"The Naked Time," really. The Enterprise overshoots the day they were first infected with the Psi 2000 virus. Spock says they all have several days to relive, just differently.
RIP I-Chaya.
One could even argue they started futzing with shit as early as The Cage. Jose Tyler says that the time barrier's been broken, along with the ship's drive speed being referred to as a "time warp factor." Granted, that might've been Harvey P. Lynn's way to get around time dilation as opposed to actual time travel, but still.
I always just equated it with transwarp drive. A generational leap in FTL speeds. Jumping from one or two times the speed of light to dozens or hundreds.
But if you're just basing that assumption on the visuals alone, then that would mean that the Enterprise looked like it did in "The Cage/The Menagerie,' then was refit into what we see in DSC/SNW, then would be refit again back to roughly how it looked in TOS. That doesn't make any sense.
The bottom line is that it was a creative choice to make the SNW Enterprise look the way it does, rather than making a 1:1 copy of the TOS version. This choice was based on the aesthetic of the previous show DSC, which went out of its way to look absolutely nothing like TOS. Just like it was a creative choice to make the Klingons in DSC look like Middle Earth orcs rather than how we've seen them since TMP (and ENT before that, chronologically speaking.) The thing is, in SNW they decided to go right back to the TMP/TNG/ENT Klingons and completely ignore the visual aesthetic created for DSC, just like they went back to showing a TOS Connie in PIC at the Starfleet Museum instead of using the SNW version.
To most fans, visuals don't matter. Only the story does. And that's fine. CBS certainly doesn't worry about the visuals. However, I personally care enough about the visuals to where I interpret shows like DSC and SNW to be part of a multiverse (which LDS showed was actually a thing), and that there's more than one 'prime' timeline (as also shown in LDS), and that terms like 'prime' are really just buzzwords at this point. (There are also more fundamental reasons why I consider DCS/SNW to be a different universe which does not seamlessly lead into TOS, but that's another story.)
That's a bit of an assumption.
Can you prove me wrong?
I think it’s fair to say that Trek means different things to different people and we probably all could stand to be better at understanding that we find different things we enjoy. I think anyone would be hard pressed to find figures as to what Trek fans find important.
All I'm saying is that visuals are just window dressing. If visuals were so important, the only James Bond we would have gotten was Sean Connery.
I agree with that sentiment but in my experience, there are many out there that don’t. I would rather focus on character and story over what something looks like and if it fits perfectly with what’s come before. Others feel differently. That’s all I’m saying.
And I'm one of them.
They both have their merits. The SW prequels were visually stunning works, but IMHO their stories sucked. If they spent more time refining their script rather than focusing on how good they wanted the movie to look, then I think we would have gotten a better product.
I'm not going to say that Sean Connery's presence in a movie is merely 'visuals' but On Her Majesty's Secret Service made half as much money as You Only Live Twice and Diamonds Are Forever.
I think my point went completely over your head.
I can't prove anything. I can say, that for me, the aesthetics are part of the package, part of what of what sells the story. The work of the behind-the-scenes art and construction folks are just as important as what the writer brings to the universe.
Without the work of Matt Jefferies, Wah Chang and others, I doubt we're here talking about Trek sixty-plus years later.
I’d be lying if I say I don’t appreciate the work done by these people. There truly has been some magnificent work done over the years. It’s just not my overriding focus when I watch my Star Trek.
Every bit of this. The look and feel of Trek has always been as important to me as the writing. Even when the story is pure garbage, the feel of the Trek universe - no matter what century the setting - can be rewarding.
Most people probably settle somewhere in between. Yes, it is subjective in a way; everyone can decide for themselves what's valid including books, games and fanfics, but this is clearly not what this thread is about.
Oh wow, never heard that shit before.
Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?
It is according to all official sources. Because Akiva Goldsman says so. Ok, got it. They must not have gotten that memo in the Lower Decks crossover episode. That memo was lost with the same one that slipped by the people who show the USS New Jersey as a TOS Constitution Class ship in Picard...
www.trekbbs.com
It was also addressed here in post #4. You are not interested in having a serious debate; you are trying to push your anti-NuTrek agenda.
Similar threads
