Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[Tenacity]

Look at TOS and TMP ... but only 3 years or so have passed in-universe

But the TOS technology dates to the obvious upgrade that occurred after WNMHGB, so it's eight plus years old.

Things like uniforms and technology shouldn't matter really.

If you really don't give a damn about what you're watching, no.

Could you do a remake of Little House on the Prairie, set in the 1870's and Charles Ingalls drives around in a pickup truck, could NBC do that? Sure, after all it is a fictional show.

 

[Mage]

But the TOS technology dates to the obvious upgrade that occurred after WNMHGB, so it's eight plus years old.If you really don't give a damn about what you're watching, no.

Could you do a remake of Little House on the Prairie, set in the 1870's and Charles Ingalls drives around in a pickup truck, could NBC do that? Sure, after all it is a fictional show.

Comparing a show that's set in a real era of the past to a show set in a make-believe era in the future.......

And I do care about what I watch. The acting, the directing, the writing, the editing. What color and style the uniforms are? No. As long as it looks good, I couldn't care less about wether or not it fits well with The Cage or WNMHSGB. It's make-believe, not historically correct.
Do the uniforms and screendisplays matter more to you than stories?

 

[Tenacity]

Comparing a show that's set in a real era of the past to a show set in a make-believe era in the future.......

But that "make believe" show has over the course of half a century built up a extensive make believe history. No a few details don't line up, but the majority of it does.

 

[Mudd]

He's in charge of something, at least. Which is more than one can say for Fuller, who is not in charge of anything at all.

Comparing a show that's set in a real era of the past to a show set in a make-believe era in the future.......

And I do care about what I watch. The acting, the directing, the writing, the editing. What color and style the uniforms are? No. As long as it looks good, I couldn't care less about wether or not it fits well with The Cage or WNMHSGB. It's make-believe, not historically correct.

Exactly so.

 

[Mage]

But that "make believe" show has over the course of half a century built up a extensive make believe history. No a few details don't line up, but the majority of it does.

Sure. But no one's forcing them to adhere to a make believe history of a future that hasn't happen. Well, I say no one.... There are some fans who are insisting on it, but if you look at the amount of people who actually really care and insist on a historically acurate fictional setting, and those who don't, the 'don't' camp wins out, by a huge margin.

This show isn't made for a minority of fans who need this to be basicly TOS redone. It's made for the masses, old Trek-fans, new Trek-fans and non-fans. People who've never watched Trek and go 'Oeh, I need to see this'. They've never even heard of Pike or Sarek. Names like Spock, Enterprise and Kirk are known to them, but only because of pop culture. So it's no big deal if this make believe future history doesn't mesh. And really, the majority of fans don't either. Sure, some stuff will make them go roll some eyes, groan a bit perhaps. But when a Constitution class starship shows up and doesn't look EXACTLY like the one from The Cage.....they'll go 'cool', and move on.

 

[BillJ]

EDIT TO SAY:
Things like uniforms and technology shouldn't matter really. Look at TOS and TMP. They are both Prime Timeline. Ten years in between in real life, but only 3 years or so have passed in-universe. EVERYTHING looked different, even the Klingons. Displays were different, uniforms, the technology looked different. And fans accept that both are Prime Timeline. Shouldn't be so hard to do the same here

Not all fans accept that TOS/TMP are the same timeline.

The thing about fiction, is the creator puts it out there, but it is up to each and every individual on how they personally interpret the material. Always has been.

 

[captainkirk]

Not all fans accept that TOS/TMP are the same timeline.

The thing about fiction, is the creator puts it out there, but it is up to each and every individual on how they personally interpret the material. Always has been.

Well in the novelization of TMP, Roddenberry claimed that most of TOS never happened. Since he was the creator and that was his intention at the time, do we accept his idea or accept what was on screen? Most of us will accept what we saw on screen, but I have seen comments from some of the people who worship at the altar of Roddenberry who only accept the Treks he worked on (TOS 1 & 2, TMP, TNG 1 & 2).

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Well in the novelization of TMP, Roddenberry claimed that most of TOS never happened. Since he was the creator and that was his intention at the time, do we accept his idea or accept what was on screen? Most of us will accept what we saw on screen, but I have seen comments from some of the people who worship at the altar of Roddenberry who only accept the Treks he worked on (TOS 1 & 2, TMP, TNG 1 & 2).

