Star Trek Canon Problems

[GhoulEddie74]

I love the SNW version of the TOS commpanels. Helll, they even look less sophisticated somehow. The new ones look like they just used a fabric mesh screen whereas the 1960s props have a design structure to the interface.

 

[Lord Garth]

The TOS movies are a curious phenomenon because, to borrow a biological term, I believe them to be a polyphyletic group – that is, I don't think they really belong together in one collection with any of the other major groups, or even really with each other. They're on a kind of "continuity spectrum" with ST:TMP at one end being the most like TOS/TAS, and STVI:TUC at the other which is definitely part of the TNG+ group. We might say that STII:TWOK, STIII:TSFS, and STIV:TVH are a single collection but don't fit brilliantly with either TOS+ or TNG+ continuities; and STV:TFF is its own batshit little thing off to the side somewhere.

So much of what was created for the TOS Movies carried over into TNG, including ships, costuming, and sets. TMP and Phase II were also rough draft versions of TNG. So, for those reasons, I group the TOS Movies in with TNG+.

To bring it all the way up to recently, PIC Season 3 drew the most from the TOS Movies and TNG. So, I'm not the only one who views them as part of the same package.

I see everything from the TOS Movies to VOY as "80s and '90s Trek". The TOS Movies and TNG make up the '80s part, more or less. Not exact (let's not split hairs over technicalities), but it gets the point across. The TNG Movies, DS9, and VOY make up the '90s part. But they're two parts of the same package, as far as I'm concerned.

ENT is '00s Trek. Everything after ENT is each a different shade of New Trek.

 

[James Cole]

EAS has a great article on why the the continuity violations of DISCOVERY / SNW are far greater than anything that happened in Star Trek from 1966-2005. Several people that worked on PS3, including writers, have directly addressed or highly implied a multiverse interpretation is in play.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again... the greatest dividing line in the Star Trek fandom currently is over the "is D/SNW somehow in the original continuity or a reboot?" argument. People will just keep talking past each other. Good faith takes will be attacked with bad faith replies where what someone wrote will be intentionally misconstrued in an attempt to get under someone's skin. No minds will likely be changed. Rinse and repeat. There will be a new thread like clockwork in another 3 months.

 

[F. King Daniel]

EAS has a great article on why the the continuity violations of DISCOVERY / SNW are far greater than anything that happened in Star Trek from 1966-2005

Are you sure it's not just he writes more about them and more negatively than with the prior ones? TOS and TNG/VOY cannot possibly coexist if you pay attention to speeds and distance. But if EAS doesn't write a dozen pages on it, it doesn't count?

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

EAS has a great article on why the the continuity violations of DISCOVERY / SNW are far greater than anything that happened in Star Trek from 1966-2005. Several people that worked on PS3, including writers, have directly addressed or highly implied a multiverse interpretation is in play.

A multiverse has been in play since the '60s. That's not some brand-new ingenuity. It's just taking it to the extreme that they couldn't before, because of budgets and such.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again... the greatest dividing line in the Star Trek fandom currently is over the "is D/SNW somehow in the original continuity or a reboot?" argument. People will just keep talking past each other. Good faith takes will be attacked with bad faith replies where what someone wrote will be intentionally misconstrued in an attempt to get under someone's skin. No minds will likely be changed. Rinse and repeat. There will be a new thread like clockwork in another 3 months.

These discussions are never productive. It might be prudent to have a thread for those who don't believe NuTrek to be canon to discuss among ourselves without trying to convert other Trekkies to the cause.

 

[Cr0sis21]

EAS has a great article on why the the continuity violations of DISCOVERY / SNW are far greater than anything that happened in Star Trek from 1966-2005. Several people that worked on PS3, including writers, have directly addressed or highly implied a multiverse interpretation is in play.
.

I just read through that... incredibly tedious article. Honestly, if someone is going to be that pedantic I don't know what enjoyment they could possibly garner from, well, anything.
A majority of what they mentioned is so banal it's barely worth mentioning. Mudd called Klingons pointy-headed and that's a major, universe-breaking continuity violation? Please.
I could refute that article pretty much line by line, but I have a life. Suffice it to say, I saw the same types of articles when TNG came out, and Enterprise, and now Discovery et al. It all boils down to the same thing: Nitpicking stuff because you don't like it.
Good faith arguments abound in this thread. Claiming the gormagander breaks continuity because it makes spacefaring creatures too common is, frankly, absurd.
Throwing Latin in your website name doesn't make it smarter.

 

[James Cole]

Are you sure it's not just he writes more about them and more negatively than with the prior ones? TOS and TNG/VOY cannot possibly coexist if you pay attention to speeds and distance. But if EAS doesn't write a dozen pages on it, it doesn't count?

For me this falls under the "going over the speed limit" argument of if TNG/VGR went 5 MPH over the speed limit vs early installment weirdness in TOS, D/SNW can go 100 MPH over, and its all the same thing. For many, it's not.

I'm not a 100% canon absolutist, instead I just want the same level of continuity that was established during the Berman era. One specific poster will love to rip me to shreds again for saying this, but effectively 98% of Star Trek from 1966-2005 fits together... you just need to head canon that the Great Barrier from TFF isn't really the center of the galaxy, and ignore a few seconds here and there of dialog, like the great distances from "That Which Survives". Whereas D&SNW manage to conflict with practically everything already established about the mid-23rd century.

And again, I'm a fan of the Star Trek lore and world building, and see it very much as a period piece.

 

[Paul755]

Trek for me is four distinct timelines.

