SNW truly respects TOS continuity!

[gvn2fly]

Instead of treating these as religious or literary texts, let alone "historical documents," we should be treating these as something akin to modern-day folk mythology with all the inconsistent details and variations in interpretations that such art and storytelling entails.

I just treat them as shows and entertainment. Why does the Enterprise interior look different? Umm..one is a show made in 1966 and another is a show in 2022. It's the same Enterprise in-universe, but this piece of fiction was filmed decades apart so it looks different.

Why are the Trill in DS9 completely different from how they were presented in TNG? They even look different and the symbiote takes over the host? DS9 must be in a different timeline or a reboot? Nah, it's a show and new writers came up with a different concept and look for the trill and retconned out the old one.

TOS talks about money and Starfleet officers getting paid and Genesis is seeking funding from the federation but in Star Trek IV and TNG there is no money in the federation. Is everything from Star Trek IV onward also in a different timeline from TOS?

 

[cooleddie74]

Share your pain...AND GAIN STRENGTH FROM THE SHARING!!!

 

[XCV330]

For those not accepting Discovery and SNW as canon because it looks too new, is TOS from the 60s the same canon as TOS remastered with all the new effects, CGI, backgrounds and music? How far does this go for you?

there are different degrees of TOS Fandamentalists

The casual TOS Fandamentalist does not really care. TOS is TOS, even if remastered. The lights are still jolly ranchers and women still can't be captain. If pressed they might even admit they like Star Trek Continues. But Star Trek means TOS. Everything else is not really Star Trek. Real TV stopped when 4:3 aspect TV's stopped being sold.

The Sacred Keepers Of the Blurry Planet: They will watch TOS Remastered if it's on, but they don't need to. They have the original on LaserDisc AND the old VHS tapes they recorded off of broadcast reruns complete with the old commercials.

True Believers: They reject The Cage. Anything beyond a viewing of TOS in its original broadcast order is heresy. Those who would in any way alter the form of the holy 1701 will burn forever in the engine room of Gene's Wrath. Any attempt to remake star trek must use 35mm film cameras, sets made from plywood and fabric, velour pullovers and models made with 1960's technology.

 

[Weyoun 251]

I just treat them as shows and entertainment. Why does the Enterprise interior look different? Umm..one is a show made in 1966 and another is a show in 2022. It's the same Enterprise in-universe, but this piece of fiction was filmed decades apart so it looks different.

Why are the Trill in DS9 completely different from how they were presented in TNG? They even look different and the symbiote takes over the host? DS9 must be in a different timeline or a reboot? Nah, it's a show and new writers came up with a different concept and look for the trill and retconned out the old one.

TOS talks about money and Starfleet officers getting paid and Genesis is seeking funding from the federation but in Star Trek IV and TNG there is no money in the federation. Is everything from Star Trek IV onward also in a different timeline from TOS?

I know there are quite a few who subscribe to the idea that TATV is a flawed representation of a historical event on the holodeck and it makes the episode better.

So how about all Trek is a holodeck production, some episodes that stick closer to continuity may have been written by Tom Paris, or Will Riker as they were there, but some are made by their Speilberg or Chris Nolan equivalent and take some artistic licence and that explains discrepancies.

Surely that allows everyone to win?

 

[Ronald Held]

I prefer not to think each episode is a dramatization of the actual events.

 

[gvn2fly]

I know there are quite a few who subscribe to the idea that TATV is a flawed representation of a historical event on the holodeck and it makes the episode better.

So how about all Trek is a holodeck production, some episodes that stick closer to continuity may have been written by Tom Paris, or Will Riker as they were there, but some are made by their Speilberg or Chris Nolan equivalent and take some artistic licence and that explains discrepancies.

Surely that allows everyone to win?

