Star Trek And The First Season Of TOS

[Aike]

Do you think this movie was respectful of what Roddenberry, Coon and the others did in the first season?

My answer is: YES! Star Trek took the best parts of the first season and updated it for a modern audience.

 

[shatastrophic]

Sure.

 

[Brent]

Cowboys in Space, that is the feeling I got, and I think that is what TOS was.

 

[Amaris]

Do you think this movie was respectful of what Roddenberry, Coon and the others did in the first season?

My answer is: YES! Star Trek took the best parts of the first season and updated it for a modern audience.

Oh, absolutely. Watching it I could see the little nuances thrown in for the original fans. I loved it.

J.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

Yes, perhaps even too much so. (Some non-Trek fans commented to me the sounds were weird in some places -- and that the Kelvin's bridge looked strange to them as well)

 

[Eddie Roth]

I find that especially obvious if you watch a TOs episode now after seeing the film. Saw "Court-Martial" tonight. And the performances and sets (pipes in engineering and such)... it all feels like a genuine update without changing the substance of it all. Well done.

 

[gastrof]

And since most of the crew we know were actually cadets, isn't this BEFORE the time covered even by WNMHGB? (Let alone the five year mission.)

MUCH of what we knew may yet be coming.

I really want to plot out the original timeline and compare it with this new one.

Can anyone give me a few dates you caught? (I've only been once so far.)

I know the main story takes place when Kirk is just about 25 years old. (Said more than once Nero arrived and the Kelvin was destroyed 25 years earlier.)

What year was mentioned as part of the stardate when Nero asked about it?

 

[T'Paul]

Horribly, horribly disrespectful to Roddenberry's vision.

Just one example: McCoy's divorce settlement

 

[Garibaldi O'brien]

Yeah, I have to agree there. Roddenberry would definitely wanted all the divorce lawyers dead by the 23rd century... unlike me. I'd rather burn them all now, or toss them off a cliff '300' style while having a BBQ.

 

[Eddie Roth]

And since most of the crew we know were actually cadets, isn't this BEFORE the time covered even by WNMHGB? (Let alone the five year mission.)

MUCH of what we knew may yet be coming.

I really want to plot out the original timeline and compare it with this new one.

Can anyone give me a few dates you caught? (I've only been once so far.)

I know the main story takes place when Kirk is just about 25 years old. (Said more than once Nero arrived and the Kelvin was destroyed 25 years earlier.)

What year was mentioned as part of the stardate when Nero asked about it?

2233 is the Kelvin's year. Which makes the bulk of the film take place in 2258. And the flash-forward in 2387. And the bar scene in 2255.

 

[Greg Cox]

Horribly, horribly disrespectful to Roddenberry's vision.

Just one example: McCoy's divorce settlement

Er, McCoy's failed marriage has been an (unofficial) part of the character's backstory for over forty years now. It was something the show's original writers intended to work in at some point, but never got around to mentioning onscreen. And it's been treated as gospel in various comics, novels, etc.

 

[T'Paul]

Horribly, horribly disrespectful to Roddenberry's vision.

Just one example: McCoy's divorce settlement

Er, McCoy's failed marriage has been an (unofficial) part of the character's backstory for over forty years now. It was something the show's original writers intended to work in at some point, but never got around to mentioning onscreen. And it's been treated as gospel in various comics, novels, etc.

It's a good thing I didn't say "McCoy's failed marriage" then, isn't it?

 

[MicahBrack]

2233 is the Kelvin's year. Which makes the bulk of the film take place in 2258. And the flash-forward in 2387. And the bar scene in 2255.

And just for reference. The first season of the original season began in the year 2265.

 

[gastrof]

T'Paul may have only appeared recently (I've never noticed this person before), and has been saying things to attract attention or even inflame. For example, saying "You're welcome" when someone thanked the makers of the film for what they've produced. Now, making strange comments about McCoy's divorce settlement, which was said to be "the entire planet" or words to that effect.

Notice also that the name is "T'Paul", a bizarre mixture of Vulcan female name form with a male human name.

This person may be a troll, and if so will have to be bathed in mayo and left in the sun.


EDIT:
Many thanks to Eddie Roth and MicahBrack.

 

[T'Paul]

T'Paul may have only appeared recently (I've never noticed this person before), and has been saying things to attract attention or even inflame. (For example, saying "You're welcome" when someone thanked the makers of the film for what they've produced. Now, making strange comments about McCoy's divorce settlement, which was said to be "the entire planet" or words to that effect.

Notice also that the name is "T'Paul", a bizarre mixture of Vulcan female name form with a male human name.

This person may be a troll, and if so will have to be bathed in mayo and left in the sun.

How can your post possibly be anything other than an attempt to troll me?

 

[PKTrekGirl]

T'Paul may have only appeared recently (I've never noticed this person before), and has been saying things to attract attention or even inflame. (For example, saying "You're welcome" when someone thanked the makers of the film for what they've produced. Now, making strange comments about McCoy's divorce settlement, which was said to be "the entire planet" or words to that effect.

Notice also that the name is "T'Paul", a bizarre mixture of Vulcan female name form with a male human name.

This person may be a troll, and if so will have to be bathed in mayo and left in the sun.

How can your post possibly be anything other than an attempt to troll me?

Guys, that's about enough of this - both of you.

Gastrof, let's avoid speculation about whether other posters are trolls.

T'Paul...they don't need to watch you, because rest assured, WE are.

 

[Kanenas]

Horribly, horribly disrespectful to Roddenberry's vision.

Just one example: McCoy's divorce settlement

Playing McCoy into the cliche of the doctor paying ex wives was not too offensive. (It did seem that the writers were just copying Doc from the love boat)

HOWEVER, it does set up the "second pilot" of TOS to continue on in cannon.

Perhaps in the next movie Spock will be in trouble for fraternizing with one of his students...

 

[Kanenas]

2233 is the Kelvin's year. Which makes the bulk of the film take place in 2258. And the flash-forward in 2387. And the bar scene in 2255.

And just for reference. The first season of the original season began in the year 2265.

I thought Kirk became captain at 35 in TOS

THEN in TNG some minor character (it was the episode with the invasion from those little slug brain aliens) which beach kirk's record by becoming captain at 26.

So this means kirk is back to being the youngest captain ever.

Does anyone remember the specifics? Do I have this correct?

 

[TheLonelySquire]

2233 is the Kelvin's year. Which makes the bulk of the film take place in 2258. And the flash-forward in 2387. And the bar scene in 2255.

And just for reference. The first season of the original season began in the year 2265.

I thought Kirk became captain at 35 in TOS

THEN in TNG some minor character (it was the episode with the invasion from those little slug brain aliens) which beach kirk's record by becoming captain at 26.

So this means kirk is back to being the youngest captain ever.

Does anyone remember the specifics? Do I have this correct?

Well Kirk was 34 in the Deadly Years from what I remember.

 

[Captain_Rogers]

Horribly, horribly disrespectful to Roddenberry's vision.

Just one example: McCoy's divorce settlement

Yep. How could I have been so blind?!?!?!?!?!?

I've changed my mind, the one liner about McCoy's divorce ruined the whole damn thing. Yup.......


geez.