Spoilers Star Trek: Prodigy and the Novels

[Zarm]

VOY: Flashback and ST: Beyond, as well, for the movie era, and ENT: These Are the Voyages for exteriors. But at what point does 'well, production necessity to match the original' (which, you know, maybe kinda tells you something about the original that's worth matching) give way to 'the principle has been soundly established and verified over and over and over again, this is established principle'? I would argue it has long-since happened, and DIS/SNW did *not* have the freedom to start from scratch- they just arrogantly acted as if they did, in defiance of 50 years of continuity. '****ing hubris,' as Admiral Clancy once put it. :-)

But, Prodigy also adds to that case by indicating that even without the production necessity of matching being in place, the principle still holds, for every series outside of DIS/SNW. (And arguably Picard, which does use the SNW exterior, and LD that doesn't really weigh in on it).

 

[Zarm]

Are we destined to always be at odds? :-) That was not my intention when joining the forums.

 

[Christopher]

and DIS/SNW did *not* have the freedom to start from scratch- they just arrogantly acted as if they did, in defiance of 50 years of continuity.

That's ridiculous, and needlessly inflammatory. The very first people to throw out the old designs and start from scratch were Gene Roddenberry and Robert Wise in ST:TMP. There's no way that a mere 3 years of progress could explain everything in the movie changing so drastically in appearance, not only in Starfleet but with the Klingons as well. Roddenberry was the first to say that a new production should be free to redo everything and start from scratch. Creators rarely have the same sense of purism about their own works that audiences do, because creators know that a lot of what ended up in the final work was the result of compromise and shortcuts, things they didn't actually want but had to settle for because they lost an argument or ran out of time or money. So Roddenberry had no great loyalty to the look or details of TOS. He was happy to retcon everything and try to bring it closer to the ideal in his head. And he is on record as saying that he approved of the idea of later creators reinventing Trek in their own way.

 

[David cgc]

I'm more surprised he didn't look at Lower Decks- with its serious-Trek-but-also-comedy-parody-moments tone and tendency to explore the weird, goofy, and obscure side of Trek, and go 'oh, they're just ripping off the format of New Frontier (but with less sex)!'

I do think PD deserves credit for basically creating the template for Lower Decks (even if coincidentally and unintentionally) several decades ahead of his time. Between that and the Brikar, modern animated Trek owes a lot to Peter David.

I think LDS has the most in common with Improvised Star Trek, if anything (obligatory fan-fic warning for the authors, do not click), but, you know "Star Trek, but wackier" is a fairly obvious premise to execute on and there'll be similarities for anyone who tries to do it. In practice, the crew of the Sisyphus is pretty different from the crew of the Cerritos, sassy Vulcan character added near the end of the run notwithstanding.

 

[Zarm]

I will have to disagree with you there; that was an 'almost totally new Enterprise,' the change was justified; completely different from breaking with 5 decades of established precedent consistently presented across 5 separate series. (I'd say 6, but TAS *did* take a few liberties with Engineering...).

 

[JD]

I'm more surprised he didn't look at Lower Decks- with its serious-Trek-but-also-comedy-parody-moments tone and tendency to explore the weird, goofy, and obscure side of Trek, and go 'oh, they're just ripping off the format of New Frontier (but with less sex)!'

Have you actually watched Lower Decks, because that is not at all what Lower Decks is, it's an outright goofy comedy with an occaisional serious moment every once and, and absolutely nothing at all New Frontier, which was overall a relatively serious series that a few little bits of humor every once and a while. Lower Decks was nowhere even close to ripping off New Frontier even the slightest bit.

I do think PD deserves credit for basically creating the template for Lower Decks (even if coincidentally and unintentionally) several decades ahead of his time. Between that and the Brikar, modern animated Trek owes a lot to Peter David.

No he really did not, and using one element of his books does not mean "modern animated Trek owes a lot" to him.

Of course it was. In "Relics," they had to match the stock footage they were using to represent the bridge in the establishing shot, and had to borrow the command chair and helm console from a fan reconstruction, only building one wedge of the bridge wall. In "Trials and Tribble-ations," they had the same need to match footage from "The Trouble With Tribbles." In "In a Mirror, Darkly," they had to reuse the TOS-matching sets they'd built for the previous productions (and expanded on between productions as a hobby). It's only in DSC/SNW that they've had the freedom to start from scratch rather than matching TOS footage or reusing existing set pieces.

