Picard and 25%

[Sci]

Here's a better way to pass the time: Are there ways to justify the differences in appearance between the 1701 as she appears on DIS vs how she appears in TOS instead of taking it as a visual retcon?

Personally, up until Star Trek: Strange New Worlds was announced, I was hypothesizing that perhaps the Enterprise, post-"The Cage," was being used as a testbed for a new type of warp field geometry that required a different hull configuration, and that afterwards the ship had been restored to its prior hull configuration in time for TOS. Given the similarities between the DIS Enterprise and the TMP Enterprise, I imagined that maybe the data gained from its time as a testbed, after some refining that happened during TOS, informed the refit she and the rest of the Constitution class underwent in the 2270s.

SNW may nullify that hypothesis, though, depending on when it's set or what it establishes about the condition of the Enterprise under Pike's command.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Here's a better way to pass the time: Are there ways to justify the differences in appearance between the 1701 as she appears on DIS vs how she appears in TOS instead of taking it as a visual retcon?

Personally, up until Star Trek: Strange New Worlds was announced, I was hypothesizing that perhaps the Enterprise, post-"The Cage," was being used as a testbed for a new type of warp field geometry that required a different hull configuration, and that afterwards the ship had been restored to its prior hull configuration in time for TOS. Given the similarities between the DIS Enterprise and the TMP Enterprise, I imagined that maybe the data gained from its time as a testbed, after some refining that happened during TOS, informed the refit she and the rest of the Constitution class underwent in the 2270s.

SNW may nullify that hypothesis, though, depending on when it's set or what it establishes about the condition of the Enterprise under Pike's command.

It's already nullified by the pre-"Cage" Short Treks ("Q&A" and "Ask Not")depicting the Enterprise and costumes exactly as seen in Dsicovery season 2. And then there's "Ephraim and Dot", the animated one which depicts the Discovery Enterprise as being how she appears during the events of TOS...

 

[Sci]

Here's a better way to pass the time: Are there ways to justify the differences in appearance between the 1701 as she appears on DIS vs how she appears in TOS instead of taking it as a visual retcon?

Personally, up until Star Trek: Strange New Worlds was announced, I was hypothesizing that perhaps the Enterprise, post-"The Cage," was being used as a testbed for a new type of warp field geometry that required a different hull configuration, and that afterwards the ship had been restored to its prior hull configuration in time for TOS. Given the similarities between the DIS Enterprise and the TMP Enterprise, I imagined that maybe the data gained from its time as a testbed, after some refining that happened during TOS, informed the refit she and the rest of the Constitution class underwent in the 2270s.

SNW may nullify that hypothesis, though, depending on when it's set or what it establishes about the condition of the Enterprise under Pike's command.

It's already nullified by the pre-"Cage" Short Treks ("Q&A" and "Ask Not")depicting the Enterprise and costumes exactly as seen in Dsicovery season 2.

Ah, good point, I'd forgotten about that! In fairness, I'm kind of okay with squinting a bit and either pretending the Enterprise in "Q & A" is actually the "Cage" Enterprise, or that the "Cage" Enterprise is actually the DIS Enterprise. I'm primarily concerned with seeing if there's a way to reconcile the ship as she appeared in TOS proper with the ship as she appears in DIS, and I'll mentally retcon either "Q & A" or "The Cage" to make it all fit.

And then there's "Ephraim and Dot", the animated one which depicts the Discovery Enterprise as being how she appears during the events of TOS...

That one doesn't bother me any. It literally involves temporal shenanigans, since the title characters go from intersecting in the events of TOS S1 to the films in the matter of a couple of subjective minutes; I'm fine with the idea that the ship they see on the outside is from a separate subjective timeframe from the ship's interior.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Picard and the 25% is a great band name.

 

[JesterFace]

Picard and the 25% is a great band name.

If there were four members in the band Picard would be 25% of the band, woah.

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

That's precisely the reason his name is officially being shortened by 25% (give or take) to be J.L. PIC.

 

[RAMA]

There is no such thing as the 25% rule in this context. I was there when this rumor got started, and the whole story is generally not seen or talked about much, but suffice it to say, it is almost totally misrepresented online.

RAMA

If YouTube is to be trusted, and why wouldn't it be.... there have been a lot of company splits and mergers which have caused Star Trek to be canon, noncanon, who gets to sell what toys to who, and someone owns this but not that, etc.

One of the conditions were that Star Trek has to be 25% different to what it was from 1966 to 2005. Is this the case with Picard? I don't know the current situation with all the companies. Is Picard 25% different to TNG by law? Sure looks different, but is it required by law to be that much different? Or are the creators free to do what they want with Star Trek?

 

[Mudd]

I'd think that a plausible reason for insisting on a substantial difference in new versions of old designs would be selling new merchandise licenses without regard to existing years-long exclusive agreements. "No, the Discoprise is not included in your toy rights to the TOS ship. You'll have to pay again for that."

 

[KennyB]

This thread is useless waste of everyones time based on YouTube videos I thought were trustworthy.

The fact that you learned and did NOT dig your heels in, like so many people do, shows you are smarter than the average bear. Move on and DO NOT TRUST YOUTUBERS!

 

[RAMA]

The very idea of trusting Youtubers is laughable!

RAMA

The fact that you learned and did NOT dig your heels in, like so many people do, shows you are smarter than the average bear. Move on and DO NOT TRUST YOUTUBERS!

