Spoilers Would you consider the things that Matalas wanted to happen as canon?

[Racefuel]

Realistically canon is only something that has become a hot-button issue since Enterprise, and even then far and away more with the community than the writers.

Roddenberry was known to be spiteful in regards to canon just because of personal grudges and petty greed (IE why TOS was mentioned so so rarely in TNG).

 

[Turtletrekker]

Out of all the almost 1,000 entries into the Star Trek canon, there has only been one so-called "canon violation" that I could not reconcile in my head. That would be the existence, common knowledge and use of cloaking devices before Balance of Terror. Other than that, the whole canonical tapestry is largely consistent with itself.

 

[Racefuel]

Out of all the almost 1,000 entries into the Star Trek canon, there has only been one so-called "canon violation" that I could not reconcile in my head. That would be the existence, common knowledge and use of cloaking devices before Balance of Terror. Other than that, the whole canonical tapestry is largely consistent with itself.

The only one that really still baffles me is as we all famously know...Khan recognizing Chekov in TWOK.

But thats just a super famous one

 

[Turtletrekker]

The only one that really still baffles me is as we all famously know...Khan recognizing Chekov in TWOK.

But thats just a super famous one

That one is indeed baffling, but it's one that I can easily reconcile in my head.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The general thrust of the gist is that Chekov was probably a redshirt security guard at the time and thus not posted to the bridge. (Also explaining his position as security chief in TMP.)

My only question is...when did Chekov become a father? Even if it's later, like in TWOK-GEN range, Anton would be over a century old by PIC's time. And he didn't sound that old.

Although I love that bit when Anton imitated his dad's accent.

 

[fireproof78]

Out of all the almost 1,000 entries into the Star Trek canon, there has only been one so-called "canon violation" that I could not reconcile in my head. That would be the existence, common knowledge and use of cloaking devices before Balance of Terror. Other than that, the whole canonical tapestry is largely consistent with itself.

I never found canon violations all that troubling. I always found ways to reconcile them. It's called imagination.

 

[Avro Arrow]

"Canon" is neither a measure of quality, nor a promise of continuity. It really just means the official collected body of work, which in Star Trek is on-screen episodes and movies only.

 

[The Wormhole]

My only question is...when did Chekov become a father?

I mean, we all accepted Sulu had a previously unknown daughter in Generations. Revealing Chekov had a son isn't far fetched at all.

Anton would be over a century old by PIC's time. And he didn't sound that old.

I have no problem believing someone over a hundred in the early 25th century would sound like someone in their late 80s by today's standards.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Oh, don't mistake my meaning, I'm not saying Chekov being a father is far-fetched. I'm just curious as to when it occurred.

 

[Sci]

I mean, we all accepted Sulu had a previously unknown daughter in Generations. Revealing Chekov had a son isn't far fetched at all.

I have no problem believing someone over a hundred in the early 25th century would sound like someone in their late 80s by today's standards.

Also, Anton being about 80 in 2401 works out just fine if Pavel was about 75-80 when Anton was born. That's already a thing that happens in real life sometimes, so it's not implausible it would happen in a 24th Century when Human lifespans are much longer.

 

[Sci]

Oh, don't mistake my meaning, I'm not saying Chekov being a father is far-fetched. I'm just curious as to when it occurred.

Maybe it happened around the same time Hikaru became a dad, and Anton and Demora grew up thinking of each other as siblings or cousins.

ETA:

Actually, the math is stretching it for that scenario. Assuming Demora was about 22 years old in 2293, that would put her birth circa 2271, which means that in 2401 Anton and Demora would need to be around 130 years old... This seems to be stretching it a bit in terms of human lifespans. Oh well, it was a nice thought for a moment!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I still think it's hilarious when Anton imitates his father's accent. It gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.

And it just popped into my head: I know there's no evidence, but I suddenly think it was around the time of ST V when Pavel became a father. I don't know why I think that. I just do.

 

[Sci]

I still think it's hilarious when Anton imitates his father's accent. It gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.

It's a nice little touch that suggests Anton is able to maintain a certain amount of humor even in a horrific situation. It suggests a lot about his personality without needing to make it overt. Nice touch from Walter Koening.

 

[Sketcher]

Also, Anton being about 80 in 2401 works out just fine if Pavel was about 75-80 when Anton was born. That's already a thing that happens in real life sometimes, so it's not implausible it would happen in a 24th Century when Human lifespans are much longer.

And already implied by Picard with Jack in the show.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

Except most of these questions are matters of obscure trivia of interest primarily to a minority of fans fixated on minutiae, not issues that actually matter to the story being told or the majority of the audience.

But that's kinda my point - they made a Star Trek series, and Trekkies are NOTORIOUS for nitpicking and wanting to know details. Which is why they should have seen questions like this coming when they sat in the writers' room. It wouldn't have hurt to just mention Lal. No need for anything elaborate. I mean stuff like this is - sadly - ammuntion for those who claim "the show is written by hacks who have no idea about Star Trek canon". To make it worse, I've seen even FANS of the show saying that they're annoyed by how it failed to answer some of the simplest questions that could have been easily put in by just letting someone make a fleeting remark. And that's where I start to get a little concerned. Maybe it's the fic writer in me tho... I'm meticulous about research and details.

 

[Scionz]

Did Matalas really try to get Garrett Wang but couldn't afford him?

I mean, no disrespect, but I wasn't aware Wang had anywhere near that kind of clout. I mean, what has Wang even DONE since Voyager? Apart from OGAM, of course.

