Guess the continuity errors!

[Kevin Wolff]

JJ Abrams didn't understand or care about the Trek universe, but he did know how to refresh the characters for a modern audience (He kind of repeated the same formula in "A New Hope Reimagined", I mean TFA). This was why the first film was a success. The plot for the film was so absurdly stupid with such gaping holes that it could be easily dismissed even by actual fans. As soon as he had to make a second film with an actual story, it was a disaster and it derailed any momentum the franchise gained by 2009's success. It also moved Trek even farther from its roots than Nemesis [shudder] did.

TNG's look and feel was to serve Gene's intention to return Trek to form. The 80's movies moved away from his vision much like the new films have, so setting the show further down the road allowed him to get back to his original vision updated for the times. He couldn't show evolved sensibilities in the 23rd century where Kirk and Khan are BOTH out for revenge and Kirk hates the Klingons because of what a single Klingon did to his son, etc. Gene took it too far though which is why season 1 and 2 were mostly weird and boring, but the idea worked better once they introduced more conflict through the aliens.

These lessons could save the new show. Evolved sensibilities in humans but not to a creative fault since we know that makes for limited drama. We'll always be flawed but as long as we are trying, the morality lesson format can work. The alien species can run the whole gamut from peaceful to monsters (like present day humanity) to keep things interesting as well as address 21st century issues and remind the viewer where we are as a species now (through the Klingons and Romulans, Ferengi, but without the cliche or oversimplification of the earlier depictions) and that there's a lot of room for improvement and that there are rewards for improving (Federation near-utopian lifestyle, at least for those not in the military ).

 

[a thousand-yard stare]

"When TNG showed a 23rd century ship's bridge, it's what we'd seen before. When VOY showed us a 23rd century ship's bridge, it's what we'd seen before. The same with ENT."

And when the US Navy looked at TOS 'Bridge' setup they started to model the Command Centre of warships along those lines.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/
(apologies for the link - and the reference is in there somewhere - check it out)

So TOS got in first and the rest is from the 'actualite'

 

[Nerys Myk]

TNG's look and feel was to serve Gene's intention to return Trek to form. The 80's movies moved away from his vision much like the new films have, so setting the show further down the road allowed him to get back to his original vision updated for the times.

Actually, I think Gene's vision changed. 60's Gene and 80's Gene had different visions.
This is 60's Gene's vision
The Star Trek Writers/Director's Guide (Third Revision 1967)
A few highlights
Star Trek is action-adventure

I. Build your episode on an action-adventure frame- work. We must reach out, hold and entertain a mass audience of some 20.,000,000 people or we simply don't stay on the air. II. Tell your story about people,

It's not about the tech

II. Tell your story about people, not about science and gadgetry. Joe Friday doesn't stop to explain the mechanics of his .38 before he uses it; Kildare never did a monologue about the theory of anes- thetics; Matt Dillon never identifies and dis- cusses the breed of his horse before he rides off on it.

Entertain. Don't preach.

IV. Then, with that firm foundation established, inter- weave in it any statement to be made about man, society and so on. Yes, we want you to have some- thing to say, but say it entertainingly as you do on any other show. We don't need essays, how- ever brilliant.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Actually, I think Gene's vision changed. 60's Gene and 80's Gene had different visions.

I agree. Gene himself started changing a lot (according to the 50-yr mission) as he got older and kept taking drugs. Also his personality often contradicted his vision. He womanized, woman-hated (post-divorce) and went off on weird tangents about all manner of things. By TNG he was more harm than help to his creation.

 

[captainkirk]

he question of aesthetics has kind of already been settled. Just look at this comparison:
http://imgur.com/a/th8xk
Excuse the mirrored Kelvin. It's pretty obvious which style they're leaning towards. There's nothing really about the Discovery design that resembles the style of TOS, it's way closer to the Kelvin and the Franklin

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Lily shining a bright light on the holes in Picard's progressive philosophy was perhaps the single greatest scene in FC.

I agree. I love Picard but he was too perfect for drama. Perhaps someone like him in the background, but not the focus. He's not where we are (or where we're going apparently) as a species right now. Humanity needs to be a little more realistic but still unified (perhaps uneasily unified) in the new series.
Lily was fantastic though in FC. Deanna never handled Picard that well. Especially Krazy Picard.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

he question of aesthetics has kind of already been settled. Just look at this comparison:
http://imgur.com/a/th8xk
Excuse the mirrored Kelvin. It's pretty obvious which style they're leaning towards. There's nothing really about the Discovery design that resembles the style of TOS, it's way closer to the Kelvin and the Franklin

Of course it does, because they are both modern designs. Discovery will look more like NuTrek than anything else, regardless of how its styled. They are not going to do retro scifi. That would be ratings suicide. At upwards of 6 million cost per episode, wide appeal will be an absolute mandate. Fan service will be put aside for the most part.

Star Trek is defined as a present day vision of the future. It will sting at first for all the people that think we're going to see TOS era design, but Star Trek like any other non-period genre production needs to stay current in its design sense.

Kirk never wore shiny leather boots with dress shoe heels and never had a communicator 5 times as thick as an iphone. Women like Uhura never had their panties showing because their uniform skirts are too short. The enterprise never had mostly straight lines and primary colored bulkheads, conduits and workstations. These things NEVER HAPPENED....going forward, that is. Eventually the same will hold true for 80's movie era and TNG era design as well.

 

[Shawnster]

Of course it does, because they are both modern designs. Discovery will look more like NuTrek than anything else, regardless of how its styled. They are not going to do retro scifi.

