• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Mirror universe Disturbing.

I'm sorry, this is nonsense. When did we reach the point where we're so obsessive about "canon" that, unless a franchise maintains 100% perfect continuity, plot-wise, visually, whatever, sequels and prequels don't exist "in the same universe" and aren't really sequels and prequels? Even though the obvious intent is that ENT or DISCO are prequels to TOS.

More importantly, why even worry about this? What possible difference does it make? Every movie or TV series since the silent era has its fair share of discrepancies or inconsistencies. Doesn't mean that every third sequel or prequel ever made is actually a reboot set in a different universe just because they changed the sets and costumes or whatever, or because they retconned a plot point from one of the previous movies.

Is THE WRATH OF KHAN not really a sequel to "Space Seed" because Khan's multi-ethnic crew from the TV episode have inexplicably morphed into a bunch of blond Aryan types? Of course not. Are TNG and GENERATIONS set in different universes because Scotty's guest-appearances don't quite match up? Are TNG and DS9 in different universes because Dax bears no resemblance to the Trills on TNG--and has borrowed her look from "The Perfect Mate" instead?

These are movies and TV shows made by dozens of different people over the course of fifty-plus years. Of course they're not going to match up perfectly, nor should they be expected to. And not every deviation requires an in-universe explanation, especially when a common sense, real-world explanation is perfectly adequate.

Occam's Razor applies here: which explanation is simplest?

A) They updated the art direction . . because, you know, it's a TV show, not reality.
B) IT'S A WHOLE NEW UNIVERSE!!!!

Honestly, Option A is good enough for me. Why not just relax, take the prequels as prequels, as they're intended, and stopping fretting about whether this make-believe universe is 100% consistent all the time.
This post should be pinned in each sub-forum dealing with any and all TV shows and movies, here and across the Internet.
 
To each his own. Every single person has the right to accept or not accept any particular form of fiction, including continuity issues and down right re-writing what the forefathers of Star Trek did so well. Many don't have to bend over backwards because of a declining fanbase's desire to ignore what was clearly inconsistent to what was developed - just for everything to fit.
First of all, yes, absolutely you are correct in that attitude to accept or reject it. However, it doesn't make it less "Star Trek."

Secondly, there is "bending over backwards" and there is recognizing that this is an art form and with that comes certain expectations. I would not expect Star Trek of today to look like decades gone by any more than I would expect Shakespeare to look like the sets at the Globe Theater when Shakespeare first published it. That, to me, is an unreasonable expectation of the art form.

Finally, the forefathers of Trek made things up as they went along. Perhaps Discovery would be more acceptable if it did that?
 
The Mirror Universe is the one in which, in a mid-20th-century popular entertainment, an episode called "Requiem for a Martian" really existed, and wasn't some idiotic hoax.:nyah:
 
I do agree the Mirror U is disturbing but I see it as that because Humanity and Human history IS disturbing. I'm a big fan of studying History, especially WW2, and the Roman empire, and that's as far as I have to look to see the worst of Human-kind.

That there could be a universe out there where people are even worse does not surprise me in any way.
 
I do agree the Mirror U is disturbing but I see it as that because Humanity and Human history IS disturbing. I'm a big fan of studying History, especially WW2, and the Roman empire, and that's as far as I have to look to see the worst of Human-kind.
Precisely so. We would like to believe that such savagery is beyond humanity now, but we are not so far removed from such atrocities in our own species.

If the Mirror Universe is disturbing how much more so is humanity's own history?
 
whenever i view the intro of "in a Mirror Darkly" i have to admit, it's too painful to watch for me (I'm not kidding when i say that it gave me nightmares about humanity's future) and for me to think about. even the claims that it shows us who we really are and not how Gene Roddenberry perceived us disturbs me to the point of pretending that the mirror universe had a different origin or is completely non-existent. i sometimes see this claim being brought up. why do people believe that the mirror universe is the most likely future of Humanity or Star trek when not viewed through Gene Roddenberry's lens of an optimistic and progressive future?

Actually i find the entire mirror universe too disturbing for my tastes. I usually pretend or wish that it never existed. it's really disturbing to see the way mirror universe characters act or behave. it's almost as though they are prime universe characters acting out of character.

i want to pretend that the mirror universe wasn't caused by humanity's own primal warlike nature. i really want to pretend that an alien invasion substituting WW3 and preceding vulcan first contact started this. i really wanted to disregard the prologue and intro of "in a mirror Darkly" and deem it non-canon or better, "nonexistent". I gives me anxiety everytime i watch it.