 

[Jayson1]

Sure. But no one's forcing them to adhere to a make believe history of a future that hasn't happen. Well, I say no one.... There are some fans who are insisting on it, but if you look at the amount of people who actually really care and insist on a historically acurate fictional setting, and those who don't, the 'don't' camp wins out, by a huge margin.

This show isn't made for a minority of fans who need this to be basicly TOS redone. It's made for the masses, old Trek-fans, new Trek-fans and non-fans. People who've never watched Trek and go 'Oeh, I need to see this'. They've never even heard of Pike or Sarek. Names like Spock, Enterprise and Kirk are known to them, but only because of pop culture. So it's no big deal if this make believe future history doesn't mesh. And really, the majority of fans don't either. Sure, some stuff will make them go roll some eyes, groan a bit perhaps. But when a Constitution class starship shows up and doesn't look EXACTLY like the one from The Cage.....they'll go 'cool', and move on.

I think most people agree with this but it does make you wonder why they would bother to even say it's in the prime universe at all? What is the point of saying that if your going to change so many things that it feels completely different? I think it is done, much like need to explain that the Kelvin Universe didn't erase the prime universe as a means of trying to win over hardcore fans. I don't think they trust fans to get excited over the idea of a 3rd universe or that a 3rd universe would confuse other potential fans who don't even know about these fan arguments.

Jason

 

[Mage]

Not all fans accept that TOS/TMP are the same timeline.

The thing about fiction, is the creator puts it out there, but it is up to each and every individual on how they personally interpret the material. Always has been.

As good as a debate-ender as any I think. We can volley back and forth about this, but I think that all parties have said what they wanted to say. And I do agree that it's up to each fan to think and feel what they like. I certainly won't stop them.

Well in the novelization of TMP, Roddenberry claimed that most of TOS never happened. Since he was the creator and that was his intention at the time, do we accept his idea or accept what was on screen? Most of us will accept what we saw on screen, but I have seen comments from some of the people who worship at the altar of Roddenberry who only accept the Treks he worked on (TOS 1 & 2, TMP, TNG 1 & 2).

He didn't say TOS didn't happen. He said we should approach it as a stylized version of events, dramatised versions of the Enterprise's logs. And that the 23rd century looked a lot more like TMP did, during TOS' run. As if TOS was a tv-show based on real events that people in the 23rd century were watching. That's how I understood his comments, anyway.

 

[captainkirk]

He didn't say TOS didn't happen. He said we should approach it as a stylized version of events, dramatised versions of the Enterprise's logs. And that the 23rd century looked a lot more like TMP did, during TOS' run. As if TOS was a tv-show based on real events that people in the 23rd century were watching. That's how I understood his comments, anyway.

Well I haven't read the novelization, I'm just going on what I've heard other people say about it.

 

[Spider]

It's all becoming clear to me now. What we have here is a reboot of a rebooted reboot.

 

[fireproof78]

As good as a debate-ender as any I think. We can volley back and forth about this, but I think that all parties have said what they wanted to say. And I do agree that it's up to each fan to think and feel what they like. I certainly won't stop them.



He didn't say TOS didn't happen. He said we should approach it as a stylized version of events, dramatised versions of the Enterprise's logs. And that the 23rd century looked a lot more like TMP did, during TOS' run. As if TOS was a tv-show based on real events that people in the 23rd century were watching. That's how I understood his comments, anyway.

I recall that as well. It's always interesting to consider that TOS is actually a dramatization for the 23rd Century audience. Probably explains the overacting.

 

[jaime]

But that "make believe" show has over the course of half a century built up a extensive make believe history. No a few details don't line up, but the majority of it does.

I am in total agreement with you on that...it's why I always argue for a return to Prime. But I don't think DSC is out of line with it from what we have seen.

 

[jaime]

I think most people agree with this but it does make you wonder why they would bother to even say it's in the prime universe at all? What is the point of saying that if your going to change so many things that it feels completely different? I think it is done, much like need to explain that the Kelvin Universe didn't erase the prime universe as a means of trying to win over hardcore fans. I don't think they trust fans to get excited over the idea of a 3rd universe or that a 3rd universe would confuse other potential fans who don't even know about these fan arguments.