Personally, I'm hoping from now on when we see flashbacks and time travel to the 23rd Century it's done in Discovery and Strange Worlds' style instead of The Original Series. The TOS style tech and sets popping up in the modern shows always felt weird to me, they were so much simpler and cheaper that it always felt weird seeing them side by side with the more complex sets in the later shows.
I read the first issue of the new 23rd century comic series Red Shirts and I have to admit, I was a little disappointed it was done in a TOS style rather than SNW.

 

[Danlav05]

Of course it was. In "Relics," they had to match the stock footage they were using to represent the bridge in the establishing shot, and had to borrow the command chair and helm console from a fan reconstruction, only building one wedge of the bridge wall. In "Trials and Tribble-ations," they had the same need to match footage from "The Trouble With Tribbles." In "In a Mirror, Darkly," they had to reuse the TOS-matching sets they'd built for the previous productions (and expanded on between productions as a hobby). It's only in DSC/SNW that they've had the freedom to start from scratch rather than matching TOS footage or reusing existing set pieces.

I do get the frustration at the inconsistency - they've even mixed DSC with clips of things like The Cage (and archive material has shown up elsewhere), yet the Enterprise looks different - plus the actors and the uniforms!

CBS seem to insist that DSC/SNW is Prime Timeline, yet a lot of fans, myself included, think that SNW should juat be a new universe. Especially when we know we're a couple of years from Kirk taking over (even though he's been in command for about a year by WNMHGB) I doubt everything will line up

 

[Christopher]

I do get the frustration at the inconsistency - they've even mixed DSC with clips of things like The Cage (and archive material has shown up elsewhere), yet the Enterprise looks different - plus the actors and the uniforms!

That's just theater. There's a difference between the story being told and the superficial interpretation of the story being told. We accept that Kirstie Alley and Robin Curtis are playing the same Saavik, that Jeffrey Hunter and Anson Mount are playing the same Pike. I don't see why it should be any harder to accept that two different studio sets are "playing" the same starship bridge. It's just different designers' interpretations of the same setting. If a dozen students in an art class paint the same model, every painting will look different, but as observers, we understand that it's still the same model, and only the artistic interpretation differs. The sets and costumes and actors are not the story. They're just the presentation of the story.

CBS seem to insist that DSC/SNW is Prime Timeline, yet a lot of fans, myself included, think that SNW should juat be a new universe.

People in 1979-82 thought that about the movies. People in 1987 thought that about TNG. And so on. It's always the same old tired arguments. Comics journalist Brian Cronin calls it "chronological privilege." We're more accepting of the inconsistencies that existed before our time than of the ones that come along after we've formed our perception of the work. But it's an arbitrary double standard.

Especially when we know we're a couple of years from Kirk taking over (even though he's been in command for about a year by WNMHGB) I doubt everything will line up

My fear is that SNW will forget that, according to The Making of Star Trek and "Where No Man Has Gone Before," the Enterprise is not Kirk's first command. TMoST said his first command was a smaller, "destroyer-equivalent" vessel, and I'm hoping that SNW plans to make him captain of the Farragut, since their design for it fits that description. After all, it makes no sense for Starfleet to give a Constitution-class ship, one of its most powerful and important vessels, to a first-time captain. That was one of the most implausible things about the Kelvin Timeline.

Although SNW is probably already overwriting my novel The Captain's Oath. TCO had Kirk take command of the Sacagawea around March 2261, and "Wedding Bell Blues" takes place on the Federation centennial in 2261, which would be August 12 according to the novels, with other apocryphal sources suggesting May, June, or October of '61. (Though all are hard to reconcile with "Blues" being only 3 months after season 2, which was ambiguously in 2259/60.)

 

[FredH]

My fear is that SNW will forget that, according to The Making of Star Trek and "Where No Man Has Gone Before," the Enterprise is not Kirk's first command. TMoST said his first command was a smaller, "destroyer-equivalent" vessel, and I'm hoping that SNW plans to make him captain of the Farragut, since their design for it fits that description. After all, it makes no sense for Starfleet to give a Constitution-class ship, one of its most powerful and important vessels, to a first-time captain.

