Everything's canon. Well, except for novels and games. But other than that there are no restrictions. And now get off my damn boat.
Last edited:
Do Trek fans still consider TOS to be apart of the real canon?
- Thread starter ReadyAndWilling
- Start date
Actually, it is up to you. So feel free to forget. Would this thread disappear then?
One thing I really give the DS9 guys credit for is not only refusing to ignore the orignal series, but playing up the stylistic differences. In the tribble episode, Dax made a point to admire the 23rd century styles. So, honestly, whether anyone prefers it otherwise or not, the original series is part of the same continuity as the rest. They all mentioned and tied into it. ALL OF THEM.
As for Enterprise, I'm willing to believe the whole "borg stuff found on Earth in the 22nd century" altered the timeline and created the timeline of Captain Robau. And THAT timeline was changed by Nero. I mean, I think of this when I'm anal enough to bitch about Robau's technology and uniforms being "off".
In reality, though, I don't give a fliying saucer about canon or continuity. It was filmed, it's official, and as long as I enjoy the episode I don't care what prior events it violates.
You know, I think the whole idea of "canon" is sort of silly from a fan standpoint. I understand the writers for shows like this need to know what's considered canon when there are conflicting backstories, but I think fans should be able to decide whatever they want to believe and whatever they don't want to.
I remember Paramount tried to say years ago that Star Trek V wasn't part of the canon... because it didn't make enough money, I guess. And at one point (in the 90s) there was the idea that the Original Series wasn't canon, but the movies and the new Star Trek were. I think today this is silly, because just like the Original Series looked dated back in 1990, Star Trek TNG (especially the first season) looks dated today. (Apart from some cheesy graphics and story lines in the early seasons, it's a very 80s idea that there would be a psychiatrist/counselor person right there with the command team on the bridge of every starship.) And just for the record, I love TNG. (In fact, I just posted my ten favorite episodes in my blog.) The point is that all the Star Trek shows are going to look dated eventually, and some of the ideas are going to turn out to be a bit silly as society moves on and science advances. Personally, I just accept it all as quasi-canon and take everything with a grain of salt. They're just cool shows to watch for fun, right?
jwb
jwbraun.com
I remember Paramount tried to say years ago that Star Trek V wasn't part of the canon... because it didn't make enough money, I guess. And at one point (in the 90s) there was the idea that the Original Series wasn't canon, but the movies and the new Star Trek were. I think today this is silly, because just like the Original Series looked dated back in 1990, Star Trek TNG (especially the first season) looks dated today. (Apart from some cheesy graphics and story lines in the early seasons, it's a very 80s idea that there would be a psychiatrist/counselor person right there with the command team on the bridge of every starship.) And just for the record, I love TNG. (In fact, I just posted my ten favorite episodes in my blog.) The point is that all the Star Trek shows are going to look dated eventually, and some of the ideas are going to turn out to be a bit silly as society moves on and science advances. Personally, I just accept it all as quasi-canon and take everything with a grain of salt. They're just cool shows to watch for fun, right?
jwb
jwbraun.com
Last edited:
A
Amaris
Guest
Right on the money, in my opinion. I take Trek as it is, and enjoy it on the basis of it's own merits. Now, don't get me wrong, I like it when someone says or does something that references another Trek series, might even get a little squee out of me (
), but to add and take away series as Canon as if they didn't exist? No, that's a bit silly. They existed, they were filmed, so they're canon.
Besides, if the visual effects really bother you, CBS just spent a couple of years remastering the show with new, spiffy cgi effects. Now personally, the old effects never really bothered me that much. I just told myself "This was twenty years before I was born! Give 'em a break!" and moved on. That being said, I always wondered what the show would look like with brand new fx work, but I never thought TPTB would spend that kind of time or money to go back and do it. Shows you what I know.
A
Amaris
Guest
While I really enjoy the new visual effects, what I see as the best thing from this remastering was the cleanup. The show has never looked better in terms of physical quality. All the colors are vibrant, the images are sharp and detailed. I love it!
True. For me this has been the real bonus of the remastering.
A
Amaris
Guest
To put it bluntly, it got me to enjoy "The Cage" on a wholly different level. I liked it before, but it felt like a new episode after the remaster.
The remastering has allowed many of us to see for the first time how much detail and texture and care went into TOS' production. We see the vibrant colour and intricacies of costumes. We see a great level of intentional detail in sets that we never noticed before. It really does make a lie of the myth that TOS was made on the cheap.
TOS' limitations were not really budget or creativity. The limitations were simply what was possible for television. Indeed I could make an argument that for the greater resources and budgets the spin-offs had that they really didn't do any better all things considered. I'd say certain F/X and the limited use of cgi has been the biggest advantages for contemporary Trek. I certainly don't think they had an advantage of imagination and creativity. In fact I think TOS did more with what was possible then than what its successors did.
I'd also add that the profuse use of technobabble makes the spinoff shows sound dumber as a whole than how TOS handled science and tech.
TOS' limitations were not really budget or creativity. The limitations were simply what was possible for television. Indeed I could make an argument that for the greater resources and budgets the spin-offs had that they really didn't do any better all things considered. I'd say certain F/X and the limited use of cgi has been the biggest advantages for contemporary Trek. I certainly don't think they had an advantage of imagination and creativity. In fact I think TOS did more with what was possible then than what its successors did.
I'd also add that the profuse use of technobabble makes the spinoff shows sound dumber as a whole than how TOS handled science and tech.
As a 21 years old who started with Enterprise, i'd like to add my pov. I've seen all episodes of all series afterward and TOS was the only one i could not even finish most episodes.
It's not only the "older" feeling of the show, it's also that i think most episodes were very boring and uninteresting.
