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

[marsh8472]

Voyager is supposed to be a fancy ship. New, bio-neural circuitry, EMH doctor, warp 9.975. And yet we don't see them using a holo-communicator. I can recall holographic communication being used twice by races with superior technology in episodes "Think Tank" and "Unimatrix Zero Part 2"

Janeway was using borg technology, Think Tank was using isomorphic projection technology. Both were superior to Voyager in technology in general.

 

[fireproof78]

Voyager is supposed to be a fancy ship. New, bio-neural circuitry, EMH doctor, warp 9.975. And yet we don't see them using a holo-communicator. I can recall holographic communication being used twice by races with superior technology in episodes "Think Tank" and "Unimatrix Zero Part 2"

Janeway was using borg technology, Think Tank was using isomorphic projection technology. Both were superior to Voyager in technology in general.

And? Humans have video phones and conference calls, and yet the majority of my communication is through a regular phone. Some technologies are either more reliable, more comfortable o more accessible for multiple species that the Federation would be dealing with.

Again, it's not a question of existence within continuity. It's a question of accessibility and practicality. Starfleet has experimented with several technologies over the years, only to discard them, only to revisit them. So, this is nothing new.

 

[Vger23]

And? Humans have video phones and conference calls, and yet the majority of my communication is through a regular phone. Some technologies are either more reliable, more comfortable o more accessible for multiple species that the Federation would be dealing with.

Again, it's not a question of existence within continuity. It's a question of accessibility and practicality. Starfleet has experimented with several technologies over the years, only to discard them, only to revisit them. So, this is nothing new.

Maybe 23rd century holocommunicator technology was found to cause sterility or something.

 

[marsh8472]

And? Humans have video phones and conference calls, and yet the majority of my communication is through a regular phone. Some technologies are either more reliable, more comfortable o more accessible for multiple species that the Federation would be dealing with.

Again, it's not a question of existence within continuity. It's a question of accessibility and practicality. Starfleet has experimented with several technologies over the years, only to discard them, only to revisit them. So, this is nothing new.

The point of the holographic communication technology in those 2 episodes was to use something that is not normally used to show that the Borg and the Think Tank have superior technology. Now that point is lost.

 

[zar]

Why does the Defiant have a view screen and chairs?

What's your record for consecutive questions asked?

 

[marsh8472]

If you mean a "reboot" in the sense of a refresh or new direction in portrayal, or in the sense of restarting something that was dormant, sure. If you mean in the sense of "not set in the same continuity" or "ignoring/erasing/cancelling out what we saw previously" then no. Nothing about what they've shown is ultimately incompatible with what's depicted in TOS and the other shows and films set in the so-called "Prime Timeline" any more than ENT was. (Unless you're counting easter eggs and in-jokes in the background that aren't meant to be clearly seen onscreen, like the maps and such...in which case you'll find similarly problematic stuff in just about every series.)

Even showing a Constitution-class ship in a slightly different configuration than seen in TOS would not be out of step, as we don't know what their true "original" configuration at launch was, and we do know that subtle changes to the Enterprise's own configuration occurred between "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the series proper, and that other vessels of the same class (for instance, the Constellation) simultaneously had different details to her as well!

-MMoM

You can try to reconcile inconsistencies. Dialogue inconsistencies are the result of incompetence, misinformation, lying, ignorance. Visual inconsistencies can be reconciled by appealing to the unknown i.e. some new technology they had hidden away somewhere that they never showed before. The more you do it, the more absurd the explanation becomes. Call it theoretically reconciled if you must but absurdity is at an all time high.

 

[fireproof78]

The point of the holographic communication technology in those 2 episodes was to use something that is not normally used to show that the Borg and the Think Tank have superior technology. Now that point is lost.

So, it isn't normally used. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Maybe 23rd century holocommunicator technology was found to cause sterility or something.

I wouldn't use it if that were the case.

 

[marsh8472]

So, it isn't normally used. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Sure, also doesn't mean they are in the same universe either. But I was talking about the episode meanings. The holographic communication system was meant to show they were technologically superior to the audience back then. Now it doesn't mean much

 

[fireproof78]

Sure, also doesn't mean they are in the same universe either. But I was talking about the episode meanings. The holographic communication system was meant to show they were technologically superior to the audience back then. Now it doesn't mean much

The meaning would decrease regardless if DISCO existed or not. It's also highly subjective as to how the meaning is taken, and will vary from individual to individual. So, maybe instead of worrying about the meaning of an episode, why not appreciate DISCOVERY as what it is, rather than a long checklist to sort out?

