Someone's a fan of Midnight's Edge
Do you believe them when they tell you we're all paid CBS plants, too?
Poll Do You Believe STD Is Actually a Reboot [After Seeing It]?
- Thread starter Kane_Steel
- Start date
Do you believe them when they tell you we're all paid CBS plants, too?
What/Who?Someone's a fan of Midnight's Edge
The people who keep going on about split copyrights, secret Bad Robot involvement and other utter nonsense, which they got from Doug Fitz's imagination.
It seemed like a reasonable explanation for why it looks so out of place, otherwise it means that the PTB actually thought this was a good way to go.
Remember, Discovery was co-created by Alex Kurtzman of Abrams reboot fame. They thought it was a good way to go (and I agree, but it's purely subjective). If they didn't have the copyright for the original designs, they wouldn't be in the intro sequence.
A reboot is easy. You dump the stories but keep the toys. Still have spaceships,transporters,starfleet etc but you erase the backstory stuff you don't like and create some new backstory. If you want Klingons to look like giant elephants or if you want them to be human warriors that left earth it doesn't matter. You can do almost anything you want with the material. Then you can do what I think "Discovery" seems to be is a light reboot. It feels different but not to different that you don't see a few tropes of old Trek still in it. I really wish though if the debate went from canon to shared universe because I think that is something that changes how the debate is shaped. For example I think all the Batman movies are part of the same canon but only the Nolan Movies are connected with each other.
Jason
Canon and continuity are different beasts. All of the Star Trek live-action material is canon, not all of it is in the same continuity.
None of the shows were designed as a shared universe, even the 24th century shows that ran side-by-side. They largely did their own things and rarely interacted with each other. Trying to cram it all into a shared universe now feel awkward to me.
I disagree about the Berman shows. They each had different tones much like how a Captain America Movie feels different than a Thor movie but they also were created more or less by the same people and you had numerous crossovers and even series regulars like Worf, and O'Brien from a previous show join another show. You could even say they did a story crossover when they were setting up the Maquis for :Voyager." The tech and visuals were even pretty much the same. The TNG transporter effect was still being used by DS9 even in it's series final. I can easily seeing a movie being done were you had characters from each of these shows being in it but if you had Patrick Stewart play Picard on "Discovery" or Dorn play his Klingon character against the new Klingons it would look weird. You could even say that with "TOS" which they did do but it was always seemed reserved for special moments were they don't care about the realism and were aiming for people's nostagia.
Jason
No. It is not a reboot. It's simply a new show in the timeline that takes advantage of modern technology to show us all the cool stuff they couldn't in the 60's. Does anyone actually believe that TOS would have used velour and cardboard if it was made in our era? That is the best they could do with the money and the tech they had available, and it still managed to look very cool.
We get so hung up on "reboots" and other hot-button issues that we allow ourselves to pretend that colored blocks of wood were really computer disks and that anything that doesn't use a colored block of wood is a "reboot."
We get so hung up on "reboots" and other hot-button issues that we allow ourselves to pretend that colored blocks of wood were really computer disks and that anything that doesn't use a colored block of wood is a "reboot."
Blame it on the Episode Relics, and a little on Star Wars.
Agreed. Star Wars fans have come to terms that computer technology in a GFFA, voice synthesis is high tech so most computers even with AI, just go "beep beep boop." Personal weapons fire bolts of energy at about the speed of a slow pitch baseball. Military tactics are a mix of Napoleanic Wars and WWI biplane duels. A galactic civilization has had something like 30,000 years to improve itself and still fights religious wars, some of them involving "beep beep boop" drois. and they never quite make it out of their Galaxy. Wierdly enough, they haven't even mapped the whole place yet.
Visually though Star Wars is very coherent, thanks to the original work done on it, despite its idiosyncrasies, people find the look of it works well enough, possibly because it is understood that starwars IS set in a moribund Galaxy that can't get its act together and probably never has. Abrams didn't change anything visually when he took that helm. Yet he did with Star Trek. And Discovery clearly has elements of the Abrams movies in it, though not necessarily in the interiors.
Star Trek promises development and growth based on technology. Federation types wouldn't be so saintly if they weren't enjoying an economy without lack of resources, but no matter. It's understood things should look more advanced, and that changes over time, as do the social norms of the time periods in which the shows have been made. As much as I like them, I suspect if episodes like Relics, A Mirror Darkly and Trials and Tribbleations had not been made, a lot of these arguments would not be going on as strongly. Unfortunately those episodes, loveletters to the past, cemented the idea that the painted plywoood and blinkenlights of the TOS sets were "canon", whatever canon even means now.
If Shakespearean theatre admirers were like trekkers they'd riot any time the plays were shown outside the Globe or if female actresses were used.
I don't think anyone is saying they want Discovery to look like it was filmed in the 60's.
well to answer the title of the thread.. yes.. Yes, it feels like a reboot of the original time line and not a continuation..
^^^^
This was first stated in 1973 with TAS...Then 1979 after ST:TMP...it wasn't stated for the rest of the TOS featue film run, but was stated again in 1987 (TNG), then again in 1993 (DS9), 1995 (VOY), 2001 (ENT), 2009 (JJ STAR TREK), 2014 (JJ STID), skipped JJ ST: B), but stated by you again in 2017 with ST: D.
^^^
See a pattern?
Logically speaking from a Vulcan perspective.. Your statement tho sarcastic, is consistent with established Trekker fandom history.^^^^
This was first stated in 1973 with TAS...Then 1979 after ST:TMP...it wasn't stated for the rest of the TOS featue film run, but was stated again in 1987 (TNG), then again in 1993 (DS9), 1995 (VOY), 2001 (ENT), 2009 (JJ STAR TREK), 2014 (JJ STID), skipped JJ ST: B), but stated by you again in 2017 with ST: D.
^^^
See a pattern?
Yep. At least somebody took the trouble to make the signal reception a little poorer than on DS9.
I think it's a reboot. Technology is not what you would expect from this time period (holograms, force fileds) but I don't see that as much of a problem as I see problems with Klingons, their behavior is off, they fight without honor.
G
Gonzo
Guest
I personally don't mind one way or the other but I must admit if it is not a reboot they have made some strange and contradictory choices.
I can see why half the forum thinks it is and the other half thinks it isn't.
I can see why half the forum thinks it is and the other half thinks it isn't.