Well, can you imagine the cost of changing an entire ship's compliment of uniforms? I mean, Seven of NIne is one thing, but an entire crew?
Star Trek Discovery Writing Staff
- Thread starter The Habs Fan
- Start date
Yes!! That would be a nice change!!
Except all those films happened after one another. My point:
Using just TOS Remastered we have one look for the 1701 in both TOS - "The Cage" and in TOS - "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
"The Cage" takes place 2 years prior to ST: D and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" 10 years later. Again, we're suppiosed to buy that in that time, the 1701 had one refit that made her look pretty much like the ST:TMP version right after "The Cage"; then a second refit to put her back to exactly how she appears in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?
And then we have bogus claims by some that "this has been done throughout Star Trek's run" when (for the 1701, it hasn't. The ship looked like it did in TOS in DS9's "Trials and Tribbleations" and the U.S.S. Defiant also 100% maintained that 'classic' Starship/Constitution Class design for ENT - "In a Mirror Darkly" just 13 years ago; yet suddenly, said classic design looks "too 1960ies" for some - and suddenly visual continuity for known Star Trek ships in a given era no longer matters in the 'Prime Universe'?
Last edited:
No, we're not suppose to buy it as it's a retcon.
Why did TOS-R make them the same? I thought they were being uber duper faithful?Except all those films happened after one another. My point:
Using just TOS Remastered we have one look for the 1701 in both TOS - "The Cage" and in TOS - "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
"The Cage" takes place 2 years prior to ST: D and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" 10 years later. Again, we're suppiosed to buy that in that time, the 1701 had one refit that made her look pretty much like the ST:TMP version right after "The Cage"; then a second refit to put her back to exactly how she appears in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?
And then we have bogus claims by some that "this has been done throughout SXtar Trek's run" when (for the 1701, it hasn't. The ship looked like it did in TOS in DS9's "Trials and Tribbleations" and the U.S.S. Defiant also 100% maintained that 'classic' Starship/Constitution Class design for ENT - "In a Mirror Darkly" just 13 years ago; yet suddenly, said classic design looks "too 1960ies" for some - and suddenly visual continuity for known Star Trek ships in a given era no longer matters in the 'Prime Universe'?
The TOS-R team were faithful as both pilot episodes (which is what they were) used the same Pike era Enterprise model in 1964 and 1965. The physical model wasn't updated again until the series went to actual weekly production; and even after that - in the original versions, they sometimes still used stock footage of the older Pilot model. That pilot model footage was used again for the ISS Enterprise in TOS - "Mirror, Mirror".
TOS-R used their CGI recreation of "The Cage" 1701 model for their updates to "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before". They also used it again when they updated "Mirror, Mirror".
Yup.
Except all those films happened after one another. My point:
Using just TOS Remastered we have one look for the 1701 in both TOS - "The Cage" and in TOS - "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
"The Cage" takes place 2 years prior to ST: D and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" 10 years later. Again, we're suppiosed to buy that in that time, the 1701 had one refit that made her look pretty much like the ST:TMP version right after "The Cage"; then a second refit to put her back to exactly how she appears in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?
And then we have bogus claims by some that "this has been done throughout SXtar Trek's run" when (for the 1701, it hasn't. The ship looked like it did in TOS in DS9's "Trials and Tribbleations" and the U.S.S. Defiant also 100% maintained that 'classic' Starship/Constitution Class design for ENT - "In a Mirror Darkly" just 13 years ago; yet suddenly, said classic design looks "too 1960ies" for some - and suddenly visual continuity for known Star Trek ships in a given era no longer matters in the 'Prime Universe'?
Works just fine for me. I guess it's on others if it doesn't work for them.
It's interesting that a simple statement like "it's a reboot" would solve so many "issues" some people have with this show, all because of a major lacking of suspension of disbelief. It's just way too hard to reconcile that Discovery is set in the same universe just because the Enterprise looks slightly different.
If we need to be so strict about continuity, is it supposed to be canon that CRT monitors have a major comeback in the 2280s? Does Pike's ship still need to have a paper printer on the bridge? Does that mean a sentient android like Data should still only have processing power that's lesser than 2018's advanced computers?
Those tribute episodes keep being brought up without the understanding that they're tribute episodes, which were not designed as TV shows to last seasons. If Rick Berman in the 90s had decided to produce a Trek series set in the middle of the 23rd century, he would have likely allowed the production teams to take some liberties in updating the look of TOS rather than replicate it right down to the jelly bean buttons.
If we need to be so strict about continuity, is it supposed to be canon that CRT monitors have a major comeback in the 2280s? Does Pike's ship still need to have a paper printer on the bridge? Does that mean a sentient android like Data should still only have processing power that's lesser than 2018's advanced computers?
