Kirk is a jerk in the films sometimes.
News Starfleet Academy Coming to P+
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
I've been having significantly less fun in fan interactions over the past few years, to the point that it's actively making my sad because one of my favorite hobbies... discussing Star Trek... is largely dying.
I spend much more talking about out-of-universe things than I do in-universe, and that sucks. I want to talk about Star Trek from the lore point of view, not from a real world point of view just to establish what "is" or "isn't" part of the discussion.
Most fans I interact with, to this day, seem to care quite a bit about canon... although not necessarily in the way I would like. Back when Discovery first aired, I was fairly ardent in saying Discovery was not canon. I was absolutely lambasted by many fans who pointed out to me that... it is indeed canon, deal with it. I'm *STILL* attacked when I have the audacity to point out that the TOS Enterprise and SNW Enterprise are not the same thing. They're clearly different, but there's this irony where i'm both expected to shut up and accept what Paramount says because that's canon, but ALSO expected to shut up and canon doesn't matter.
In fact I don't even disagree with you on some core things. I think the whole multiverse idea is great. I would absolutely love DSC/SNW to be an alternate, reboot universe. It makes more sense that way. Disregarding "canon", that is not the case... because it's not the case to the creators, who ARE incorporating DSC/SNW into other works and connecting it directly to the older works. I've been attacked repeatedly for suggesting DSC/SNW take place in a different timeline.
I want them to just be their own thing, but the creators themselves are making it very difficult to do so, because they don't consider them to be their own thing, and some fans have a paradoxical view of wanting them to be connected to the universe at large but not actually.
And he's also an Admiral and considerably older, and promotions and aging are known to change how MANY people behave.
Well, canon is the official body of work. You're looking at continuity. It helps with those terms, trust me, as I've been on both sides of those arguments.
Here's my thing: I put my view out there and people can accept it or reject it. I am more interested in people's points of view on Trek, than the real world why of things. To me, TOS connecting to SNW is richer for it, though I have the opposite view: TOS connecting to TWOK is weaker for it. So I see both sides of it.
Again, I would encourage those wanting a conversation to lay out those parameters rather than just going:
And, I'm considered anit-canon, anti-continuity, anti-lore because of my view that stories should stand on their own, unrelated to their connections. The connections are fine, but they, to me, are a spice, not the meat.
Mileage, etc.
Yes, recently promoted people should be considered with suspicion...
Trelane.
Funny, I've had more fun talking about Trek with people over the last few years than I ever had during the Berman era. There's a little bit of something for everyone.
I'd say that's on you. If you start every conversation about how so and such isn't canon and bla bla bla, there comes a point where maybe you have to ask yourself if you're taking this shit a little too seriously.
Because it is canon....? You made a false statement, and people corrected you. Just because you dislike something, doesn't give you the ability to declare something non-canonical.
You're not being attacked. Your viewpoint is being challenged. You seem to have an inability to accept a show modernizing its visual aesthetic. Clearly the intent of those responsible for making the show is for the two ships to be one and the same. Your inability to get over that issue is on you, not the producers.
That's cool. I wouldn't. Having SNW connect directly to TOS does nothing but improve TOS.
Something they generally don't do. Certainly no worse than previous series.
Yay!? I thought connective tissues was a good thing? Unless of course YOU don't like something.
Because it doesn't. Pointing out an error is not an attack.
We'll all have to forgive them for not making the Trek series that YOU want. Nevermind that they're making stuff that others enjoy. If it's not made to your level of satisfaction, it must be crap.
Hunter’s a powerhouse. Between Broadcast News, Crash, Top of the Lake and the Piano she’s straight up one of our best working actors today.
Will be interesting to see how the rest of the cast rounds out, but this is an excellent start for me.
Will be interesting to see how the rest of the cast rounds out, but this is an excellent start for me.
Great choice
Cage could play a hateful, obsessed fan in a dramatic mockumentary that takes place in the late Voyager, pre-Enterprise era.
"This isn't just silly science fiction. Star Trek is a period piece, it's an invented period, but you need to observe the traditions, and the continuity, and the styles." - Mike Okuda
This... so much this. Especially when people shift it into bad faith gaslighting. NuTrek really has polarized the fandom.
PICARD season 3 effectively treated those two series as an alternate timeline.
Also Terry Matalas, Dave Blass, Doug Drexler...
You need to observe the traditions?
Or else what?
Sounds like a very limited point of view. What do we do to invent new things within Star Trek? How do you answer a historical question? You can't add new information without violating someone's preconceived notion of how it must work. And not only that, but if you go by TOS as strict literal history you also need a very 60s era viewpoint on how technology works.
Let's take the Eugenic Wars: when did they happen? The 90s, according to TOS. Except WW3 happened in the 20th century, except that's impossible because Spock said the 90s was the era of the "last so called world war."
Who's version of history is the correct one?
With all due respect, I've been dealing with this type of attitude since I was a TOS fan with a whole bunch of TNG fans. It's only more polarizing because we can see the reactions more quickly. This attitude has always been there.
I do that with TMP.
No harm, no foul.
No it didn't.
How narrow minded. That kind of stagnation leads to things dying.
I sincerely hope Holly Hunter's role isn't a "special guest star" type...
Or else you get 80 pages of people arguing about continuity in the Starfleet Academy thread, even though the first main cast member has just been announced and they could be talking about that instead.
I've see dumber and worse arguments in this fandom.
You must be young. I'm only 40 and I remember things being much worse in 2001. I'm told it was just as bad in the late 80's. Trekkies have always been a bunch of whiners whenever things don't match up to their own personal opinions of how things should be.
How so? Because they showed the New Jersey looking like TOS? That's an awfully big leap to think the visual aesthetic of Picard erases two shows from continuity.
A bunch of guys with no say in the matter.
Similar threads