 

[F. King Daniel]

And the TOS/TAS/TMP era battlecruisers, which BTW are all slightly different from one another rather than the same, weren't green—except for the one from "Trials And Tribble-ations" (DS9), which is again at least subtly different to any of the others if you want to get technical—and neither was the Raptor from ENT nor the Toron-class shuttle from "Gambit" (TNG) nor the transport from "Rules Of Engagement" (DS9).


The ones we've seen in DSC thus far need not in any way constitute all of their frontline battleships, any more than the Starfleet ones need do. We've seen what, a measly two actual battles out of the entire war? And again, multiple disparate designs being called the same thing is nothing new with DSC. Besides, the names Starfleet describes them by are exonyms, and need not be accurate. (Which would indeed be quite appropriate, considering their real-life origin.) To my recollection, the only times we've heard Klingons themselves call them by those designations are on occasions where the conversations are obviously being translated for us.

So the Klingons go to war in DS9, using hundreds of 100+ year old ship designs, but keep all their DSC-era ships at home?

And when they go to war in DSC, they keep all their ENT/TOS ships at home?

No wonder they lose.

And won't you feel silly if they ever show the neck extending and the wings unfolding on that "D-7" from "Choose Your Pain" to more closely resemble the classic design?

If this happens I'd wonder why, if the D7 is in fact a Transformer, why they never showed it doing that previously.

Or if they reveal that the 24 ruling houses at this time are all of a particular caste that arose out of ancient interbreeding with Hur'q, and staged a takeover while the Empire struggled to deal with the Augment virus crisis following ENT, who subjugated others and professed themselves to be the "true" Klingons? (Pardon my Godwin here, but think of how Hitler wasn't actually a blond-haired "Aryan"!) Or whatever they might choose to invent as an explanation.

And how will you feel when they don't acknowledge the new look in the show itself ever?

The idea that there could be multiple "races" of Klingons isn't new. It was in fact one of the earliest theories that sprang up to "explain" the difference between the TOS and movie ones, and IIRC even earlier was to be a focus of the planned "Kitumba" two-parter in the Phase II series that was ultimately scrapped in favor of TMP. And it also figured into John M. Ford's The Final Reflection which we know they're utilizing as inspiration on DSC. Even just in TOS itself, the Klingons in "The Trouble With Tribbles" didn't have the same greasepaint makeup as the ones seen in earlier and later episodes. And there has been a fairly wide variety of skin colors and cranial features and hair patterns across other series and films since. Heck, there is wide-ranging variation among human features just here on Earth. (And there used to be even more, considering the now-extinct Neanderthals, etc., who did interbreed with us back when they were around.)

You see markedly different as "incompatible" but that's a very narrow view, IMO.

Multiple races of previously-unseen Klingons was a lot more plausible when there were 79 episodes to draw conclusions from than 700.

And them only ever showing up en masse, with all the other Klingons vanishing completely only to reappear a little later when those new Klingons likewise magically vanish, is plausible how?

Sometimes a reimagined look is just a reimagined look.

 

[EnderAKH]

And how will you feel when they don't acknowledge the new look in the show itself ever?

"Wow, what a really good show. It's interesting characters and plots entertained me for the entire time it was on. I really loved the visual look of the show, I'm so glad they didn't try to recreate a 60's aesthetic. I had no problems assuming this was the same historical timeline as the original series, just with production design and special effects created for a 21st century audience. "

 

[GeekUSACarl]

1. The point of the holographic communication technology in those 2 episodes was to use something that is not normally used to show that the Borg and the Think Tank have superior technology. Now that point is lost.

That's trek for ya. But honestly a show with this many off shoots over this many decades, you're gonna have to switch gears. With todays crowd it would simply be unbelievable that a future, mostly human civilization didn't have such communication when CNN can beam a rather crude hologram in studio in 2016.

 

[cultcross]

Nothing Discovery can do will retroactively change the existing shows. It is difficult to see how a show made in 2017 can diminish a dramatic point from an episode in, say 1997, that we have seen already, in some cases many times, and can return to whenever we wish. If you like Discovery's visual style or choices then great, if not, well it doesn't change what went before. It can't. You can still enjoy that. But if you were ever hoping a show made today for general distribution was going to restrict itself by shows made before much of its audience were born, you face disappointment.

 

[zar]

And how will you feel when they don't acknowledge the new look in the show itself ever?

This has been answered for you a hundred times already, man. No different than we felt about TMP. In your mind, each of your complaints must be explicitly addressed in the show, and you're projecting that requirement onto everyone else - but to us, the complaints were never valid in the first place. This was never "incompatible" to begin with.

The Klingon arc will tie into TOS of course, but that may or may not include a 50 year old battlecruiser model or a makeup change, because it doesn't need to. I have some of my own ideas as to how it will, which I think I mentioned in your "Random speculations" thread, but the difference is I know it's nothing but random speculation, while you're under the illusion that you know what the creators have in mind (in spite of explicit contradiction) and that everyone else is too blind to see it.

