Spoilers Canon, Continuity, and Pike's Accident

[yotsuya]

The reason modern Star Wars can get away with replicating the 1970s look and feel of ANH is because much of the technology we see in Star Wars is supposed to be, from an in-universe perspective, old and even outdated. Star Trek meanwhile is constantly telling us that what we see is supposed to the peak of advancement, and many Trek shows are set on what's described as the newest most advanced and state of the art ships. You can't replicate a 1960s look, or make something that's supposed to be less advanced than it and expect modern audiences to accept it as the technological peak the same way they will look at a replicated 1970s look and accept it as outdated.

But the 60's Trek IS more advanced. While they used raised buttons, something the replicated in SNW, they are programmable. Each button can be what it needs to be. Plain walls vs. decorated walls is a style. What is wrong with going with the idea that 2260's era Star Trek is visually similar to 1960's Earth. I don't have a problem with it. I have more of a problem with the changes.

 

[Ovation]

Yep, and again the critics are taking the humanocentric view that because 1960s aesthetics are repulsive to them, then "obviously" it will be repulsive to 23rd century Andorians, Tellarites, etc.

I don’t know about “repulsive” but I consider the aesthetic opinions of actual people to carry more weight than that of nonexistent “aliens from the future”, as would any sane production team in charge of an entertainment business.

 

[Yistaan]

I don’t know about “repulsive” but I consider the aesthetic opinions of actual people to carry more weight than that of nonexistent “aliens from the future”, as would any sane production team in charge of an entertainment business.

Fair enough

 

[Mudd]

Yep, and again the critics are taking the humanocentric view that because 1960s aesthetics are repulsive to them, then "obviously" it will be repulsive to 23rd century Andorians, Tellarites, etc.

The audience is composed only and entirely of 21st century humans. Those other critters you cite don't and never have or will exist.

 

[Hythlodeus]

I swear, sometimes I wonder if half of the people in this thread are those aliens from Galaxy Quest

 

[Tallguy]

I swear, sometimes I wonder if half of the people in this thread are those aliens from Galaxy Quest

Obviously not. The Galaxy Quest people only had the historical documents. We have books and blueprints and interviews!

 

[Set Harth]

So, it's time to treat Star Trek as Star Wars?

Somewhere, JJ Abrams feels a sudden tingling sensation...

 

[fireproof78]

Somewhere, JJ Abrams feels a sudden tingling sensation...

I'd welcome his return personally.

 

[fireproof78]

LOL.... I was citing Rogue One and comparing it to Relics, Trials and Tribblations, Flashback, and In A Mirror Darkly. Same level of detail. And once you do such a callback it means if a later production doesn't that they have broken a layer of continuity. And then there is Star Trek Continues which did 11 episodes. That was the established level of faithfulness and that is what I expected. I don't mind reboots. Some can be better than the original. Strange New Worlds isn't hesitating to chart their own course and it is a fabulous reboot of the Cage.

Now if you want to see every new production be modern and up to date, that is your preference. That is not mine. Discovery should have been set before The Cage or in a very different time or been labeled a reboot. The combination of shoehorning it in the middle of an established era of Trek and not following the established franchise policy for the era has disappointed many fans. It hasn't bothered others. Both views need to be respected. You are right and I am right. IDIC.

How is it disappointing if it's just now a nearly identical parallel universe?

And I'm still waiting for a modern production company to make a 60s era reproduction of this vision of the future. I want to see if modern audiences, outside of detail oriented fans, will buy it.

 

[Hythlodeus]

How is it disappointing if it's just now a nearly identical parallel universe?

And I'm still waiting for a modern production company to make a 60s era reproduction of this vision of the future. I want to see if modern audiences, outside of detail oriented fans, will buy it.

I honestly doubt that

 

[fireproof78]

I honestly doubt that

I doubt it as well but there seems to be a conviction that 60s designed sets can pass muster. So, I want money to be put where the mouth is.

