Spoilers Canon, Continuity, and Pike's Accident

[fireproof78]

We could have a future were i watch an ep of SNW and switch filters to see it they way it looked like upon release, or with “The Cage” visuals restored.

Which shows s complete disrespect to all the artists working. This is basically saying Trek performances and art peaked in.the 60s. Why make anything new?

Why make more Trek now? Why recast Saavik? Change uniforms in TWOK? By this argument change is very bad for Trek.

 

[David cgc]

I've gotta say, I love how many Star Trek fans, when it's suggested that the kinds of things the holodeck does all the time on the shows could be done in real life to the shows, respond with a hearty, "Get bent!"

 

[fireproof78]

I've gotta say, I love how many Star Trek fans, when it's suggested that the kinds of things the holodeck does all the time on the shows could be done in real life to the shows, respond with a hearty, "Get bent!"

Unless there is the ability to customize it to each individual preferences then yes I'll push back on it. This is taking Trek past performance art to historical documentary levels.

 

[Yistaan]

You're the only person who wants this here.

He's not. I want it too, but am aware that the realities of filmmaking make those wishes absurd. But people are afraid to say that because they'll get ganged up on. And then the critics will fabricate comments like "You're the only one who wants that" when it's not true.

He can literally say his genuine opinion because he's a mod, but most of us don't have that benefit. I myself am only speaking up because you literally wrote a comment that wasn't true. I know it's not true because I'd like it also.

 

[Finn]

^No. He's not the mod in this forum.

 

[Yistaan]

^No. He's not the mod in this forum.

It doesn't matter, the gist is people who don't have some sort of badge on their profile are less willing to go against what seems to be against the majority opinion because they'll be afraid of being labeled as a troublemaker etc.

And again, the people in the majority are so confident they will literally say that "everyone" agrees with them, even if it's not true.

 

[Tuskin38]

He's not. I want it too,

You weren't here at the time.

 

[fireproof78]

^No. He's not the mod in this forum.

Yup. I disagree with the poster on some things, agree with them on others. I doubt they are the only one though since 60s designs are now considered peak scifi future imaginings.

 

[Finn]

It doesn't matter, the gist is people who don't have some sort of badge on their profile are less willing to go against what seems to be against the majority opinion because they'll be afraid of being labeled as a troublemaker etc.

And again, the people in the majority are so confident they will literally say that "everyone" agrees with them, even if it's not true.

So are you afraid to say something, about canon, politics, science here? Or maybe in TNZ?

 

[Yistaan]

So are you afraid to say something, about canon, politics, science here?

Oh yeah. It seems I can have opinions that people find controversial, won't allow me to explain context, and rush to judgment. Maybe I'd be fine saying them here but I'd rather play it safe. And besides, if it's not relevant to Star Trek, said opinions wouldn't be on-topic here anyway. But I mainly play things safe after my experiences on Star Wars forums.

At worst people end up defaming an innocent person over something said about a fictional character.

Over at theforce net Jedi Council Forums, I made an offhand comment on a thread that Luke's fantasy dream with Camie in the Last Jedi novelization (someone who had bullied him and called him Wormie) seemed out of character (out of character that his dream would be with someone like her instead of any other women he'd met who were kinder to him).

Immediately, a moderator and another poster (both of whom were male) teamed up against me, said I was a sexist "nice guy" who hated women in publicly accessible forum posts (none of this is remotely true just to be clear) in regards to this post about Camie (a fictional character) and banned me on the spot. In shock, I messaged the moderator and said if my post about Camie (I didn't say anything bad about her at all, just that it seemed unrealistic she'd marry Luke even in a fantasy dream) was off they can delete it, but that his and the other poster's posts declaring me sexist (all publicly accessible) were false and defamatory and should be removed.

In reply, the moderator wrote a taunt "Lawyer up", which I then had to spend an inordinate amount of money to get a law firm to look over theforce net forums, only for my attorney to find that the defamatory content was removed (the moderator must have realized I was taking this very seriously by that point).

My lawyer then saw the mod's message to me that the ban was for 48 hours and we felt the matter was resolved. However, after 48 hours passed, the ban was still there and I asked the mod what happened. He said for daring to ask and not "apologizing" for sexism (about a fictional character keep in mind, and over comments about her history of calling Luke Wormie not her gender), the ban was extended to 96 hours. This was years ago, and it's clear my ban is permanent unless I "confess" to their accusation of sexism.

