IMO every other series has not violated canon so much. There may have been a few goofs here and there. They were also establishing the canon as they advanced the timeline.
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
That's a load of bunk.
And so is Discovery.
Your argument against DSC being set in the Prime Timeline is logically flawed because you're trying to hold it to a standard to which no other Star Trek series has ever been held.
G
Gonzo
Guest
While also giving themselves a little breathing room before we reach a point in the timeline which is already heavily established in ToS.
It's my opinion. To me it feels like an alternate timeline because it is so different from what came before. I'm not insulting or bashing the show. I enjoyed it a lot.
That's not how it works.
It works for me.
G
Gonzo
Guest
That's ok, there is nothing wrong with that kind of approach to the show if it helps you enjoy it.
There are those however who will see that as some kind of a challenge to their own view of the show as if its some kind of competition, or as an invitation to them to try to convince you otherwise by banging on about it.
Just ignore them, if they wish to be miserable that's fine just don't let them drag you down with them.
Misery loves company.
* sigh *
You remind me of certain U.S. Political figures who are convinced that whatever they choose to believe is the way things are, but life doesn't actually work that way.
Well, in a way it could. I mean, I pretty much accepted holocom being replaced with classic Trek viewscreen communivation by the rationalization that the holocom took away too much bandwidth, but "it's in another universe" is just as much a rationalization as the previous one, even if it is in my opinion a bit too easy. And if you want to get really technical it would still be canon, the same way all the laternate realities in "Parallels" are canon. To be clear, I don't see it that way, but I can see how one would come to that conclusion. In a way I do it myself with some of the 80s Trek novels that don't fit with TNG. Personally, I really only have a problem with declaring DSC being in a different universe, purely on the basis of one not liking the show.
And if this was anything more than a fictional tv show you may have a point
It's because Bryan Fuller had a "vision", that was probably completely bonkers, wild, weird, and unconventional. And then he got canned because he wasn't delivering results (most likely because his ideas were so weird and specific that he never got around to actually, you know, produce said content). And the new replacement crew, consisting of people with vastly less talent, were stuck with continuing what Fuller previously did - the whole prequel stuff included. And they didn't really knew what to do with it either.
G
Gonzo
Guest
That's what happens when a project is handed over mid way through, quite often its due to the parent network being heavy handed.
I am hoping the damage isn't too great to American Gods.
Yeah. I have to agree with Rahul. And I'm as big of a Discovery fan as any. Why attack someone like that? It's not called for. Especially if they already said they like the show. Not that it would be okay even if they didn't, but still...
I think American Gods is probably going to change a bit going forward. But the finished season was probably pretty close to what Fuller wanted to do.
Discovery on the other hand looks like it is completely different from what Fuller wanted to do. It'll be really interesting if we one day get some behind-the-scenes material, where we can see which direction Fuller originally wanted to take the show.
Very poorly.
G
Gonzo
Guest
Shame to lose Gillian Anderson and Kristin Chenoweth, they were both great but I can understand why they left the production.
Please stop.
I'm on your side of it being Prime Timeline, but you don't need to be an ass to people who disagree with you.
Similar threads
