I think you have to stretch the definition of adaptation a bit for a prequel to fit.
Last edited:
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
This academic disagrees:
Film remakes, sequels, and prequels are often understood as forms of adaptation: that is, modes of cinematic remaking characterized by strategies of repetition, variation, and expansion.
But I digress, and a narrower, less controversial point can be made.
TMP is the original film adaptation of TOS. STXI is also a film adaptation of TOS.
The depiction of the Klingons in TMP was originally intended to represent how Klingons were always supposed to look. Roddenberry said so. That's an example of how the process of adaptation works. Literal-minded fans have trouble with that.
It's definitely not the definition I'm familiar with, which is 'to transfer a story from one medium to another'.
My impression is that they're Starfleet officers, but the jobs they're doing would belong to enlisted in the real world. Sulu, Uhura, Chekov, any redshirt... Those jobs would be done by seamen or corporals in the real world, NOT by a lieutenant. But I guess showing them doing administrative work wouldn't be half as interesting...
Streaming television is no longer the same medium as over-the-air broadcast television; it's an evolution to be sure, but not only is the technology completely different, the economics supporting production are distinct also.
Plus, "A Quality of Mercy" is produced decades apart from "Balance of Terror." This isn't the same team on any level making SNW as what made TOS. Adaptation is heavily involved, updating what was made in the 1960s so that it is feasible to make and market today on the platform it's distributed on. There are reasons why SNW doesn't look like a redux of "The Cage."
The Spock and Christine relationship isn't necessitated by TOS, but it is at least in broad strokes compatible with it. That's evidence of adaptation right there, taking their relationship in a direction that wasn't mandated by anything seen before, so that if we regard SNW as a prequel then that forces us to reinterpret what was shown on TOS. The reinterpretation is exciting and compelling, which is what makes it worthwhile.
In any case, if we're going to apply your definition, it's technically applicable, on its face, due to the change in medium.
That's even more justification to merge the two seperate Rank Hierarchies into one system.
About the Caste system. Historically speaking, as most of us probably know and definitely should know, it consists in India of four groups of people. The highest group is that of priests and warriors. The next lowest are the merchants/business men, then the common workers, followed last, by the untouchables. The untouchables are called this because they are the descendent of slaves, and can be made ritually clean.
This is why they can't be made ritually clean...they take care of dead bodies, among other things.
Now those of who are of European decent.
Got news.
Go back far enough into European history, and it becomes Indo-European history, go further, and it becomes proto Indo-European history.
So we too have exactly the Caste system as the more modern Indians have. Priest/Warrior(Kings and nobles), merchants, common workers. And some might add slaves...
Yes, I know that slavery was abolished in England before it was abolished in the United States. Serfdom was also abolished before slavery was abolished in Russia.
Oh, this refers to being successfully abolished in the United States. The United States Supreme Court over turned a law abolishing slavery in 1819, because it violated the United States Constitution. This is why the antislavery amendment was added to the United States Constitution. At terrible cost. I refer to the United States Civil War.
Division always exists. Because in essence people get stupid about things, as in who is the King-of-the-hill.
Bachelors degree in Cultural Anthropology 2002. State University of New York at Buffalo (Amherst).
And as a professional Anthropologist people are weird. :^DDD
This is why they can't be made ritually clean...they take care of dead bodies, among other things.
Now those of who are of European decent.
Got news.
Go back far enough into European history, and it becomes Indo-European history, go further, and it becomes proto Indo-European history.
So we too have exactly the Caste system as the more modern Indians have. Priest/Warrior(Kings and nobles), merchants, common workers. And some might add slaves...
Yes, I know that slavery was abolished in England before it was abolished in the United States. Serfdom was also abolished before slavery was abolished in Russia.
Oh, this refers to being successfully abolished in the United States. The United States Supreme Court over turned a law abolishing slavery in 1819, because it violated the United States Constitution. This is why the antislavery amendment was added to the United States Constitution. At terrible cost. I refer to the United States Civil War.
Division always exists. Because in essence people get stupid about things, as in who is the King-of-the-hill.
Bachelors degree in Cultural Anthropology 2002. State University of New York at Buffalo (Amherst).
