I agree, but we should not exspect a show made in 2017 to mimic a style that only looked high tech 50 years ago.
I think we just need to accept the fact that this is a full reboot.
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
I agree, but we should not exspect a show made in 2017 to mimic a style that only looked high tech 50 years ago.
The realistic fans don't. I'm as big a TOS booster as you'll find here but I didn't expect CBS to reconstruct the sets from "In A Mirror Darkly(ENT)."
We saw a mirror-perfect hologram in "Lambs...", so I guess it's signal fuzz when talking to people off-ship.
But the holographic technology is suddenly the least of the continuity problems facing Kathy J and her crew of "What do you mean there was a drive system 100 years ago that could materialize the ship anywhere in the galaxy instantly and it worked?" starlost.
But the holographic technology is suddenly the least of the continuity problems facing Kathy J and her crew of "What do you mean there was a drive system 100 years ago that could materialize the ship anywhere in the galaxy instantly and it worked?" starlost.
Last edited:
Yeah, it renders Janeway's entire 7-season journey a little meaningless in the worst case, doesn't it.
After the assurances we got that this show was faithful to Trek, I must admit I am a little worried. We will only know the full damage after a season or two, but as a worst case scenario, the writers have ignored really obvious issues when they could have come up with an adequate explaination without violating canon, or script. I.E. one of Enterprise's biggest problems.
I guess if that happens, we have to accept that Star Trek is now Doctor Who; some loose anthology.
After the assurances we got that this show was faithful to Trek, I must admit I am a little worried. We will only know the full damage after a season or two, but as a worst case scenario, the writers have ignored really obvious issues when they could have come up with an adequate explaination without violating canon, or script. I.E. one of Enterprise's biggest problems.
I guess if that happens, we have to accept that Star Trek is now Doctor Who; some loose anthology.
Episode 4 underlined that accurate use of the technology came at a cost, a cost Michael probably won't except. So it probably won't last to the end of the season
Frankly it's less of a problem than the genesis torpedo, which could wipe out all life on a planet, turn it into a garden for a few weeks, then blow it up.
Or the torpedos that blow up suns.
To be honest it's always been like that.
Prior to Enterprise, there was no reason given for the Klingons going from very human to what they were in TMP onwards (and TMP Klingons are different to TNG Klingons in look).
The Borg in Q Who were ONLY interested in technology. Not to mention the idea of a Borg queen runs counter to their whole concept. A very mustache twirling villain of a Queen at that.
Romulans originally didn't have cloaking devices and the original war was fought without warp drive.
The Dominion had transporter technology that could reach across the galaxy. Never brought up again. Not to mention their ability to penetrate shields (it's easily handwaved that they remodulated their shields or somes uch, but it's never mentioned again).
Khan and World War III in the 90's.
TMP brought up the idea that you have to leave the star system before going to warp, otherwise it's a massive risk.
Enterprise gave us tiny handheld forcefield generators, which were frankly superior to even TNG tech.
And those are just a few off the top of my head.
@Blamo - Some of them were decried at the time, so can't really be taken as the actual intent.
In other words, the staff responsible, at least in the case of the infamous Romulan cloaking device in ENT, were painfully ignorant of something that was basic knowledge to fans.
At least during TNG, there was a very stable internal continuity developed, with guest stars like Gowron returning across 12 years of TNG and DS9.
The change into a Doctor Who anthology, where villains suffer retcon in origins and motives every few years, would thus be a big departure, no matter what people insist.
In other words, the staff responsible, at least in the case of the infamous Romulan cloaking device in ENT, were painfully ignorant of something that was basic knowledge to fans.
At least during TNG, there was a very stable internal continuity developed, with guest stars like Gowron returning across 12 years of TNG and DS9.
The change into a Doctor Who anthology, where villains suffer retcon in origins and motives every few years, would thus be a big departure, no matter what people insist.
I don't care if the explanation is tecnobabble shite, I expect some kind of explanation. Enterprise has been identified by the showrunners as absolutely canon, meaning that while a partial visual retcon is okay, the effects of the augment virus still happened.
If they explain, great, and fine by me. I don't think they have to explain anything, and I don't "deserve" an explanation. They are Klingons-I can live with that.
However, I do like your concept that they are trying to reverse the Augment virus and these are the results.
Just slingshot around the sun before it blows and fix this mess
I do not follow your logic. There's almost certainly a colonel named Green out there right now NOT killing lots of non-existing mutants.
No, it wouldn't.
How so? There's a lot of time between the DY-100 sleeper ship and Zefram Cochrane breaking the warp barrier for Elon Musk to fit into the public history of human spaceflight. Marla McGivers said sleeper ships fell into disuse around the year 2018 due to advances in sublight propulsion technology.
Why can't Elon Musk in the Trek universe be partly responsible for that breakthrough?
Gonna need to unpack that one.
Or the use of the transporter and some DNA from Dr. Pulaski's hairbrush to reverse her premature aging -- an idea that ostensibly could be used again to solve many other health issues in people, but wasn't.
Or perfect cloning with the transporter? There are so many ideas they used once then ignored.
I don't think you got what I mean. I'm not talking about the licence, i'm talking about the show's very ontology. With Fuller's tv series, he has spokenly openly about them being 'fan fictions' - something he applied to Hannibal and American Gods. I am not speaking in terms of IP or licence holders, but that creating a new product from an existing licence is always going to be, hermeneutically, "fan fiction" - an approach which is effectively a collage of the familiar and the novel. In Fuller's words, and in the words of academics who have written on this understanding of artistic creation, this is a mode of creative independence and faithfulness combined - putting 'one's spin' on a (effectively shared) universe.
As KT Torrey of Virginia Tech summarises: 'Hannibal treats the repetitive nature of fanfic—stories that “play out” a multiplicity of variations of the same basic story—as a source of narrative strength: because in repetition, the series suggests, there is possibility.' Furthermore, 'As fanfic—as a fan-authored text, albeit a network televised one—Hannibal openly acknowledges that it’s both a product of fannish cultivation and a participant in a wider ecology of fannish production.' Torrey's blog here isn't a peer-reviewed text, but I like her methodology - and it's highly suitable for a production as fannish as Discovery, which has echoes of fans like Moore joining the S3 writing room of TNG, and also its incorporation of figures like Beyer, whose career as licenced Star Trek novelist is - as an entire body of work - dismissed by certain figures as 'fanfic' or worse.
I think Discovery's very nature as a fannish production, from members of its cast (such as Isaacs), to its very fannish writers room, to its production team, is interesting, striking and says a lot about adaptation as a mode of making.
It says to me that it's a world built from our world in 2017 onwards, instead of one rooted in the 1960's idea of what came next.
Discovery may make reference to TOS and other bits of "canon," either this timeline or that timeline. But despite the producers insistence that the show is 10 years before TOS, the show is its own thing. Reboot, reimagining, or whatever.
