"Stop complaining."
I'm going to have to find several memes for this one.
I'm going to have to find several memes for this one.
What has the new series done to ruin Star Trek this time?
- Thread starter Ray Hardgrit
- Start date
And what, his cover identity also meant being with a completely different branch of the military?
Besides, being in the SAS is a Big Deal in the British military. That's not something you'd create for a cover identity as it would make the person too conspicuous and the whole purpose of a cover identity is to make the person low profile. The only reason being in the SAS would be part of a person's cover identity is if there was something about that person that screamed "I'm SAS!" at which point it would be incorporated into the cover identity "can't hide it, so work with it." But in order for that to be the case here, Bond would have to have been SAS himself, which he most certainly is not.
The theory doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny at all.
Lose your audience, you lose your advertising.
Not saying it's entirely unfounded. But, the backlash from the fandom is far more quickly felt and they tread far more lightly. It's why we got some TWOK riffs, Khan returning, Klingons returning, themes of revenge, and such being repeated.
And to me it sounds like reaching for reasons that it woudln't work. I've seen too many shows and movies with cover identities in one form or another for that to be a deal breaker for a cool idea. Shrug. Lol. Someone or some place he had to get, someone he had to deal with, someone he had to impersonate, required that status. Creative problems, creative solutions. I still think its an awesome idea, I can't un-see it now lol.
Thing is, everyone in The Rock knew the character was with MI6 anyway, so even if it were a cover identity, what was it's purpose? It wasn't to cover the fact that he was with an intelligence agency, which is the only real purpose a cover identity is supposed to serve anyway. If he needed to be an MI6 officer for the purposes of the mission anyway, than why bother with a cover identity? The best way to pull off a successful mission is to stick as close to the truth as possible, as it involves less work for all involved. If Bond, an MI6 officer had to pose as an MI6 officer, he'd have done so as himself, not a cover identity. If the mission required someone with a background in the Army and SAS, MI6 would have just selected someone who had been in the Army and SAS for the mission rather than a Naval officer.
I wonder, was it really neccessary to create a new timeline for the Kelvin movies, to tell the story about what happened with the Enterprise and the crew before TOS?
I think yes because it allowed Abrams and company to play around a little bit more with where people were to start out with. I think one of the biggest challenges for writing stories in the time period of the original cast is the battle against expectations. Saying that regardless of what might have been before our lives have been changed gives a little more freedom.
And, honestly, they barely got the freedom anyway given the complaints around the Enterprise being the wrong size, the technology being all wrong, Spock being wrong, etc.
It could have been set after TNG and its movies for the same reasons; there's a natural evolutionary progression in technology running through TOS/TAS/TOS-Movies/TNG/DS9/VOY. It is quite easy to see how one era spawned the next, which is the reason the appearance of TOS visuals in TNG's "Relics". DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" were not shocking, but seen as the forerunner of the then-current ST universe. Apparently, the people behind the DSC-verse were trying to rewrite the history of ST by removing as many connections to TOS as possible, but in being blinded by eternal stupidity and/or agendas, they seemed to forget that DSC appears far more advanced than any of the Berman series. So much for a prequel that fit into a larger, evolutionary continuity to any degree.
Which was the intent. There was no one holding a gun to the head of the hacks behind DSC, forcing them to completely disregard any sense of historical awareness of how a TOS prequel would appear.
Frankly, the hacks behind DSC were unqualified to write anything in the realm of TOS, so it was just as well the series jumped ahead in time.
Ah, yes, when in doubt we insult people.
They wanted to bring in new fans who had never watched Star Trek before and create an element of the unknown for the pre-existing fans to keep them guessing and surprised, allowing creative decisions like destroying Vulcan. A new timeline, at least in concept, was a good idea. They bungled it up by keeping it connected to the Prime Universe so they could keep Leonard Nimoy around. And in STID they got a little too carried away with the TWOK
I'm just glad the ridiculous holographic mirrors in DSC Season 1 are now long gone from this specific era of the franchise. 
SNW tends to ignore DISCO when it can.I'm just glad the ridiculous holographic mirrors in DSC Season 1 are now long gone from this specific era of the franchise.
Number One's line at the end of Season 2 of DSC that all the Enterprise's holographic projectors have been ripped out and won't be coming back was both a relief and a sign the producers were starting to learn their lessons, and one of the turning points for Kurtzman Trek.
Goldsman doesn't seem to be that big of a DISCO fan and he worked on the show.
Just my opinion, I have a feeling that a lot of this stuff probably would not have been as big of a deal if people thought Discovery was amazing. If that 1st season had blown people away with its storytelling, I think a lot of the arguments about the aesthetics and canon fade into the background for most.
It was the fact Discovery's first season was a mess with its narrative that just compounded the problem. And, in a way, it's a damning indictment of the show that they probably spent god knows how much time worrying more about whether sets and visuals were updated enough for something based off of a 1960s IP than if the story actually was, you know, good and functioned well over the course of that season.
Discovery seemed to aspire to be prestige television on the order of Game of Thrones but too often felt more like it had the depth of Xena: Warrior Princess (i.e., pew-pew action and fist fights over compelling storytelling). For example, I think a lot of people reassessed Battlestar Galactica after its later seasons and ending, and how badly a lot of people felt they went over. And for that matter, that's true for Game of Thrones too, and how a lot of fans of A Song of Ice and Fire came to really dislike the changes made to the novels by the television series after the final seasons.