You see, to us, and the average viewer, it doesn't matter if Augments appear or not, or if we see detachable/retractable Klingon ship necks or not, or whatever. These are possibilities, but the story could take us anywhere. Yours is by far the more narrow view. You have a fragile theory that would be shattered with a single instance of supposedly "incompatible" ideas being connected by any means. Like any conspiracy theory, yours becomes more complicated with each new fact that you need to deny. The question of how you would react to these revelations is appropriate, and your avoiding the question with another question is telling.

Or how about what we've already seen? We have Lorca using 2D screens for communication, a haired Klingon sarcophagus, and a DSC comic with haired Klingons. Even though these are incompatible.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

So the Klingons go to war in DS9, using hundreds of 100+ year old ship designs, but keep all their DSC-era ships at home?

And when they go to war in DSC, they keep all their ENT/TOS ships at home?

That's merely restating the exact same fallacy twice. They're just fighting somewhere else, either in other battles besides the ones we see, or simply off-camera. It's not like we see the entirety of either war, raging across quadrants. We only see a little slice of each. There were explicitly at least ten separate allied fleets comprised of Gene-only-knows how many battle groups that fought in the Dominion War! Space is frickin' huge, man! I suppose you think Norways and Sovereigns and Ambassadors and any number of other Starfleet designs didn't fight in the war either, just because we never saw them in any of those big fleet shots? And that there wasn't even a single Constitution seen at the Battle of the Binaries is some sort of continuity error too, even though they're explicitly confirmed to be around out there a few episodes later?

The episodes pointedly don't show everything, merely the particular events that directly concern Our Heroes™ in the course of those specific stories. And often they don't actually fully show even those, so much as suggest them, leaving us to fill in the blanks with our own imaginations. That's how it's always worked!

If this happens I'd wonder why, if the D7 is in fact a Transformer, why they never showed it doing that previously.

It would be fairly in line with the movie-era Bird of Prey shifting wing configuration in different operating modes. Why did they stop showing that feature for decades? Real life answer: because it was too much trouble and put too much strain on the model. In-universe answer: whatever you want it to be! Once again, just because we didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Now, do I seriously expect to see this happen? Hell no. But if the difference bothers you so much that you can't suspend your disbelief, why not try imagining harder instead of throwing up your hands and saying "oh well, I guess this can't be the same continuity!" I mean, you can, no one can stop you, but that isn't going to change the fact that from the perspective of the storytellers (and most of the audience, I'd wager) it nonetheless is.

And how will you feel when they don't acknowledge the new look in the show itself ever?

As @zar said, the same way as about the TMP change before DS9 decided to acknowledge it, yet still leave it unexplained until ENT then decided to go ahead and outright explain it. Either we're just supposed to ignore it and imagine they always looked like that, or there's some in-universe reason for it that as yet can only be theorized/guessed at, because they haven't thought up a story about it that they feel is worth telling, or have, but are waiting for the right time to tell it. Neither of which would lead me to proclaim these shows to be in different continuities despite all "official" protestations otherwise.

Multiple races of previously-unseen Klingons was a lot more plausible when there were 79 episodes to draw conclusions from than 700.

The idea of multiple races of Klingons was somehow more plausible before we'd actually seen multiple races of Klingons? And it's less plausible now that we have? Right then.

And them only ever showing up en masse, with all the other Klingons vanishing completely only to reappear a little later when those new Klingons likewise magically vanish, is plausible how?

Here we go with the same tired fallacy yet again! Did we see every Klingon on every ship in every episode they appeared in? Why could there not simply be others of different varieties there that we just didn't see? Maybe the different types disdain one another and segregate themselves? Or like I said before, maybe one rises to dominance for a time, subjugating and succeeding another, undertaking to enslave or drive out (or even wipe out) and effectively replace them, only for the other to later make a resurgence and return to do the reverse? Yeah, you're right, stuff like that could never conceivably happen without...magic! It's too implausible!

Sometimes a reimagined look is just a reimagined look.

Sure, absolutely it could be just that and nothing more. But if that's the case, then no explanation should be needed at all. It seems like either way you just refuse to accept that it's all meant to be the same continuity. I, on the other hand, am happy to accept it either way. We're both entirely free to make that individual choice for ourselves, of course. But ultimately, it's neither your personal rejection nor my personal acceptance that determines whether it actually is or isn't. It ain't up to us.

-MMoM

 

[Jedman67]

It's much healthier to give your brain exercise coming up with convoluted and ridiculous explanations for retcons than to simply accept The Powers That Be at face-value.

