• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?

Is it?

  • Yes, that's the official word and it still fits

    Votes: 194 44.7%
  • Yes, but it's borderline at this point

    Votes: 44 10.1%
  • No, there's just too many inconsistencies

    Votes: 147 33.9%
  • I don't care about continuity, just the show's quality

    Votes: 49 11.3%

  • Total voters
    434
While we're on the subject of what's not canon, I'd like to nominate TNG "Force of Nature," TNG "Genesis," VOY "Threshold," TOS "The Way to Eden" and "Spock's Brain," Nemesis, and STV.
Oh come on TOS - "Spock's Brain" HAS to exist in continuity.

You can't dismiss a classic line like: "Brain and Brain!...WHAT IS BRAIN?!!"
^^^
(Pure poetry ;))
 
Last edited:
As for DSC... a prequel obviously deals with different constraints. Yes, things like chip designs and uniforms and tech can still change over a few years... but when we already know what the "later" versions look like, we expect the "earlier" versions to look like something that can plausibly lead to them. When information is unknown in later continuity (say, about cloaking devices), we expect it to be unknown in earlier continuity as well. A prequel that comes across as if it were a sequel creates a lot of cognitive dissonance. Not necessarily enough to place it "outside of canon" (which, again, is more of an official term of art — if it's onscreen it qualifies), but certainly enough to make it difficult to reconcile with known continuity.
DSC looks like it flows from the USS KELVIN in to TOS. I have no struggle with it, no cognitive dissonance, or whatever.
 
Yes, yes it did.

I don't know exactly why you're calling me (or anyone else) any kind of "fundamentalist," though, except for purposes of being dismissive. TOS is my favorite Trek series: stipulated. That's hardly uncommon in the fandom. But beyond that, all that's really under discussion here is what kind of expectations it's reasonable to have of a prequel... there's no reason Trek should be different in that respect from any other genre franchise.

Prequels, perhaps even more than sequels, are obviously intended to bank on the affection audiences have for the original material, and the myriad ways in which they succeed (or fail) at this are certainly fair game for discussion. Just think back to how widely (and deservedly) excoriated Lucas's Star Wars prequels were!...
THe look of the prequels never bothered me. I thought they look great. They looked different. There was an attempt to show that the era did not look like the previous one, and it allowed Lucas to not be stuck in the 1970's. In that regard, the imperial era and beyond is a technologically regressive period. The same thinking could be used to partially explain the oddity of the TOS era, but to some degree a lot of it visuall has to be replaced or else just a bunch of nod and wink campyness ensues.
 
Oh come on TOS - "Spock's Brain" HAS to exist in continuity.

You can't dismiss a classic line like: "Brain and Brain!...WHAT IS BRAIN?!!"
^^^
(Pure poetry ;))

You'll decanonize Luma over my dead body, you heartless monsters.
 
So you're saying if they'd used an ENT-style render of a classic TOS-style Constitution-class ship, 95% of the audience wouldn't have noticed it at all? (And most of the rest of us, who care about such things, would have loved it for the nostalgia kick?) Then why did they bother to change it at all? I thought the whole problem was that "modern audiences" would allegedly revolt if they saw an original-style Enterprise on screen!... :)
I think a fair amount of people would have cared the other way -- a TOS-style Connie would have just looked wrong, and the scene wouldn't have worked at all.
 
I haven't had a chance to see the show yet, although I have read the DSC novels and heard a few spoilers. From what I've heard, DSC has some pretty major discrepancies with the rest of the franchise. Said discrepancies seem to have been made on purpose, strongly suggesting to me that the Powers That Be should've made DSC a hard reboot if they didn't want be beholden to what came before.

However, while I think it's fair to note when the show gets things wrong (or right, for that matter), we should give the show a chance to finish producing all the episodes/novels/comics that tell the story and see how many discrepancies are resolved by the end before writing the show off as a lost cause as far as continuity goes.
 
It really has not
You've heard wrong.

- Changes in the Klingon makeup made under false assumptions (e.g. no hair and all that).

- Klingons using cloaking technology before they actually had it, much less the Federation learning about it ("Once More Onto the Breach" [DS9]). Also, Klingons possessing working phase cloaks despite the fact the Klingons actually never got the tech to work even by the 24th century ("The Pegasus" [TNG]).

- New uniforms used in a timeframe when the "Cage"/"Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms were in use (albeit explained by the first DSC novel).

Yeah, it's a thing.

About as major as TMP.

From what I know and having seen TMP, I have to disagree.
 
One problem I was thinking of is the bridge window. If the Enterprise has a bridge window that pretty much contradicts the times we see that the Enterprise has issues largely because their visual cameras/sensors are blocked and they basically can't see anything.
It's like the Wrath of Khan ending battle simply would not work if they had the window.
 
- Changes in the Klingon makeup made under false assumptions (e.g. no hair and all that).

