I think once we have context of what is happening in the show it will be easier to decide how it fits together.
Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed
- Thread starter captainkirk
- Start date
You will feel differently when you have decide if Mark Leonard's version of Sarek also had a close realtionship with Burnham.
Plus how will you know if you should watch this show before you watch "TOS" during a trek marathon? You very head-canon is at stake!Jason
Prime Universe? Kelvin? 3rd Unknown Universe?
At the end of the day, does it really matter where it takes as long as they tell good stories? One can make the argument that every time something looks different, its a whole new universe. The writers say that it takes place in Prime. That's good enough for me. But it seems that some fans take this so damned seriously, that just because of a look, that has been repeated ad nauseum is considered to be a re-imagining, well, it just can't be Prime.
Who cares? Why is such a big deal being made about it?
Also as been said, ad nauseum, the number of people who want to see a future based upon what was projected in 1966 is a minority at best. Showing that would just be laughed off the screen by most viewers. I'm sorry, but that's true. The futurism as presented in Star Trek has always been about projecting from today. I personally think that's exactly how it should be. I love TOS. It's my favorite series. But that doesn't mean I want a 2017 Star Trek showing the future from 1966. Hell no. I want it to look like what we think the future looks like from today.
And can I also point out, we haven't even seen a good picture of the completed Discovery or the inside of the gorram ship! We've only seen the Shinzou. Discovery may be closer to what we see in TOS! May I also point out, we really don't even know what the frikkin show is going to be about! I just get so tired of this jumping to conclusions when we know so little.
You don't like the look? Fine by me. That's subjective and I can appreciate differing tastes.
You think it looks too futuristic based on what we saw 51 years ago? Yup. You're right. Get over it or don't watch.
You want to criticize the Klingons for their changed look? I point you in the direction of every time an alien race that has ever been re-imagined in the history of Star Trek.
You want to complain about the timeline? I ask: Why should it even matter if they tell good stories, which may I remind you, we really don't know much about in the first place!
To quote MST3K: "Just repeat to yourself, 'It's just a show! I SHOULD REALLY JUST RELAX!'"
At the end of the day, does it really matter where it takes as long as they tell good stories? One can make the argument that every time something looks different, its a whole new universe. The writers say that it takes place in Prime. That's good enough for me. But it seems that some fans take this so damned seriously, that just because of a look, that has been repeated ad nauseum is considered to be a re-imagining, well, it just can't be Prime.
Who cares? Why is such a big deal being made about it?
Also as been said, ad nauseum, the number of people who want to see a future based upon what was projected in 1966 is a minority at best. Showing that would just be laughed off the screen by most viewers. I'm sorry, but that's true. The futurism as presented in Star Trek has always been about projecting from today. I personally think that's exactly how it should be. I love TOS. It's my favorite series. But that doesn't mean I want a 2017 Star Trek showing the future from 1966. Hell no. I want it to look like what we think the future looks like from today.
And can I also point out, we haven't even seen a good picture of the completed Discovery or the inside of the gorram ship! We've only seen the Shinzou. Discovery may be closer to what we see in TOS! May I also point out, we really don't even know what the frikkin show is going to be about! I just get so tired of this jumping to conclusions when we know so little.
You don't like the look? Fine by me. That's subjective and I can appreciate differing tastes.
You think it looks too futuristic based on what we saw 51 years ago? Yup. You're right. Get over it or don't watch.
You want to criticize the Klingons for their changed look? I point you in the direction of every time an alien race that has ever been re-imagined in the history of Star Trek.
You want to complain about the timeline? I ask: Why should it even matter if they tell good stories, which may I remind you, we really don't know much about in the first place!
To quote MST3K: "Just repeat to yourself, 'It's just a show! I SHOULD REALLY JUST RELAX!'"
I think most people feel this way. Trying to figure out the proper universe is just for fun. Of course people will judge the show on how good it is and not all this stuff. That doesn't mean people can't have fun with the canon and little details and the world building the show will be doing. I think people are getting debate mixed up with complaining.
