• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Andrew Probert and Rick Sternbach Communicator/Tricorder Props

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course it's a reboot. Why the hell would they make another "Star Trek" movie unless they were going to start over? There are - incredibly - even easier ways to lose money than investing it in movies.
 
^^ If you have a problem with the warning you should take it up with Unicron in PM rather than public forum. ;)

They always say that, but it keeps folks from focusing on the validity of the warning if you take it to PM or MA. This keeps it in the forefront, pointing out a certain level of hypocrisy in the warning ways here.
 
...TMP is neither. The history is not started over from scratch, nor has it been altered. It's a sequel that takes place several years later, which is why it looks different. The why's are completely irrelevant, the established history is still in place and unaltered, thus no reboot, no retcon.

Except that Andorians and Klingons suddenly have forehead ridges when they didn't before, and the given explanation involved hand-waving and saying "Oh, that's the way they've always looked."

Separate issue, but it's only a retcon if it's posited that the Klingons always had the ridges, which "Trials and Tribble-ations" makes quite clear that they didn't. It was just a difference that was left unexplained until that arc in Enterprise. We have yet to have an explanation regarding the Romulans, and one thing they discovered when preparing to do Andorians on Enterprise is that there really wasn't any consistency in the first place. Even during TOS there were subtle differences, so it's not really a violation of anything to show Andorians that were slightly different, since they were all different. Suffice it to say that Andorians are a very diverse race.
 
And with TMP we were told by the "Powers That Be" that the Klingons always looked this way, even in TOS, but we just didn't use enough Windex on our television screens which is why they looked human. :klingon:

I don't recall Gene Roddenberry ever making a statement on the subject, but ST:TMP costume designer Robert Fletcher rationalized the new Klingon makeup in a Fantastic Films Magazine (April, 1980) interview:

Fletcher.jpg


Of course, whether GR would have been inclined to invoke this perfectly sensible explanation had he remained in creative control of the film series is something we will never know.

TGT
 
^^ If you have a problem with the warning you should take it up with Unicron in PM rather than public forum. ;)

They always say that, but it keeps folks from focusing on the validity of the warning if you take it to PM or MA. This keeps it in the forefront, pointing out a certain level of hypocrisy in the warning ways here.

For what it's worth, I'm always open to the possibility of rescinding. I rarely even give warnings. I'm off to bed in a few minutes and I have to work the better part of tomorrow, but GA is right. PM me and we can talk, but please don't derail this thread.
 
Yes because all humans look exactly alike too, with no variation at all, and there were never any, like, Neanderthals who looked a lot like humans but had slight differences in bone structure and heavier brows.
 
Yes because all humans look exactly alike too, with no variation at all, and there were never any, like, Neanderthals who looked a lot like humans but had slight differences in bone structure and heavier brows.

Yes, but 'Where is your Neanderthal now?'
 
You don't have a clue what a "retcon" is, do you?

Perhaps not.
But as what else should I view the 'refit'-explanation for a totally new miniature representing the same ship.

Why am I not surprised that you'd be completely clueless.

"Retcon" is short for "retroactive continuity", i.e., Superman's earlier career as Superboy. Originally, Clark didn't put on the suit until he was an adult, then around the 1950's, we suddenly are told of all these adventures he had as Superboy. The history has been changed, and is thus, a retcon.

This is not to be confused with a reboot, the best example of which (sticking to Superman for the moment), is John Byrne's 1986's "Man of Steel" miniseries; the Superboy stories are out, the Kents are still alive, and the previous continuity, rather than being changed, like the previous Superboy stories did, was completely out and restarted.

TMP is neither. The history is not started over from scratch, nor has it been altered. It's a sequel that takes place several years later, which is why it looks different. The why's are completely irrelevant, the established history is still in place and unaltered, thus no reboot, no retcon.

DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND OR DO I NEED TO USE SMALLER WORDS!?!

So, I've use the word in the wrong context. Kill me.
 
Yes, but 'Where is your Neanderthal now?'

Extinct, although the existence of Neanderthals and modern homo sapiens appear to have overlapped for ~100,000 years.

TGT
I'd love to see someone actually get ahold of genetic material from neanderthals and what we call "modern man" and see if the two are actually different, or if it's just another set of physical feature variations within a common species.

All we actually know about neanderthals is that the skull structure was a bit different. Who's to say that these two "different species" remained different species? Can we be sure that the two "races" (not "species") didn't simply interbreed?

I mean, we've all seen folks with nearly-neanderthallic faces, haven't we? Maybe one didn't go "extinct," but that rather, through thousands of generations of interbreeding, the two became one race... and that those carrying "neanderthallic characteristics" simply tended to breed out of the pool over time?

Seriously... is there any REAL evidence that the two aren't both... BOTH... our ancestors? Yes, I know what the current conventional wisdom claims... but is there really evidence, or is this mainly conjecture (like so much else we think we know)? Remember... once upon a time, the "conventional wisdom" held many things which have since conclusively been proven wrong.

Theories are wonderful, useful tools... but it's dangerous to treat them as facts. The "two separate species" argument is a theory... not a confirmed fact.
 
I know my lab partner in my high school biology class fit the physical description for a Neanderthal to the letter.

For that matter, just watch a professional wrestling match sometime, you'll see plenty of 'em.

I think the interbreeding model holds a lot more water.
 
Captain, the Earth-Two(PreCrisis) Superman had no Superboy career. When the stories were written for the Earth-One Superman, we found out he had a Superboy carreer starting around 8 years old. Stories in the 1950's were a transition time starting to center on the Silver Age Superman.
 
Star Trek is also just another visual (and perhaps even continuity) reboot. That the writers use that 'alternate timeline felgercarb' to pander to the fanbois like you, should make you feel... important? pandered to?

Okay, I 've had another chance to read through this thread. And this post also deserves a warning for flaming. I had a long day at work and didn't get a chance to look at things until late last night, so I apologize to anyone who felt I missed this. ST-One, you really need to dial back the attitude. I'm sorely tempted to close this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top