I use to take it more strictly but have soften as I get older. So, for me it changes.
Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 1x10 - "A Quality of Mercy"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
So what Goldsman is actually saying here, is.....
.....wait for it.....
ALTERNATE TIMELINE!
Since, chronologically, TOS comes after SNW, wouldn't TOS be the alternate timeline?<brain fart fixed>
Last edited:
TOS will eventually be the one written out of the universe it created.
If they're shortsighted and stupid. Which I don't think the current producers are.
No.So what Goldsman is actually saying here, is.....
.....wait for it.....
ALTERNATE TIMELINE!
Gene Roddenberry, Gene L. Coon, Robert Justman, Rick Berman, Michael Piller, Branon Braga, Ron Moore...etc.
^^^
They ALL have stated when it's 'canon' vs the 'story they want to tell this week'; the 'story they want to tell this week' will take precedence every time.
Same difference, right? Then SNW and TOS are still different timelines.
The writers.It could be. Who is to say that this timeline is any less correct than the other?
All the Trek series are in the same overall timeline.
They're saying they will change things, not that there's a different timeline. That much was obvious from moment the Pike showed up.
Last edited:
I was just playing along with the alternate timeline hysteric. lol
Last edited:
It reminds me a bit of the last Doctor Who New Years' special, "Eve of the Daleks," which was a time-loop story, with the added wrinkle that every loop starts slightly later. And it was painfully obvious that at no point, not even once, did the writer ever so much as take out a scrap of notebook paper and write out minute-by-minute what events happen between 11:51 and midnight when the loop resets. Things that apparently occurred two or three minutes into the loop were still happening in the last couple of loops that only started around one minute to midnight.
It's the utter inanity of a writer, Chris Chibnall, who'd make it clear he has very little patience for fiddly details and dot-connecting, choosing to do a kind of story that's entirely about making the most of an extremely tight, limited set of circumstances, where every fiddly detail and connected dot matters. The kind of story that tells you by its premise, "Now, pay close attention, every difference and detail could be critical" and then just really half-asses it.
Likewise, I don't understand the allure of doing a story about the butterfly effect of a decision and making it, uncommented on, actually depend on a change to a totally different decision. Being an alternate history, the episode functions by comparison to what we know already happened, it's not the time to be loose with what's going on. And it is loose; putting aside the fact that nothing we're told about Pike weaseling out of his deal from "Through the Valley of Shadows" has anything to do with why he'd be involved in "Balance of Terror," we in this forum can't even agree on why Kirk is in this episode. Is it because the audience already knows Kirk made the right decisions without Pike breathing down his neck, and Pike needs some diegetic way to see what would've happened if he hadn't been there, or is it to show that Pike also ruined Kirk's life by not accepting promotion and turned him into a grouchy, uncharismatic plank of wood since he didn't get his ten episodes worth of life-changing character development on the Enterprise?
I’m fine with same overall multiverse.
So what Goldsman is actually saying here, is.....
.....wait for it.....
ALTERNATE TIMELINE!
*pause*
Oh, I’m sorry, I was right in the middle of not giving a crap what Akiva Goldsman said.
Indeed. Some of the details have been changed to annoy the guilty.
I thought we were always supposed to treat the writer’s word as the word of God? Or is that only when we agree with them?
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll