so the producers and writers said that discovery will lead into TOS (60's aesthetics and all)...

[Arvis Taljik]

That it's set in the Prime Universe, which contains TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, ST I-X and now DISCO.

Why this is such a difficult concept to understand for some is beyond me.

This; exactly this.

If Star Trek were being created today, with absolutely no pre-existing media in a set universe, then its rather obvious that it would not look like 60's Trek because that is not what contemporary audiences would think of as being 'futuristic'.

Darwin's theory of evolution applies to TV and Movies as well as isolated life on tropical and sub-tropical islands. Adapt or die. Trek either adapts to today's audience or it dies, simple as.

 

[DJM]

That it's set in the Prime Universe, which contains TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, ST I-X and now DISCO.

Why this is such a difficult concept to understand for some is beyond me.

Apologies, I misspoke. The producers have said it takes place in the prime "timeline." A timeline that contains at least one parallel universe.

Producer Akiva Goldsman has said same timeline but " Discovery will exist within its own universe."

There is a lot of dancing around the working. About how it will all make sense in the end.

 

[The Wormhole]

My approach is simple: Discovery is its own thing and everyone who says it's the Prime Universe are wrong.

 

[Kor]

How about they just treat this as its own separate "version" of Trek, the same way that DC has several separate movie and TV continuities going on simultaneously, and they don't need to tie into each other at all. That would be so much cleaner IMO.

Kor

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

First they tell us that the Kelvin stuff is in its own separate universe, and we insist that no, it has to be the same one as TOS. Then they tell us that DSC is part of the same one as TOS, and we insist that no, it must be it's own separate one. Fandom, man...

 

[Vger23]

My answer is: none of this matters because Star Trek isn't real and its feasibility as a universe that is functional, consistent and that I could actually live in is NOT one of the elements I use to weigh my enjoyment of the franchise. I just don't care either way. It doesn't matter. At all.

 

[Jayson1]

That it's set in the Prime Universe, which contains TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, ST I-X and now DISCO.

Why this is such a difficult concept to understand for some is beyond me.

Being in the prime universe though doesn't mean the exact same universe all the other shows are set in. Alternate universes open the door up to a universe that we haven't explored in the prime universe if they want to go that way. I mean they can do some stuff that has been mentioned already such as adding more 60's looking touches from time to time and sorting out the Klingon look to make it possible for this show to be set in the universe we are familiar with but it isn't their only option.

Jason

 

[Jayson1]

My answer is: none of this matters because Star Trek isn't real and its feasibility as a universe that is functional, consistent and that I could actually live in is NOT one of the elements I use to weigh my enjoyment of the franchise. I just don't care either way. It doesn't matter. At all.

I think everyone agree's that it doesn't matter in terms of the show being good or not. It's basically just a issue people enjoy because people enjoy the whole concept of the trek universe beyond just it's dramatic appeal. It's fun to think about the universe as real place and wondering how it operates and stuff like that. Also comes in handy to know what is what when it comes to fan fiction and novels that tend to dig even more deeper when it comes to exploring the universe in more detail.

Jason

 

[Tuskin38]

Being in the prime universe though doesn't mean the exact same universe all the other shows are set in. Alternate universes open the door up to a universe that we haven't explored in the prime universe if they want to go that way. I mean they can do some stuff that has been mentioned already such as adding more 60's looking touches from time to time and sorting out the Klingon look to make it possible for this show to be set in the universe we are familiar with but it isn't their only option.

Jason

But a separate universe isn't the Prime Universe. I.e. The Mirror Universe isn't the Prime Universe.

 

[Tuskin38]

Producer Akiva Goldsman has said same timeline but " Discovery will exist within its own universe."

Well no, IIRC he said it exists in its own corner of the prime universe.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

This; exactly this.

If Star Trek were being created today, with absolutely no pre-existing media in a set universe, then its rather obvious that it would not look like 60's Trek because that is not what contemporary audiences would think of as being 'futuristic'.

Darwin's theory of evolution applies to TV and Movies as well as isolated life on tropical and sub-tropical islands. Adapt or die. Trek either adapts to today's audience or it dies, simple as.

I agree with you but that doesn't mean it CAN'T look cool and futuristic with a couple tweaks.

IMO Trek 2009 balanced this perfectly well. Though I coulda done without the lens flares.

 

[Arvis Taljik]

IMO Trek 2009 balanced this perfectly well. Though I coulda done without the lens flares.

+1 on the too much lense flare. JJ overdid it; he always over does it.

 

[Ovation]

I love the lens flares.

 

[Jayson1]

But a separate universe isn't the Prime Universe. I.e. The Mirror Universe isn't the Prime Universe.