And as a professional Anthropologist people are weird. :^DDD
I try to watch all Star Trek. I would be lying if I said that I enjoy modern Trek as much as the classic shows. However, I have found things to like in all of the new series, even if I dont like a particular show overall. The only project that I could not find any redeeming value in was Section 31. I would guess that my most controversial opinion would be that I find Lower Decks almost painful to watch. It is the only series that I have not finished or caught up on. I finally dropped off in the 3rd season and intend to finish it eventually and I hope that I will enjoy it more in the later seasons.
I think that particular style of broad comedy just does not work for me. Also, reference humor and nostalgia callbacks wear thin on me quickly. I am not against it when done sparingly or when its cleverly placed, but I find that Lower Decks uses it too much. Its practically the point of the show. Further, the rapid fire pacing of the show is just not something I enjoy.
There are some things I do like. I liked the Rutherford and Tendi characters. The voice acting is good and the animation is very well done. I am not blind to the fact that the creators obviously love the older series and are very well versed in the lore. In theory, I should be the biggest fan. However, I struggle with getting through each episode.
I guess I am surprised that it became so popular within the fanbase and that I seem to be so out of step with the majority on a Star Trek show. I guess it goes back to how comedy is maybe the most subjective genre of all. If a comedy is working for you, its wonderful. If not, its almost a torture to get through. Anyway, not every show will appeal to everyone and I just find myself in the minority on this show.
I think that particular style of broad comedy just does not work for me. Also, reference humor and nostalgia callbacks wear thin on me quickly. I am not against it when done sparingly or when its cleverly placed, but I find that Lower Decks uses it too much. Its practically the point of the show. Further, the rapid fire pacing of the show is just not something I enjoy.
There are some things I do like. I liked the Rutherford and Tendi characters. The voice acting is good and the animation is very well done. I am not blind to the fact that the creators obviously love the older series and are very well versed in the lore. In theory, I should be the biggest fan. However, I struggle with getting through each episode.
I guess I am surprised that it became so popular within the fanbase and that I seem to be so out of step with the majority on a Star Trek show. I guess it goes back to how comedy is maybe the most subjective genre of all. If a comedy is working for you, its wonderful. If not, its almost a torture to get through. Anyway, not every show will appeal to everyone and I just find myself in the minority on this show.
Robert Kirkman, writer and creator of The Walking Dead comic book series once responded to fans complaining about the changes made in the TV show version of The Walking Dead and how that made things in the show very different from the comics by saying "do you really want to watch a show that tells the exact same story you read in the comics in the exact same way with no variation? What would be the point in that?"
And while it's true some of the changes that occur in adaptations are due to factors like what works in one medium won't work in another, or if there's been a notable timespan after the original that the adaptation is being done they may need to update with the times, the bottom line is the whole point to an adaptation is to present a new interpretation on something, not to slavishly replicate the source material.
In my experience, it absolutely is. Anecdotal though.
It depends on what your Fandom wants.
Some want it 1:1 adaptation, some don't mind changes.
You're not going to satisfy all your existing fan base when you go to a jump from one medium to another.
That's just straight up facts. The best that you can hope is that the adaptation is faithful & good.
Hopefully you can win over most of the existing fan base before you worry about your new customers who has never seen the original.
Lower Decks works for me, so I'm pretty happy with it. I was sad when it wasn't renewed for another season.
Last edited:
Let's not be masturbatory. That'd be like having a ''you do realize'' drinking game or clip-show honoring far-too-recent summer repeats, or, worse yet, remaking SINNERS or THUNDERBOLTS.*
It really doesn’t. It comes down to what the people funding the project want.
If you care about your ROI (Return On Investment), then you will care about what your existing fandom will think about your project.
If it's a personal work, then it doesn't matter.
If it's commercial, you'll want to get a read on your potential built in customer base thinks & wants.
It's it's a brand new work w/o a existing Fandom/Customer base, then do whatever you want & hopefully you find customers.
Well, yeah, because defining what fans want is a pointless endeavor. It's rather variable.
Which fans? If this board has taught me anything, if you put ten fans together they will want eleven different things.
If this board has taught me anything, if you granted the fans millions of dollars and carte blanche to produce a new canonical Star Trek series, then the production company would be bankrupt before they finished shooting the first episode, maybe even before shooting began.
The overwhelming majority of the fans have no idea how it works.
I wish I could like this a hundred times over. Never has a truer statement been written.
Similar threads
- Locked
