And? This isn't TOS.
Discovery's uniform insignia...combadge?
- Thread starter MarsWeeps
- Start date
Pretty sure "Star Trek" isn't historical documentaries.
"You don't believe Gilligan's Island is real do y..."
"Those poor people"
Oh, I thought you were talking about something relevant to the new TV series. You're not.
Well, not people who think they're watching a science fiction show about the future...that much is certain.
Once again, if you're hoping for fealty to the aesthetic of a fifty year-old TV series your hopes are in vain. Everything we've seen thus far confirms that.
It's set in the same era. For any story in universe consistency generally desirable.
Agreed. But that's not the point now is it.
Um... If the show is set in the same era as "The cage" then the elements of that story are very relevant.
I think it's clear by now that the Star Trek universe is not OUR future. So it doesn't have to mesh with what our predictions for the future will be, or even seem "futuristic"(which is hardly an objective term) to us.
I suppose I have to agree. After all, Rogue One was a huge failure becasue it had that '70's scifi aesthetic. Nothing could ever be watchable unless it has bling-bling touch screens and dark mood lighting.
You're very good at false equivalencies.
I like the Rise of the Federation explanation of the different uniforms' patches, with UESPA being the arrowhead, which would explain Defiant having it also at that time.
Odd, someone made a similar comment to me on facebook the other day. Something about if I didn't like VOY or ENT then i should shut up and go watch the JJ films.
Nuance is apparently a lost art.
If it's set in the same era but filmed 60 years later, and is meant to be a reboot, you actually don't want to clone the 60's style.
Last edited:
I'm sorry but Lucas and his set designers were way ahead of the game when they designed the lived in look at Star Wars.....and even the Imperial sets. Rogue One did recreate that feeling and style perfectly. It's a far cry from the cheaply built and brightly colored TOS sets. I love them. I grew up watching them every day but they would NOT work well on screen today, they just wouldn't. I hope they do blend some of the props and sets to have the feel of TOS but still be believable as tech of the future. Like the bridge consoles and even the arms of the captains chair being touch screen panels but maybe colored and shaped like the colorful buttons of TOS consoles..........
Star Trek is suppose to look like a possible future for us. As our technology changes, so to must the possible technology for Star Trek, or otherwise is looks like we stepped backward in technology in the future. Now it is true you can't unmake Star Trek from the 1960s, and it would be logical to get the aesthetic feel of that series to make the entire thing seem connected if writing a story set during similar events, but if a technology is present today, it should logically be at least possible in the far future.
Star Wars can get away with keeping its look from 1977 to 2016 between two films that are suppose to be weeks to days apart within its own timeline because it is not suppose to be our future. It is in its own universe "A long time age, in a galaxy far far away". Thus it doesn't have to conform with our present day technology. Add to that that Star Wars is Space Fantasy, meaning stuff can work via "magic" and no one will really care because it is fantasy.
Star Trek, being science fiction, and set in our potential future, requires that is at least seem like it could be our future at the time the story is written. That and Star Trek, even with fans working in the production, is not very good at internal consistency due to our own rapid advancements in some fields of technology and not in other fields predicted during the 1960s. Star Wars. at least in recent years, it attempting to remain consistent within its own canon, but not within the laws of our physics.
Star Wars can get away with keeping its look from 1977 to 2016 between two films that are suppose to be weeks to days apart within its own timeline because it is not suppose to be our future. It is in its own universe "A long time age, in a galaxy far far away". Thus it doesn't have to conform with our present day technology. Add to that that Star Wars is Space Fantasy, meaning stuff can work via "magic" and no one will really care because it is fantasy.
Star Trek, being science fiction, and set in our potential future, requires that is at least seem like it could be our future at the time the story is written. That and Star Trek, even with fans working in the production, is not very good at internal consistency due to our own rapid advancements in some fields of technology and not in other fields predicted during the 1960s. Star Wars. at least in recent years, it attempting to remain consistent within its own canon, but not within the laws of our physics.
![15209230785_7c40ef685a_o[1].png](https://www.trekbbs.com/data/attachments/1/1416-b924b9fe78564ce436556195e0156e3f.jpg "15209230785_7c40ef685a_o[1].png")
We're not discussing "elements of that story." We're discussing visual design (in that instance, the fact that they're using badges instead of patches). What a fifty year-old TV series looked like has little to do with what the producers are doing now. Not relevant.
Well, you pretty much do have to, since what I wrote that you responded to was a statement of fact and not a proposal regarding the success or failure of the show:
That's simply a fact. Look at every visual element of the show that's been made available. None of it matches "The Cage" - it's a closer match for Enterprise than anything else, if only because one of the ship designers worked on that show.
Again: if you think this is going to look like TOS, you're just flat wrong.
I think the best and most historically appropriate way for this show to handle cannon is basically the same way they handle the prime direction in the show, the main cannon tennet of the show. Which is to basically throw it out the window when it hinders story telling and or isn't convenient.
That isn't an apt comparison, Star Wars had a bigger budget then TOS.
I agree. Also think it's more than that though. Star trek has always tried (don't laugh lol) to go for a grounded in reality technological approach. So from th. Beginning it would always look dated eventually. Star wars on the other hand always viewed technology as something to serve the story. Whereas in the star trek the technology is the centre point of the story many (although I'd wager not majority) of the time. When you basically technology analogous to magic in a fantasy story, it's never going to look dated. You can do anything you want to
You do know that Rogue One earned more than a billion dollars in worldwide box office right?
You probably meant to say that Rogue One was a huge success exactly because it had a dated '70s sci-fi aesthetic!
Edit: Upon reconsideration you probably are being sarcastic in which case I agree with you 100%.
Last edited:
All of this talk on aesthetics is just another great reason to not have set the dang show in the TOS era.
Sarcasm...
You do know that Rogue One earned more than a billion dollars in worldwide box office right?
You probably meant to say that Rogue One was a huge success exactly because it had a dated '70s sci-fi aesthetic!
Sarcasm...
Similar threads
