Exactly so.
so the producers and writers said that discovery will lead into TOS (60's aesthetics and all)...
- Thread starter crashchaos
- Start date
Exactly so.
Except the First Class movie series isn't even in the same timeline anymore.
Only a Star Trek fan would posit an alternate universe as requiring fewer assumptions than two uniforms existing simultaneously.
I just used advanced calculus to balance my check book...Only a Star Trek fan would posit an alternate universe as requiring fewer assumptions than two uniforms existing simultaneously.
What?
I have grown to like DSC somewhat, though mostly I agree with you.
Mostly, because, Dark Matter in particular actually has a much more likeable crew and more positivity than DSC. Killjoys too tbh.
Discontinuity is largely in the eye of the beholder, and we all draw the lines in different places—and accept varying degrees of blurring in them—as to what exactly is or isn't a discrepancy. Personally, I would never count a different warp or phaser effect or the recasting of a different actor in the part of the same character as discrepancies, as @marsh8472 apparently does. That's getting wayyyy too nitpicky, IMO. But it is a matter of opinion.
The Klingon makeup I feel could go either way, it could be an in-story difference or not, because the previous change was both at various times. It's not so drastic that I can't simply ignore it—although it took some getting used to at first—but part of me also still suspects they might be going somewhere with it. It would not surprise me if they were. As others have pointed out, they seem to have done their homework on details of past Klingon stories. Death howl, mummification, eating from enemy's corpses, House Mo'Kai, Kor, Kahless, bat'leth...and especially considering those last two, I find it difficult to believe they missed the bit about him creating the first one from a lock of his hair. (That was of course just a story, and one unknown to any but a small circle of Klingon clerics in "Rightful Heir" [TNG] by virtue of having been left out of circulating texts. I rather think they might be going for a "Jesus wasn't really white"/"Hitler wasn't really Aryan" parallel of some sort here, but I could be wrong of course.)
Also, I doubt with all the talk about getting right with TOS and other shows (at least story-wise) that they're going to just ignore the ENT plotline about their change of appearance. They may or may not have a specific plan in mind already, but if they don't yet then I'd wager they're at least thinking about how to handle it. I'm betting it'll probably come in somehow.
Ships designs require no explanation, as covered before. Cloaking seems on track to be taken care of, provided we're liberal enough about interpreting "Balance Of Terror"...a story which they definitely seem to be well aware of.
Well, some of them clearly are, with the direct intent of forcing us to re-evaluate what we think we know, and re-asserting their right to dispel longstanding fan notions that have gained acceptance as "fact" in the absence of this period being further explored, and to play around in the wiggle room left by other stories. For instance, the mutiny. Spock has often been misquoted as saying there had never been a mutiny aboard a starship before in "The Tholian Web" (TOS), which many including @King Daniel Paid CBS Plant already saw as being a "discrepancy" with other TOS episodes despite the fact that no one was more than accused of mutiny in any of them. What Spock in fact said was that there was no record of a mutiny such as the one they were putatively looking at the results of aboard the Defiant there. Depicting his own adopted sister as Starfleet's infamous "first" mutineer was no accident; they wanted us to go "WTF??" and then have to actually think it out and realize that our supposed all-encompassing knowledge of Trek trivia wasn't quite all we'd cracked it up to be.
Site-to-site transport not being a thing before TOS and holography not being a thing before TNG are similar canards they deliberately flouted any expectations of reinforcing. Again, they've done their homework. Perhaps more diligently than some of us have.
To my recollection, there are like two brief lines of dialogue that "don't fit" between those two films and that's it.
Only the last of those three really requires any further "reconciliation" at all, though.
They have specifically mentioned that they will adjust the look of some of the tech, even if it's only a matter of color scheme. We know there is a specific reason why they did not want any of the ships seen yet to have round nacelles. (I firmly believe it's because we're going to see a TOS Connie in all her glory at some point and they want that design to remain visually unique to all others. I bet she'll have more TOS-style uniforms too!) The computer's voice already has a distinct TOS feel to it, and even says "working..." with a sight stutter! Holograms have been done to death over pages and pages and pages of this thread and others, which I guess you haven't read?
The Discovery uniforms are shown to go back at least seven years earlier to when Burnham first came aboard the Shenzhou. That means the ones Pike's crew are wearing in "The Cage" can be newer uniforms that so far are only being used on a few ships and will have to wait until after the war to propagate to others, if even then. Most Trek series received a uniform change at some point during their run, and most have had additional types of specialized uniforms for specific purposes. Why wouldn't Discovery? If/when they do, they may not be exact to the old ones, of course...but they may have a more similar look, just as you observe about the various ones in the Kelvin films, enough that we can imagine them as being what Pike's "really" looked like. I'm content to have a modicum of faith and simply wait and see, and enjoy the ride along the way. Why aren't you? What is obsessing over these or any other details going to change?We can see the uniform transition between episodes
Occam's razor should make it clear that these should be the only 2 types of star fleet uniforms being worn around this time. They are not hiding fleets of ships with crew members that wear improved/more stylish type uniforms while at the same time hiding all these crew members wearing the older less stylish uniforms on Star Trek Discovery.
