When pigs flyThe Enterprise looks like this in 2259, it will look like TOS from 2265-70 and then like the TMP Enterprise from 2273-85. All three are canon looks in the same continuity.
When pigs flyThe Enterprise looks like this in 2259, it will look like TOS from 2265-70 and then like the TMP Enterprise from 2273-85. All three are canon looks in the same continuity.
No. The concept of canon comes out of religion and academia. Canon is a body of work whose legitimacy is declared by a recognized authoritative body - in this case, successive Star Trek production offices and the "owners" of the "intellectual property."Is it really? Aren't fans the real keepers of canon? Because if they don't care, who will? And canon is really a fan term, not something the producers often think about.
They did base the transporter pad in SNW off the modifications they did to the DSC one for Q&A.Yeah, "Q & A(SHO)" is all reused sets and "Ask Not(SHO)" uses just one new set piece, the Enterprise's Main Engineering, which was radically overhauled, made smaller in scale and much closer to TOS for SNW.
Or when you learn to have an open mind.When pigs fly
Honestly, if visual continuity means so much to you, then vote with your dollar. Don't subscribe to Paramount Plus, and go and subscribe to Disney Plus, which recreates everything in their star franchise down to exact set recreations and deepfakes. Otherwise, I'm not sure what else there is to say.When pigs fly
Indeed. More fans should do this.Honestly, if visual continuity means so much to you, then vote with your dollar. Don't subscribe to Paramount Plus, and go and subscribe to Disney Plus, which recreates everything in their star franchise down to exact set recreations and deepfakes. Otherwise, I'm not sure what else there is to say.
Those pigs are spaceborn and are going to warpWhen pigs fly
And any fool knows a dog needs a homeThose pigs are spaceborn and are going to warp
No. The concept of canon comes out of religion and academia. Canon is a body of work whose legitimacy is declared by a recognized authoritative body - in this case, successive Star Trek production offices and the "owners" of the "intellectual property."
They are the arbiters of what counts and what doesn't.
Not to be pedantic, but the expression is actually "pore over." Much different meanings there.I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. Like I said somewhere above, about all they are paying attention to from TOS is a rough timeline. The finer details that a lot of us pour over are ignored.
It the tears, pouring out at every violation.Though there are often different denominations with their own authority structures and their own differing canons.
Maybe we will start to see something like this happen with pop culture franchises in a few more decades when (if?) these intellectual properties ever become public domain. But the entertainment industry will undoubtedly make sure that doesn't happen.
Not to be pedantic, but the expression is actually "pore over." Much different meanings there.
Kor
The rights returned to CBS when Filmation and it's follow-up owners went belly-up.As for questions of TAS's 'canonicity' which were mentioned earlier, evidently the main reason that Roddenberry (and/or his lawyers?) did not want it to be used as source material for newer Trek had more to do with legal questions of IP ownership and rights since one or more of the entities involved in TAS's production had gone belly-up. All that stuff must have been sorted out in recent years.
Kor
When pigs fly
So, we're agreed then that SNW respects TOS continuity.![]()
My open mind says reboot.They did base the transporter pad in SNW off the modifications they did to the DSC one for Q&A.
Or when you learn to have an open mind.
Your open mind isn't in charge of Star Trek.My open mind says reboot.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.