Jason
I think there is a large sect of fans who are whining because its not in their "head canon." This has been an issue since 1979. Its not just people "having fun." Its getting belligerent because its not "their" Star Trek. Jason, you might be one of the "having fun" guys, and I respect that, but I argue you're also in the minority.
I would tend to agree. From personal experience, there can be an attitude of "Not my Star Trek" that is very much very serious about it all fitting together.
But would you guys really say that's the majority? My impression has always been that it's the other way around, that it's actually just a very, very vocal minority which cares that much about strict adherence to canon and established visuals. I would also hazard a guess that it's mainly happening online and that out there in the real world the vast majority of fans really just wants good stories and good production values. But maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part. 
After 50 years, I think its amazing it holds together as well as it does. But Trek is also about looking forward. I know people are going to misinterpret that to think I mean that Discovery should be in the 34th century with "hyperbolic photonic exoscopic torpedoes" and that's not what I mean at all. Star Trek, arguably, at its best, is about being relevant. Just pushing the timeline isn't going to do that. Telling a story about today set in the future with a sci-fi background is, in my opinion, what Star Trek is all about. It shouldn't matter that Discovery is set in the 23rd century or that the Klingons have undergone a few face lifts over the years. But yet, here we are!
But would you guys really say that's the majority? My impression has always been that it's the other way around, that it's actually just a very, very vocal minority which cares that much about strict adherence to canon and established visuals. I would also hazard a guess that it's mainly happening online and that out there in the real world the vast majority of fans really just wants good stories and good production values. But maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.
I said a "large sect." I didn't say a majority. But you're probably right. It is probably more of a very vocal minority. And I hope your wishful thinking is correct.
Granted I didn't become a Trek fan until 1994, my senior year of high school but from what I understood is most of the people who complained about "TNG" because it didn't have Kirk,Spock,McCoy in it, eventually came around and liked the show. Also people didn't like "DS9" either because it was to different from "TNG" and yet it eventually got a fanbase as well and the same with "Voyager" and "Enterprise." I suspect most people will come around to this show as well if it's good. I would bet a million bucks that most of the people who really hate what they have seen will still watch,and many will even love it.
Jason
Well, you did say people like @Jayson1, who don't care all that much about canon and are just “having fun”, are in the minority. That's implying people who do care too much about such things are the majority. Or maybe I did get you wrong there, sorry.I said a "large sect." I didn't say a majority. But you're probably right. It is probably more of a very vocal minority. And I hope your wishful thinking is correct.
Not a failing, just personal preference.
You will feel differently when you have decide if Mark Leonard's version of Sarek also had a close realtionship with Burnham.
Jason
Please tell me you're joking.... Just because, in his few appereances, Mark Leonard's Sarke never mentioned Burnham's character, doesn't mean they were not well connected. And why does it matter if and when I watch Discovery IF I ever marathon Star Trek. And I truly hope that your comment about head-canon was just jest, and that you don't actually expect ALL Star Trek fans to have head-canon that connects everything to everything. Sometimes stuff just doesn't connect.
Not that it matters, but I was a fan since I woke up in a hotel room with my family and my dad was watching "Devil in the Dark" back in the mid 80s.
And I hope so. People are going to watch, whether that be through first run on CBSAA/Netflix, later on Blu-ray or digital or via some illegal method. There will be those who will enjoy it. There will be those who will hate watch it. There will be those whose opinions will be swayed one way or another. It will have a fanbase, absolutely. What I just get tired of, and this was very apparent back during the Enterprise days, is the fans watching just to hate on it. That to me just isn't healthy. Its why I stopped watching The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. There was just no joy in either.
Well, you did say people like @Jayson1, who don't care all that much about canon and are just “having fun”, are in the minority. That's implying people who do care too much about such things are the majority. Or maybe I did get you wrong there, sorry.
