Spoilers STAR TREK: SECTION 31 - Grading & Discussion

[HotRod]

Comparing a Walker class to a Miranda class is like comparing artwork from an Impressionist to artwork from a Cubist. Two different styles, from two different visual continuities.

These are both 1962 Chevrolet cars.

If you can accept that both these cars can be made in the same year by the same manufacturer, than accepting that Starfleet can make both the Miranda and Walker class within several decades of eachother, isn't that difficult.

 

[TheFlutteringHorde]

Maybe the visual canon shouldn't be treated as dogma because it's a tv show and sometimes they make the bird of preys too big and sometimes they give the Yamato a NCC-1305-E because the people making it are only human and trying to make sense of it is impossible unless you're willing to ignore something. Which can be fun! I love tech manuals and stuff, but I don't take them seriously enough that if what's on screen doesn't match up with what was in it or what was in the previous show that it's going to detract from my enjoyment of it.

 

[NCC-73515]

I think I spotted a Cardassian tending bar, but I'm not sure. the Paramount+ website quality is shit

Probably the same one from the publicity pics

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Maybe the visual canon shouldn't be treated as dogma because it's a tv show and sometimes they make the bird of preys too big and sometimes they give the Yamato a NCC-1305-E because the people making it are only human and trying to make sense of it is impossible unless you're willing to ignore something. Which can be fun! I love tech manuals and stuff, but I don't take them seriously enough that if what's on screen doesn't match up with what was in it or what was in the previous show that it's going to detract from my enjoyment of it.

For me, trying to treat certain visuals as canon is futile. When the Klingons suddenly had foreheads, I just accepted it as the franchise having better makeup, I didn’t need a canon explanation. When Saavik suddenly changed actresses, I just accepted that it’s the same character played by a different actress, I didn’t need a canon explanation. With the Enterprise now given a visual makeover to look more futuristic for modern audiences, I just accepted that as something for the show, I certainly don’t need a canon explanation.

In fact, when it does come to explaining visual discrepancies, I think the cleanest is in PICARD by showing Romulans with both smooth and V ridge foreheads. That was done perfectly, and didn’t need a nerdy two part episode dedicated to that.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Surely the Picard example is the opposite of what you're describing as it addressed the difference in appearance in-universe instead of just leaving it as 'the makeup got better, don't question it' (and did a bloody good job of it as well).

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Surely the Picard example is the opposite of what you're describing as it addressed the difference in appearance in-universe instead of just leaving it as 'the makeup got better, don't question it' (and did a bloody good job of it as well).

Because unlike Enterprise it didn’t trip over itself to try to overly explain the discrepancy with a two parter. It just both TOS and TNG Romulans shown to coexist in our universe and trusts fans to go with it.

 

[TRON JA307020]

These are both 1962 Chevrolet cars.

If you can accept that both these cars can be made in the same year by the same manufacturer, than accepting that Starfleet can make both the Miranda and Walker class within several decades of eachother, isn't that difficult.

I can accept it because they both look like they were produced within the same time frame.

 

[Orac]

I liked it, but there was one thing I thought was a little silly and potentially confusing for people afflicted with cognitive rigidity (A high percentage of Trekkies I suspect), why put out 7 Star Trek movies without numbers then put out a 14th movie with the number 31 on it?

 

[HotRod]

I can accept it because they both look like they were produced within the same time frame.

Do they? Beyond having 4 wheels, they share virtually nothing in common. The Chevy II is all straight lines and simple shapes, while the Corvette couldn't be more different with flowing curves and contours.

My whole point is that if Chevrolet could make two cars that were so entirely different from eachother, the idea that Starfleet could make classes of Starship that are each very different from eachother, isn't a difficult one.

 

[Trekker4747]

Is the Chevy Ii here a "new generation" of the model or is that a generation/design that's a few years old? I believe that's a first generation Corvette so a new design with the trends and style of the time. The sedan being older. (Also, different classes of cars with different intentions in design and function, It's probably comparing an apple to an old orange.)

 

[Dukhat]

Do they? Beyond having 4 wheels, they share virtually nothing in common. The Chevy II is all straight lines and simple shapes, while the Corvette couldn't be more different with flowing curves and contours.

