Which is what Trek has done when the tech has made itself available.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
Heh .. I very much knew well in advance that Janet (the GF) had absolutely no interest in me as a lover.Any movie date at that age with your older brother's girlfriend would yield worthwhile memories. The factual memories would of course be platonic...I think I already figured that, but what about when the movie came out?
(nor I her)
She just happen to also like Trek.
And at that time, I was deeply infatuated and dating a wealthy older gentleman who unfortunately, was NOT into Sci-Fi at all.
(but he was very much into me on a regular basis, and even paid for the two of us to go see the movie)
Last edited:
Dammit! Janet!!! ...
Yeah. Whatever DID happen to Saturday night? I guess we went and got...OLD. Gasp!
Funny you should say that ... She was a HUGE Rocky Horror fan.
She took me to a midnight showing of the movie once because my brother wouldn't go.
(I'd seen the movie before, but had never done it as an "EVENT")
We had a blast that night too.
stop random accusations. disprove my point instead.
Yes, if we pretend that being a robot is the only alternative to being unprofessional, I'm sure that would be a great response. But in reality, saying that X is too much in one direction doesn't mean you want its polar opposite.
It wasn't random. It was specific, and I made the disproving of your point in the post you just quoted. Let's try again:
Your point isn't discussing what I was saying but instead pretends that I was saying something else. Your point was unrelated to what I was saying.
Last edited:
We've had three different exteriors in the modern era. ;-)
Yeah but all of those are settings in the TARDIS' main menu.
- There's no good reason to treat recasting a fictional character like casting a real historical character. None at all.
- These are not "biopics." Not in any way. Using that as a standard for comparison is ludicrous.
- They have cast this series brilliantly. Full stop.
And even if they were biopics, a good amount of deviation is often expected. Pretty sure Colin Farrell looks nothing like Alexander the Great, nor Mel Gibson William Wallace, but those aren't part of those movies' problems.
Of course, Dr Sarah April was voiced by... Nichelle Nichols.
Even Alan Dean Foster contradicted major parts of "The Counter-Clock Incident" for his adaptation in "Star Trek Log Seven".
TAS was not in the "ST Chronology", nor the "ST Encyclopedia" - by Roddenberry/Arnold decree - but once Filmation was sold off and the ownership rights of everything in their back catalogue was confirmed by the lawyers, it did move back into canon. The novelization of "TNG: Unification" had the first new references to TAS easter eggs and then Trek dot com was permitted to add TAS encyclopedic entries to their officially-licensed website. I recall an announcement on the site of that symbolic change in status.
And, of course, Billy Dee Williams (Harvey Dent) eventually turned into Tommy Lee Jones (Two-Face).
Last edited:
So someone who saw the episode at Paley says that not only does Robert April appear but also one George Samuel Kirk aka "Sam". He's a member of the science division and stationed aboard the Enterprise.
In your own personal head-canon that's fine, but in the rest of the world, not so much.
It can help cope with the differences, though. When I watched Enterprise I decided to interpret it as a reboot so as to not be bothered by the inconsistencies with established lore, and it worked fine for me. Now I just consider that First Contact screwed up the timeline.
If the alternate timeline take works for you fine. But frankly you are holding something against this Star Trek show that every Star Trek show has been guilty of. There's never been 100% tight continuity in the Star Trek franchise. Even the original series contradicted itself.
