• 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!

Personal continuity..... Anyone?

Emperor-Tiberius

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
I would like to know if any Star Trek fan has his/her own, ideal for them, continuity as to what happened in Star Trek and what not?

Like, some could ignore ENT, others would accept everything except for TOS and movies, and others might as well follow only TOS.

Whats your take?
 
TOS, TAS, ST I-VI and a handful of novels and comic stories.

And this isn't because I hate the newer shows by any means. I have and do enjoy watching them on occasion, but they've never really felt like "Star Trek" to me (And no I really can't explain that, its totally subjective).
 
Seasons One and Two of TOS, TAS, ST:TMP and Seasons One through Five of ST:TNG up to and including Hero Worship (even though I absolutely loathed just about every single episode of that show). In short, if it was produced Gene Roddenberry it "happened". If it wasn't it didn't. :)

TGT
 
Well, I accept TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9 and all 10 movies.

From here, I accept numerous novels and comics - like the recent YEAR FOUR issues from IDW, as well as KLINGONS: BLOOD WILL TELL mini-series, that work for me, real well. Also, THE ART OF THE IMPOSSIBLE is a staple for me since I read it, as its IMO the best buffer from the 23rd century to the 24th one. And, I accept Shatnerverse fully, at least until CAPTAIN'S GLORY, as I ignore COLISSION COURSE.

I recognize VOY exists, but not as it is. There is a ship called Voyager thats missing, and it did come back, but thats it. I try to forget the show the best way I can...

From ENT, I accept "In a Mirror, Darkly" two-parter, and "Terra Prime".

So I kinda like to think that the Trek universe, viewer-wise, began with "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and ended with fictional "Q&A" and "Captain's Glory". But thats just me.
 
Seasons One and Two of TOS, TAS, ST:TMP and Seasons One through Five of ST:TNG up to Hero Worship (even though I absolutely loathed just about every single episode of that show). In short, if it was produced Gene Roddenberry it "happened". If it wasn't it didn't. :)

TGT
And I was gonna ask if anyone followed the Roddenberry canon! :) Anyway, I gotta ask: Why reject everything else? I don't try to persuade you, just to understand the notion.

I mean, I'm not Berman lover - VOY and ENT are, for the most part, out of my continuity. So why no TNG S6-7 and DS9?
 
And I was gonna ask if anyone followed the Roddenberry canon! :) Anyway, I gotta ask: Why reject everything else? I don't try to persuade you, just to understand the notion.

Because the Star Trek "franchise" means about as little to me as Burger King's. As far as I am concerned Trek was a particular form of televised space opera created and executed by a particular group of producers, writers, composers and designers under the guidance of Gene Roddenberry during a particular period of their respective lives which just so happened to take place in a particular epoch of American and world history, none of which - needless to say - exist any longer.

TGT
 
You do realize though, that the films from 2 to 6, with 5's possible exception, didn't require much involvement from Roddenberry. In fact, he gave ideas, but they rejected them, being the executive consultant. Also, he has said that elements in 5 and 6 are non-canonical. TAS, also, was considered non-canonical to him, if I'm not mistaken.

Also, TNG seasons 1-3 are very much Roddenberry's vision, and movies 5 and 6 were made during seasons 1-2 and 4, in which he was very much alive.

That said, I understand your sentiment on the particular group of people that made it work. I just think that Star Trek survived Roddenberry - just not that long enough.
 
You do realize though, that the films from 2 to 6, with 5's possible exception, didn't require much involvement from Roddenberry.

I don't understand the intent of this sentence. Gene Roddenberry was removed from the executive producership of the film series after TMP by the studio.

In fact, he gave ideas, but they rejected them, being the executive consultant.

Yes, which is why I ignore the Post-TMP films. I wanted to see the work of Hollywood (and beyond) writers and artists focused through the lens of Gene Roddenberry's conceptual, literary and aesthetic sensibilities, not Harve "The Powers of Matthew Star" Bennett's.

Also, he has said that elements in 5 and 6 are non-canonical.

Considering his "Executive Consultant" contract with Paramount obliged him to avoid officially trashing the Bennett/Nimoy films, I am surprised that he even went as far as "decanonizing" individual "elements" of those celluloid excretions.

TAS, also, was considered non-canonical to him, if I'm not mistaken.

...and yet GR expressed pride in what they were able to achieve within the budgetary and time constraints of a children's animated series in The Making of Star Trek: The Motion Picture by Gene Roddenberry & Susan Sackett. I have absolutely no idea what caused him to change his mind a decade later, and considering that I have never seen or heard anything attributed to GR concerning his decision to throw TAS into limbo (all such reports came from second and third hand sources) I will give him the benefit of the doubt and instead blame the studio suits du jour.

