• 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!

Spoilers Canon, Continuity, and Pike's Accident

Because Superman is based in comics. Anyone could play Superman. This also applies to characters originating in theatre and prose. There's no canon look to them other than what's described. Whereas with the television character we have a specific appearance.

No. You're making excuses for insisting that Shatner=Kirk.

That's not true. Nor is it particularly important.

Shatner hasn't been Kirk, nor has Kirk looked like Shatner in the several fully canon Trek productions made, since 1996.

Three people have played Kirk now, no deepf*king required.

There will be more,

You just don't like it, which is fine. But it might be a good idea to stop calling other people "obstinate."
 
Which Ziyal or Saavik is their canon appearance?
Under the Cardassian makeup the Ziyals look pretty much alike. Like the Borg Queens.
The second Saavik is portrayed by a less controversial actor.

But I concede the point - seeing the Hansen parents change looks is a bit confusing to watch.
Moving my goalpost, I’d say it’s more important with main and recurring characters than bit players. In the Jurassic Saga movies, there could only be one Alan Grant, but Lewis Dodgson only appeared briefly before being recast.

No. You're making excuses for insisting that Shatner=Kirk.

That's not true. Nor is it particularly important.
Ah, when you disagree with a rationale it’s an excuse, untrue and not particularly important. Again, it doesn’t matter what Spider-Man or Fitzwilliam Darcy look like because the source material is written. Whereas Jack Dawson in Titanic is Leonardo unless somebody made a reboot instead of a pre/sequel. The epochal Matrix Quadrilogy explained the change of looks for the Oracle.
Three people have played Kirk now, no deepf*king required.
Bear in mind that Pine’s Kirk is from an alternate timeline. So it’s only SNW that goes the new route in the Kirk example.

I'm sure there's some excuse for why that doesn't matter either.
The Bond movies aren’t one big continuity. Once we hit the blond Bond, he remained the same in the movies and the supporting cast became specific actors, like Judy Drench being Boss.
 
Last edited:
Told you.

And...Kirk goes on appearing on canon Trek, played by different actors, and it's just fine.
I’m sure there is a television series example that would disprove my argument but the Bond movies ain’t it. They are not in one continuity because Bond’s unchanging age over decades could not be explained. Plus, he should use the lasers from Moonraker from that point in time onward.

Yes, Kirk playing by different actors is fine. But AI, CGI and deepfake provide the option to overcome limitations if money and willpower allow. Like how the Roddenberry Archives is bringing Spock back.

Don't take visual canon so damn seriously.
Key words: visual, canon. This isn’t some anime with magic and dragons, it is a show of our future and a viewership’s suspense of disbelief is limited.
 
Those old-timey characters originate in theatre and drama. Spider-Man can be recast because it’s just a comic book figure.
Kirk is a visual character from television. His appearance is part of the character.
Absurd.

Because Superman is based in comics. Anyone could play Superman. This also applies to characters originating in theatre and prose. There's no canon look to them other than what's described. Whereas with the television character we have a specific appearance.
And again.

it is a show of our future and a viewership’s suspense of disbelief is limited
No. It isn’t. As to limited suspension of disbelief? Limited only by one’s imagination.
 
I could show somebody a screenshot from Superman - The Movie and somebody else could point to Reeve and say "That's Superman."

And then, I could show somebody a screenshot from Man of Steel and somebody else could point to Cavil and say "That's Superman."

And so on, and so forth...
Should I also mention Kirk Alyn and George Reeves, or the current CW Superman Tyler Hoechlin? ;)

Edited to add:

Oh I forgot Brandon Routh.
 
Moving my goalpost, I’d say it’s more important with main and recurring characters than bit players. In the Jurassic Saga movies, there could only be one Alan Grant, but Lewis Dodgson only appeared briefly before being recast.
What about Stargate? The two original leads of SG-1 were played by different actors in the series than in the original movie. Likewise on Stargate Atlantis, Dr. Weir was played by a different actress than the one who played her when the character was originally introduced on SG-1.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top