Strict literalism leads to a certain level of inflexibility.
Even The Kelvin films got accused of being inaccurate.
Transition and explanation of SNW into TOS technology
- Thread starter Astrostars2025
- Start date
Even The Kelvin films got accused of being inaccurate.
By all means give Batman a new looking Batcave in a different movie series, but when it all takes place in the same reality I want the reality to look like it did last time I was there. It's how I know it is the same place, it's how I identify the time period.
When I was twelve or thirteen I wrote a Doctor Who fanfic story about a superspy Time Lord. Being twelve or thirteen, I didn’t get why it was really dumb for him to be actually named The Agent…Who should totally introduce a Superspy Time Lord. (No not the Third Doctor)
That Time Lord is based in Hollywood.
SNW is a prequel to TOS in which universe? The PU or a closely related one?
Prime universe is the official stance.
Ours.
+
I find it "cheating" that the Prime Universe is changed (retcon'ed) by time travel, case in point, Romulans changing the date for Khan's birth and the Eugenics War. But it's still "prime" they claim.
I like the aesthetics such as the new set designs (ship exterior only so-so). My "gripes" are with expanding/advancing the technological capabilities and historic knowledge (ex. what's a Gorn, again?) in this new universe.
We aren't gonna see a 60s version of the future in the 2020s. Trek is about the extrapolation of the future from the present not the past.+
I find it "cheating" that the Prime Universe is changed (retcon'ed) by time travel, case in point, Romulans changing the date for Khan's birth and the Eugenics War. But it's still "prime" they claim.
I like the aesthetics such as the new set designs (ship exterior only so-so). My "gripes" are with expanding/advancing the technological capabilities and historic knowledge (ex. what's a Gorn, again?) in this new universe.
You can't extrapolate styles 200 years into the future. It's better in my opinion to make use of the style that's been established in order to have well defined time periods in the fictional setting.
Ships look like the Phoenix in the 2060s, the NX-01 in the 2160s, TOS in the 2260s, TNG in the 2360s.
Of course you can, Science Fiction does it every day,
TOS and TNG aren't ships. The fictional 2260s looked like TOS in the 1960s and like SNW in the 2020s. In the 2070s it will look like a future extrapolated from that decade.
Star Trek is not a period piece. Nothing about it's fictional setting needs to be sealed in amber. It's about the future, our future and as such it need to reflect our present.(and past). It's also not an alternate history. If you like that sort of thing, I recommend "For All Mankind,"
Preserve the episodes. Preserve the movies. Preserve the models, props and costumes. Preserve the memories of the cast and crew. Those are history, The "timeline", not so much.
Last edited:
Or you could recommend "Assignment Earth", "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow", "Past Tense" and "Future's End". Those are some interesting alternate history episodes from Star Trek
Star Trek is a period piece, even if the current definition (set in a past period) doesn't really reflect that reality just yet. But there are levels of fidelity. TOS is Pride and Prejudice and SNW is Bridgerton.
Nah. When the 2260s are in the history books then they can do it as a period piece. When they do a show about the making of Star Trek, then it will be a period piece.
Roddenberry didn't created it as a period piece. It's about the present through the lens of science fiction. No rose colored nostalgia glasses needed.
None of it is real, so whomever is making the show can make it look however they want and call it canon.
They own it. We, as fans, do not. End of story.
Yes, but I live in hope that they'll do a better job of it so I can enjoy it more.
They used to be really good at this in the past and it's a shame if the new teams can't compete.
They used to be really good at this in the past and it's a shame if the new teams can't compete.
Exactly so.
No, they didn't. TOS doesn't fit with TNG. Voyager is inconsistent with TNG. Enterprise was famously derided for being an incredibly poor prequel because it was too much like TNG, down to the technobabble and weapons.
Exactly. Treating Trek as a period piece says, "do not go beyond a 60s era conception of the future." It's deliberately limiting in a way that was not intended by Trek writers because they kept advancing the look and tech with increased budget.
Voyager's biggest problem was being inconsistent with its own premise, it matched with TNG pretty well, and TNG literally visited TOS's bridge.
Yep, definitely could've done better there. Though it won points by bringing back a TOS Constitution class and the TNG Enterprise!
Damn, maybe we could set the next show AFTER PICARD. That might solve all the problems!
Also the 2025 era conception of TOS's future is the same except with more pointless blinky lights, light strips and shiny floors. It's just a shame that people in the 60s couldn't quite conceive of the room being slightly bigger.
Timothy Dalton might agree!
Uh, ST is, by definition, a "period piece." The period is a few centuries in the future, but it's still a period.
Period.
Period.
Similar threads