Is there anyone in the fandom who feels disturbed or lacks the gall to tolerate the mirror universe? if so, come out and let's talk
No

It's a freaking TV show grow up.

And :barf: genes "vision".
 
I'm sorry, this is nonsense. When did we reach the point where we're so obsessive about "canon" that, unless a franchise maintains 100% perfect continuity, plot-wise, visually, whatever, sequels and prequels don't exist "in the same universe" and aren't really sequels and prequels? Even though the obvious intent is that ENT or DISCO are prequels to TOS.

More importantly, why even worry about this? What possible difference does it make? Every movie or TV series since the silent era has its fair share of discrepancies or inconsistencies. Doesn't mean that every third sequel or prequel ever made is actually a reboot set in a different universe just because they changed the sets and costumes or whatever, or because they retconned a plot point from one of the previous movies.

Is THE WRATH OF KHAN not really a sequel to "Space Seed" because Khan's multi-ethnic crew from the TV episode have inexplicably morphed into a bunch of blond Aryan types? Of course not. Are TNG and GENERATIONS set in different universes because Scotty's guest-appearances don't quite match up? Are TNG and DS9 in different universes because Dax bears no resemblance to the Trills on TNG--and has borrowed her look from "The Perfect Mate" instead?

These are movies and TV shows made by dozens of different people over the course of fifty-plus years. Of course they're not going to match up perfectly, nor should they be expected to. And not every deviation requires an in-universe explanation, especially when a common sense, real-world explanation is perfectly adequate.

Occam's Razor applies here: which explanation is simplest?

A) They updated the art direction . . because, you know, it's a TV show, not reality.
B) IT'S A WHOLE NEW UNIVERSE!!!!

Honestly, Option A is good enough for me. Why not just relax, take the prequels as prequels, as they're intended, and stopping fretting about whether this make-believe universe is 100% consistent all the time.

With all due respect the above response is nonsense. Pure and simple, nothing beyond The Original Series would exist if it weren't for an ever increasing number of folks obsessing over this fictional creation and engaging in these extracurricular activities.

It also serves to communicate that there need be some semblance of continuity. That there is a real world benefit for a historical mindfulness. Decrying fans for daring to have standards (as varied as they maybe) is truly hypocritical.
 
This post should be pinned in each sub-forum dealing with any and all TV shows and movies, here and across the Internet.

No it really shouldn't. It is specious. For one thing: those that really truly believe that aren't (t)here. That would be text book hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
The REALLY scary thing is that there are many divergent points, including those based on real-world historical events, could have created the so-called "Mirror Universe":

What if the Roman Empire never fell? (Which we kind of see in the TOS episode "Bread and Circuses")
What if the Mongol hordes with further than the Middle East, in their westward expansion?
What if the American Revolution never happened, thus the Age of Empires continued?
What if the Union lost the American Civil War?
What if the Axis Powers won WW2?
What if the Soviet Bloc won the Cold War?
What if the Augments won the Eugenics War?
What if "First Contact" with the Vulcans never happened?

And all this is on top of the fact that there could be divergent points within the Star Trek timeline, like, "What if Spock chose not to listen to OUR Kirk?" We could see a TNG era Mirror Universe, as envisioned by VOY's "Living Witness", instead of the one seen in DS9's "Crossover" episode.

Food for thought.
 
The REALLY scary thing is that there are many divergent points, including those based on real-world historical events, could have created the so-called "Mirror Universe": ...

All good scenarios. My complaint is when there is a breach why is 90% of the time to the same alternate universe? The notion of a multi-verse is a valid scientific theory as well as accepted sci-fi/fantasy fodder.
 
I think the Borg in the mirror universe are a primitive pre-warp species that live a Amish style lifestyle rejecting all advanced tech.


Jason

My theory: In the MU the Borg are a rich source of B-Pop groups as they are self-autotunning and have a tremendous catalog of choreographed routines preloaded to thrill audiences everywhere with the guarantee that no two concerts would ever be the same.
 

Unfortunately I am a simple unfrozen caveman layperson so the vagueness of your response frightens and confuses me.

giphy.gif
 
Unfortunately I am a simple unfrozen caveman layperson so the vagueness of your response frightens and confuses me.

giphy.gif
It's half a joke and half a reference to Stargate, which discusses quantum realities, and the ability to jump from one that was very similar to another, and that if too many people (read the same character) go into one reality it would cause a disruption.

To my mind, it is something of those effect quantum signatures being similar enough that they draw people from parallels that are quite similar.

Or something.
 
You're thinking of Sliders aren't you? Not Stargate, as that is about a system of wormholes throughout the galaxy connecting planets and many different alien races, some of which are hostile!
JB
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top