I really don't want to see that kind of thing here in Trek fandom. While combating sexism/racism etc. is important, outright accusing someone of being sexist/racist/etc. solely on opinions about fictional characters without evidence of real life wrongdoing is just outright defamation and can seriously damage someone's life.

 

[Markonian]

Which shows s complete disrespect to all the artists working. This is basically saying Trek performances and art peaked in.the 60s. Why make anything new?

Why make more Trek now?

It didn’t peak in the 60s. It is simply what has been established the 2260s era looks like. TOS-R updated content without having to override it completely. STO has missions in the 2260s and they look fine to a 20s eye while celebrating the look of 2265.

If artists want to change things, make a sequel or explain the different looks. Example: TMP is set after TOS and it makes sense Starfleet changed its fashions. The 5Y comics show TOS and TMP visual side by side. One doesn’t need to erase what came before.

 

[Yistaan]

It didn’t peak in the 60s. It is simply what has been established the 2260s era looks like. TOS-R updated content without having to override it completely. STO has missions in the 2260s and they look fine to a 20s eye while celebrating the look of 2265.

If artists want to change things, make a sequel or explain the different looks. Example: TMP is set after TOS and it makes sense Starfleet changed its fashions. The 5Y comics show TOS and TMP visual side by side. One doesn’t need to erase what came before.

You might want to read the recent Star Trek Annual 2023 comic book, https://www.space.com/star-trek-annual-2023-covers-idw-publishing . A line of dialogue says that the Enterprise was refit between Strange New Worlds and TOS. It still doesn't explain the differences in the ship between Q&A and Cage, but Q&A has other problems as well (the Prime Directive is referred to as such when the later Strange New Worlds premiere has Robert April coin the term, 5 years after Q&A).

 

[fireproof78]

It didn’t peak in the 60s. It is simply what has been established the 2260s era looks like. TOS-R updated content without having to override it completely. STO has missions in the 2260s and they look fine to a 20s eye while celebrating the look of 2265.

If artists want to change things, make a sequel or explain the different looks. Example: TMP is set after TOS and it makes sense Starfleet changed its fashions. The 5Y comics show TOS and TMP visual side by side. One doesn’t need to erase what came before.

Nothing is being erased is the point. And "looks ok" is in the eye of the beholder.

No, I am not comfortable overriding an artists art because of a look. This is not historical recreation.

 

[Ovation]

Because it impairs the impression that what we are watching is real.

Except…it’s NOT “real”.

You may be right and I may be wrong.
But it’s happening. This BBC article gives an example how a character in Fast Furios was portrayed by three brothers but looks like only one of them on screen: https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20150511-could-marilyn-star-in-a-new-film

We could have a future were I watch an ep of SNW and switch filters to see it the way it looked like upon release, or with “The Cage” visuals restored.

 

[Noname Given]

Because it impairs the impression that what we are watching is real.

Um...yeah, it's NOT real. In the end it's just entertainment. What are you smoking these days?

 

[Tuskin38]

If artists want to change things, make a sequel or explain the different looks. Example: TMP is set after TOS and it makes sense Starfleet changed its fashions. The 5Y comics show TOS and TMP visual side by side. One doesn’t need to erase what came before.

SNW isn't erasing anything, Discovery didn't erase anything.

TMP did retcon the Klingon design, until Enterprise decided it had to explain something that didn't need explaning.

 

[Mudd]

This is a foolish conversation proceeding from Markonian's nonsensical declaration about how they'd like entertainment to work, instead of the way it does, and none of it is worth wasting any more time on.

It doesn't matter, the gist is people who don't have some sort of badge on their profile are less willing to go against what seems to be against the majority opinion because they'll be afraid of being labeled as a troublemaker etc.

Nope.

 

[fireproof78]

Markonian is just approaching it like historical reality, rather than dramatic art. Closer to Civil War reenactment than artistic expression.

It's valid if unusual approach to Trek that I'm seeing expressed more.

 

[Mudd]

Comparing anyone to a "civil war reenactor" ought to be grounds for a warning.

 

[fireproof78]

Emphasis on the word "closer."