care more about the grapes their man-servants are dropping in their mouths than they do in the integrity of their work, or you can shrug it off and continue enjoying the show on its own merits and to hell with continuity, canon, and other internet argument buzzwords.
Honestly, I just look at it as artistic interpretation. People treat CBS and the production as soulless vampires who are just sucking out of Trek all that they can with no regard for the history. I find that insulting. Artistic interpretation is just as valid as any past Trek.
For me seeing the Enterprise reinterpreted is like seeing a 1940s Spitfire reinterpreted for the 21st century. Or a banana reinterpreted for the 21st century. I want to see it in more detail not less accuracy!
Well, a banana is a real world thing and a Spitfire is a historical plane. The Enterprise is fictional. It's real history is mutable.
Yeah, but TV series like Star Trek go to a lot of effort and expense to convince you that everything that you're seeing actually is real and you're encouraged to play along and willingly suspend your disbelief. The Enterprise absolutely is real, at least during the hour or so that I'm watching TV, and its general appearance has been established.
It's general appearance is what is presented.
The Strange New Worlds Enterprise looks like the toy your parents got you because it was cheaper than the proper one and they couldn't tell the difference.
Technology 200-400 years more sophisticated than ours should be as incomprehensible to us as an iPhone would be to George Washington.
Lot of posts in just 19 h that are quite worthy of a response. I'll shorten them as much as I can...
a contradiction is a contradiction, even when both versions are part of the canon. the old and new testaments are quite different, and yet both are part of the bible. where did I say that something that contradicts previous canon information is not canonical itself?
a simpler example: everything trekcore shows on their screencaps pages is canonical, because they are screencaps of the very thing that makes up the canon.
a contradiction is a contradiction, even when both versions are part of the canon. the old and new testaments are quite different, and yet both are part of the bible. where did I say that something that contradicts previous canon information is not canonical itself?
I like TNG, VOY, and DS9 more than TOS and ENT, but I only disliked TOS when I was a kid. And if TOS hadn't been the same in its appearances in TNG, DS9, and ENT, but they had already changed it back then, perhaps looking different in each of the appearances, the discussion would've happened back then. It's them breaking with the tradition now that any new appearance of TOS would still look like TOS that creates the whole debate now.
Novels and comics and games never had to fit and never were expected to. People can roll with it and still express their desires. I'll watch all episodes immediately when they come out, and will probably watch many of them several times (unless they turn out like those in Disco S3 and 4, which I mostly only watched once). Wishing for A doesn't mean that B is the end of the world, or destruction of a holy grail, or whatever some people like to call it.
Exactly. Show that the jelly buttons are holographic interfaces that can be pushed, squeezed, turned, twisted, pulled, etc. Much more than just a button. It takes 3 seconds to show something like that. TNG also didn't have labels you could read on the TV screen. I only know some of the buttons on the bridge consoles because I love LCARS in general, looked at them in detail, printed and painted my own to play with, etc.
Mine are the pylons and the compressed neck. Bridge modules changed in every movie, so they are apparently regularly changed in-universe
What if Fuller wanted them? Then there's a very good reason for them!
Yes, it's often the same people who say stories and characters are what matters and looks are just window dressing, but at the same time the looks are pretty damn important to them.
I like that - it means I'm simply staying young
And you can see it in the Smithsonian of all places, among the most important planes and spacecraft in real history.