 

[zar]

It's much healthier to give your brain exercise coming up with convoluted and ridiculous explanations for retcons than to simply accept The Powers That Be at face-value.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

It's much healthier to give your brain exercise coming up with convoluted and ridiculous explanations for retcons than to simply accept The Powers That Be at face-value.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive or contradictory. The Powers That Be have already said it's the same continuity and timeline, and that there are in-story reasons for at least some of the perceived differences that will be revealed as the show goes along. They haven't said if all of them will have in-story reasons, nor specified which will and which won't. And what exactly is so "convoluted and ridiculous'' about what I've suggested as just one potential explanation for the Klingons? (Or was that not directed at me?) Things not all that far off from that scenario have actually happened here on this planet over the course of human history!

 

[fireproof78]

Those two things are not mutually exclusive or contradictory. The Powers That Be have already said it's the same continuity and timeline, and that there are in-story reasons for at least some of the perceived differences that will be revealed as the show goes along. They haven't said if all of them will have in-story reasons, nor specified which will and which won't. And what exactly is so "convoluted and ridiculous'' about what I've suggested as just one potential explanation for the Klingons? (Or was that not directed at me?) Things not all that far off from that scenario have actually happened here on this planet over the course of human history!

Because Star Trek cannot be that complex!

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Call it theoretically reconciled if you must but absurdity is at an all time high.

Pardon me for momentarily allowing my exasperation to slip through a bit here, but coming from someone who's apparently a really big fan of VGR, that's pretty rich! Get back to me when the spore drive on DSC transforms everyone into salamanders!

The point of the holographic communication technology in those 2 episodes was to use something that is not normally used to show that the Borg and the Think Tank have superior technology. Now that point is lost.

No it isn't.

The Borg are amply evident to be superior in numerous other ways, and even with the holo-projection itself, it's not merely a simple image of the subject; the Queen can manipulate every detail at will, in real time:

QUEEN: I altered the transmission to restore your original appearance. I know how vain humans can be.

And the isomorphic projection is specifically called out as being superior to any mere hologram:

JANEWAY: A hologram.
KURROS: Nothing so crude. An isomorphic projection.

And the point of the holo-communicator in "For The Uniform" (DS9) wasn't actually to imply that things had suddenly made some quantum leap forward in advancement at all. Quite the opposite—and lending an unintended irony to your comment about "absurdity" above—the point was simply to absolve them of the need for lengthy viewscreen conversations between Sisko and Eddington, and the reasoning behind it was that it was considered "absurd" that something of that nature hadn't already been seen long before!

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Holocommunicator

The idea for the holo-communicator was Ronald D. Moore's. According to Moore, "That's something I had been pushing for because I just think it's so absurd that in the twenty-fourth century they have holodeck technology that allows them to recreate Ancient Rome, but everybody talks to each other on television monitors. It's just so lame. The viewscreens have been around for over thirty years. Can't we move to something a little more interesting? But it's like pulling teeth."

Ira Steven Behr was completely behind Moore's idea; "Viewscreen scenes are always difficult to pull off. The longer they are, the more boring they are, and having a character talk to someone on a viewscreen is very distancing. And it did work in this episode. We never could have had Eddington on the viewscreen for all of his scenes. It would have been dramatic death."

But the idea didn't turn out to be practical or dramatically necessary on an ongoing basis, which is why it never got used again after "Doctor Bashir, I Presume" (DS9):

Despite this, however, the holo-communicator was not seen as successful, something alluded to by Gary Hutzel, "It was a terrible idea from the get-go. The idea was to create this amazing 3-D image, but TV's a 2-D medium, so it's hard to show that it's 3-D. So you have to move the camera around so that audience can see that it's 3-D, but then it could look to them like the guy beamed in. So you have to find a way to deal with that. It created all these problems that the writers hadn't thought about, and it missed the whole point of why Gene Roddenberry wanted a viewscreen: so you could avoid unnecessary expense."

And the dialogue from "For The Uniform" that you yourself quoted, and to which I earlier alluded, actually provides us a simple and plausible enough in-universe reason why this form of communication might not have been used more frequently, which can readily be retroactively extended even to ships that might previously have been so equipped:

SANDERS: You appear to be sitting on my bridge. It may take me a while to get used to this. I'm not fond of uninvited guests.

If you want a real-world analogy, just look at the history of 3-D movies...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_film

3D films have existed in some form since 1915, but had been largely relegated to a niche in the motion picture industry because of the costly hardware and processes required to produce and display a 3D film, and the lack of a standardized format for all segments of the entertainment business. Nonetheless, 3D films were prominently featured in the 1950s in American cinema, and later experienced a worldwide resurgence in the 1980s and 1990s driven by IMAX high-end theaters and Disney themed-venues. 3D films became more and more successful throughout the 2000s, culminating in the unprecedented success of 3D presentations of Avatar in December 2009 and January 2010.

-MMoM