This was one of my problems with the NuEnterprise. It was quite possible to do a modern take on the Enterprise while still maintaining the original look.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a6/38/e1/a638e13de013284f66865127ecc0bc32.jpg
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081031062950/fanon/images/6/6b/Enterprise.jpg


As for comparing the Discovery's design to NuTrek... It share a design with the Franklin from "Beyond."

 

[Kevin Wolff]

This was one of my problems with the NuEnterprise. It was quite possible to do a modern take on the Enterprise while still maintaining the original look.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a6/38/e1/a638e13de013284f66865127ecc0bc32.jpg
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081031062950/fanon/images/6/6b/Enterprise.jpg


As for comparing the Discovery's design to NuTrek... It share a design with the Franklin from "Beyond."

I hate NuEnterprise and would have been happiest with a slightly updated version of the refit. If not that, either of those would be better too. NuEnt was just too curvy and flashy. Like starfleet went from concept to production without an engineer seeing the concept and saying "Nope, that won't work. And you can't make that shape and be able to go to warp", etc. And then make it look real.
From the first Discovery pass which I like, it looks like they won't make the NuTrek over-the-top ship design mistakes. I think when we inevitably see Enterprise again, they'll do something like the refit with callbacks to the TOS version as well like that first image. I hope anyway.

 

[Tenacity]

here's nothing really about the Discovery design that resembles the style of TOS, it's way closer to the Kelvin and the Franklin

Opinions vary, personally I think the Discovery (thus seen) looks far more like the DS9 station than anything out of the Abrams universe.

 

[Voth commando1]

It's going to be just like Enterprise, in that Discovery won't violate any ACTUAL continuity, only misguided fanon assumptions.

To be fair to enterprise they often did work to ensure it wouldn't "technically" violate continuity.

 

[Voth commando1]

I'm hoping that they preserve no more than the core concepts of Trek. I don't think preserving the look of any of the old shows is a good idea as it may very well lead to DSC being another nostalgic prequel show rather than a fresh new look at the future based on our present. Why have flip phone communicators or even comm badges when 21st century military and law enforcement are already using always-on live audio/video feeds, for example. No colorful uniforms or set designs (for the federation at least) that harken back to a time that's no longer relevant. Take only what works, the concepts and values that set Trek apart, and ignore the rest.
I love the old shows but they belong to their time, not to this one. DSC should not fit snugly into continuity, but should be the beginning of a new, more complex and relevant Trek universe that can be built upon in the years and series to come.

Trek is on the downhill and it won't endure much more than another 15 years at most.

 

[Trekkin]

2002 called. It wants its prophecy of certain doom back.

I predict...that the series is inevitably going to contradict the other series when it comes to how the characters formally address Lieutenant Commanders.

 

[uniderth]

The problem I think stems from the fact that most people associate greeblies with hi-tech, and smooth surfaces with low-tech. I agree with Jeffries' design considerations that most of the ships tech should be accessible from the inside so you don't need tons of greeblies bolted to the outside of the ship. And please PLEASE stop with the "random-greeblie-overlayed" hull panels. No spacecraft builder is going to randomly weld together plates of metal and hope it will make a good hull. It doesn't make your ship look cool or "realistic", it makes it look idiotic.

 

[UssGlenn]

This was one of my problems with the NuEnterprise. It was quite possible to do a modern take on the Enterprise while still maintaining the original look.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a6/38/e1/a638e13de013284f66865127ecc0bc32.jpg
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081031062950/fanon/images/6/6b/Enterprise.jpg
"

I like Vektor's version so much that the image in the first link has been my desktop background for ages.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

They'll still stick to smooth surfaces for starfleet ships. It's not surface detail that makes a ship look more real or high tech. Just compare the TOS and refit TMP Enterprise and one can clearly see how much updating can be done while still honoring the original design. NuTrek ships were an epic fail because they were designed badly, so when I say I think overall design will be more like NuTrek, I'm talking about overall modern feel, and not specific designs. I mean they won't try to fit the show in with the look of TOS in any noticeable way.
But I also certainly don't think the engineering brewery or lens flare hair salon bridge of NuTrek will be seen again. At least I hope not.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

I like Vektor's version so much that the image in the first link has been my desktop background for ages.

I like it too, but it's an example for sticking close to the pre-refit TOS (nacelles for instance). Imagine that they are ignoring all that. Imagine an updated refit AS the new original, and then years down the line if they ever decide to refit it, they would go forward from that design (meaning round nacelles never existed). Every fan design is done around preserving the prime design. They won't preserve the prime timeline anymore in my opinion. DSC will be the new starting point for the 23rd century alpha quadrant. NuPrime if you will.

The only reason they are setting it in the prime is because the JJverse is inherently flawed in its idiotic attempt to not say they are rebooting Trek in case it failed. They are not setting it in the prime to honor what has come before. But by not stating its a reboot, they avoid further confusion. Or at least they meant to. Again, IMHO.

 

[uniderth]

The only reason they are setting it in the prime is because the JJverse is inherently flawed in its idiotic attempt to not say they are rebooting Trek in case it failed. They are not setting it in the prime to honor what has come before. But by not stating its a reboot, they avoid further confusion. Or at least they meant to. Again, IMHO.

Nope. They're going to have kazoos for the Red Alert.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I hear Hattie Hayridge is free...

"AWOOGA! AWOOGA! The ship is on Red Alert! This is not a drill! This is a drill..." <rrrrrrrrr>

 

[Emperor Norton]

• Uniforms.
• Having too many Constitution class ships.
• Having Connies that may not have been in existence during that time.
• Forgetting about Robert April.
• Having TOS characters make cameos when they were not old enough for whatever it is, or may have been mentioned as being somewhere else.
• Ferengi and Borg *shudders* and other races who were not known, but who get mentioned or who appear without naming themselves for no reason.