No it wouldn't, because people want their fictional stories to be "real" LOL. So you see the shows I like is what *really* happened. The shows I don't like were created by Neelix haha

 

[Weyoun 251]

No it wouldn't, because people want their fictional stories to be "real" LOL. So you see the shows I like is what *really* happened. The shows I don't like were created by Neelix haha

Yeah, so all the "correct" episodes were Tuvok giving holostories another go after the Worst Case Scenario debacle and the rest are Wesley Crusher's 23th century equivalent of TikTok stories

 

[Tuskin38]

I know there are quite a few who subscribe to the idea that TATV is a flawed representation of a historical event on the holodeck and it makes the episode better.

That's how the Post-Season 4 Enterprise novels treated it. A Section 31 conspiracy to fake Trip's death so he could work for them.

 

[Weyoun 251]

That's how the Post-Season 4 Enterprise novels treated it. A Section 31 conspiracy to fake Trip's death so he could work for them.

I thought that was it but my novel verse experience is only the Domion War Quadrilogy so I didn't want to get it wrong

Also how dope would it have been to do the E-E books as the films

 

[cooleddie74]

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

 

[Yistaan]

TOS talks about money and Starfleet officers getting paid and Genesis is seeking funding from the federation but in Star Trek IV and TNG there is no money in the federation. Is everything from Star Trek IV onward also in a different timeline from TOS?

Maybe our system of money is eradicated in favor of some bizarre future version of bitcoin? I'll call it fitcoin. When Picard says, we work to better ourselves, maybe every Federation citizen has a chip installed that tracks neural connections, physical health, etc.

Working out, learning new languages and advanced science, performing tasks, etc. is loaded into a chip installed in every person. Personal improvement is the new bitcoin mining, called fitcoin mining. The more you work out and study, the more fitcoins you have.

Thus, when Picard says people work to better themselves, they are just mining more fitcoins. All other currency (dollars, renminbi, euros, even bitcoins) are eliminated in favor of fitcoins. Thus you reconcile statements saying there is no money since the late 22nd century with the obvious references to money in TOS etc.

Those money references are references to fitcoins, which people earn through bettering themselves.

 

[fireproof78]

Is everything from Star Trek IV onward also in a different timeline from TOS?

I hate time travel.

 

[yotsuya]

I guess this comes down to what you consider continuity and what you think respect for that means.

I do feel the SNW crew thinks more of TOS than the Discovery crew did. But that does not change that I don't think CBS cares one bit about it.

To me continuity includes the visuals. When I watched Pearl Harbor, the use of post WWII wide deck carriers in several scenes yanked me out of the film. Unless I look at SNW as a reboot, I cannot enjoy it. It is not in the same continuity by any means that I understand the word as TOS. The visuals are a total reboot and the story is trying to shove in back story that does not truly fit with what we saw in TOS. Specifically the episode Amok Time. Though it was a cool thing for them to use similar music. There are little pieces of TOS scattered throughout SNW. Cool easter eggs in a reboot, far too little to be in the same continuity.

Continuity was 2010 rebuilding the sets as exactly as possible from 2001. Continuity was Rogue One recreating the ships and characters from Star Wars A New Hope. Continuity was rebuilding the original Tardis control room and using it more than 50 years later. Continuity was rebuilding the TOS sets for two episodes of Enterprise. So there is an established standard for continuity out there (not just in Star Trek). That is what I expect of truly respecting continuity.

A reboot takes an old item and refreshes it for a modern audience. They range for nothing being carried over it being closely inspired by the original.

So based on industry standards of continuity vs. reboot, SNW is a reboot and does not have a reasonable amount of continuity with TOS.

And CBS has never said anything about continuity, only that Discovery and SNW are in the prime timeline. What that means has not been explained, but based on what they produced, it is a reboot. A reboot that is sort of following the prime timeline. They probably have a copy of the Star Trek Chronology and think that if they don't rewrite that they are good.

Anyway, this is my opinion and how I look at it. I'm not going to tell anyone else what to believe, be it Star Trek, religion, or politics, or anything else. And being in a Star Trek group, I would hope the my opinion is equally respected. If you are good with imagining they fit, great for you. But that doesn't work for me. For me it is a reboot and SNW has hit it out of the park as a Pike era TOS reboot. Probably my favorite show of this year.

 

[Weyoun 251]

I guess this comes down to what you consider continuity and what you think respect for that means.