 

[Noname Given]

It's already nullified by the pre-"Cage" Short Treks ("Q&A" and "Ask Not")depicting the Enterprise and costumes exactly as seen in Dsicovery season 2. And then there's "Ephraim and Dot", the animated one which depicts the Discovery Enterprise as being how she appears during the events of TOS...

That's okay - because E&D got aspects of the 1701 TMP Refit Enterprise wrong; and hell, they went OUT of chronological order with respect to TOS episodes depicted and aspects of STIII:TSFS. - so yeah, it's ALL a mess. (Read: Like Classic STAR TREK always has been WRT overall continuity and in universe consistency from episode to episode.)

EMBRACE THE YATI (IE Yet Another Trek Inconsistency) that is current Star Trek. (Including 'Picard' BTW)

 

[KennyB]

EMBRACE THE YATI (IE Yet Another Trek Inconsistency) that is current Star Trek. (Including 'Picard' BTW)

YATI IS CANON!!!!!!!!!!
There's a paradox for ya.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I try not to make mental gymnastics over the how/why DISCO ENT looks different from TOS. I don’t watch the Trek universe as if it’s a documentary where it should all function as if it were undisputed reality. To me it’s just a TV show taking creative licenses, and in these incarnations it’s supposed to be in the same timeline as TOS only it’s seen through the filter of a 21st century filter rather than the more archaic 20th century visuals of TOS.

PIC can get away with trying to replicate the 24th century shows because at least those don’t look as dated as TOS.

 

[Qonundrum]

No, it's actually been debunked

Link?

 

[Qonundrum]

Even if someone wanted to argue the 25% different case, they wouldn't have any luck with PIC.

The Enterprise-D looks the same when we see it. 100% the same. Ten Forward looks the same. The TNG and TNG Movie Uniforms look the same. Whenever they show footage from the TNG Era, it looks the same.

There are a few subtle differences with the shiny new 1701-D CGI but any of those nitpicks don't amount to 25% and are all easily passed off as "dream sequence" anyway.

Of course, Stewart did say he would return to the show only if he didn't have to wear the uniform. So he's back in the show... and wearing a uniform... But he had to be cajoled to return to the franchise and then shows up at a convention acting quite diff-- oh wait, he's like an actor and stuff. Gotta love itr...

Source: https://www.cinemablend.com/televis...t-made-before-signing-on-for-star-trek-picard

 

[Tuskin38]

Link?

https://comicbook.com/startrek/news/star-trek-discovery-enterprise-design-legal/

 

[Tim Thomason]

Ah, good point, I'd forgotten about that! In fairness, I'm kind of okay with squinting a bit and either pretending the Enterprise in "Q & A" is actually the "Cage" Enterprise, or that the "Cage" Enterprise is actually the DIS Enterprise. I'm primarily concerned with seeing if there's a way to reconcile the ship as she appeared in TOS proper with the ship as she appears in DIS, and I'll mentally retcon either "Q & A" or "The Cage" to make it all fit.



That one doesn't bother me any. It literally involves temporal shenanigans, since the title characters go from intersecting in the events of TOS S1 to the films in the matter of a couple of subjective minutes; I'm fine with the idea that the ship they see on the outside is from a separate subjective timeframe from the ship's interior.

Ephraim and Dot is being told from different points of view, initially the Point of View of Starfleet Science in an inaccurate representation of events in an animated form... or then in the point of view of Ephraim the Tardigrade as she travels the mycelial network in and around this strange ship and things are jumbled and visualized haphazardly.

As for the Enterprise... perhaps she was launched in her Discovery configuration (let's call it Mark I design) and this is what she looked like during "The Cage". In the next seven years, she'll undergo a massive refit to Mark II design (WNMHGB & TOS & TAS), with a few changes here and there. Another massive overhaul will take place in 2271-2273, where we get the Movie era/"Enterprise class" design (Mark III). Two massive refits, retconning only The Cage, works better than other ideas that would involve some backtracking and as many as five refits.

My assumption, right now, given that Discovery Season 2 was all about returning to the status quo, and SNW seems to be all about "bringing back classic Star Trek" (literally even), they'll probably 'explain' the starship's appearance during the run of the series, with little changes here and there and perhaps a grand finale that will merge the ship with it's design from Enterprise's finale. The 'explanation' is not going to be pretty.

 

[rfmcdpei]

It is not clear to me how "25% different" would even work. What metrics could be used to meaaure this difference?

Eaves seems to have been told to make his work 25% different from the old for creative reasons. Maybe it was marketing? It seems much more likely to be a rough rule of thumb than anything enforceable in law. What does "25% different" even mean?

 

[NCC-73515]

if the dish is 30%, the engineering hull 30%, the nacelles 15%, and the struts 15%, and they changed the struts completely and the rest a little, you can end up with 25%.

 

[Angry Fanboy]

It is not clear to me how "25% different" would even work. What metrics could be used to measure this difference?

Exactly. It's completely arbitrary and open to interpretation. How do you arrive at a definitive figure for what percentage one warp nacelle is different from another warp nacelle? Impossible.

 

[rfmcdpei]

Exactly. It's completely arbitrary and open to interpretation. How do you arrive at a definitive figure for what percentage one warp nacelle is different from another warp nacelle? Impossible.

I simply do not see something so vague being put into a functional legal contract.