Also, TNG seasons 1-3 are very much Roddenberry's vision...

Hardly. GR was by that point a very sick old man physically and mentally damaged from decades of alcohol and drug abuse, to say nothing of his public humiliation at the hands of Charles Bluhdorn and Michael Eisner only a few years earlier. That the ST:TNG bible was in actuality penned by David Gerrold and D.C. Fontana - two of TOS' lesser writers, AFAIAC - with the first seasons teleplays rewritten on GR's behalf by his slimeball attorney Leonard Maizlish, well, you can see why I hold the show in such low regard. That I included TNG in my list was simply due to GR's name appearing under the "Executive Producer" credit.

....and movies 5 and 6 were made during seasons 1-2 and 4, in which he was very much alive.

See above.

That said, I understand your sentiment on the particular group of people that made it work. I just think that Star Trek survived Roddenberry - just not that long enough.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point. :)

TGT
 
Last edited:
If you accept shows that have Gene Roddenberry's name under Executive Producer, why not use the entire season 5 in your canon? Just asking.
 
I accept all the live-action series and movies into my continuity. Even though I would love to erase certain episodes from canon, like "Rascals" and ST:V, can't deny that those events happened. I include certain novels I liked into my continuity, provided they do not contradict onscreen Trek.
 
I accept TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, and all 10 films as having "happened." I've enjoyed many novels and comics, but I consider them all to be aprocryphal, although I think I would give a bit more weight to The Good That Men Do than I would any other non-television non-film production.
 
If you accept shows that have Gene Roddenberry's name under Executive Producer, why not use the entire season 5 in your canon? Just asking.

Simply because GR croaked during principle photography of Hero Worship. I have little interest in divining his actual creative contribution to latter-day TNG (it was undoubtedly hovering around zero for a couple of years by that point), but the episode itself provides a convenient Omega to The Cage's Alpha for discussions such as this one.

TGT
 
Everything except the cartoon, "These Are the Voyages", and JJ Abrams supposedly in canon (yeah right) movie.
 
My personal continuity is everything in the canon plus everything in the books that is not contradictory. Basically, it's as much as I can squeeze in, and exceptions are handled in a subjective way on a case by case basis.
 
TOS will forever be my favorite of the series; however, I have taken the approach with Trek as the same way I approach the DC Animated universe (Batman: TAS, Superman: TAS, Justice League, etc.). If I enjoy it, I enjoy it. If it references something else in that "shared-universe," then it's all the better. If it contradicts something, then to hell with it if it doesn't really effect my overall enjoyment of the story.

I have also begun to take this approach with the DCU comics and the Trek novels that I happen to pick up on occasion.
 
I just find ENT too contradictory to TOS, pre-season 4, and just not at all satisfying a Trek hour. VOY is even worse - TNG-lite, for the sake of it. Both series had each their own best episodes, and I will not go on to say that all was terrible. Just not my cup of tea, not enough to see them both again.

I accept, as I said, "In a Mirror Darkly" and "Terra Prime", because I enjoy the storylines a great deal. But then again, I also take don't take all "In a Mirror Darkly" elements as canonical - in my mind, I fit as well as it can with Shatner & Reeves-Stevens's Mirror Universe trilogy, which shows a more interesting way to deviate the two linked universes.

That said, Star Trek will always be, for me, TOS-TNG-DS9. They pretty much epitomize Star Trek for me, and always will do so. Because even in each series's worst (a couple of the movies and a number of episodes), they remain the most original shows of the franchise, with spawned that really do credit to Star Trek's name.
 
Personal continuity?? C'mon.. I am not going to stick my head in the sand or my fingers in my ears and go "lalalalalalalaican'thearyoulalalala" just because there were a couple of less than stellar episodes of Star Trek. That's kinda silly and very childish.
 
Its not childish - why endure hours of stuff that you don't even like? Also, what if you have your own explanation for something? And what if canon info just doesn't cut it in front of other, more preferable solutions?

Its all subjective, but a fan always has a choice.
 
Its not childish - why endure hours of stuff that you don't even like? Also, what if you have your own explanation for something? And what if canon info just doesn't cut it in front of other, more preferable solutions?

Its all subjective, but a fan always has a choice.
Because it's just a TV show and none of it really happened, so why play "pretend that show didn't happen because I don't like it"?


I agree with Number 6.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top