Is TOS really part of Trek Canon?

[Lord Garth]

Are you and YARN friends or the same person?!!?

Nard, I think your irony sensor array may be malfunctioning.

Though I didn't read the whole thread at first, I knew something was up when you said ST XI could just be inserted between ENT and TNG/DS9/VOY when its plot was specifically designed to blaze a new trail.

Mainly I was stating counter-arguments for their own sake to keep from getting rusty. I also think there are fans out there who probably would like to substitute ST XI for TOS and keep everything else; as if it were all still one time line.

 

[Sci]

The show is so old and out of date now that it seems like it would just be easier to leave it out.

Why confuse new fans with two different Captain Kirks or Klingons who don't like Klingons? Why not just erase the cheesy design of the original Enterprise?

With new Trek in place, can't we finally, thankfully drop TOS out of official canon?

No. TOS is still canon, and it is in fact the standard by which all other Trek is measured. And it's the only Trek to have truly penetrated American popular culture.

 

[Leathco]

Of course TOS isn't canon. It was replaced by Battlestar Galactica.

Sorry....just the thread title.....wow.

 

[Warped9]

You just try telling Mr. Nimoy that

No problem. He's an actor, not a continuity buff. He just reads the lines.

Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

 

[YARN]

No problem. He's an actor, not a continuity buff. He just reads the lines.

Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

Off-topic, but why don't you like Star Trek II?

 

[Warped9]

Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

Off-topic, but why don't you like Star Trek II?

Who's talking about STII - TWOK? I'm talking about ST09.

 

[YARN]

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

Off-topic, but why don't you like Star Trek II?

Who's talking about STII - TWOK? I'm talking about ST09.

Sorry, I had the impression that you only endorse Trek from TOS to TMP, which would exclude TWoK.

 

[Warped9]

Off-topic, but why don't you like Star Trek II?

Who's talking about STII - TWOK? I'm talking about ST09.

Sorry, I had the impression that you only endorse Trek from TOS to TMP, which would exclude TWoK.

Folks like to bring up personal canon or continuity or whatever. For me Trek started going off the rails after TMP, in fits and starts. There are things in all the first six films I like as well as some TNG, but not consistently so.

 

[YARN]

Who's talking about STII - TWOK? I'm talking about ST09.

Sorry, I had the impression that you only endorse Trek from TOS to TMP, which would exclude TWoK.

Folks like to bring up personal canon or continuity or whatever. For me Trek started going off the rails after TMP, in fits and starts. There are things in all the first six films I like as well as some TNG, but not consistently so.

Hmm, a lot of fans consider TWoK to be the best Trek film of all time.

Do you like TWoK, but consider it non-canonical? If so, what is non-canonical about it?

Do you not like it (overall) and also consider it non-canonical?

 

[Warped9]

Sorry, I had the impression that you only endorse Trek from TOS to TMP, which would exclude TWoK.

Folks like to bring up personal canon or continuity or whatever. For me Trek started going off the rails after TMP, in fits and starts. There are things in all the first six films I like as well as some TNG, but not consistently so.

Hmm, a lot of fans consider TWoK to be the best Trek film of all time.

Do you like TWoK, but consider it non-canonical? If so, what is non-canonical about it?

Do you not like it (overall) and also consider it non-canonical?

It has good character moments. It has a lot of energy and good pacing. At heart it's a good story, but it's riddled with logic flaws that I can't buy. There are also a lot of ideas in it that I think ill-conceived. I also hate the look of the uniforms and the way the film is set up as some sort of reset button after TMP as if the first film never happened.

And, yes, I know I'm of the minority opinion.

 

[YARN]

it's riddled with logic flaws that I can't buy. There are also a lot of ideas in it that I think ill-conceived.

Internal logic flaws?

Logic flaws as in violating the laws of physics?

I agree that the film isn't perfect.

They got the physics of the nebula wrong -there would have been no "pea soup" effect with random lightning. Nebulae are huge and it is improbable in the extreme that one would simply collapse into a planet orbiting a single star.

OK, Chekov was not on the show when they first encountered Khan.

Sure, the story about the Seti Alpha does not make sense in terms of what we know about physics.

But, TOS has some pretty glaring errors too.

Is there something I am missing?

 

[Warped9]

Yes, nothing is perfect, but for me TWOK just has more than its share and it all compounds to make me think it's an alternate continuity. It gets even worse when you factor in the remaining four films which are pretty much consistent with TWOK. So I just discount the whole mess of five films as an alternate continuity.