While that’s true, The Making of Star Trek — however seminal it was to me growing up, and however much it represented the views of Roddenberry et al at the time — isn’t canonical either (anymore, anyway). If I recall correctly, in the universe as portrayed or at least implied in TMoST, in the TOS era the Constitutions are the big ships alternately pushing out the frontier and projecting power, behind which eventually comes everybody else; and just as there are only 12 or 13 of them, there are also (for whatever reason) only about 12-14 starbases. Both ideas have long since been left behind in the series made since, as the approximately-TOS-era fleet now has hundreds or thousands of ships, many or most of which seem to be other classes on roughly the same scale as the Constitutions, and I’m pretty sure we’ve seen references to higher-number starbases too.

If SNW does end up making the Enterprise Kirk’s first command, I suppose one can always squint and say he previously commanded one or more assignments on an ad hoc basis just offscreen, which Starfleet didn’t consider “real” commands, just temporary assignments. It would be a fudge, but eh.

 

[Christopher]

While that’s true, The Making of Star Trek — however seminal it was to me growing up, and however much it represented the views of Roddenberry et al at the time — isn’t canonical either (anymore, anyway).

Obviously, but in "Where No Man," Dehner said that Kirk asked for Gary Mitchell "on your first command," which implies she's talking about a different ship. If she'd been talking about the Enterprise, she probably would've said something more like "when you took command of this ship." So there is canonical corroboration, even aside from the common sense of it.

Of course, there's plenty of other dialogue from TOS that SNW has already contradicted, like Spock in "The Naked Time" reacting to time travel as a hitherto-unproven possibility rather than something so well-known that Starfleet already has well-defined regulations for dealing with it. Or Spock in "Dagger of the Mind" saying he'd never melded with a human before, when he's done it at least twice in SNW as of this week's episode. Or Uhura not recognizing T'Pring in "Amok Time." But Trek continuity has always been impressionistic. I still say the modern inconsistencies are no worse than TNG season 4 retconning in a Cardassian War supposedly going on during its first two seasons, which had portrayed Starfleet as an emphatically peacetime organization.

Both ideas have long since been left behind in the series made since, as the approximately-TOS-era fleet now has hundreds or thousands of ships, many or most of which seem to be other classes on roughly the same scale as the Constitutions, and I’m pretty sure we’ve seen references to higher-number starbases too.

Counterargument: DSC and SNW have repeatedly referred to the Enterprise as Starfleet's "flagship," a nonsense concept that wasn't introduced to Trek until TNG but has now been annoyingly retconned into the TOS era. (A flagship is a flag officer's command ship or the lead ship of a task force. Starfleet as a whole should not have a flagship.) It's unlikely that they'd give command of the (ugh) "flagship" to a first-time captain.

Of course it's always possible that they'd ignore logic and make the same mistake Kelvin did. I'm just hoping they don't, and I'm hoping that the fact that they designed the Farragut in a way consistent with TMoST's "destroyer-equivalent" ship is a hint that they plan to make it Kirk's first command.

 

[FredH]

Counterargument: DSC and SNW have repeatedly referred to the Enterprise as Starfleet's "flagship," a nonsense concept that wasn't introduced to Trek until TNG but has now been annoyingly retconned into the TOS era. (A flagship is a flag officer's command ship or the lead ship of a task force. Starfleet as a whole should not have a flagship.) It's unlikely that they'd give command of the (ugh) "flagship" to a first-time captain.

Of course it's always possible that they'd ignore logic and make the same mistake Kelvin did. I'm just hoping they don't, and I'm hoping that the fact that they designed the Farragut in a way consistent with TMoST's "destroyer-equivalent" ship is a hint that they plan to make it Kirk's first command.

That’s certainly true. Thing is, with only three (really two and a half) seasons to go and the apparently stated intention to end the series with Kirk taking command, that’s not a lot of time for a previous command — unless they either plan to (a) have his previous command be fairly short, or (b) involve a time skip, which they could certainly do.

 

[JD]

After all, it makes no sense for Starfleet to give a Constitution-class ship, one of its most powerful and important vessels, to a first-time captain. That was one of the most implausible things about the Kelvin Timeline.

