When's the last time that happened? OHMSS?
I'll give you away team, but replicators, ready rooms and holo-coms don't bother me.
Poll Is continuity important?
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Indeed. The TOS aesthetic is good as a framing device, the idea of the history for the characters, either feeling out of place, like the dS9 crew, or the more nostalgic feelings, like Scotty in Relics. As such a device it works quite well.
As a long term show made in the 2020s? I would be hard pressed to go "Yup, feels like the future."
I was including ENT in my statement.
Idris Elba is 49. The chances of the next Bond being that old are practically nil. They're going to go 35-40 so they can get a decade's worth of movies out of him.
You're talking about inspiration. Creativity still must have some order, even if it's just the colours you choose to throw against a canvass.
Then they should toss the original Star Trek out. No sense in continuing to cram a square peg in a round hole.
Too bad Tom Hardy is 44.
It will happen probably sooner or later. I have a feeling after Pike We get the transition to Kirk for 2 seasons and maybe (that's a big maybe) a reboot of the three Tos Seasons. But than we have 3 episodes of Enterprise, 1 of DS9 and 1 of TNG that shows the old TOS aesthetic....opps guess those
will have to be rebooted also.....
Last edited:
Eh, I'm fine with Tom Hardy never being Bond.
It will happen probably sooner or later. I have a feeling after Pike We get the transition to Kirk for 2 seasons and maybe (that's a big maybe) a revoot of the three Tos Seasons. But than we have 3 episodes of Enterprise, 1 of DS9 and 1 of TNG that shows the old TOS aesthetic....opps guess those
From a pure aesthetic point of view, TNG doesn’t really match up with the “new world” either. In fact looking at the new Stargazer, the Enterprise E and maybe the Defiant are the only ones that would fit now.
so should we dump TNG, DS9 and Voyager?
Well I was kidding of course. But yeah only Picard,Discovery and Snw all match up in aesthic. The weird thing is...How come in Picard during Jean Lucs dream he was dreaming of the TNG ten forward exactly as it appeared in TNG except it was all dream white??? Should it not have been given an update treatment like TOS Enterprise?? Same with the holo Exterior of D...
The biggest set design difference i see since DS9 and Voyager is the heavy use of blinding LED lights. LEDs have replaced so much of our current lighting from parking lots, car head lights etc. They are also pretty easy to use and light stuff with and not overly expensive. So the LEDS coupled with Holo Tech makes the aesthetic totally not match up with anything before. Just Pike /Picard and Disco has this aesthetic in the prime universe. It's also amazing that it appears essentially unchanged from Picard all the way to the 32nd century. Except everything's even brighter...lol...
Yes, continuity is very important to me but I have no problem with a retcon if there is a good reason for it. But mostly there isn't one (at least per my standards) and I get ripped out of the immersion pondering the question "Why the f* did they change that" for a couple of minutes until I can get back to the show. And that's just plain annoying.
Sad thing is, if we're dumping things that have dated badly then it might be Picard and SNW with their overuse of LED strips that go first before TNG.
TNG is so 80s it hurts, especially the overreliance on beige and tans. LED strips at least strike me as moderately enjoyable.
The difference is back then a female 007 would not be seen as a capable agent, but as a sex object, a form of fanservice.
They've had four chances to do a clean reboot with Star Trek and each time, they didn't.
TMP (1979) --> When Star Trek came back as a motion picture. They could've made a whole new version but they didn't. They kept the original actors and said it was after TOS.
TNG (1987) --> When Star Trek returned to TV. They could've said it was a whole new version. And they sort of did. Except they still said it was 100 years after TOS, 80 years after the movies, and had DeForest Kelley guest-star in the very first episode.
Star Trek (2009) --> Star Trek was deader than dead before it returned again with this movie, which relaunched the franchise. This is the closest they've come doing a clean reboot. But even here, they couldn't quite do it. They had the film take place in a split timeline, so they could have Leonard Nimoy.
DSC (2017) --> Star Trek comes back to television. Again, another opportunity to do a clean reboot. But CBS dug in its heels and maintained that Paramount might have "The Kelvin Timeline" but they had "The Prime Timeline" and went with the idea of DSC being a visual reboot only.
This has all led me to conclusion that there will never be a clean reboot for Star Trek. Instead, they'll keep retconning things and push old material out of continuity in favor of new material, but still say it's all canon. I don't see it changing. They've made it messy, so I'm looking at each series differently.
DSC --> Visual Reboot
PIC --> Not a Reboot
SNW --> Soft Reboot
All in my opinion, based on how I see these series, which has nothing to do with Paramount's position.
I'm not going with "one size fits all" anymore because it doesn't look like they're going with "one size fits all" either, despite whatever Corporatese they might spew out. So, it's possible that TNG/DS9/VOY will be retconned in the future too, in some series.
They've done it already with how the Ferengi looked in Discovery, which led to a ton of mock outrage over an alien species that was seen on-screen in DSC for all of 30 seconds in the entire season, if even.
It's messy and it's going to keep getting messier and messier with the passage of time. It'll drive someone crazy if they let it.
I care about continuity and canon (believe or not) but only up to a point. That point stops where my enjoyment of what I'm watching begins. Keeping track of canon and continuity and seeing how it all adds up should be a fun thing to do on the side, not something that takes the fun out of actually watching.
Last edited:
I don't know if I'd go as far as calling it 'outrage' but I can promise you that my own annoyance with what they've done with the Ferengi makeup is genuine. Quark was a main character who appeared in like 160 episodes and I don't appreciate Discovery implying that he actually looked dramatically different all this time and DS9 just wasn't able to realise his appearance correctly with its low budget and primitive makeup techniques.
Well, if, when in a decade or 20 years a new successor series comes along, it will happen to the current DIS iteration too. Klingons will once again be re-imagined, the ships will get an overhaul, and so on.
I'd say it's simply because they all hire creative teams to that somehow want to leave their mark. It's for the same reason they keep re-arranging where to find specific features in each new version of products such as Microsoft Word and Excel, even if it's only a change, not necessarily an improvement.
I'd say it's simply because they all hire creative teams to that somehow want to leave their mark. It's for the same reason they keep re-arranging where to find specific features in each new version of products such as Microsoft Word and Excel, even if it's only a change, not necessarily an improvement.
That's a very pessimistic view of the future.
I mean it'd be one thing if they were fixing something, like how Enterprise fixed the Andorian makeup, or if they were taking a one-off alien and making a culture out of them like DS9 did with the Trill. Even the Bajoran and Cardassian makeup needed some time to settle down into its final look. But at some point these aliens should have a final look.
I mean it'd be one thing if they were fixing something, like how Enterprise fixed the Andorian makeup, or if they were taking a one-off alien and making a culture out of them like DS9 did with the Trill. Even the Bajoran and Cardassian makeup needed some time to settle down into its final look. But at some point these aliens should have a final look.
Last edited:
Imagine being an artist being brought in... to slavishly recreate a shitty cardboard prop from the 1960's, or badly thought out tablet prop from the 1990's with zero useful screen space.
I don't have to imagine, I've seen artists talking about all the research they did and how they went above and beyond to get it looking just right. And this is happening right now on series like The Mandalorian, where they're meticulously recreating a background prop made out of an ice cream maker.