I do feel the SNW crew thinks more of TOS than the Discovery crew did. But that does not change that I don't think CBS cares one bit about it.

To me continuity includes the visuals. When I watched Pearl Harbor, the use of post WWII wide deck carriers in several scenes yanked me out of the film. Unless I look at SNW as a reboot, I cannot enjoy it. It is not in the same continuity by any means that I understand the word as TOS. The visuals are a total reboot and the story is trying to shove in back story that does not truly fit with what we saw in TOS. Specifically the episode Amok Time. Though it was a cool thing for them to use similar music. There are little pieces of TOS scattered throughout SNW. Cool easter eggs in a reboot, far too little to be in the same continuity.

Continuity was 2010 rebuilding the sets as exactly as possible from 2001. Continuity was Rogue One recreating the ships and characters from Star Wars A New Hope. Continuity was rebuilding the original Tardis control room and using it more than 50 years later. Continuity was rebuilding the TOS sets for two episodes of Enterprise. So there is an established standard for continuity out there (not just in Star Trek). That is what I expect of truly respecting continuity.

A reboot takes an old item and refreshes it for a modern audience. They range for nothing being carried over it being closely inspired by the original.

So based on industry standards of continuity vs. reboot, SNW is a reboot and does not have a reasonable amount of continuity with TOS.

And CBS has never said anything about continuity, only that Discovery and SNW are in the prime timeline. What that means has not been explained, but based on what they produced, it is a reboot. A reboot that is sort of following the prime timeline. They probably have a copy of the Star Trek Chronology and think that if they don't rewrite that they are good.

Anyway, this is my opinion and how I look at it. I'm not going to tell anyone else what to believe, be it Star Trek, religion, or politics, or anything else. And being in a Star Trek group, I would hope the my opinion is equally respected. If you are good with imagining they fit, great for you. But that doesn't work for me. For me it is a reboot and SNW has hit it out of the park as a Pike era TOS reboot. Probably my favorite show of this year.

This is a perfect example of what I think encourages good discourse.

For me, I call that fidelity rather than continuity.

Continuity to me is a theme but allows for artistic licence. A cover version if you will.

Fidelity is a genuine reproduction. With the various orchestras I played in you have to hit the notes on that stave perfectly.

My reply doesn't do your post justice but fair play and I definitely respect where you are coming from.

 

[yotsuya]

TOS talks about money and Starfleet officers getting paid and Genesis is seeking funding from the federation but in Star Trek IV and TNG there is no money in the federation. Is everything from Star Trek IV onward also in a different timeline from TOS?

If you follow some Doctor Who theories of the universe, travel in time creates the possibility of changing history (3 different stories of the destruction of Atlantic). So every story with Time Travel in Star Trek leads to the possibility of a branch in the timeline or a change in history. Did Spock and Kirk really restore the timeline in City on the Edge of Forever? What about all the time travel in Enterprise? I haven't even looked into that possibility. But we have a 3 film established version of that in Star Trek. How many more branches could there be?

 

[fireproof78]

So based on industry standards of continuity vs. reboot, SNW is a reboot and does not have a reasonable amount of continuity with TOS.

Except for the characters. And events, especially with Pike.

But we have a 3 film established version of that in Star Trek. How many more branches could there be?

Thousands.

 

[Tuskin38]

What about all the time travel in Enterprise?

Since Enterprise was a prequel, any events that happen in that show already happened from the perspective of the shows that take place after it.

I don't think CBS cares one bit about it.

They care, just not in the same way you do.

 

[cooleddie74]

The setting of "TATV...(ENT)" tells us outright that the events of Enterprise are in the holodeck computer of the 1701-D in the year 2370, and that's over three years before the time travel to save First Contact. So if anything DSC, SNW, TOS and the other later series take place in the ENT timeline.

 

[fireproof78]

They care, just not in the same way you do.

Exactly.

 

[yotsuya]

They care, just not in the same way you do.

I do not truly believe that CBS cares at all. Not one bit. They only care if it makes them money.