If the aesthetics were the only sucky aspect of the Star Wars prequels, we'd love them.
Sadly, they sucked in basically every single possible aspect. Discovery will have to try really hard to be that bad.
Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed
- Thread starter captainkirk
- Start date
If the aesthetics were the only sucky aspect of the Star Wars prequels, we'd love them.
Sadly, they sucked in basically every single possible aspect. Discovery will have to try really hard to be that bad.
I agree, I want to enjoy the ride too. The trailer actually got me excited to join the ride. So hopefully they'll give us a premiere date (aside from just the fall) and I'll be ready. Of course I'll have to get CBS access to see the entire season, but I'm willing to give it a shot
While Star Trek has had design inconsistencies throught the movies, it has always kind of been in some sort of time progression to kind of explain this. Also, the characters actors remained the same until the JJ reboot. He opened pandoras box in that departement and it was for milking a franchise that should have stayed dead, just like Hollywood is used to doing nowadays. SW VIII, despite the silly plot, did alot better in that departement.
As for STD: There are several things that bother me about their design choice (my personal opinion):
1. TOS, to me, is the wild west age of Trek. Just leave it at that. Its 60ies style "cowboy diplomatics", cheesy, somewhat silly but still progressive for its time. Recasting the actors and using a more modern design, will make for different stories, athmosphere and eventually universe. At least the way they seem to be doing this now. To me, STD is a reboot of the series. Different actors, different design etc. I dont care if they say its the same timeline. It isnt. Its basically a new timeline, a retelling of the same timeline with different actors and different design is nothing else than a reboot. A timeline is tied to a specific design progression, fashion, faces etc. Ok, lets call it a soft reboot. (Or whatever)
2. If we would stay true to Roddenberrys idea of a very very streamlined design of ship interior, then this new Trek does certainly not fit in there very well. At least not from what we see in the trailer. (This could change of course) Of course the limitations of the 60ies FX hd their role in the streamlined design of the 1701. But look at TNG: Despite the 90ies camp, the Okudagrams seem to fit very nicely in the modern day still but were due to the demand of a very streamlined and user-friendly design. The esthetics of Trek should be in line with the kindo of utopian future Trek wants to be in.
3. To have a continuity between ENT and TOS, but setting it 10y before TOS, made for a ENTxTOS kind of design? Thats just stupid. Its like making a movie about the early 20th century, but with ties to 1850ies clothes. pls.
To be in the same timeline:
Yes, I understand the need to adapt the Series to current technological advances, but they could have done it in a different time. Setting it, f.e. in between TOS and TNG, somewhere around after 1701-C, could have given them the opportunity for different more modern designs. Setting it after TNG even more. Just use the Okudagram basic design and add to it more modern features and its ok. There are many choices possible for uniforms between the red ones and the pajamas from TNG.
But I understand the convoluted universe and stories, make this difficult to stay in canon.
Or just make a total reboot:
Forget about Trek lore completely and hard reboot the series. Just use some of the same Aliens and the utopian vision, some of the tech etc. but different actors, characters and stories. Give the fans some service here and there and be good. Just like BSG. I mean, a series about a starship exploring the unknown universe: The opportunities are endless. Trek was kind of dead after the more or less failed TNG movies anyway.
Finally, of course they do what they want, and I'll watch it and will probably enjoy it.
As for STD: There are several things that bother me about their design choice (my personal opinion):
1. TOS, to me, is the wild west age of Trek. Just leave it at that. Its 60ies style "cowboy diplomatics", cheesy, somewhat silly but still progressive for its time. Recasting the actors and using a more modern design, will make for different stories, athmosphere and eventually universe. At least the way they seem to be doing this now. To me, STD is a reboot of the series. Different actors, different design etc. I dont care if they say its the same timeline. It isnt. Its basically a new timeline, a retelling of the same timeline with different actors and different design is nothing else than a reboot. A timeline is tied to a specific design progression, fashion, faces etc. Ok, lets call it a soft reboot. (Or whatever)
2. If we would stay true to Roddenberrys idea of a very very streamlined design of ship interior, then this new Trek does certainly not fit in there very well. At least not from what we see in the trailer. (This could change of course) Of course the limitations of the 60ies FX hd their role in the streamlined design of the 1701. But look at TNG: Despite the 90ies camp, the Okudagrams seem to fit very nicely in the modern day still but were due to the demand of a very streamlined and user-friendly design. The esthetics of Trek should be in line with the kindo of utopian future Trek wants to be in.
3. To have a continuity between ENT and TOS, but setting it 10y before TOS, made for a ENTxTOS kind of design? Thats just stupid. Its like making a movie about the early 20th century, but with ties to 1850ies clothes. pls.
To be in the same timeline:
Yes, I understand the need to adapt the Series to current technological advances, but they could have done it in a different time. Setting it, f.e. in between TOS and TNG, somewhere around after 1701-C, could have given them the opportunity for different more modern designs. Setting it after TNG even more. Just use the Okudagram basic design and add to it more modern features and its ok. There are many choices possible for uniforms between the red ones and the pajamas from TNG.
But I understand the convoluted universe and stories, make this difficult to stay in canon.