I meant those "having fun" were in the minority of the group who were complaining. Not that the majority of fans were complaining. At least I think that's what I meant.
It's all good. I think I just read you wrong.I meant those "having fun" were in the minority of the group who were complaining. Not that the majority of fans were complaining. At least I think that's what I meant.
No, you're right. The JJ verse is a perfect example of what you're talking about. The old school/hardcore canon fans had a major fit when the first JJ Trek came out yet it got great reviews and the best box office that Trek has ever seen.But would you guys really say that's the majority? My impression has always been that it's the other way around, that it's actually just a very, very vocal minority which cares that much about strict adherence to canon and established visuals. I would also hazard a guess that it's mainly happening online and that out there in the real world the vast majority of fans really just wants good stories and good production values. But maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.
My new theory is that everything is related to Kirk. People don't care about the countless inconsistencies between TOS, TMP and the post-TWOK movies. They changed so much and TOS was hardly great about being consistent. But as long as Kirk (only if played by William Shatner) is in it, all is well.
Any other series that shows inconsistency is baaaad.
That's it, my Kirk theory. Kirk has power over minds.
Now say it again in Shatner's staccato tone: Kirk! has power! over minds!
Do you feel it? That is Bill, in your mind.
Any other series that shows inconsistency is baaaad.
That's it, my Kirk theory. Kirk has power over minds.
Now say it again in Shatner's staccato tone: Kirk! has power! over minds!
Do you feel it? That is Bill, in your mind.
Abrams' Trek was the punching bag for so long. It's rather amusing to see it be elevated because DSC's trailer didn't give away every plot detail.
*tinfoil hat* DSC is actually just a cover for Abrams' new project! It all makes sense.
That's what that voice is. Explains so much.
Only being Logical Like Spock
Ofcourse it's Prime Timeline. It is, because the creators stated it is set in the Prime timeline. Saying that you think it isn't, doen't make it so.
It doesn't matter at all where they say it's set, only whether it actually is consistent with the established universe. But the moment I heard "reimagine" from those creators, I decided to treat it as a 3rd timeline, and that's fine with me. I have no particular preference for what timeline the show is set in.
As for TOS fans who experienced a 'reboot' - you're missing a couple:
TAS - Yes, it was drawn to look like TOS; but overall, the music and a number of the stories were lacking/off. It did have a few decent outings, but there was a fan schism when it was on the air.
ST:TMP - Many fans didn't care for the way the Bridge was reworked; the uniforms were pajamas - and many a fan was asking why the refit 1701 Nacelles looked more like they belonged on the bottom of a Klingon Battlecruiser.
Also, ST:TNG was two things (IMO) a reboot; with a big retconning of established Star Trek elements while still trying to claim - "no, it's the same continuity from TOS. Sorry, no. The Prime Directive in TOS ONLY applied to primitive societies who had no knowledge of interstellar spacefiight or that intelligent life existed on other worlds. If either one of those criteria wasn't met the Prime Directive did not apply. TNG expanded it to "Any world not a member of the Federation..." too many times to count.
Personally as an old TOS fan, I LOVED all three JJ-Verse films. They DID recapture a lot of the spirit and tone of TOS - and I think that;s wht ST:TNG fans felt they were 'not Star Trek' because to them TNG (and the 24th century in general WAS 'Star Trek'. The retcon of the Federation; and the sudden idea that humanity had somehow managed to quell all sociatal confklicts between humans in general was a BIG departure from the TOS tone of "yeah, were better in many ways but still not perfect" really put a lot of TOS fans off TNG at the start.
I have a feeling TNG fans are really going to understand how TOS fans felt when TNG retconned a lot of elements when it launched. I doubt the regulars of ST: D will spend a lot of time around a Conference Table discussing philosophical points - and I seriously doubt Michelle Yoeh's character will ever call for a conference like Picard did in the middle of a fight with a Borg Cube.
Last edited:
Similar threads