Jason

Kelvin universe explicitly ties itself into Prime (thereby its rules on time travel) by hunting fan dollah with Nimoy appearance and to make cheap story shortcuts. It had to paint itself out of that corner so as not to piss off fans and licensees, after JJ messed up. Only Beyond doesn't take shortcuts based on Prime continuity.

 

[Campe]

Well I haven't read the novelization, I'm just going on what I've heard other people say about it.

So it's not fair to make a statement commenting on it if you haven't read it yourself, right?

As for what the novel does say:

It is made doubly amusing, of course, by the fact that our five-year mission was so well documented, due to an ill-conceived notion by Starfleet that the return of the U.S.S. Enterprise merited public notice. Unfortunately, Starfleet’s enthusiasm affected even those who chronicled our adventures, and we were all painted somewhat larger than life, especially myself.

Eventually I found that I had been fictionalized into some sort of “modern Ulysses” and it has been painful to see my command decisions of those years so widely applauded, whereas the plain facts are that ninety-four of our crew met violent deaths during those years—and many of them would still be alive if I had acted either more quickly or more wisely. Nor have I been as foolishly courageous as depicted. I have never happily invited injury; I have disliked in the extreme every duty circumstance which has required me to risk my life. But there appears to be something in the nature of depicters of popular events which leads them into the habit of exaggeration. As a result, I became determined that if I ever again found myself involved in an affair attracting public attention, I would insist that some way be found to tell the story more accurately.

It does not decanonize TOS nor does it really discuss the looks. It just suggests the events of TOS were larger than life.

(Edited to fix paragraphs in book quote.)

 

[captainkirk]

So it's not fair to make a statement commenting on it if you haven't read it yourself, right?

I apologize. I had seen enough people discuss it that I was under the impression that the novel contained a passage more explicitly decanonizing TOS. Instead it appears that Roddenberry was trying to bring the show more in line with his new ideas for the characters.

 

[Campe]

I apologize. I had seen enough people discuss it that I was under the impression that the novel contained a passage more explicitly decanonizing TOS. Instead it appears that Roddenberry was trying to bring the show more in line with his new ideas for the characters.

Its cool. Just putting things into perspective.

 

[BillJ]

...but I have seen comments from some of the people who worship at the altar of Roddenberry who only accept the Treks he worked on (TOS 1 & 2, TMP, TNG 1 & 2).

I tend to prioritize Roddenberry over other creators, but when something is just plain dumb (love instructors) I tend to just dismiss it entirely. The man wasn't infallible.

 

[captainkirk]

I tend to prioritize Roddenberry over other creators, but when something is just plain dumb (love instructors) I tend to just dismiss it entirely. The man wasn't infallible.

I tend to ignore Roddenberry (more specifically post-1970 Roddenberry) because of the strange ideas he tended to have. My favorite being this memo he sent to Alan Dean Foster concerning a plot point in an early outline for the pilot of Phase II where N'sa (before they came up with V'ger) would at first appear to be an asteroid on a collision course with Earth:

"Near the beginning of your outline, we reach a point where they have determined that the thing rushing toward Earth is not the nickel-iron of most meteors, but rather is a complex of different chemical combinations hinting at refining techniques. Nevertheless, you have Kirk ordering the photon torpedoes readied for a massive barrage. True, you never use that massive barrage, but even having Kirk ready is really out of character for our captain and ship. Our captain is not simply going to blast an unknown object containing complex chemical combinations hinting at refining techniques. He wouldn't blast it even if it looked like a meteor. At the first hint that it contained refined chemical combinations, Kirk would order the Enterprise to parallel its course while the ship's sensors thoroughly investigated the mysterious stranger.
"Or, if the mysterious object was so near to Earth that a photon barrage was absolutely necessary, Kirk would be going through enormous personal torment at having to blast it before investigating it thoroughly. If that were our direction, the personal torment would be our principal story excitement at the time."

Now this sounds much more like Picard than Kirk, but even in TNG I don't think they would consider Picard being tormented at having to destroy an interesting rock a great source of story excitement.