I absolutely love the Kelvin movies, but I still have to admit that Kirk going from cadet to captain at the end of the first movies, was beyond ridiculous. They really should have just done a bigger time jump and had him already an established member of the crew when they went after the Narada.

 

[Christopher]

That’s certainly true. Thing is, with only three (really two and a half) seasons to go and the apparently stated intention to end the series with Kirk taking command, that’s not a lot of time for a previous command — unless they either plan to (a) have his previous command be fairly short, or (b) involve a time skip, which they could certainly do.

They already had a 3-month time jump between "Hegemony Part II" and "Wedding Bell Blues." And season 2 must have taken much longer than it appeared, since season 1 was in 2259 and season 3 is sometime in 2261. The ten episodes per season must be spread out over a substantial span of time, despite seeming to come closer together.

However, I think what they said in that interview was that they planned to do an epilogue with Kirk taking command, so there probably would be a time skip. Sort of like how Discovery ended with a time skip and an epilogue.

I absolutely love the Kelvin movies, but I still have to admit that Kirk going from cadet to captain at the end of the first movies, was beyond ridiculous. They really should have just done a bigger time jump and had him already an established member of the crew when they went after the Narada.

As I've been saying all along, they should've had a 4-year time jump between the Academy scenes and the attack on Vulcan. Not only would that have given Kirk time to reach at least lieutenant's rank, but it would've corrected the 4-year discrepancy in Chekov's age.

Although now that I think about it, they shouldn't have ended the movie with Kirk taking command at all. It was too soon in his arc for that. That should've been the end of the third movie, or at least the second.

 

[JD]

If they had gone that route, then I would have said the second, they're not going to want to wait to get everybody that long to get everybody in their expected positions.

 

[Christopher]

If they had gone that route, then I would have said the second, they're not going to want to wait to get everybody that long to get everybody in their expected positions.

Well, heck, Strange New Worlds is taking five seasons to do it...

 

[JD]

That's true, but SNW doesn't feel like it's as focused on specifically setting up the TOS crew the way the Kelvin movies were.

 

[Terror Door]

Although now that I think about it, they shouldn't have ended the movie with Kirk taking command at all. It was too soon in his arc for that. That should've been the end of the third movie, or at least the second.

And they had a perfect set-up for that too: let's say Kirk gets a field promotion to Lieutenant, gets officially transferred to the Enterprise and Pike says "Keep this up, Mr. Kirk and you'll be sitting in this chair in four years." Kirk: "I'll do it in three." Cue credits, and his promotion to Captain is then part of the next movie. Ah well...

 

[Christopher]

And they had a perfect set-up for that too: let's say Kirk gets a field promotion to Lieutenant, gets officially transferred to the Enterprise and Pike says "Keep this up, Mr. Kirk and you'll be sitting in this chair in four years." Kirk: "I'll do it in three." Cue credits, and his promotion to Captain is then part of the next movie. Ah well...

Oh, nice callback.

 

[Tuskin38]

My fear is that SNW will forget that, according to The Making of Star Trek and "Where No Man Has Gone Before," the Enterprise is not Kirk's first command.

They're not going to forget that.

SNW Season 3 trailers

Spoiler

The trailers show him taking command of the Farragut, though that could easily be a 'oops the captain died/is injured' situation and it's just a temporary command.

But I do think they're setting him up to take command of it eventually.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I keep thinking that this has died off without me needing to speak up. But then it keeps coming back, so I guess I have to say something.

Another reminder to forum participants that this is the Literature forum, and our discussions showed be centred around books, comics, and audios. I get that the book release schedule has been fairly sparse lately, but we have forums specifically dedicated to discussing the shows and movies, so that kind of discussion should take place there. I do try to make some allowances for the natural ebbs and flows of discussion, because it makes sense that someone may comment or make reference to the shows just because we are discussing Star Trek. But the shows should not become the focus of our threads. This thread has basically morphed into yet another thread comparing TOS and SNW.

If someone was comparing Prodigy to the novels, then that would be OK… that’s the topic of the thread, after all. But it doesn’t look like anyone has even mentioned Prodigy since the 16th.

Sorry, I’m not trying to be a downer, and I love the shows as much as all of you do. But let’s please try to keep things primarily focused on the literature.