My whole point is that if Chevrolet could make two cars that were so entirely different from eachother, the idea that Starfleet could make classes of Starship that are each very different from eachother, isn't a difficult one.

I don’t think the problem is that Starfleet makes ships that look different from each other. I think the problem is that Starfleet makes ships that don’t look like they come from the same time period, because one’s components look far more advanced than the other’s despite being contemporaries. See the DSC Cardenas class and the PIC Radiant class for an example of this. Your car example isn’t really telling because both cars, despite looking different, still look like they were built in 1962. Now show a 1962 Corvette alongside a 2025 Corvette, and the argument becomes a bit more clear.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Do they? Beyond having 4 wheels, they share virtually nothing in common. The Chevy II is all straight lines and simple shapes, while the Corvette couldn't be more different with flowing curves and contours.

My whole point is that if Chevrolet could make two cars that were so entirely different from eachother, the idea that Starfleet could make classes of Starship that are each very different from eachother, isn't a difficult one.

Im talking about time period not style.

 

[HotRod]

I think the problem is that Starfleet makes ships that don’t look like they come from the same time period, because one’s components look far more advanced than the other’s despite being contemporaries.

Some leeway has to given to the fact there has been a visual update to ships of that era. If you look at them as being advancements of the NX-01 and not contemporaries of the TOS Enterprise, it works pretty good.

See the DSC Cardenas class and the PIC Radiant class for an example of this.

I'll give you that out of all the Discovery Ships, the Cardenas probably does look the most out of place. Yet, if it had cylindrical nacelles, it wouldn't be too far off from the Cardenas.

As for the Radiant, I'm sure I've mentioned before that she wouldn't look a bit out of place next to the SNW Enterprise, which also wouldn't look out of next to a Cardenas with Cylindrical nacelles.

Here's hoping that rumor of Discovery ships with cylindrical nacelles appearing in Strange New Worlds season 3, is actually a thing.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

Late to the party, but holy crap! That was awful! In fact, I couldn't make it past the point where they stun Georgiou. It's like someone found a generic sci-fi script and decided it would be Star Trek by putting in two known characters -- with the required nod to Garrett becoming a captain, of course.

Wish we could have gotten something better. Now have to wait until SNW...

 

[Tuskin38]

Probably the same one from the publicity pics

There was in those? Must have missed them.

 

[Tuskin38]

In fact, when it does come to explaining visual discrepancies, I think the cleanest is in PICARD by showing Romulans with both smooth and V ridge foreheads. That was done perfectly, and didn’t need a nerdy two part episode dedicated to that.

I think TNG showed that first, because none of the Romulans ever batted an eye at Spock with his flat forehead.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I don't really get why TNG changed the Romulan makeup to begin with, seeing as Balance of Terror, the first and most important Romulan episode in TOS, builds a whole subplot around the fact that the Romulan commander resembles Spock.

 

[cooleddie74]

Plus all the TOS Movie Romulan makeup is smooth headed like every Romulan we saw in the late '60s.

 

[Tuskin38]

According to 'Star Trek: The Next Generation 365' via Memory-Alpha

For their appearances on Star Trek: The Next Generation, makeup artist Michael Westmore gave the Romulans V-shaped forehead ridges to "compete" with the Klingon redesign introduced in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. (The Art of Star Trek, p. 92) The Romulan ridges also developed from efforts to make them look more menacing than how they had appeared before and physically differentiate them from Vulcans. "From the very first moment they appeared on-screen," Westmore commented, "the viewer had to take them seriously, rather than seeing them as stereotyped villains with pointed ears […] I devised a forehead that had a dip in the center, and then I hollowed out the temple area. We wanted to stay close to their natural forehead, not making them look Neanderthal, but giving them a built-in sullen expression they couldn't get away from." (Star Trek: The Next Generation 365, p. 068)

Ronald D. Moore disliked the makeup because of the TOS connection

Writer Ronald D. Moore, who joined the show in its third season, expressed, "I hated the foreheads on the Romulans. The backstory [established in 'Unification'] was that they were basically the same race, yet somehow the Romulans got these different foreheads at some point." (Star Trek: The Next Generation 365, p. 068)

 

[James Cole]

3.8/10 on IMDB with almost 8000 votes. Would be ironic if it ended up with a 3.1!