You can sort of see that dynamic with Strange New Worlds. I think the 1st season was much better received than the second. But once we got into Klingon boy bands and super-soldier serum, people were like hold up a second.
It was the fact Discovery's first season was a mess with its narrative that just compounded the problem. And, in a way, it's a damning indictment of the show that they probably spent god knows how much time worrying more about whether sets and visuals were updated enough for something based off of a 1960s IP than if the story actually was, you know, good and functioned well over the course of that season.
Discovery seemed to aspire to be prestige television on the order of Game of Thrones but too often felt more like it had the depth of Xena: Warrior Princess (i.e., pew-pew action and fist fights over compelling storytelling). For example, I think a lot of people reassessed Battlestar Galactica after its later seasons and ending, and how badly a lot of people felt they went over. And for that matter, that's true for Game of Thrones too, and how a lot of fans of A Song of Ice and Fire came to really dislike the changes made to the novels by the television series after the final seasons.
You can sort of see that dynamic with Strange New Worlds. I think the 1st season was much better received than the second. But once we got into Klingon boy bands and super-soldier serum, people were like hold up a second.
Nah. Well, maybe one or two. It's Star Trek where humans can gain super speed and telekinesis by taking a pill. A super steroid is actually more believable.
The Boy Band was genius. A clever subversion of expectation. (Oh wait, we can't have that! )
Last edited:
With T & T & T, they were in an already changed 2022 and trying to prevent the future of alternate Kirk. And La’an was only pulled into alternate Kirk’s timeline due to a temporal agent, to end up dealing with the Romulan temporal agent that changed that timeline to begin with. That’s how one can ignore the stuff about La’an and alt-Kirk accessing the hotel suite and crossing the borders with no ID. It’s an alternate timeline, with temporal agents everywhere.
The original ‘90s Eugenics Wars still happened as it should have, and implied having already happened in PIC S2. The 21st century Eugenics Wars as shown in the SNW premiere also still happens. The whole idea of a second US civil war leading into WW3 is lifted from John Titor, but whatever. It is what it is.
It was Goldsman acknowledging the concept of time sliding in some interview that caused unnecessary debate.
I’m not crazy about all the TOS characters all serving together before TOS. But TNG shows that a character can join the Enterprise, then leave for a year, and then return later. So, it's possible that the TOS characters are just visiting Pike's Enterprise for now.
With Captain April, maybe Pike and Una see April as a Black man, while Kirk sees April as a white man. It’s not a construct that seems to matter and that’s likely the point.
The spore drive in the 23rd century wasn’t a move I was crazy about either, but at least one could justify it as one of Starfleet’s attempts at breaking the Warp 7 barrier that got lost to history. And the Klingon redesign and radical ship design can be tied to the events of ENT.
The only really bad decision is making Burnham Spock’s adoptive sister. That was a bad move.
If they wanted to tie Burham to a legacy character, then set it in the early 25th century and tie her to Sisko. Being daughter of the Emissary, trying to make her own path away from that, and researching her father’s interest in Kirk and his crew would then lead to her discovering Spock and getting involved in the Romulan reunification movement. And in the process, meet and befriend Spock’s grandson, a descendent of Spock and Saavik. Could even justify her Vulcan outlook by being mentored by Tuvok. Then everything else that occurred in DIS falls into place with no real contradiction.
And if CBS still wanted it to be a TOS prequel, but still set after ENT? Then the second-best way is as a descendant of Mayweather (or even adopted and raised by a member of Archer’s crew or Shran) that is a friend of Sarek and was influence to Spock in his years as a child. And set it a few years removed from the opening scene of ST’09. But then they never bump into TOS unless the series runs for 20+ years.
The original ‘90s Eugenics Wars still happened as it should have, and implied having already happened in PIC S2. The 21st century Eugenics Wars as shown in the SNW premiere also still happens. The whole idea of a second US civil war leading into WW3 is lifted from John Titor, but whatever. It is what it is.
It was Goldsman acknowledging the concept of time sliding in some interview that caused unnecessary debate.
I’m not crazy about all the TOS characters all serving together before TOS. But TNG shows that a character can join the Enterprise, then leave for a year, and then return later. So, it's possible that the TOS characters are just visiting Pike's Enterprise for now.
With Captain April, maybe Pike and Una see April as a Black man, while Kirk sees April as a white man. It’s not a construct that seems to matter and that’s likely the point.
The spore drive in the 23rd century wasn’t a move I was crazy about either, but at least one could justify it as one of Starfleet’s attempts at breaking the Warp 7 barrier that got lost to history. And the Klingon redesign and radical ship design can be tied to the events of ENT.
The only really bad decision is making Burnham Spock’s adoptive sister. That was a bad move.
If they wanted to tie Burham to a legacy character, then set it in the early 25th century and tie her to Sisko. Being daughter of the Emissary, trying to make her own path away from that, and researching her father’s interest in Kirk and his crew would then lead to her discovering Spock and getting involved in the Romulan reunification movement. And in the process, meet and befriend Spock’s grandson, a descendent of Spock and Saavik. Could even justify her Vulcan outlook by being mentored by Tuvok. Then everything else that occurred in DIS falls into place with no real contradiction.
And if CBS still wanted it to be a TOS prequel, but still set after ENT? Then the second-best way is as a descendant of Mayweather (or even adopted and raised by a member of Archer’s crew or Shran) that is a friend of Sarek and was influence to Spock in his years as a child. And set it a few years removed from the opening scene of ST’09. But then they never bump into TOS unless the series runs for 20+ years.
Similar threads
- Locked
