• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Poll Just how important is adherence to continuity in Star Trek?

How important is adherence to continuity in Star Trek?

  • Stories should STRICTLY adhere to previous continuity. Differences must be EXPLAINED.

  • Stories should GENERALLY adhere to previous continuity. Differences can be IGNORED.

  • Stories should VARIABLY adhere to previous continuity. Differences are to be EXPECTED.

  • Stories should NOT adhere to previous continuity. Differences are to be ENCOURAGED.


Results are only viewable after voting.
I like continuity and I really appreciate when things tie together.

That being said, any time you’re making a prequel that is filmed 60 years later, you’re gonna run into some problems. I appreciate when things are explained though. I always like when TPTB give a nod to the long time viewers.

Even little Easter eggs. :D
 
Not very. The needs of the story are the priority and if jettisoning continuity serves the story, than continuity is jettisoned.

That said, if the show's producers go out of their way to insist the show will line up with canon, and then do anything but, then there's an issue.
 
Hmmm…. I'm, missing the "burn all heretics! Explanation of differences?? No differences, period!" option.

(Just kidding).

(Disclaimer: ignoring Discovery since I haven't seen any of it).

At the end of the day, it is just entertainment, so I don't mind too much about continuity. However, it is also entertainment that is close to my heart and I wouldn't appreciate a new series subverting the previous spirit of Star Trek.

For example, a series that meddles with Jim Kirk's. Picard's or Starfleet's precies historical past, I can stomach. However, a series that would depict Starfleet as a ruthlessly power-hungry organisation, where all our "heroes" are hypocritical sycophants trying to gather more power for themselves (to give just an example), I would take issue with. If you are throwing the spirit out, better relabel it instead of keeping the Star Trek name. Even though it could still be an excellent series worth watching in its own right, just taking place in a different "universe" as far as I'm concerned.

So all in all, I'd think I'd vote for option 3.
 
Last edited:
However, a series that would depict Starfleet as a ruthlessly power-hungry organisation, where all our "heroes" are hypocritical sycophants trying to gather more power for themselves
Sounds kind of like Starfleet as depicted onscreen anyway.
 
I'm a little stuck between generally and variably adhere to continuity but would still stick to generally adhere, inconsistencies should be pretty few and if so can just be ignored.

But I am a lot more open to visual changes to species or ships, as long as they look pretty similar (or the new version is an improvement), than to story changes about particular characters or events.
 
If they make one from the outset, then ideally they'd maintain the rules they made from the outset. Especially if it's the same group of people. But also having to take into account how long said franchise is running for.

TNG started out by loosely following TOS, making references and aping scenes but not flagrantly violating what was set up in the past. Except for arguably the empty void thing in "Where Silence Has Lease" where Data out of his way to emphasize nothing like that void has ever been come across before despite the empty void thing that appeared in "The Immunity Syndrome", only Nagillum was larger and more magical than the giant space amoeba that was also interested in reproduction... Season 3 created a much more taut continuity with itself. Continuity that began to show slack in the TNG movies and pretty much flung out the window on Voyager and Enterprise since they were grasping at the smallest straws to do something different.

But DS9, Voyager, etc, are all 'based on'. And to be fair, most of VOY's Borg episodes range from good to great, though some were pretty inconsistent over size of collective, number of queens, limitations or the inverse of regarding drones, how often that we hear "after one or two shots our phasers are useless" and a dozen shots later they're still pew-pewing away as if the Borg can't adapt to the different frequencies like an economy-sized crutch... sigh... to say nothing of Worf divorcing Troi to go get it on with Dax and then getting upset because she's the one with the longer list of cootie swappers so therefore she's cheating on him except she genuinely wasn't so what the heck were they doing on the cootie-swapping planet of the whole galaxy (Risa) to begin with...

Yeah, continuity does suck. It all boils down to audience expectations, consistency, the lack thereof, and cooties.
 
Am I really the only person who JUST DOESN'T CARE?????!!!!!

I'm at the point of such an epiphany. Like booze, it's fun early on but then it gets so easy to be confused and to blame everyone else for each little thing that goes differently afterward...

My name really ought to be "Qtie McMetaphoriq", I swear...
 
I guess my general, simple reply is that I'd like a little adherence to canon (both narrative and visual), but I'm not going to dismiss it if it does its own thing as long as the story being told is good.
 
Is the ship in our beloved Starfleet?
Does it have an interesting crew?
Is whatever it is that they're doing interesting?

After that, I don't care. But if you can't get at least two out of the above three I won't be watching.
 
I think there should be a believable reality that ties into TOS at least or is it should be in it's own separate continuity which is not an alternate reality. That's the trick.
 
A lot of TOS episodes didn't tie into other TOS episodes without continuity errors.

Continuity errors are easy to explain away in sci-fi like Trek. Some time traveller somewhere sometime has gas at an inopportune moment and suddenly the United Earth Space Probe Agency turns into Spacefleet Command.

Another time traveller swallows a fly? Spacefleet Command becomes Space Central.

Continuity is good for suspension of disbelief. In general, if you decide to adhere to it at all than the more you can stick to it the better. But the longer a fictional franchise exists the more the canon becomes a burden, restricting the artists making the product. Sometimes it has to be broken in service of the story.
 
The UESPA was Kirk not wanting to reveal too much to Captain Christopher on the ship! At that time they were unaware of his importance to human exploration history and Spock's get out clause! So they didn't want to give away too much!
JB
 
Trek has its 'universe' and it claims a history. It laid those ground rules and when it stuffs up its continuity it looks more stupid than it is :guffaw:
 
GR's universe should be the prime concern to those following after GR or else get your own God damn universe!
 
GR's universe should be the prime concern to those following after GR or else get your own God damn universe!

Roddenberry's universe hasn't went anywhere. Like it or not, "Star Trek" is owned by CBS and will be used in whatever manner they see fit to generate revenue and promote their assets.

I just treat Discovery as its own timeline, part of the greater Star Trek multiverse.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top