Alex Kurtzman on the Fine Line Between Adding to, and Staying True to, Star Trek's Canon

This cannot be spoken of again. But for the sake of discussing canon mess ups...…….

This explanation would make sense at least, but the problem--it's never shown at all. Or explained. Just vague statements.

And then the contradictions are bound to pop up -- Picard flat out said there was No money at all. But then TNG mentions a 'starving student' with 'threadbare clothes' and 'mismatched shoes'. See what I mean? lol

Those have been my questions too for the longest. Why don't they just show these scenarios regularly happening, particularly on earth?

Otherwise it's all going to look weird to the viewer. If they work regularly, what are they constantly bartering?

Jake had to ask Nog for money because as a human he says, he didn't have any--although he had a job. This is some pretty weak world building on some basic concepts.

 

Maybe Picard will get into it.

 

Yes, this is what I want.

I always thought when Trek Picard arrives, the characters and things are probably going to look, talk and behave a lot differently than they did on the TV show.

With it being streaming, less restrictions, a more serialized approach, it'll probably be able to show a lot more going on than just 'planet of the week things now.

 

I doubt there would be any difference. TOS once made it a plot point that they gave totally random guests complete access to the ship's information databanks with *no security restrictions* just for entertainment/light reading. The TOS Security dept. never felt very competent to me, so I honestly wouldn't be shocked to find out they *did* have forcefields in the corridors and just always forgot to use them.

Sisko's restaurant is probably a complicated situation that will always be hard to pin down until someone gives us a clear idea of what life on Earth specifically is actually like.

But I don't think 10-forward is really an issue at all. The truth of the matter is that a ship like the Enterprise D doesn't need 10-forward waiters at all, so if no one is interested then, oh well. Who cares? The crew can just get their drinks and food from the replicator themselves. That some people *are* interested likely just means that those people have other things that interest them beyond 'seeing the galaxy'. Maybe they just like the idea of living on a starship for a year. Maybe they're already on the ship anyway because they're related to someone in the crew and they want something useful to do with their time. Maybe they just like wandering. Maybe they're super into dating Starfleeters. There's plenty of reasons why someone might want to be on a ship like the Enterprise badly enough to be willing to take a simple, easy manual labor position, even in a world where money doesn't exist.

 

The Federation economy has never been explained beyond vague implications. It pretty clearly doesn't matter. The point is that humanity has evolved to the point where people don't have to do work they don't want to do just to have money to survive. We've gone this long without it being explained and I don't particularly need to see it spelled out now.

TNG and the later shows always took a hagiographic view of TOS. They acknowledged it without referencing specific events (eventually, TNG showed the bridge on the holodeck, DS9 did the Tribbles thing, and Enterprise used the TOS bridge in the mirror universe and just pretended it didn't look stupid). Discovery continues the tradition of taking a hagiographic view of TOS. The difference is that the time period is close to TOS's, so it's perhaps a bit more obvious than when the series were set a century in either direction.

 

Will we finally hear JLP drop the F-bomb? Will JLP say something is "cool"?

 

If Picard drops an F-Bomb, that would be red meat for the "STD STP Sucks!!!" Crowd. They'd love it too much because they'd be able to proudly point to it and say, "Look at what Star Trek has become! Look at the depths it's now sunken to and this is the proof!" So, for this reason, I hope Picard himself doesn't drop an F-Bomb. I want detractors to be deprived of the chance to gloat and say "See? See?!"

The other characters, I don't care so much if they drop an F-bomb. They seem like a surly crowd. It would be weird if they didn't drop one occasionally. Not the other way around.

 

Pretty much. The F-word is the last thing Star Trek needs.

 

Well, he did once use the M-word on TNG. Wouldn't be much of a stretch that he would be more...liberal...with his language once he's left Starfleet.

Although the use or non-use of expletives is trivial and a non-issue, my opinion.

 

1980s American Television intended for an English-speaking audience. To much of the intended viewing audience in the United States unfamiliar with French, "merde" would register as a foreign word, not a swear word. That's ethnocentric, for sure, but we're also talking about his use of it an episode made during the Reagan Era. If they weren't able to slip it under the censorship radar, they wouldn't have had Picard say it.

 

I kind of liked when Tilly said that. A Trek character sounded "normal" for a change.

They don't have to be cursing all the time, but I do get the feeling they're probably going speak, behave, and express themselves more differently than on the TV show.

The show did have its limits.

Network censors looking over their shoulders, product of the 80's-90's, Roddenberry's rules and futurism, living up to a super ideal version of humanity, and basically just being stuck in 'the plot of the week" format.

It's the 2010's, it's on a streaming platform, less fear of network execs or uptight intolerant viewers weighing it down, so the characters in it should be more free to express themselves--like regular people.

I hope they sound and express themselves differently when Picard arrives. It'll be lot more refreshing to see that, than in the restricted way they did before.

Worf and Obrien began to express themselves more differently when they hit DS9.

Even with Troi, I notice that in the movies and on Voyager, she sounded different. The exotic accent was less, and her demeanor seemed more down to earth.

We're at 2020 now. They have to sound different.

 

This is exactly what I've been rooting for. Why not just show, in a clear, obvious way, and on a regular basis, how human economy works?

It's not a demand, I just want to see it out of curiosity. Along with other stuff. If there's no TV, what do humans do for entertainment?

They need to show more stuff IMO.

But I think this is an example of poor world building. It's pretty basic element in the Trek verse and it's one of the vaguest things. Along with religion, what a 24th human jail looks like, toilets, how people get paid if they earn money, why are there butlers and maids etc., everything about 24th century humans is vague.

The Ferengi seemed more fleshed out and explained than us.

The only things they ever really show you is humans smiling in colorful clothes in the background, to show how enlightened and post scarcity earth is.

With the Game of thrones (and Star Wars) they had so much extensive backstory and world building, that they're filming a prequal just based on all the extra history from the show. They could do the same with Star Wars.

 

Is there some age cutoff where either word becomes inappropriate? At what age does this occure?

 

But is 'Belgium' still off limits?

 

I now want senile Irumodic syndrome Picard cursing like the Iron Shiek.

 

OMG, yes! I think that a Star Wars prequel would be awesome. Wouldn't it be neat to find out how Luke's dad became Darth Vader, and that Clone Wars thing happened? Maybe they could include Boba Fett! That's a guaranteed awesome movie - no way they could screw that up!

-Me in 1998

 

That no longer seems to be the case...

 

Well that’s just a news broadcast. I imagine those still exist.

The novels have them as well.

 

Seems logical to me to surmise that if peoples are still watching news broadcast on TV like devices, they are probably still watching Corporate/Government Sponsored shows that are also broadcast in some form on the same devices.