What has the new series done to ruin Star Trek this time?
- Thread starter Ray Hardgrit
- Start date
It is according to Paramount.
So suck on that!
Whatever THAT may be, depending on the writer and producer and year of production.
So suck on that!
Whatever THAT may be, depending on the writer and producer and year of production.
In the latter half of the 23rd Century budget cuts meant they had to chose between bridge modules and uniforms.
2271: "You guys get a sleek new ship redesign, but you have to wear ballhugger and camel toe jumpsuits for a few years. Bland ballhugger and camel toe jumpsuits.
With weird black belt buckle things."
With weird black belt buckle things."
For what it's worth SNW did bring back the TOS-style stylus PADDs and the angular, jagged desktop computer monitors and both were almost entirely unchanged (the same goes for the desktop commpanels with the rows of switches). So even SNW gives lovely nods to the TOS design, saying "this is where we're going" or at bare minimum "it's already here, we just made some of it look different for our series."
Saavik is the same gender, hair color, skin tone and general look as the original portrayal. I haven't complained about Mount or Peck either. Dress them in TOS uniforms and you know exactly who they are supposed to be. The look is not that different. Very minor.
April is a different background all together.
I have never discounted TAS. I was quite happy with all the references on Lower Decks.
Humans are Humans, Terrans and Earthers. Vulcanian is fine.
Vulcan has no moon. It has a sister planet.
Age of the Enterprise is a touchy one, because it can lead down a rabbithole of ignoring TMP completely. Could have been referring to how long Kirk has had her. People misspeak all the time.
Things can be handwaved, untilt hey are too massive to ignore, like entire time periods being moved, or entire character backgrounds being retconned.
It really does feel like the different production departments aren't on the same page. Sometimes things are a recreation, sometimes a slight reimagining and sometimes radically different. In some shots a prop will look so perfect for 2259 it'd could make the most hardcore TOS fan weep, in other shots they couldn't even get the colour of the room right.
Oh, FFS, SNW is simply acknowledging there's more to the world than just white men with their decision to make April black. And you know what, I'd have been okay if they decided to go with Roberta April instead. As long as she's still married to Sarah April. Some parts of canon should be adhered to.
So Enterprise is out because it contradicts TOS.
At the risk of inviting burning at the stake human race is just the human race with minor genetic variations across phenotypes.
In a franchise with changing from Klingons to humans and back again.
Cast the same dude, call him Jack February. He was Pike's captain when they both served on the USS Yorktown. Problem entirely solved. He can even be married to Joe February, who is trans. Nothing contradicts anything, everyone's happy.
Even the art department loves to mix and match aesthetics. The photo of Pike with Captain April around the year 2250 has both men wearing TOS Pilot-style pullover ribneck shirts.
Commodore Stone says hello, all the way from 1967. Would have been exactly what you said, and not pissed off purists for no reason at all. Literally nothing would be any different about the show, and you would have your "simple acknowledgement" that has been acknowledged on Trek always.
And then we'll get the litany calling for Stone, Stocker, April, Decker, etc.
People are rarely happy when it comes to minutia.
I said background, not race. I was attempting to be vague, because thats not my issue or what I'm talking about at all, and I wasn't trying to derail things. Background covers a lot of things, including race.
ENT is another one that is super iffy. There are a ton of lines in TOS it definitely contradicts, but some of it is that thin line between canon and fanon. Either way, it is in a post time travel era, where most of that stuff can be handwaved. There is a reason that it is my preferred explanation, and covers from ENT up to SNW, and my point has always been stop gaslighting us with Prime, when there is a built in canon explanation for all of the differences, and it fits perfectly in production order lol.
By making Robert April, the historic first Captain of the Enterprise a black man, they provided representation which wasn't there when he was just another white guy. And it retroactively adds diversity to the list of most decorated Captains as seen in Disco's first season, which at the time it aired the only one on that list who wasn't a white guy was Georgiou. Now we have two. Granted, Georgiou is still the only female on the list.
Yeah, we should be seeing all of them show up at some point or another. Huge missed opportunity. Could have worked all of them into the Fleet Captain moment, maybe.
eyeroll emoji. needs to be part of the "like" option.
Gaslighting?
Where's my eye roll?
This is nearing ridiculous levels of arbitrary notions. Cochrane, invention of warp drive, Bonaventure, Vulcan conquered or not?
Cloaking devices?
It's just luck and choose and it's ridiculous now.
The modern shows have different challenges to the classic ones. Now there's far far more information to keep track of, but it's much easier to check things. So if a season 1 TOS ep The Conscience of the King has McCoy says Vulcan had been conquered and a season 2 ep has Spock say they haven't been conquered in collective memory, then it's a forgivable mistake. All you can do is shrug and move on.
When Enterprise gave Romulans and the crew a cloaking device, that was straight up contradicting one of best TOS stories, and the writers were well aware of it. Not good. Don't like. If you absolutely have to contradict a TOS story, pick The Conscience of the King, no one will notice!
The Bonaventure was from TAS, so no contradiction there at all. I'm not being funny, TAS was considered non-canon, so writers ignored it for the most part (except for Yesteryear).
Again, arbitrary distinctions are arbitrary.
If the Bonaventure is a non canon so is April.
Similar threads
- Locked
