"We have to get out of here! There's no time Toulouse!"
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
"We have to get out of here! There's no time Toulouse!"
Why should a tv show produced in 2017 look like a tv show produced in 1960's?
That simply isn't what anyone has said. You can keep the look and use modern production techniques. There is simply nothing wrong with the designs.
Yes, it is. But, there are interpretations consistent with lore that can be applied. Why not enjoy the speculation rather than railing against the writers for their supposed oversights?
No there are issues with the TOS connie. Which they've fixed with the new one. (and the refit version back in '79)
And no-one has said that there is.
There really aren't. Don't mistake Roddenberry having a ton of money as there being an issue with the original designs.
There really are. The pylons and neck being the big ones.
Those are my only problems with the TOS connie. Everything else is fine.
I'm fine with the original pylons and neck from the 1960s. That said: the new neck doesn't bother me at all and the new pylons are acceptable for the most part and the gap in between gives them a modular appearance where you can imagine engineers removing the back strut and straightening the front one to get to the TOS look. They're better than one really big, wide, flared pylon in this time period.
Well, obviously I do enjoy the speculation, or I wouldn't be posting in forums like these!
That said, I would enjoy the show more if it would live up to some of the interesting fan speculation I've seen here over the past few months, rather than living down to our lowest expectations based on familiar TV tropes. I don't think it's "railing against" the writers to observe that they're responsible for that. Surely it would be really nice actually to see different kinds of Klingons interacting and competing within the Empire, for instance, rather than just speculating about it?
Sure, it would be nice. I just don't expect or require it for my enjoyment.
That joke came up a little short.
^ I stole it from Python, actually. 
(it's at about 2:28)
(it's at about 2:28)
Both Abrams and Alex Kurtzman could take some lessons from "Space Battleship Yamato: 2199" on HOW to dop a re imagining without making the original hero ship of the franchise look very different from what originally appeared on TV screens - as well as how to make the ship interior tech and layout look good for modern audiences again without really screwing with what was in the original version.
And Gretchen Berg is an idiot. The LOOK is just as important to 'canon' as the rest; and to say "we're totally respecting canon" shows just how clueless she is in that regard. (But what can you expect from someone who is primarily a fan and novel writer for the ABSOLUTE SH!TFEST that was "Star Trek: Voyager"?)
Last edited:
And Gretchen berg is an idiot. The LOOK is just as important to 'canon' as the rest; and to say "we're totally respecting canon" shows just how clueless she is in that regard. (But what can you expect from someone who is primarily a fan and novel writer for the ABSOLUTE SH!TFEST that was :Star Trek: Voyager"?)
Both Abrams and Alex Kurtzman could take some lessons from "Space Battleship Yamato: 2199" on HOW to dop a re imagining without making the original hero ship of the franchise look very different from what originally appeared on TV screens - as well as how to make the ship interior tech and layout look good for modern audiences again without really screwing with what was in the original version.
And Gretchen Berg is an idiot. The LOOK is just as important to 'canon' as the rest; and to say "we're totally respecting canon" shows just how clueless she is in that regard. (But what can you expect from someone who is primarily a fan and novel writer for the ABSOLUTE SH!TFEST that was "Star Trek: Voyager"?)
Gretchen Berg doesn’t write the Voyager books. Kirsten Beyer does. Respect the canon of real life.
I think Beyer is a good novelist who was the absolute wrong choice to work on a prequel to TOS. She seems far more committed to the 24th century, and it shows.
After finishing 15 episodes, even culminating in a cliffhanger involving the U.S.S. Enterprise herself, I remain unconvinced. I want it to be - and don't scoff at this - as good a prequel as Enterprise. Because even comparing episodes from 1966 and 2005, I see an in-house Trek style. There was enough tech extrapolation running back & forth, plus a graphic interface style which is unmistakably Trek. Discovery is hampered in several key areas, particularly production and redesign work that looks like it goes out of its way deliberately not to fit in.
Or maybe it's just that the look of TV, has just leaped so far ahead in 13 years, there's a disconnect with the last thing in the Prime universe, and much more in common with what JJ Abrams brought in.
Or maybe it's just that the look of TV, has just leaped so far ahead in 13 years, there's a disconnect with the last thing in the Prime universe, and much more in common with what JJ Abrams brought in.
Last edited:
Interesting. Got any images or links you can share to illustrate how Yamato did this? (I don't really feel like going down the rabbit hole of random Google searches!...)
Similar threads
