More than one, but fewer than twenty kajillion.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
They'd best hurry up....BEFORE THERE'S STILL TIME!!
Given Lord Terry is now suckling at the MCU's teat, I wouldn't hold my breath on Legacy happening anytime soon if ever.
That's what fans ask for.
Some fans, not all.
That's not what the Internet tells me
Anything that occurs in the "now " needs background at some point. I know that this is a radical thing. But I believe that it is called 'History' or 'Herstory'.
Even when set in a past setting the show is still always in the future. Though I always thought it would be a great idea for show if it was set in a alternate timeline. You know how the TOS Enterprise went back in time to present day 60's a few times. What if the Enterprise crashed landed. Then you go to the present day and show a what would now be a alternate 2025 that formed around this event.
Modern day setting where governments have access to future Trek tech. Maybe some of the crew survived and are being held hostage by various governments. Humanity is working on the first warp drive ship by sort of learning as much they could from the wreckage. Maybe the ship crashed landed in London and now the whole city is abandoned and off limits to most people.
Playing to win right here.
What did Fry say? 79 episodes, about 30 good ones?
I often maintain that most Trek bats about .500 for me, with TOS maybe bring slightly above average.
Truth be told, all the shows in the 1966-2005 timeframe have a similar percentage of actual good episodes.
VOY having the smallest percentage.
I said what I said.
I said what I said.
Technical info, such as how many meters long a starship is or how long it takes to warp from Earth to Vulcan, is present to enhance the feeling of realism, not to be beholden to. Next week it could serve the story better to be another way.
I'm going to agree to disagree on that.
Just like this scene from Discovery.
This. Serve the story first and foremost.
If I want a technical manual I'll *check notes* read the technical manual.
Qo'noS being four days away from Earth at mid-22nd century maximum warp being an example. Qo'noS being just a day or two away from Earth in the TNG Era series sounds ludicrous, but that's how Trek works. By the need and the speed of plot.
What if the Klingons moved their Capital Planet some where between Mid 22nd Century and later 23rd Century?
In our own history, Countries have moved Capital Cities before, moving Capitol Planets and renaming them shouldn't be that hard.
They could've moved the seat of power to a new Planet or a existing planet with enough of a population base, and rename said planets.
Similar threads