As for Jack meeting Wesley? Not really losing any sleep over that. As a Traveller, Wesley essentially exists outside of time, so for all we know he and Jack could already have met.

The pay, even the minimum pay, would be dictated by the SGA. And the TNG crew + the guest stars cost a lot. Michelle Forbes, I know from BGS discussions, was very expensive 15 years ago.

They were back to counting phaser shots this season.

 

[Scionz]

During his Reddit AMA, Matalas made a number of interesting comments about what he had wanted to do or envisioned but ran out of time or money.

Among these things were that Ro Laren was supposed to return at the end as the Changelings had beamed her off the shuttle before it exploded. He also commented that he hoped that Wesley and Jack would have met at some point before Jack got posted to the Enterprise.

Would you consider these things canon?

Creative intent that clarifies what is on screen is canon because what is on screen is confusing is canon. Expanding the story beyond the scope of what is on screen is not canon, but certainly worth knowing and keeping mind in absence of another explanation.

Example (actually from David Blass): the Enterprise E, or an Enterprise E style trophy case is in the Conference Room of the Enterprise D, replacing the Season 3-7 wall when you look in through the window. It is clearly visible in stills of the CG.

Is it the Enterprise E's? That was not clarified.It could just be the same style case.
But Blass recognized the case as being there. It is there in canon now. Geordi made a change to the Enterprise D. We can speculate that because the Season 1/2 conference room wall was dated and the Season 3-7 one was ugly.

Better examples:
Q: Is Admiral Shelby the commanding officer of the Enterprise-F?
A: No. In Star Trek, Admirals almost never permanently command starships, and no admiral with as many pips as Shelby ever has. Per Matalas, she was there in her function as master of ceremonies given the occasion. That is canon, because we never hear or saw anything like "that's Shelby's ship". Just her in the seat, which does not necessarily imply permanent Captaincy.

So is the Star Trek Online Andorian captain now canon? No. Matalas says he imagines a canon version of him is the CO of the Enterprise-F, but we haven't seen him. So the captain of the Enterprise F is unknown.

Q: Is Shelby dead?
A: We don't know. She got shot twice in the chest. Matalas says she may be alive. We never saw a body. Creative intent is "may be alive", but visual evidence lacking for or against, therefore canon would be "Status: Unknown".

Q: Where is Jurati-Borg, unmentioned (in that context) in Season 3.
A: Matalas says guarding the Season 2 Transwarp conduit. We can say that's canon, because that's where we left them off at the end of Season 2 and what they said they would do. We have no reason to think that would change. Matalas is clarifying, really restating, what the Season 2 end of season status was.

Matalas is worth listening to because creative intent ALWAYS informs context of what we see that is often getting harder to make out on screen nowadays in TV shows and movies (in general). But the canonicity rules haven't changed. A clarification is a clarification and is canon, but an elaborating is not cannon. Which is what is really a case-by-case thing.

 

[Sci]

But that's kinda my point - they made a Star Trek series, and Trekkies are NOTORIOUS for nitpicking and wanting to know details. Which is why they should have seen questions like this coming when they sat in the writers' room.

At the end of the day, Star Trek is not just for the longtime fans. It is also for a general audience. And sometimes Trekkies want details that would derail the actual story being told. The writers should never sacrifice story for the sake of fan trivia.

It wouldn't have hurt to just mention Lal. No need for anything elaborate.

Why? So they can check off a box that says "mentioned Lal?" So they can say, "Yes, I watched 'The Offspring?'" Mentioning Lal would have added nothing to the story. She wasn't relevant.

I mean stuff like this is - sadly - ammuntion for those who claim "the show is written by hacks who have no idea about Star Trek canon".

There will always be someone saying that because there will always be someone whose aesthetic tastes differ from whichever creator is working at that time. There's no reason to appease people who attack in bad faith like that.

To make it worse, I've seen even FANS of the show saying that they're annoyed by how it failed to answer some of the simplest questions that could have been easily put in by just letting someone make a fleeting remark. And that's where I start to get a little concerned. Maybe it's the fic writer in me tho... I'm meticulous about research and details.

What detail would have made "The Last Generation" better? And "better" does not mean, "Scratches every little trivia-obsessive itch." It means, actually improves the story being told. What question needed answering?

Q: Is Shelby dead?
A: We don't know. She got shot twice in the chest. Matalas says she may be alive. We never saw a body. Creative intent is "may be alive", but visual evidence lacking for or against, therefore canon would be "Status: Unknown".

Oh c'mon. The person we saw on that viewcreen is clearly dead. She was shot in the chest, twice, at point-blank range from less than three feet away, by drones who were operating under orders to kill anyone who wasn't assimilated.

No, where there is wriggle room is the identity of the person we saw on that viewscreen. It is possible that that was not actually Admiral Elizabeth Shelby but instead a Changeling replacing her (who was surprised to be betrayed by the Borg). But whether the person on the viewscreen was Shelby or a Changeling, that person is very clearly dead.

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

 

[The Wormhole]

Admirals almost never permanently command starships, and no admiral with as many pips as Shelby ever has.

Although, Admiral Clancy would have had they gone through with the original plan of having her in the S1 finale instead of Riker. The only reason they went with Riker instead was because when they made the arrangements to use the Disco bridge, they learned Jonathan Frakes was in studio anyway directing the Disco episode that was filming at the time, so they figured "oaky, Riker's in command instead."