Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[Michael]

If Discovery is "Prime" then they should respect that line as its from one of Trek's finest (and a fan favorite) episodes.

Well, I don't care if it's “Prime” and I certainly don't want the writers of Discovery to be under the obligation to be mindful of a piece of Trek trivia that was only important for one episode. I like “Balance of Terror” just fine and I'm not contesting its or Star Trek's standing among fans. I just don't think little bits of trivia define what Star Trek *is* for me.

 

[BillJ]

Well, I don't care if it's “Prime” and I certainly don't want the writers of Discovery to be under the obligation to be mindful of a piece of Trek trivia that was only important for one episode. I like “Balance of Terror” just fine and I'm not contesting its or Star Trek's standing among fans. I just don't think little bits of trivia define what Star Trek *is* for me.

I'll judge Discovery against its current competition. I am considering it a reboot.

 

[Campe]

But the problem is they say its "Prime", if its "Prime" then you take what's there for good or ill. How much do they change and fans still buy it being "Prime"? They've changed the look, if they start changing details then it really can't be what they are saying it is.

Then explain 50 years of continuity errors that all falls under the definition of Prime Star Trek. Trek fans seem to be fine with changing canon as long as it suits them.

If Discovery decides to stay true to canon and not show the Romulans and not even reference them or the not seeing each other BS, I don't like it but fine by me. If they tell a good story that is worth telling about the Rommies (that does not fall into the "Acquisition"/"Regeneration" stuff which were generally not good stories) even better.

Having said all that, I don't care if it's Prime, Kelvin or a reboot. I just want good storytelling.

 

[captainkirk]

But the problem is they say its "Prime", if its "Prime" then you take what's there for good or ill. How much do they change and fans still buy it being "Prime"? They've changed the look, if they start changing details then it really can't be what they are saying it is.

Exactly. The only reasons to set it in the Prime-timeline are to take advantage of the story opportunities and to appeal to old fans. Given how much they seem to be changing it doesn't look like they're actually using any Prime specific elements. You cannot say it's a true prequel to TOS set in the Prime-timeline while disregarding everything previously established.

I know we've only seen the trailer, and I'm fully prepared to eat my words if the actual show proves me wrong, but right now I don't see that happening.

 

[Mudd]

The only reasons to set it in the Prime-timeline are to take advantage of the story opportunities and to appeal to old fans.

Only to appeal to old fans, in fact. The story opportunities represented by the so-called "Prime" continuity that are somehow lost by rebooting are negligible - okay, completely nonexistent as long as it's a fresh reboot rather than AbramsTrek.

 

[Noname Given]

It's an amazing episode of TOS. I can't deny that for a second. But when you add a lot of layers upon layers in storytelling over 50 years.



That's why they invented subspace radio in the series. Defeats that whole problem.



It did and it didn't work badly by any stretch. I just can't see how a sustained conflict would go without both sides seeing the other. And the Romulans have been portrayed as tracherous and secretive but honorable. They may destroy their own ships before being captured but maybe I'm forgetting an episode but I can't see them just flat out murdering prisoners of war. It wouldn't seem right. In fact "Yesterday's Enterprise" shows they didn't.

And I can't imagine Earth just letting POWs not be part of the cease fire. Unless the victory by Starfleet is less certain as we've been let on to believe. History, after all, is written by the victors.

You forgot the line:

Mr. Spock: "In primitive space vessels; that allowed for no captives, no quarter..."

My take on it was that the Earth/Romulan War was fought entirely in space. There were no planets fought over, or ground battles. It was completely a war of attrition with regard to Space Fleets. (But that's my take. The only canon sources are Spock's comments.)

 

[Campe]

You forgot the line:

Mr. Spock: "In primitive space vessels; that allowed for no captives, no quarter..."

Yes I did. Thank you for pointing that out. I stand corrected.

My take on it was that the Earth/Romulan War was fought entirely in space. There were no planets fought over, or ground battles. It was completely a war of attrition with regard to Space Fleets. (But that's my take. The only canon sources are Spock's comments.)

I have a hard time believing that the ultimate fight here was just over space with no planets ultimately in contention. If either side had no gains or loses in ground or planets and space as the case may be is fairly useless when it comes down to it. Planets have resources to be exploited as well as being a good staging area for the next stage of the war.

I suppose it's possible that either bombarded from orbit and didn't land troops. But it doesn't seem realistic. Then again it is a TV series with FTL tech and molecular transporters. Maybe I should really just relax.

 

[Mudd]

I'd think that in an interstellar war you would take (or lose) planets by cutting off the access of enemy spacecraft to that planet.

There's never been any direct suggestion in Trek, as far as I can recall, that there were inhabited worlds being fought over.

 

[Campe]

There's never been any direct suggestion in Trek, as far as I can recall, that there were inhabited worlds being fought over.

Wasn't Betazed occupied during the Dominion War?

In fact...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Yep.

 

[jaime]

I am pro remain in the Prime Universe. All you Trexiteers can dance all you like. (The arguments seem extremely similar as for a recent referendum.....advantages outside, not being beholden to a greater whole that has worked, more or less, for nearly fifty years...)

 

[F. King Daniel]

I don't see them not using the Romulans. I know Enterprise had no members of the crew ever see a Romulan, but there's only so long they could keep that up as it was a ridiculous idea back in Balance of Terror that they somehow never saw a Romulan before that moment.

Rememeber, had ENT not been cancelled, they planned an arc where T'Pol's father turned out to be a Romulan agent. And no doubt they'd follow that with a mass amnesia episode so everyone forgot and it tied up neatly with TOS

 

[captainkirk]

Rememeber, had ENT not been cancelled, they planned an arc where T'Pol's father turned out to be a Romulan agent. And no doubt they'd follow that with a mass amnesia episode so everyone forgot and it tied up neatly with TOS

Or, like in Acquisition and Regeneration, Archer would forget to ask the name of their species.

 

[Mudd]

Wasn't Betazed occupied during the Dominion War?

In fact...

I was referring to the Earth - Romulan War and the practicality of fighting it from space.

Do not ask me DS9 shit.

 

[Campe]

I was referring to the Earth - Romulan War and the practicality of fighting it from space.

Okay. But we've actually seen exactly two sustained conflicts in Star Trek, the Dominion War, which was an example showing what I suggest and the Xindi War, which was barely a war. More like one ship against an entire government... until the very end.

The information we have on the Romulan War is very limited. There is a passing reference in "In a Mirror Darkly" (I believe just referencing Archer fought in it in his bio, not in dialogue), what we know from "Balance of Terror" and, if you want to take this as something happening in the Prime Timeline (which I choose to do), Star Trek Beyond, where it's stated Edison and the MACOs fought in the war. That would seem to indicate that ground battles were fought in the Romulan War.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

I look back in on this thtead and am amazed to see people still cliaming it can not be prime because it does not look dated. Trek has had its visuals rebooted twice. A 3rd time has zero effect on the story or events, just in how we, the viewers see them unfold.

 

[Campe]

^ I wish I could like that 100x.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

^ I wish I could like that 100x.

Its something I have seen many places and I just do not get it. We see this in other mediums all the time, its not a huge deal. Its prime, ENT was prime, its no biggy. They just rebooted the look to fit with a modern view, not a 1960's view of what the 22nd century would look like.

 

[Tenacity]

but I can't see them just flat out murdering prisoners of war

You forgot the line:
Mr. Spock: "In primitive space vessels; that allowed for no captives, no quarter..."

No quarter means (among other things) take no prisoners, not take prisoners and then kill them.

 

[Jesse1066]

Visuals are not currently the topic. And nobody ever said it had to look "dated." That would be absurd.