Is he a lieutenant? I though that uniform indicated an NCO.
Come on. Kirk's bridge crew stayed for decades and you're gonna call out Kyle for being a Transporter chief five years later?
Lt.Kyle
- Thread starter Attentiveluke
- Start date
Come on. Kirk's bridge crew stayed for decades and you're gonna call out Kyle for being a Transporter chief five years later?
Uhura was communications chief for 28 years under Kirk and it looks like about 6 under Pike. 
Then they just need to stop claiming it to be "still the Prime Timeline/Universe" if its obviously not, as evidenced by recasts and changed backstories. None of that is a problem, save for the producers insistence that it is the same continuity, and not a loose reimagining. Until then, handwaves to explain changes are necessary, and "not the same guy" is as good as any.
To be fair, Uhura had no real backstory in TOS or the TOS Movies. The fact her family is dead isn't any kind of retcon any more than Chekov having dated Irina Galliulin at Starfleet Academy retcons what little we learned about him in Season 2. When your character is a mostly blank slate it's hard to say any of the new marks "changed" anything.
They don't need to do anything. We can either flex or argue.
No.
1. We don't know if it is the same Kyle.
2. If it is we've had racial recasting before and nobody blew a gasket.
3. See 1 and 2.
2. If it is we've had racial recasting before and nobody blew a gasket.
3. See 1 and 2.
The producers insistence that it is prime is the only thing that can make it prime. The idea that inconsistency, recasts or change negates it being "prime" is a fannish notion. The franchise's history is rife with all three and for some reason only recently have fans decided to declare things "not prime" for them.
Hopefully James R. Kirk will put Kyle in his place.
I'm one of ENT's vocal cheerleaders around these forums and even I can admit that some of that series doesn't visually nor logically jibe with TOS. But most of it does. And most of SNW does. And both are Prime.
One R.
No sense of humor.
You think Trek prequels have continuity issues? Today's the 20th Anniversary of Attack of the Clones. Wait until you hear how George Lucas attempted to make everything make sense across decades of production.
There are times when TOS doesn't jibe with TOS.
And in the same season!
Neither ENT (until season 4) nor SNW matches very well at all. ENT and First Contact can explain the tech and visual changes to SNW, but not the recastings. It is very obviously NOT set in the original 60s continuity, regardless of what any producers or any fan insistence claims. Not sure how it is a "fannish" notion when it is blatantly made clear by just about every choice the producers have made.
Nah.
It's all Prime. Inconsistencies and choices you don't like included.
It's a TV show, well a series of TV shows and films. That's all the reason I need to explain the changes.
So, do Vulcans have special ability to change faces? Or is TSFS in a different universe from TWOK?
I turn the floor over to Mel Brooks
Hell, the events in ENT are even part of the Enterprise-D holodeck computer more than three years before FC. Which shows that it's all Prime. First Contact leads to ENT which leads to DSC and SNW and those evolve into TOS and beyond until we arrive at the Enterprise-D and her successor ships.
It's been painfully obvious since I watched "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and TMP that the aesthetics don't line up.
And?
There's no way Kirk's WNMHGB hair can exist in the same universe as his TMP hair!
He tried, Mr. Spock. He really tried!
Similar threads
