Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[Nerys Myk]

I've heard this argument before (Gene Roddenberry himself said it no less) and I partially agree with it except that star trek isn t our future, they had a nuclear war in the 21st century (I think) so it isn't our future. Anything in our future which ends up looking like star trek is a star trek reference.

It supposed to be our future, The references to "past" events are usually ignored when our heroes journey to the present. Which is why episodes taking place in the 80's, 90's and 00's make no reference to the Eugenics Wars, Augments or the destruction caused by the wars*. Instead they look like the world right outside our windows because there is more mileage to be gained from show our heroes in contemporary time than some fictional version created decades before. If Star Trek is still being produced in the 2060's, you can be sure there won't be a WWIII as part of the narrative.

* Yes there is a model of the Botany Bay in Rain Robinson's room, but it's set decoration and not a plot point or even mentioned.

 

[Tuskin38]

Was it the Botany Bay or just a generic sleeper ship? Because (I could be wrong) but it is implied that there was more then just the Botany Bay made.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Was it the Botany Bay or just a generic sleeper ship? Because (I could be wrong) but it is implied that there was more then just the Botany Bay made.

It was a set decoration. Probably placed there by the art department, who tend to be bigger nerds than the writers.

 

[Tuskin38]

Unless they're working on Nemesis, lmao.

 

[jaime]

Wow...I tried to follow most of it, but there was some issues in my comprehension for a minute.

One, it's a strawman argument that individuals are acting like "The 90s never happened." No, we're talking about brand recognition and mass appeal. No one is saying it didn't happen-not one person.

Finally, CBS is clearly taking some of that advice regarding influences, because we see multiple influences on DIS, not just TOS. I get a much stronger ENT vibe from the overall production values than I do TOS, which, of course, is the controversy.

No one outright says the nineties, did t happen, that's hyperbole from me to finish the line of thought. There is hiwever a prevailing wind you see around the board that TOS is the de facto face of Trek, and is superior. It's that I argue against. DIS, as you say, leans in an ENT direction, with touches of TOS, and another lean towards the movies. Which is exactly what it should be, since it exists in relation to those things and not just TOS.
It's narrative focus...well...from the trailers it owes more to Ds9 than any other Trek.

 

[CorporalClegg]

There's a reason why TOS is considered one of the greatest TV shows of all time and the others are not.

There's also a reason why TOS iconography is much more universally recognized and familiar to people.

 

[fireproof78]

No one outright says the nineties, did t happen, that's hyperbole from me to finish the line of thought. There is hiwever a prevailing wind you see around the board that TOS is the de facto face of Trek, and is superior. It's that I argue against. DIS, as you say, leans in an ENT direction, with touches of TOS, and another lean towards the movies. Which is exactly what it should be, since it exists in relation to those things and not just TOS.
It's narrative focus...well...from the trailers it owes more to Ds9 than any other Trek.

TOS is the face of Trek in pop culture. Doesn't make it superior, at least in my estimation, and while I've seen arguments for preference I have seen similar arguments for other shows and films.

I think that all Star Trek builds upon past incarnations (even TNG, Gene's baby) and then add in more, depending upon cultural times. I think DIS demonstrates that through uniform, alien conception and ship design, drawing upon multiple sources to fabricate new art.

There's a reason why TOS is considered one of the greatest TV shows of all time and the others are not.

There's also a reason why TOS iconography is much more universally recognized and familiar to people.

And this is something CBS knows far better than any of us. The fact that series like "Star Trek Continues" and merchandising emphasizing the TOS style keep pushing forward, even with other series.

 

[Mudd]

There's a reason why TOS is considered one of the greatest TV shows of all time and the others are not.

There's also a reason why TOS iconography is much more universally recognized and familiar to people.

Well, iconography is recognized because the property itself, TOS, is so popular.

Which is why every attempt to restart the Franchise goes back to that well in some form or another. Enterprise was an attempt to do a TOS-like show. Abrams went straight for TOS - not so much the TOS-based movies - in 2009. Discovery is set during the TOS era for a reason.

The studio lost interest in the Roddenberry Revised Version, ie. the 24th century, when they retired Voyager with the recognition that Trek needed to go in a different direction.

Apparently Seth McFarlane is somewhat fond of it, though.

 

[Columbus019]

Justin Bieber?

"Beeb" is slang for the BBC (British broadcasting corporation).

 

[BillJ]

Apparently Seth McFarlane is somewhat fond of it, though.

I'm fond of it to a degree. It just hasn't aged as well as TOS, nor did it make as big an impact on me.

 

[Mudd]

I'm fond of it to a degree. It just hasn't aged as well as TOS, nor did it make as big an impact on me.

Yeah. That's why I'm delighted that, despite the visuals. The Orville riffs on original Star Trek rather than TNG.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

I'm fond of it to a degree. It just hasn't aged as well as TOS, nor did it make as big an impact on me.

I think TNG aged much better than TOS. It might have clunky tricorders, padds that apparently can't hold more than one document at a time, and weird hair/clothing styles, but at least its computers didn't make tape-spooling noises when calculating.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I'm fond of it to a degree. It just hasn't aged as well as TOS, nor did it make as big an impact on me.

I agree. And I'm not talking about (and I don't think you are, either) the look, the props, or the SFX -- all of which are superficial and not terribly important to overall storytelling.

I find much of TNG difficult to watch these days because its tone, the actions of its characters, and its messages in general were so much more a product of its time (the late 1980s and early 1990s) than the tone of TOS was a product of the 1960s.

Granted, there were some uniquely 1960s themes associated with TOS, but for the most part its message and tone were more classic and timeless compared to TNG. TOS usually told straightforward classic stories without the "affected preachiness" that TNG often displays when viewed today.

 

[137th Gebirg]

I think TNG aged much better than TOS. It might have clunky tricorders, padds that apparently can't hold more than one document at a time, and weird hair/clothing styles, but at least its computers didn't make tape-spooling noises when calculating.

I could be wrong, but I always thought they were teletype sound effects.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

I could be wrong, but I always thought they were teletype sound effects.

Either way, TNG computers didn't make those noises.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

And yet TOS had a markedly greater influence on the development of real world computers than TNG did. Put another way, starship computers in TNG don't do anything that computers in TOS don't do except maybe reproduce under the influence of strange radiation.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

And yet TOS had a markedly greater influence on the development of real world computers than TNG did.

Really?

I'd say the PADD (introduced in TNG had a pretty big impact on modern computing treads and development.

 

[Mudd]

None of it has had much to do with computer evolution other than giving old-timey comp sci majors something to do while waiting for their jobs to run.

Okay, something other than whacking off.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Really?

Yes, I was thinking specifically of the development of natural language voice interfaces, much more of a long-term evolutionary process, that's still in progress, that has required breaking through multiple barriers of what was deemed technically feasible just to get to this point. TOS presented that in an adult-oriented environment, not uniquely, but certainly in contrast to what Lost in Space was doing and in a way able to influence a whole generation of computer scientists.

I'd say the PADD (introduced in TNG had a pretty big impact on modern computing treads and development.

That would be about it. But then again TOS had those stylus-interfaced electronic clipboards, and from a technical standpoint, a PADD isn't radically different from that, but rather a more incremental development, sorry.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

None of it has had much to do with computer evolution other than giving old-timey comp sci majors something to do while waiting for their jobs to run.

Okay, something other than whacking off.