The only few ones that i would ever consider rewatch are :
Balance of Terror, Tomorrow Is Yesterday, The City on the Edge of Forever, Mirror, Mirror and The Trouble With Tribbles.
It's not really the characters either. I loved them, Spock/McCoy interaction is always hilarous. But it's not enough, i won't rewatch what i think is a 1 hour boring episode for only 10 minutes of great characters interaction.
It's not only the "older" feeling of the show, it's also that i think most episodes were very boring and uninteresting.
The only few ones that i would ever consider rewatch are :
Balance of Terror, Tomorrow Is Yesterday, The City on the Edge of Forever, Mirror, Mirror and The Trouble With Tribbles.
It's not really the characters either. I loved them, Spock/McCoy interaction is always hilarous. But it's not enough, i won't rewatch what i think is a 1 hour boring episode for only 10 minutes of great characters interaction.
We've all heard the addage: "Eat your vegetables first." The fact that TOS seems boring if you start off watching graphically superior material and then revert back to it is precisely why I recommend that new fans begin with TOS, and then work their way into new territory.
Once you aquire a taste for TOS, it sticks. If you don't form it early in your Trek experience though, it can be hard to form an appreciation for the series after the fact.
At the other end of the spectrum, I probably wouldn't find Enterprise to be very relevant or interesting if I didn't view it in the context of being familiar with the Trek canon which it is a prequel to.
That said, when I first got into Star Trek, Spock was my favorite character and TOS was my favorite incarnation. As time has progressed, I relate more to TNG and the character of Picard. Of course, everyone likes Star Trek for different reasons, and appreciates different elements of it. There isn't anything wrong with that.
I was there from the beginning, as an 11 y.o. in 1966. TOS will always be the ONLY real ST for me. The other series can be entertaining and even sometimes involving, but I'll always miss the original actors in the original character roles. And in 1966, ST was amazing, at least to my young eyes. We had little else to compare it to that came close in quality or exotic aliens and planets. Even then, I knew Lost in Space was for kids only! And without TOS, there would not be the rest of the sagas. I'll tolerate the rebooted universe because I want Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. to go on and on, even if I don't always like or accept where they go. Really, Spock kissing anyone on a transporter platform before a major showdown with the enemy. Please!!!
A
Amaris
Guest
Yes! Agreed on all counts. I think TNG did some rather creative work, but toward the end started relying HEAVILY on technobabble. DS9 took some respite from it (it feels like the most TOS to me aside from TOS), but VOY and ENT were crammed wall to wall with technobabble, and it was just blech. In TOS, if Scotty said they were losing power, by damn they were losing power and that's all you needed to know. There was no need to get into why the transducers were out of phase with the plasma relays or remodulating the multiphase quantum accelerator to reduce subspace chroniton distortion and so on and so on.
I didn't feel excited, I felt bored. I knew these words were bullshit, but they weren't believable bullshit. At least, I didn't believe them. I love TNG, don't get me wrong, but Scotty felt more like an Engineer to me than Geordi.
It works both ways.
Without Enterprise, i wouldn't have watched TOS at all or i would have stopped after the first few episodes. >> I would not care about the original cast.
It's because i learnt to like the universe with Enterprise that i still watched TOS to the end.
And as i said before, it's not the graphics that are the problem, it's the way stories are told .Moreover, there is even less serialization than in early TNG, so that doesnt help it either. (For the record, I really did like the TOS movies, more so than the TNG one, it's really not a cast problem).
Obvious Troll is Obvious.
I strongly agree with both the paragraphs.
As I understand it, Gene Roddenberry (who wasn't even in charge then) declared only a couple specific parts of TFF non-canon:
- Sybok being Spock's brother (because I think it had been stated at some point that Spock was an only child), and
- McCoy euthanizing his dad (because Gene didn't think it was befitting the character)
That being said, I always wondered what the show would look like with brand new fx work, but I never thought TPTB would spend that kind of time or money to go back and do it. Shows you what I know.
And it also shows just how timeless the show is, because they never would've done that if they weren't sure that people would be watching it.
So true. But then, I would stop after "kissing" and still have the same reaction.
Kinda like watching the Star Wars prequels first?
Actually, I must confess (well, I'm not really ashamed, since I'm a Trekkie) that I had never seen any of the SW movies until a couple years ago when I watched A New Hope. But I had seen plenty of trailers, and played some of the video games. So when I watched the movie, it did seem pretty dull and slow, and the thought certainly did cross my mind, "where are the cool lightsabers with all the flips and stuff?" So, yeah, I didn't enjoy the original Star Wars movie because I had something more flashy to compare it to, but I'm pretty sure there aren't too many Warsies who think ANH is boring.
TOS is kinda the same way, but on the other hand, you don't have to like it. There's a not TV show made that's for everyone, so maybe it's just not your style. That's perfectly fine. But if it might be your style, don't let yourself spoil the experience by expecting it be something else.
Well, not everyone gets into it. It was a different kind of storytelling back then, with no serialization and broader acting styles, among other differences. But I seriously give you props for watching them all, rather than just dismissing the series out of hand, or saying it shouldn't count, because it's old and stinky. Nothing wrong with a differing opinion as long as it's an informed one.
Most of my friends refuse to watch B5 because it looks dated, even if i keep saying it's great. So i don't think they would even consider TOS.
I can live with it, even if it looks a little odd, but i'm taking the production's era into consideration. On another hand, i think Abram's trek uniforms, which looks like the one in TOS, are ridiculous, in a 2009 production.
I can live with it, even if it looks a little odd, but i'm taking the production's era into consideration. On another hand, i think Abram's trek uniforms, which looks like the one in TOS, are ridiculous, in a 2009 production.
Similar threads
- Poll