-MMoM
Last edited:
I really liked all of your post but this part stood out to me. It appears that DISCO is threatening a lot of misconceptions and personal canon more than it is damaging actual continuity, any more than other iterations have done.
In my opinion, it feels like DISCO is just the latest punching bag and will continue to get beat up for things that other shows got away with.
Maybe Season 2 will bring something of a compromise. Ala something like this. If we got uniforms like these, I'd shut up.
Why is Burnham in a red shirt?Maybe Season 2 will bring something of a compromise. Ala something like this. If we got uniforms like these, I'd shut up.
I needed someone to put in a red shirt. I know she would have a blue one but just for the sake of showing all the division colors, I put Burnham in a red shirt.
Why is Burnham in a red shirt?
I could live with that.
The whole point is that nearly anything and everything you learned in your Star Trek Canon 101 class might be inaccurate, yes. But if you didn't already know that Vulcans absolutely can and do lie and make mistakes, then you clearly weren't paying attention in that class to begin with! And I shudder to think where we'd be if the Borg weren't constantly underestimating humanity's capabilities!So the Borg and Spock a Vulcan are lying or mistaken also? And everyone else is wrong? Come on...
You know what this reminds me of? This. Make sure you read to the end where Drexler puts Bernd in his place with a parody of epic proportions. Here's a little preview:Technological progression continuity looks like this over 100 years
USS Discovery is supposed to be the 1917 model car in comparison to the 2017 model car. But they flipped it in Discovery
-MMoM
Last edited:
Nope.
Reactions from a grand total of two people on the busiest forum on the board?
My "failed attempt to prove everyone else cares"? If you genuinely think that was my motivation in setting up that poll you need a slap.
That poll was to show that nobody cares whether it's a perfect prequel to TOS or not. And it was 134 who didn't care to 19 who said they'd cancel their subscriptions over it. The results were what I expected, and if you look you'll see my name among the 134 - and I just checked, so is yours! So you don't care if DSC is in the Prime universe or not either! Thus this whole debate is a massive waste of time.
Yay.
Vulcan won't be destroyed until next year in the Kelvin Timeline. But they hadn't ever had an all-out war with the Klingons per Into Darkness.
-MMoM
That's kind of debatable, since the future from which Wolverine transfers in "Futures Past" is implied to be the same future where X2 and X3 happened. It's really only "Apocalypse" where the new timeline really begins, effectively erasing everything that happened in the first three films (thank god!) and rebooting the X-men's story continuity in the mid/late 1980s.
Because she IS a red shirt. She has no real rank, and despite her qualifications she is basically expendable. In other words, she's an incredibly smart and capable person who can do a whole lot of really amazing shit, but that Starfleet doesn't really care if she lives or dies. She is, effectively, the Master Chief Redshirt of Discovery.
I can't find the quote, but I seem to remember the showrunners saying something about deliberately "challenging assumptions" or something to that effect.
Do you think I was born yesterday? I may not have engaged with you before, but I've read plenty of your thoughtful contributions to this subject before. Your agenda has been clear for months and I'm hardly the first one to call you out on it. Enough is enough.
I'd love to believe you've actually realized that.
The point, and it is a good, one, is that this is obviously not a "straight prequel" to TOS. It is, at least IN EFFECT, a reboot of the 23rd century franchise. It will allude to events in TOS in broad strokes at best, and will avoid actually blowing the TOS/Movie continuity completely out of the water by mass producing the Spore Drive, having Burnham become more famous than Spock, blowing up Vulcan or having Christopher Pike killed by Khan in a gunship massacre. The "Smallville/Gotham" reference has been made multiple times, of course, and that's pretty much what we're talking about here; nobody thinks "Smallville" is a straight prequel to the 1950s "Superman" serials either.
So what does it even mean for "Smallville" to be reconciled with Superman lore? It means literally three things:
1) Clarke Kent moves to metropolis at some point and gets a job as a reporter
2) So does Lois Lane
3) Lex Luthor becomes a really rich businessman.
Broad strokes.
Same for Discovery: as long as Vulcan doesn't get destroyed, the Federation is still intact, and Spock can still plausibly be the science officer of a Constitution class starship somewhere in the galaxy, consistency is maintained. Beyond that, all bets are off, and the producers can and will do whatever the hell they want if it makes the series better.
It's a joke...I do that.
Also, Master Chief Redshirt sounds like an amazing rank. I think my next Halo character will be named that.
Similar threads