- Klingons using cloaking technology before they actually had it, much less the Federation learning about it ("Once More Onto the Breach" [DS9]). Also, Klingons possessing working phase cloaks despite the fact the Klingons actually never got the tech to work even by the 24th century ("The Pegasus" [TNG]).

- New uniforms used in a timeframe when the "Cage"/"Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms were in use (albeit explained by the first DSC novel).

Yeah, it's a thing.

None of these things are discrepancies; they're either retcons or additions to the continuity.
 
- Changes in the Klingon makeup made under false assumptions (e.g. no hair and all that).

- Klingons using cloaking technology before they actually had it, much less the Federation learning about it ("Once More Onto the Breach" [DS9]). Also, Klingons possessing working phase cloaks despite the fact the Klingons actually never got the tech to work even by the 24th century ("The Pegasus" [TNG]).

- New uniforms used in a timeframe when the "Cage"/"Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms were in use (albeit explained by the first DSC novel).

Yeah, it's a thing.



From what I know and having seen TMP, I have to disagree.
nothing you stated contradicts anything already established. it just adds to the lore
 
- Changes in the Klingon makeup made under false assumptions (e.g. no hair and all that).

- Klingons using cloaking technology before they actually had it, much less the Federation learning about it ("Once More Onto the Breach" [DS9]). Also, Klingons possessing working phase cloaks despite the fact the Klingons actually never got the tech to work even by the 24th century ("The Pegasus" [TNG]).

- New uniforms used in a timeframe when the "Cage"/"Where No Man Has Gone Before" uniforms were in use (albeit explained by the first DSC novel).
Those all can be explained in some way, and don't violate canon in any major way. Klingon Empire is an intergalatic power and yet there is no variation in appearance? Uniforms change in 3 years from TOS to TMP but ten years of adjustment from Kelvin to Disco to Cage is unreasonable?

The cloak is the only one that kind of bothers me, but cloaking tech is always something that gets in the way (the Federation steals one, the Federation can't use one because of a treaty, etc.).
 
None of these things are discrepancies; they're either retcons or additions to the continuity.
That's a ridiculous statement. Saying something is a retcon is an answer to how to resolve a continuity discrepancy... it doesn't mean the discrepancy doesn't exist in the first place.

And according to whom are any of the mentioned differences necessarily retcons, anyway? The showrunners certainly never actually said "we're going to be retroactively revising continuity." On the contrary, they said "everything will be consistent with established canon."

So the actual nature of these discrepancies is very much up in the air. That's why (for instance) we have some posters saying that the new Klingon look is a retcon and they've "always" been that way (wildly implausible as that may seem), while others are saying that it's just a sign of diversity in the Empire alongside the human-style Augment Klingons and ridge-headed hairy Klingons we already know (even though that diversity just hasn't been seen on screen yet in DSC). Who can say?
 
That's a ridiculous statement.

Nope.

Saying something is a retcon is an answer to how to resolve a continuity discrepancy... it doesn't mean the discrepancy doesn't exist in the first place.

And according to whom are any of the mentioned differences necessarily retcons, anyway? The showrunners certainly never actually said "we're going to be retroactively revising continuity." On the contrary, they said "everything will be consistent with established canon."

So the actual nature of these discrepancies is very much up in the air. That's why (for instance) we have some posters saying that the new Klingon look is a retcon and they've "always" been that way (wildly implausible as that may seem), while others are saying that it's just a sign of diversity in the Empire alongside the human-style Augment Klingons and ridge-headed hairy Klingons we already know (even though that diversity just hasn't been seen on screen yet in DSC). Who can say?

Also Nope.
 
What false assumptions? Klingons changed makeup drastically from TOS to TMP, then more subtly in other movies to TNG. No in show explanation was ever given until ENT decades later.

Don't know the details on the cloaking tech, so I will give you that.

How do you explain the drastic change of uniforms from TOS to TMP to WoK? Or within TOS (no red at first,The Cage is different from WNOHGB which is in turn different from later TOS) . What about the changes within TNG? Why weren't the DS9 costumes the same as the end of TNG? Why the weird conversion to First Contact uniforms for DS9?

There has been a novel explanation for different uniforms on different ships with the Constitution ships in particular getting their own uniforms, by the way.

But the main thing is, uniforms change in the Trek Franchise all the time and often are not given an in universe reason for the change.

The Discovery uniforms do actually show a transition from the more utilitarian jumpsuits of ENT to the Cage and then TOS styles. Like the silver or gold piping.
 
The Klingon cloak is problematic. The Suliban had them but i think the reset button might have fixed that. I may be wrong but i half remember Kang or Kor on DS9 saying their ship was one of the first to have a cloak. As augment Klingons have been wiped from the Discoveryverse, will that still be canon?.

Also interactive holograms that gives real time communication throughout the quadrant and Jedi Vulcans who communicate similarly through the mind im surprised USS Voyager with the holograms and the vulcan Tuvok didnt communicate with Starfleet earlier from the delta quadrant since the DIS apologists say all this is canon...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top