Kind of a pet peeve here, but I tend to hate predestination paradoxes. Plotwise they are (not always, but all too often) a cheap and lazy way to write time-travel stories, and thematically they (usually) send a disquieting message about destiny vs. free will.
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
I tend to agree. It robs the story of jeopardy if the outcome is written in stone. Even if it makes more logical sense for time travel to work that way, it doesn't make for a good story.
In Trek generally, this isn't how it works anyway - how many times have we seen the future explicitly changed by alterations in the past?
In fact, we see it in this movie.
Enterprise happened. It's Prime. TOS doesn't mention Robert April, either, but we know he's canon.
Well, Enterprise does come before TOS, and so does Discovery.
Look, I haven't done the math but really is quite impressive
Nothing that will change minds on the topic, that's for sure.
I mean, sure, that's what it says on the tin, but I'm just saying, I feel tonally that the show has more in spirit and more in common with Enterprise than it does with TOS, whatever their intentions may be.
Largely tongue in cheek, but I do generally agree. But, that actually works for me of seeing perhaps that attitude and how that starts to shift towards TOS. It's also why I like the USS Kelvin being in the Prime Timeline because it also feels very Enterprise.
And the Kelvin looks more like a TOS starship than any of the DSC starships to date. It fits in very well with the design lineage from the NX-01 to the Enterprise 1701. For all the flak the look of the Kelvin bridge can get and its internal design and layout the ship is a very TOS-looking vessel from the outside and very pleasant to look at.
The Kelvin bridge was ironically a much better update to the traditional Starfleet bridge than the damn Apple Store knock-off that was used for the Enterprise's bridge in those movies was. Which is one of my serious gripes with Trek XI, they obviously could get the proper Star Trek look right, they just chose to blatantly disregard it.
Don't forget TAS.
I'll never understand the "Apple Store" comparison. Possibly because I loathe Apple and like Star Trek
It's the white walls in the bright lights. :PI'll never understand the "Apple Store" comparison. Possibly because I loathe Apple and like Star Trek
My Apple Stores are different then
My Radioshack was like that before it closed.My Apple Stores are different then
Again, no...so the Apple store comparison will fall completely flat.
Not all stores will look alike. It was a joke anyway.
*rimshot*
I take the opposite view, I see changes to the timeline as being implausible and struggle to suspend disbelief. I much prefer it when events are unchanged and the time traveller was always part of a past event.
I also don’t see the free will/ Destiny problem, and predestination paradox doesn’t really describe what’s going on. The events are neither predestined nor are they a paradox.
I don't get a choice in whether its considered the prime timeline.
It is, because they made it that way.
It is, because they made it that way.
The illusion of choice.
Similar threads