For me TMP offered a new start, and the following films painted things like it was the end of the road. In some respects TNG was a refreshing change...and then it started to sour.

 

[FordSVT]

No problem. He's an actor, not a continuity buff. He just reads the lines.

Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

The problem I have with people like you is that you seem to think the original followed its own continuity to the letter. You just don't LIKE newer Trek, and you invent reasons to marginalize it.

And it's one thing to pretend you've got your own "personal continuity" floating around in your head, but quite another to claim that your opinion on canon matters more than the people who actually produce the material. ST09 is canon, the writers intended it to be in the same continuity, and there is absolutely nothing you can say or do that is going to change that.

 

[Warped9]

Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.

He might think so, but if that's what Abrams and the writers really wanted then they should have paid more attention to the original continuity. And I hardly fault Nimoy for not recalling in specifics what was done forty years ago.

Save your breath. Nothing you can say can alter what I saw and heard on the screen. And I will never grant this film one shred of credit for anything.

The problem I have with people like you is that you seem to think the original followed its own continuity to the letter. You just don't LIKE newer Trek, and you invent reasons to marginalize it.

And it's one thing to pretend you've got your own "personal continuity" floating around in your head, but quite another to claim that your opinion on canon matters more than the people who actually produce the material. ST09 is canon, the writers intended it to be in the same continuity, and there is absolutely nothing you can say or do that is going to change that.

Believe whatever you want---it's totally irrelevant to me, as is your opinion. To me it's no different if a million people believe one thing and I see the evidence points another way. I'm not going to follow the crowd if I'm convinced they're wrong.

Generally speaking I question almost everything. Someone's word often isn't enough particularly if I don't know them. There are people who will accept many things almost blindly because everyone else seems to go along with it, and the thought of swimming against the current might secretly, unconsciously, frighten them. I'm not one of those and never have been.

 

[Shatnertage]

Warped9, I humbly submit for your inspection the fact that Leonard Nimoy, the man who created the character of Spock, and who wrote a book called I am Spock, probably knows a lot more about the character (and is a lot more emotionally invested in it) than any of us. If he believes that the character he played in ST09 is Spock from "The Cage" to "Reunification," I don't see how we can plausibly argue against him.

How do you reconcile this? Can we "know" more about the characters than the creators? Post-structuralists would argue yes.

 

[Warped9]

^^ I don't need to reconcile anything. He believes what he believes and so do I. The evidence on the screen doesn't support his assertion or the film maker's. I'm not going to get into an argument over it, it's just the way it is.

Twenty million people can swear what they want, but if the evidence doesn't support it then I follow the evidence. And I don't care how much money the film has made or how many critics endorse it. If I think it's bad then that's what I think and no amount of argument will change my mind.

 

[Char Aznable]

^^ I don't need to reconcile anything. He believes what he believes and so do I. The evidence on the screen doesn't support his assertion or the film maker's. I'm not going to get into an argument over it, it's just the way it is.

Except that it totally does. STXI is as consistant with past Trek as past Trek has been with itself. Any major continuity errors are explained with the Narada attacking the Kelvin. I'm not going into an argument over it, it's just the way it is.

 

[Shatnertage]

^^(to Warped's post) I'm not trying to be argumentative. I don't take it personally that you don't like a movie that I liked, anymore than I take it personally that we both like the same television show. I'm just trying to understand how you came to the position you're at, and maybe share a few reasons why I feel the way I do.

If we all believed the same thing this wouldn't be a very interesting place.

 

[Warped9]

^^ I don't need to reconcile anything. He believes what he believes and so do I. The evidence on the screen doesn't support his assertion or the film maker's. I'm not going to get into an argument over it, it's just the way it is.

Except that it totally does. STXI is as consistant with past Trek as past Trek has been with itself. Any major continuity errors are explained with the Narada attacking the Kelvin. I'm not going into an argument over it, it's just the way it is.

No it's not, in so many ways. But essentially two basic things:
1. NuOld Spock doesn't remember the things TOS Spock would know, namely Kirk wasn't in command of the Enterprise at such a young age.
2. Robau recognizes Romulans decades before they're revealed for the first time to Federation eyes in "Balance Of Terror."

The rest is just piling more dirt in. Of course if you choose to believe that I simply refuse to grant ST09 any credibility whatsoever that's your right.

In regard to the thread's original post: discounting TOS as part of contemporary Trek's canon? Go ahead, works for me.

 

[F. King Daniel]

That's funny, in the film I watched, nobody mentioned Romulans until 25 years after the Kelvin was destroyed.

Anyway, each to their own (even if yours is WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! )