That isn't called retconning. Michael Burnham being the cause of Sarek and Spock not talking to each other is a retcon. Outright ignoring the Augment virus storyline is not.
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
Yes it is. The virus was itself a retcon. So removing it, is also a retcon.
Edit: You exsample is not a retcon by the way.
Then you clearly don't know shit about what is or isn't a retcon. But then, you seem to be under the impression "retcon" means "magic word which wins me my arguments."
Yeah...no.
Was a reason ever givein for the split? No it was not. Adding a reason did not change anything, it simply expanded what was there. Just like adding family for Scotty or spock is not a retcon, unless it was stated they had no siblings or family
A retcon, by definition changes things.
Oh my cock. "Every word of that sentence is wrong."
I have little desire to be on your cock man.
Also, while not wrong about what it does, I did look it up. And I stand corrected on yours not being a retcon. As it now counts "new information" as a retcon.
That's always been the case. You are seriously losing credibility with every damn post you make.
It always has, it didn’t just start.
The Augment virus doesn't need to retconned. At all. There is no logical reson to do so and "I don't like it" isn't justification for producers to jettison canon from the most recent series produced during the current century.
Not how I recall it man, but I am willing to admit I may have recalled it incorrectly.
Doesn't mean it should. Or that enough Trekkies dislike it to justify doing so.
A lot of people in Hollywood do things all the time. It doesn't necessarily mean those decisions are a stroke of artistic genius or make their particular brands any better by means of changing something just for the sake of changing.
A lot of people in Hollywood do things all the time. It doesn't necessarily mean those decisions are a stroke of artistic genius or make their particular brands any better by means of changing something just for the sake of changing.
I think they already have killed it. Although as long as we dont get 60s brown face I am fine. Hell klingons eith hair could be the aguments. I simply do not think they will keep 60s human looking augments
The smooth Klingons in Ent were not brownface, so why would they be here?
We will not get human looking ones. It makes zero sense and a human shot would totally change the Voq/ash story.
So if they are around, they will not look human.
Spock's choice is what led to them not talking. We just saw more of the circumstances leading up to it, just like we did in ST 09. So, yes it is a retcon, by definition, but it also is expansion on current lore.
No harm, no foul.
Similar threads
