• 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!

Discovery at STLV. The massive info dump

Star Trek fandom; where the look of the show is more important than the show itself. Subscribe now, and recieve the latest newsletter with a 20.000 word essay on just WHY the buttons on that new shirt should have been red, not brown.
 
Maybe ST just isn't for you then, 'cause if you love Trek you have to be able to live with the visual inconsistencies.. it's been a part of Trek's fabric for decades, most noticably starting with TMP.. but don't forget the visual re-imagining of the Borg for First Contact for instance... whenever Trek got more money to spend or work with newer technologies, it would show on the screen... you see it with so many long running franchises. My advice: get over it, choose substance over style and just enjoy the fact that what we have been waiting for for over 12 years is finally about to happen: Trek on tv is back..!!!

He didn't reject change outright, he just suggested that this change was more 'blatant' than previous examples you cited, and thus more jarring.

Personally I haven't seen anything too jarring yet, it will depend on how the show frames the change. If Klingons are bald and different because they are aboriginal, and most Klingons are mixed race, then that would be fine with me. If however, they always looked like this and just cant grow hair at all, under any circumstance, that would jar quite badly with decades of Klingons with long flowing viking locks - including a clone of Kahless from the 9th century A.D. or whenever - and a story of how he 'plunged his locks into a volcano and forged the first bat'leth', etc - and mostly because its unnecessary to be so extreme in their retcon and they would look fine with hair.

Other than that, I care far more about the substance of the show.
 
As long as they are entertaining and interesting, I can still enjoy the various Trek spinoffs as their own separate thing loosely based on Star Trek, even though they aren't true Star Trek to me. TOS still stands on its own, and it isn't undermined by the fact that the spinoffs aren't consistent with it.

Kor
 
Um, it's been 43 years. The LAST time we actually saw STAR TREK on TV was 1974 with The Animated Series.
mean we're talking STAR TREK on TV - not the retconned Berman/Braga era TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT crap. GET IT RIGHT! ;)
None of you are right. It's been 48. The last time Star Trek was new on TV was 1969. No bloody TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT. Dang! People don't know nothin'!
 
Just for clarity sake, are you serious or joking?

I'm serious that I do not consider Enterprise or JJTrek to be Star Trek. So while for the rest of you it may be only 12 years since the last Star Trek TV show. For me it has been 16 years. And 15 years since that last Star Trek film.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top