Those tribute episodes keep being brought up without the understanding that they're tribute episodes, which were not designed as TV shows to last seasons. If Rick Berman in the 90s had decided to produce a Trek series set in the middle of the 23rd century, he would have likely allowed the production teams to take some liberties in updating the look of TOS rather than replicate it right down to the jelly bean buttons.
Except all those films happened after one another. My point:
Using just TOS Remastered we have one look for the 1701 in both TOS - "The Cage" and in TOS - "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
"The Cage" takes place 2 years prior to ST: D and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" 10 years later. Again, we're suppiosed to buy that in that time, the 1701 had one refit that made her look pretty much like the ST:TMP version right after "The Cage"; then a second refit to put her back to exactly how she appears in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?
And then we have bogus claims by some that "this has been done throughout SXtar Trek's run" when (for the 1701, it hasn't. The ship looked like it did in TOS in DS9's "Trials and Tribbleations" and the U.S.S. Defiant also 100% maintained that 'classic' Starship/Constitution Class design for ENT - "In a Mirror Darkly" just 13 years ago; yet suddenly, said classic design looks "too 1960ies" for some - and suddenly visual continuity for known Star Trek ships in a given era no longer matters in the 'Prime Universe'?
Just repeat to yourself: “It’s just a show. I SHOULD REALLY JUST RELAX!”
Technology will take a major change if that strictness is applied.
That's why, as ridiculous as it seems to me, a reboot would be more beneficial because, despite constant statements to the contrary, canon creates shackles.
Everything related to setting creates shackles though. Roddenberry applied pretty strong shackles that the writers hated during the early TNG era (no conflict within the crew, no money, replicators mean no scarcity issues, etc). The setting on a starship creates certain narrative shackles, limiting the type of stories you can tell on an ongoing basis.
Or hell, pull out of Trek. If I decide to write a piece of historical fiction, I better do my homework in terms of primary research. I'm also limited in my ability to create ahistorical characters of too much fame - unless I want to go right into alternate history.
IMHO shackles can be a good thing for a writer, because they can force you to think outside of the box and not write the first story that pops into your head. It's sort of like how musicians should try and compose songs in a different style of music from time to time.
Last edited:
I'm not arguing against limits. But, Trek isn't an historical piece so the same rules don't have to apply, such as when technology develops, etc. Increasing Trek tech based upon what contemporary knowledge makes more sense to me than operating within what was established before.
The shackles I see as problematic is the audience expectations that every single detail must be adhered to.
I understand your point here, which is why I came up with my own list of ten things I would change in Trek if we were doing a reboot. A well-done reboot could truly bring Trek into the 21st century.
My issue with reboots in general, however, is I don't trust the writing crew to use the ability to deviate from canon wisely. Instead I think that lazy writers would use it as an excuse to "not do their homework" and just make up shit as they went along. Which is how canon ended up such a tortured mess to begin with.
I take the showrunners of Discovery at their word that the show takes place within the prime universe. However, some of the most controversial decisions - such as the Klingon redesign (which, if nothing else, didn't work from a performance standpoint) and the Federation-Klingon war in general - were also the ones which stretched established canon the most. Was the Trekverse really enriched in any way by adding them? I don't think so.
Hell, it didn't start with Discovery. Enterprise adding the whole Xindi War in the third season was completely unnecessary and stretched credulity. Some good episodes were made in the process, but Enterprise's supposed point - to examine the foundation of the Federation - was delayed by a whole extra year in the process.
If a reboot was done, I would want there to be a well-thought-out series bible which actually documented the planned changes to Starfleet, the Federation, technology, etc in advance.
If the writers would clarify "we're sticking to the story canon of Prime yet updating the look for a 2018 show" I wonder how that would help.
What made it easy for me was that I embraced this idea long ago. People seem to stumble over this mistaken notion that real-life TV production considerations somehow don't come into play when it's Star Trek. I understood things would look differently, if only for that reason, though there were certainly many others.
Last edited:
Conversely, I think operating within the parameters established before makes more sense than increasing Trek tech based on contemporary knowledge, because I don't see how your conclusion follows from your premise here. After all, it's fiction — none of the tech is real, and it's not supposed to be an extrapolation from real-world 2018. Our present is not the past of Trek's setting. Its own established history is. If you want an in-story explanation, how about decades of global war in the mid-21st century (and heck, as far back as the 1990s!) throwing Earth's technological developments onto a different track from what's familiar to us IRL?...
That's right, it's fiction. Make believe. Thus it's flexible to alterations at the whim of its creators.
Deal with it.
Deal with it.