1) TOS/TAS
2) TOS movies, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LDS, PIC, PRO
3) Kelvin
4) DSC, SNW, SFA, S31

I enjoy them all but I do separate them.

I would never wish that to be imposed on anyone and I don’t think any kind of official word should come from TPTB, but it’s just a lot neater like that for me.

for me we have hundreds of thousands of timelines (as established in TNG S7 “Parallels”) or alternate universes and we’ve just seen a handful.

I head canon TOS thru Enterprise and Prodigy (including the movies) as one. Disco thru LD as another and then you have the Kelvin timeline. Plus, each one has its own Mirrorverse.

But again, that’s my head canon. And regardless of where I slot a show I enjoy it all. Even knowing it’s officially “prime” doesn’t take away my enjoyment or make me hate, look down on it, etc…

I've said this before, and I'll say it again... the greatest dividing line in the Star Trek fandom currently is over the "is D/SNW somehow in the original continuity or a reboot?" argument. People will just keep talking past each other. Good faith takes will be attacked with bad faith replies where what someone wrote will be intentionally misconstrued in an attempt to get under someone's skin. No minds will likely be changed. Rinse and repeat. There will be a new thread like clockwork in another 3 months.

spot on right here.

 

[Cr0sis21]

I'm not a 100% canon absolutist, instead I just want the same level of continuity that was established during the Berman era. One specific poster will love to rip me to shreds again for saying this, but effectively 98% of Star Trek from 1966-2005 fits together... you just need to head canon that the Great Barrier from TFF isn't really the center of the galaxy, and ignore a few seconds here and there of dialog, like the great distances from "That Which Survives". Whereas D&SNW manage to conflict with practically everything already established about the mid-23rd century.

I've yet to see anything on Disco and the rest that breaks continuity more than the Federation's one crime punishable by death, no female captains, or the changes in the appearance of the Klingons.
DISCO maintains better continuity with TOS than TOS did with itself.

 

[Tuskin38]

Trek for me is four distinct timelines.

1) TOS/TAS
2) TOS movies, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LDS, PIC, PRO
3) Kelvin
4) DSC, SNW, SFA, S31

I enjoy them all but I do separate them.

I would never wish that to be imposed on anyone and I don’t think any kind of official word should come from TPTB, but it’s just a lot neater like that for me.

But Lower Decks and SNW crossed over and Boimler and Mariner didn't notice anything wrong.

 

[Skipper]

EAS has a great article on why the the continuity violations of DISCOVERY / SNW are far greater than anything that happened in Star Trek from 1966-2005. Several people that worked on PS3, including writers, have directly addressed or highly implied a multiverse interpretation is in play.

My God I read that article and, it seems almost the parody of how people see trekkies. Look, I love discussing the minutie of the our most loved franchise, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

[Cr0sis21]

My God I read that article and, it seems almost the parody of how people see trekkies. Look, I love discussing the minutie of the our most loved franchise, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

I felt like I was reading a much more self-serious, much less tongue-in-cheek version of this:

 

[fireproof78]

I've said this before, and I'll say it again... the greatest dividing line in the Star Trek fandom currently is over the "is D/SNW somehow in the original continuity or a reboot?" argument. People will just keep talking past each other. Good faith takes will be attacked with bad faith replies where what someone wrote will be intentionally misconstrued in an attempt to get under someone's skin. No minds will likely be changed. Rinse and repeat. There will be a new thread like clockwork in another 3 months

Is it that important though?

Even knowing it’s officially “prime” doesn’t take away my enjoyment or make me hate, look down on it, etc…

This. This is the most important piece. If I'm thinking of timelines and continuity while watching a show then it has failed.

 

[King Bob!]

These discussions are never productive. It might be prudent to have a thread for those who don't believe NuTrek to be canon to discuss among ourselves without trying to convert other Trekkies to the cause.

Eh, I don't believe in safe spaces. For pretty much anyone. Any idea should be able to be debated and defended, pro and con, respectfully.

 

[1001001]

These discussions are never productive.

We certainly agree there.

It might be prudent to have a thread for those who don't believe NuTrek to be canon to discuss among ourselves without trying to convert other Trekkies to the cause.

Fan Fiction Forum?

 

[fireproof78]

Are you sure it's not just he writes more about them and more negatively than with the prior ones? TOS and TNG/VOY cannot possibly coexist if you pay attention to speeds and distance. But if EAS doesn't write a dozen pages on it, it doesn't count?

EAS doesn't really count anyway. Half the articles I read miss out on bits of lore and the other half is on service of a negative view on anything nor fitting in to the predetermined Star Trek box.

 

[Cr0sis21]

EAS doesn't really count anyway. Half the articles I read miss out on bits of lore and the other half is on service of a negative view on anything nor fitting in to the predetermined Star Trek box.

I honestly laughed out loud when I saw him say TAS can't be canon because Spock's hometown looks different in it from how it looked in the TOS remaster.

 

[GhoulEddie74]

Wow. It says that over there?

Stick to timelines and pictures of ships because some of that site's takes are garbage.

 

[HauntRod]

I honestly laughed out loud when I saw him say TAS can't be canon because Spock's hometown looks different in it from how it looked in the TOS remaster.

Bernd is a wonderful example of a toxic, gatekeeping fan. Someone who takes this shit way too seriously. The less like him we have in the fandom, the better off we'll all be.

 

[Cr0sis21]

Wow. It says that over there?

Stick to timelines and pictures of ships because some of that site's takes are garbage.

Some?