TOS-ENT, ST I-X = Prime
ST XI+ = Kelvin
DSC = 75% Prime
Old Trek = 1966-2005
New Trek = 2009+
ST XI+ = Kelvin
DSC = 75% Prime
Old Trek = 1966-2005
New Trek = 2009+
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
NopeTOS-ENT, ST I-X = Prime
ST XI+ = Kelvin
DSC = 75% Prime
Old Trek = 1966-2005
New Trek = 2009+
FunnyDSC = 75% Prime
That looks suspiciously like math. Not buying it.TOS-ENT, ST I-X = Prime
ST XI+ = Kelvin
DSC = 75% Prime
Old Trek = 1966-2005
New Trek = 2009+
Someone is saying that?
Just trying to figure out why the "It's Prime! It's Prime! It's Prime!" bunch are so invested. It's like they think they get a prize if they win the silly argument.
Um, isn't that part of any fandom?
Fandom doesn't like being wrong
From now on, whenever someone hits me with "But what about _____?" I'm going to blame it on the 25%.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it... I personally think this is a Godsend for canon debates.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it... I personally think this is a Godsend for canon debates.
And there's the people who say that denying it's Prime makes it more tolerable because then it's not "real Star Trek" and their broccoli won't touch their mashed potatoes.
One of its true failings.Fandom doesn't like being wrong
I would never call something "real Star Trek", but I do choose to view Discovery as an alternate reality/timeline. Simply because it's easier to just go with the flow instead of worrying about what fits and what doesn't. (Same thing as the Kelvin U, I see it as a slightly alternate reality and not just time travel from Prime.) And the beauty of that is, the show itself will almost certainly never contradict me.
I think I'll stop arguing in this thread because no matter what I say I get incomprehensible responses that seem increasingly hostile and completely unrelated to the actual content of my posts.
So don't take it the wrong way, however, I get the feeling that someone will, but from now on I won't even check that thread for additional posts anymore.
So don't take it the wrong way, however, I get the feeling that someone will, but from now on I won't even check that thread for additional posts anymore.
Not always.
Which leads me to an interesting question: if TAS is canon -- and I see no reason why it wouldn't be -- what's the in-universe explanation for why the crew of the Enterprise spent two years looking like hand-drawn cartoon characters? Transporter malfunction? Warp drive issues? Personal forcefields?
Starfleet budget cuts. Those Admirals didn't care about anything other than the bottom line.
If we can get Robert Downey Jr. to do some Trek stuff he can play any race he wants. But I think he is the only one in Hollywood who can pull it off.
Lou Diamond Phillips.
Just saying.
A movie I saw but can't recall anything about.
The lead Brits are played by Americans, (though actually were father and daughter) and the lead American is played by a Brit.
So you're saying it's not...OPTIMAL Prime? It needs to be transformed somewhat?
(*Rimshot*)
I...I died inside years ago.
Similar threads
