I want to see those damn turtleneck sweater uniforms from The Cage & WNMHGB!

[BillJ]

I'm not trying to diminish its importance, but I found the characters and the events more important than the tech. In a show that is imagining humanity's future I feel that tech should not overwhelm the characters.

Though, that perhaps is quite a reflection of current humanity, where technology matters more than people...

That's just it, no one forced them to overwrite TOS. They chose to do that. They could've put Discovery early in the 24th century and largely told the same story, or put it in an alternate timeline.

They created an issue where there had been none before.

 

[Yistaan]

I'm not trying to diminish its importance, but I found the characters and the events more important than the tech. In a show that is imagining humanity's future I feel that tech should not overwhelm the characters.

Though, that perhaps is quite a reflection of current humanity, where technology matters more than people...

Tech in Star Trek, even outside of TOS, isn't even consistent. "Borg expert" Shelby asks in the Best of Both Worlds "Nanites?" like these are new to her, yet later we see Borg have been assimilating via nanites for years (if not centuries).

That's arguably a more serious contradiction than any Disco stuff which, hasn't shown any clear functional difference from TOS I think (others can feel free to post examples here). The tech we have today, phones, tablets, even internet (referenced in the Menagerie as "subspace chatter") were all already extrapolated in TOS. Yeah they look clunkier but the functionality they predicted ended up being more or less what we have now.

TOS not having holograms ended up being directly addressed in a rather clunky way, but it was addressed.

 

[fireproof78]

That's just it, no one forced them to overwrite TOS. They chose to do that. They could've put Discovery early in the 24th century and largely told the same story, or put it in an alternate timeline.

They created an issue where there had been none before.

I would say they created an issue that was going to be an issue no matter what. Unfortunately, that speaks to the chaos BTS as well as the fact that this franchise is adverse to moving in a new direction.

But, like I said, I don't think there is a functional difference in the tech, nor do I feel like it takes away from TOS in any substantial way. So, the official line doesn't bother me as others. Mileage will vary.

That's arguably a more serious contradiction than any Disco stuff which, hasn't shown any clear functional difference from TOS I think

Exactly. I don't see a functional difference, which is why I don't put such an emphasis on the look. Like GR said in the show bible the tech isn't the emphasis. A phaser is a phaser, like a revolver is a revolver.

However, over the past 50+ years fandom has spent time building up the tech and the look and insisting that the tech is as important as the characters. I can understand the passion but I cannot see the need.

 

[Ralphis]

I had kind of hoped for an updated version of the uniforms used in the pilots, kind of like what the Kelvin timeline films did with the TOS uniforms, but I ended up really liking the Disco Enterprise uniforms, so I just went with it.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

yet later we see Borg have been assimilating via nanites for years (if not centuries).

Nanoprobes, not nanites.

 

[bryce]

The Enterprise has always been modular. So, yes.

It has? Is there canonical proof of that?

In Beyond, when the 1701-A is being constructed, it did seem to have a version of that "swapable bridge module" that I have read speculated about.

 

[Yistaan]

In Beyond, when the 1701-A is being constructed, it did seem to have a version of that "swapable bridge module" that I have read speculated about.

Sounds like it's canon. The Enterprise captains just like swapping bridges.

 

[NCC-73515]

Perhaps there's a Sunday bridge, or a Federation Day bridge, for special occasions XD

 

[Dukhat]

I mean....how much more turtleneck can you get?

Those are most definitely not the same uniforms from “The Cage” and “Where No Man Has Gone Before,” which is what the OP was referring to.

In Beyond, when the 1701-A is being constructed, it did seem to have a version of that "swapable bridge module" that I have read speculated about.

That is not the prime universe Enterprise NCC-1701, or even the Prime universe NCC-1701-A for that matter.

 

[Yistaan]

Perhaps there's a Sunday bridge, or a Federation Day bridge, for special occasions XD

Don't forget Captain Harriman's Tuesday bridge.

 

[Ovation]

Nanoprobes, not nanites.

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Y’all should try out for Cirque du Soleil

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.

? With nanites there would always be story potential of them becoming sentient as in “Evolution”, whereas nanoprobes seem to be just probes, nothing more.

 

[Ovation]

? With nanites there would always be story potential of them becoming sentient as in “Evolution”, whereas nanoprobes seem to be just probes, nothing more.

Sigh.

It was a joke. While devoted fans likely know the difference to an astonishing degree of precision, more casual viewers likely would not.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Sigh.

It was a joke. While devoted fans likely know the difference to an astonishing degree of precision, more casual viewers likely would not.

But that just makes it clear it wasn’t a joke. You’re really implying that it was a mistake to use similar but not identical concepts because it might be seen as inconsistent by viewers who couldn’t remember the difference in terminology and/or understand enough about science to conclude that terminology usually differs for a reason.

 

[Ovation]

Humour. It is a difficult concept.

 

[DaveyNY]

Humour. It is a difficult concept.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Especially when one is trying so hard not to get it.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Humour. It is a difficult concept.

No, it’s merely trolling my counterargument to Yistaan’s argument that Shelby should’ve known better. First it’s supposedly a joke, then it’s a claim about the casual viewer, then again it isn’t, so I’ll simply remember to skip your comments in the future.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

No, it’s merely trolling my counterargument...

I’ll simply remember to skip your comments in the future.

Please stop accusing people of trolling and saying you'll ignore them. If you want to skip their comments, then just do it. Publicly pointing that out is the opposite of just ignoring their comments.

 

[Qonundrum]

The only way to do that right now is to rewatch Cage and WNMHGB and bask in the glory that is faded mustard, chokehold-blue, and puke peach. (IMHO, pale pastels just don't do anything for me. I blame my ADHD ferrets.)

The turtleneck quilting is nice, but the color hues are desaturated and bland. Possibly made for b/w photography, but as even "Cage" was filmed in color I suspect they may have had a goal for Trek to be in color from the get-go to take advantage of the new color presentation technology, as a premiere top-tier series. Understandable, given its budget and investment at the time. Then again, "Cage" has a more austere bridge set whereas WNMHGB featured the bold red trimmings, and maybe color wasn't a thought -- until the second pilot was made but they weren't going to spend any more money than utterly necessary because they already invested a ton and had one failed pilot but took another chance in hopes they'd recover. Okay, it's been 55 years later and I'd opine that by now they probably did recover, just about... But the second pilot worked and they did the costume redesign into the technicolor wonderland that became iconic. And, yeah, given RGB additive processes, the use of red, green, and blue uniforms is almost an in-joke. But the green looked gold due to the lighting used, which is a bit of a hoot... (and Kirk got his second tunic, which was definitely a definitive green that stayed green no matter what temperature the light bulbs were. I'm partial to 6000K, myself...) Actually, the film stock used might be an influence as well; light color tints can alter the perception of a hue but film stock also plays a role. It's why, back in the day, portrait photography for people used Kodak whereas landscape photographers used Fuji. Kodak did better with the warmer tones, or placed more emphasis on those. Fuji was robust in the greens and blues for sure... Tools o' the trade and all that... nowadays it's just "megapixel myth"...