 

[Yistaan]

I think there's been a subtle change in some posters' tactics here to the point of altering what we're saying and then criticizing that (i.e. strawman argument). I'm not saying we should suddenly make a TOS set now in SNW. But they should if they reach 2265 to preserve continuity. Honestly the issue can be avoided entirely if they don't tread over TOS' timeframe.

Now it's suddenly become about us claiming a 1960s set can carry a show, when all we want is maybe a line about a refit at the series finale of SNW.

Stuff like Robert April at least trying to look like in TAS while at the same time making new and compelling black characters for the audience to root for--that's what this topic is about. Calling the Asian guy Sulu or a new Asian character rather than Kyle. How did these comments get twisted into saying we want a 1960s set to carry a modern tv show?

 

[Tuskin38]

But they should if they reach 2265 to preserve continuity.

Keeping the same designs would not alter continuity.
Continuity is are stories itself.

 

[Yistaan]

Keeping the same designs would not alter continuity.
Continuity is are stories itself.

Regardless it's telling that the emphasis has become on claiming I said 1960s sets can carry a tv show, something if you look at my posts I never said, and rather than the below, which I did say


Now it's suddenly become about us claiming a 1960s set can carry a show, when all we want is maybe a line about a refit at the series finale of SNW.

Stuff like Robert April at least trying to look like in TAS while at the same time making new and compelling black characters for the audience to root for (like maybe Batel should be a black woman and leave April as he was in TAS)--that's what this topic is about. Calling the Asian guy Sulu or a new Asian character rather than Kyle. How did these comments get twisted into saying we want a 1960s set to carry a modern tv show?

 

[fireproof78]

Now it's suddenly become about us claiming a 1960s set can carry a show, when all we want is maybe a line about a refit at the series finale of SNW.

Well, no, that's not all. That might be all for you, and certainly I would welcome it too.

Stuff like Robert April at least trying to look like in TAS while at the same time making new and compelling black characters for the audience to root for--that's what this topic is about.

The line is different for everyone.

Keeping the same designs would not alter continuity.
Continuity is are stories itself.

This is more to my view.

But the 60's Trek IS more advanced. While they used raised buttons, something the replicated in SNW, they are programmable. Each button can be what it needs to be.

How the hell do we know that?

 

[Yistaan]

For what it's worth just to be clear, my complaints would be exactly the same if SNW M'Benga were played by a white man when TOS established him as a black man.

 

[fireproof78]

For what it's worth just to be clear, my complaints would be exactly the same if SNW M'Benga were played by a white man when TOS established him as a black man.

So if they introduce a second Robert April, played by a white guy then life is good?

 

[Racefuel]

I know its considered semi-canon, but when I was starting in Star Trek fandom back 30+ years ago now, TAS wasn't considered part of the timeline..therefore the only picture of "Robert April" to exist was a stock picture of GR in the Star Trek Encyclopedia.

I have no issue with Robert April being black, none whatsoever.

 

[Yistaan]

Time for a repost of the below as a minority myself as my answer to possible personal attacks that may try to turn continuity issues into race issues.

Since apparently some are still trying to make this about race, as an Asian guy I'm just going to say it--they called Andre Kim's character Kyle instead of Sulu so that they could just leave him in the transporter room and not give him the episodes and development that Sulu deserves. It's the literal definition of token. No wonder Andre left, I'd have done the same if I were an actor.

That's why it infuriates me that the canon issues regarding April immediately have the show's defenders say they care about diversity when Trek basically told me as an Asian man with the whole Kyle nonsense that they're not ready to have an Asian man be a strong lead. The last Asian guy featured prominently on Trek is the butt of jokes to this day, on this very forum, regarding being a perpetual ensign.

If Trek's trying to claim improved diversity, as an Asian man myself I am not impressed. It then even gets more irritating when white people tell me as a minority man how I'm supposed to feel about racial issues, or outright say there's "something wrong with" me if as a minority myself I make my own headcanon regarding April (that again, no one is forcing anyone else to accept as their own headcanon).

 

[Tuskin38]

April's skin colour doesn't change who the character is.

If TAS wasn't canon, would it still bother you?