You act as if I'm calling these people scum of the earth. I simply don't like when blame is placed on someone who can't defend himself.
Spoilers An easy explanation for the klingon ship design in Season 1
- Thread starter Unimatrix Q
- Start date
You act as if I'm calling these people scum of the earth. I simply don't like when blame is placed on someone who can't defend himself.
No, just that I'm willing to take them at their word at the moment.
That's great. I'm not.
To be honest, I am doubtful that even if they presented transcripts of exactly what happened the production staff would still be called liars.
The so-called "D-7" in season 1 was actually intended to be called a Sech class, that's what it's described as in the concept art and in all materials CBS gave to Eagle Moss for their model. The problem was someone in studio got a bit overzealous about continuity and told the computer voice actress to call the ship a "D-7" not realizing a completely new design was going to be used. Eagle Moss, for their part tried to explain things by saying that particular ship was using a tractor beam salvaged from a D-7 which is why the shuttle's computer identified the ship as one, but I guess that's out the window now that the D-7 is a new design currently being built.
Referencing terms from the history of the Trek doesn't equal any sort of knowledge of understanding of the terms at play (though of course it doesn't mean they don't know either). And acknowledging some bits of canon but weirdly ignoring big huge issues that would feed directly into major aspects of their story is... odd. They can use whatever they want, but throwing "Black Fleet" and "Molor" mean anything about knowing the lore. They could be making knowing references that have meaning, or they could be saying "that Death Star just jumped over a Hoth because it has the Force of a Yoda Fett".
Except the references they make, make sense with the greater franchise, they're not just pulling out random words and names.
That's exactly how continuity works. It's ever evolving not static.
So if Christopher Nolan suddenly proclaimed that his Batman films actually took place ten years before the '60's Batman TV show and that his films were just a 'visual reboot,' you'd say that the continuity fits perfectly?
Yes
I never said it was perfect. It's never perfect. But it is ever changing and not static, which is not the same thing.
They have mostly skirted the line of not not making sense. To be clear, I'm not coming down against their usage. Real connections are essential to a story, an ingredient in the mix. These references are... little flourishy decorations on top of the story cake. But definitely skirting the line, ie- the Bat'leth comes from a strand of hair, which makes it a darn good thing they retconned the bald retcon back to the preretcon hair status. Also, they are pulling random words and names for things like Pike's accolades (though it seems the production team has been the guilty party several times with this sort of thing, rather than the writers).
The people making the 2D art and the people making the story and writing the episodes are not the same.
Sorry, I don't agree. Ignoring your source material while at the same time calling your show a prequel to that same source material pretty much makes your show a reboot.
Still, it's as good an explanation as any. Sech class it is, then!
Every long running entertainment franchise makes adjustments to the source material. Especially in stories that are set in the past or involve flashbacks. New things are added and sometime old stuff is ignored. That's how it worked. Probably since we began telling stories around the campfire.
Sorry, I don't agree. Ignoring your source material while at the same time calling your show a prequel to that same source material pretty much makes your show a reboot.
See, this is where we have insurmountable differences of opinion. I say there's a difference between what TPTB say, and what actually is. And that there are many reasons why they may misdirect us, from marketing to legal issues to some whim of a departed showrunner. You say whatever TPTB tell you to unquestioningly.
Which of us is the paid plant?
That's the same thing. Because they are TBTB.
Oh, I understand that. Even Trek has done that internally. What I'm saying is that when something is so different from the source material in practically every way, then it blurs the line between 'making adjustments' and 'starting over from scratch.' And if you're doing the latter, then it's hard to take seriously the idea that these are two totally compatible universes. Hence my example with the Batman films/Batman TV show.
If they tell us their show is amazing and the best show ever made, would you unquestioningly believe them? Even if they intend something, they can fail miserably.That's the same thing. Because they are TBTB.
Similar threads