It all depends on how we define what Prime Universe means. For example wouldn't the mirror universe episodes still be prime universe since we see characters from the main universe crossover into that universe? As long as you can swtich over with a in-universe concept I think they can be counted as being one and the same. To me prime means a shared universe where each show is connected in some in-universe way. That for me tends to be crossovers in both characters and the overall look in regards to technology and ships/bases/alien design with some margin of era that allows slight changes from time to time to stay updated with new technology and even a big change once in awhile. I do think the amount of change though when it comes to your more established aliens should be limited unless you have a time jump where the changes could in theory happened in those unexplored years.

A alternate universe though you can make even more changes and simply explain it away as history unfolding in a different way or aliens evolving in slightly different ways or perhaps have partaked in genetic engineering or some kind of virus etc.

Jason

 

[Tuskin38]

Prime Universe means the main timeline were the events of TOS and on happened.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

Apologies, I misspoke. The producers have said it takes place in the prime "timeline." A timeline that contains at least one parallel universe.

Producer Akiva Goldsman has said same timeline but " Discovery will exist within its own universe."

There is a lot of dancing around the working. About how it will all make sense in the end.

There is no dancing around going on. The only difference is that Discovery is made in 2017, TOS was made in 1967. Every single thing that "breaks" canon can be explained by the difference in production value or character traits.

Klingons: they are bumpy-headed aliens. Check.

Spock has a mystery sister: so what. Spock didn't even mention to anyone who his parents were until they stepped foot on the Enterprise. He's never been open about his personal life.

etc.....

 

[Jayson1]

There is no dancing around going on. The only difference is that Discovery is made in 2017, TOS was made in 1967. Every single thing that "breaks" canon can be explained by the difference in production value or character traits.

Klingons: they are bumpy-headed aliens. Check.

Spock has a mystery sister: so what. Spock didn't even mention to anyone who his parents were until they stepped foot on the Enterprise. He's never been open about his personal life.

etc.....

Granted if we take this view it means that you can't do a modern show in the prime universe that makes sense. If the things that are different are more than they are the same it gets to a point were it stretches credibility. Especially if your doing it in a time period so close to a show that has already been created. It would be like saying "Gotham" is a prequel to Batman 66. Maybe things can be arranged in a way to sort of make the details fis but it would be a hard premise to pull off and still look creditable. Even the things which I think can be done to sort of make the show fit into the Prime Universe feels like a stretch but it would be just enough to slightly buy into the idea. I do think we need to realize that the Prime Universe has been around so long it is hard to stick with it at this point. At some point you just have to reboot and start a new shared universe or timeline or canon or whatever the proper word is. If we want to still get Prime stories that is what books,comic,fan films,fan fiction and maybe even a cartoon at some point can do. I also still kind of want a final closure film for the 24th century that sort of officially closes that chapter of Trek but I doubt I will ever get to see it and by the time someone thinks to even try I am sure many of the actors will have died by then.

Jason

 

[cultcross]

I agree with you but that doesn't mean it CAN'T look cool and futuristic with a couple tweaks.

IMO Trek 2009 balanced this perfectly well. Though I coulda done without the lens flares.

What you call a 'couple tweaks' had this board exploding in horror at the travesty of it all, and involved fully redesigning nearly everything. About the only thing I'd describe as merely 'tweaked' is the duty uniform. Trek 09 redesigned everything for a new era, and did it very well. And if we're honest with ourselves the loss of the USS Kelvin doesn't nearly explain it all. It was just a redesign for the late 00s movie market.
Discovery was always going to be a similar visual redesign. There just wasn't any other option.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

What you call a 'couple tweaks' had this board exploding in horror at the travesty of it all, and involved fully redesigning nearly everything. About the only thing I'd describe as merely 'tweaked' is the duty uniform. Trek 09 redesigned everything for a new era, and did it very well. And if we're honest with ourselves the loss of the USS Kelvin doesn't nearly explain it all. It was just a redesign for the late 00s movie market.
Discovery was always going to be a similar visual redesign. There just wasn't any other option.

Yeah I wasn't around here then but I remember elsewhere people having a problem with it.

I suppose I have a harder time understanding the hysterics, I tend not to care too much, it's got nacells and a saucer so, I'm happy.

 

[cultcross]

Yeah I wasn't around here then but I remember elsewhere people having a problem with it.

I suppose I have a harder time understanding the hysterics, I tend not to care too much, it's got nacells and a saucer so, I'm happy.

Agreed. The visual continuity elements never bothered me, I'd rather whatever is current looks as good as it can. It's why the almost constant uniform changes never bugged me.