Or just make a total reboot:
Forget about Trek lore completely and hard reboot the series. Just use some of the same Aliens and the utopian vision, some of the tech etc. but different actors, characters and stories. Give the fans some service here and there and be good. Just like BSG. I mean, a series about a starship exploring the unknown universe: The opportunities are endless. Trek was kind of dead after the more or less failed TNG movies anyway.
Finally, of course they do what they want, and I'll watch it and will probably enjoy it.
You haven't seen this show yet.
Here is more of this pessimistic outlook on life that is the exact opposite of Star Trek message.
The whole Prime/Kelvin timeline thing was always such a red herring. The Data's head paradox notwithstanding, Discovery is taking place in both timelines according to any time travel rules, and is going to contradict both in ways that'd make us go mad. I'm looking forward to it.
It would be hilarious if Discovery gets rid of both timelines when Michael's relationship with Sarek causes Spock to never be born. No original series, no next generation, no Kelvin incident to split the timeline, Enterprise still canon, Data's head still under San Francisco.
It would be hilarious if Discovery gets rid of both timelines when Michael's relationship with Sarek causes Spock to never be born. No original series, no next generation, no Kelvin incident to split the timeline, Enterprise still canon, Data's head still under San Francisco.
PLOT TWIST: Mike Burnham is Spock, who in this universe embraced his human side, then had a gender and race reassignment.
Doesn't matter what timeline it's set it because either way it doesn't look very good. It seams from the trailer that this series is going to be centered around a war with the klingons. It's disappointing that the jj Abrams movies have turned Star Trek into generic sci fi action, and even though beyond was close to feeling like Star Trek it was still a generic bad guy revenge plot. Star Trek is best when telling a great story that mirrors a political or ethical problem of the time. The discovery trailer may have hinted at some racism with vulcans, we have to go through that again, but it's much different than when TOS commented on racism. Around the time that TOS was on it was in the middle of the civil rights movement and it made sense to comment on racism, while there is still racism most people aren't racist. If discovery wanted to tackle racism they should tackle institutionalize racism, or better yet they should should focus on transgender rights which is a big deal right now. This show looks like it's not so worried about paying homage to Star Trek and instead using this popular property to push their streaming service but are shooting for a broader appeal than just the dedicated fan base, much like the new movies.I know we were just told that Discovery is a true prequel to TOS, but I think by now we've all seen the trailer and realized that that can't really be true. In fact, when Bryan Fuller initially said it was set in the Prime Timeline he also said that it could be in either one. But a direct comparison shows which timeline it most closely matches:
And while not a direct comparison, look at the design on this helmet compared to the Klingon architecture in STID:
I don't see anything in the trailer that resembles TOS, it's all clearly based on the aesthetic of the new movies (just look at all the lens flares.) So until we get a real indication to the contrary, I'm going to say that Discovery is set in the Kelvin Timeline.
Many here see these Star Trek time periods almost like historical period dramas. So establishing the setting of Discovery needs to get the period interiors, costumes, right. And unlike the original series, is not establishing a yet unknown future.
Discovery seems to be interpreting the future aesthetic based on Star Trek Enterprise, the USS Franklin, and the USS Kelvin - all of which are pre TOS. The biggest issue is firmly setting things 10 years before. The Cage, and The Menagerie are the closest canon to that period, and it doesn't seem to have played any part in the design inspiration.
* This is all prefaced on the fact we have yet to see the USS Discovery, and have no idea if the USS Shenzhou is within that 10 year period, or something earlier.
Discovery seems to be interpreting the future aesthetic based on Star Trek Enterprise, the USS Franklin, and the USS Kelvin - all of which are pre TOS. The biggest issue is firmly setting things 10 years before. The Cage, and The Menagerie are the closest canon to that period, and it doesn't seem to have played any part in the design inspiration.
* This is all prefaced on the fact we have yet to see the USS Discovery, and have no idea if the USS Shenzhou is within that 10 year period, or something earlier.
That all depends on what the "ten years before Kirk, etc" means.
Is it ten years before their five year mission or their birth?
That is something to know for sure...
I think determining which timeline the show is important only in regards to just how much change we think we might see on the show. If it's prime we will expect certain restrictions if it's a reboot it's wide open to what they can do.
Jason
I'm almost sure it means the five year mission. Doesn't matter, though. Discovery can rewrite any prior and future events at will. Sarek was looking after Michael Burnham instead of spending time with Amanda, the Sarcophagus ship causes a major time travel accident after which young Sarek never travels to Earth, the time cops chasing Commander Burnham fine future Spock from Yesterday for unauthorised travel, thereby erasing him from the timeline, or Archer/Future Guy shows up and says “Nice timelines you have there”
Well it says ten years before the Enterprise as well so I assume it's the mission. But if it's before their birth then obviously it would definitely be in the Prime-timeline. However given Sarek's grayer hair it seems more likely that it's ten years before the mission.
Interesting that you both mention this because the Kelvin itself was a ship of the Prime universe, before the split. So, if that's the look, it's a Prime universe look.
That was my original preference too. To set it after Nemesis and Voyager. Maybe 100 years later. That way you could change things up a lot and not be tied to the exact scenarios as they were left when we last saw the 24th Century.
But, I'm really excited about the new series after the trailer. Really glad that it's in the Prime universe and a direct prequel to TOS.
If small universe syndrome is bad with shows set within decade(s), imagine how would it feel if Sarek showed up in a show set 100 years after Nemesis. 
Similar threads
