I guess how much the drug makes one a "super soldier" depends on how tough one thinks Klingons are, but I saw Scotty send two to the floor with a single punch each in The Trouble with Tribbles so how tough can they actually be.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
And, of course, we have the Jem'Hadar of the Dominion. Genetically engineered to be reliant on ketracel-white injections into their carotid arteries that make them fanatically loyal to both the Founders and their Vorta field handlers.
Not like humans haven't done this for centuries.
A brief history of drug-fuelled combatants
From mead to magic mushrooms to methamphetamine – drugs have always fuelled battles.
theconversation.com
Kirk beat up a eugenic superman who crushed a phaser.
A metal pipe to the stomach and the back took Khan down in a matter of seconds.
I never got the impression that the Ketracel White did anything other than to keep them alive. Other than withdrawal symptoms, it’s not like it made them high or sped them up in any way when they were injected.
The cognitive dissonance is strong in that one.
The main problem with Season 2, Episode 1 isn't the existence of the super soldier drug, it's:
1. There was no previous setup of M'Benga's past as a traumatized war veteran, making it feel like a random asspull between seasons.
2. Why didn't any of the Klingons have disruptors?
1. There was no previous setup of M'Benga's past as a traumatized war veteran, making it feel like a random asspull between seasons.
2. Why didn't any of the Klingons have disruptors?
Huh? La'an was visited by a DTI agent from the 29th century. How does that contradict the fact that DTI didn't exist during TOS? Indeed, this was even acknowledged in that very scene when after the agent introduced herself, La'an said she had no idea what a Department of Temporal Investigations was, to which the agent said "it doesn't exist yet."
Star Trek's continuity has ALWAYS been what the writers wanted it to be in a specific moment. "The Squire of Gothos" hints at Star Trek being about 800 years in our future. But we ignore that because its generally accepted to be in the 23rd century as stated in an onscreen title at the beginning of The Wrath of Khan. Nevermind the dialogue of that same movie suggests that Khan was royalty "on Earth 200 years ago," but also referenced directly the year 1996. Its also a fairly commonly held belief that The Wrath of Khan takes place in the year 2285. So, is the opening intertitle "In the 23rd Century..." correct? Was Khan put into exile in 1996? Or was Khan royalty on Earth in the year 2085? These can't all be true.
This is a point to suggest: With Star Trek's continuity, while holds together amazingly well for almost 60 years and closing in on 1000 stories, there's going to be some things that don't match exactly, sometimes, as noted above, in the very same story. If my brain needs to explain something away (which I try not to because its just an entertainment franchise, and I try to just enjoy the ride), I say that all of the temporal incursions and timeline manipulations over the years have caused there to be changes to the timeline. It doesn't necessarily mean that the things that occurred in "The Squire of Gothos" or The Wrath of Khan didn't happen. They just might look a little different.
Edit: Fixed some spelling and clarity issues.
This is a point to suggest: With Star Trek's continuity, while holds together amazingly well for almost 60 years and closing in on 1000 stories, there's going to be some things that don't match exactly, sometimes, as noted above, in the very same story. If my brain needs to explain something away (which I try not to because its just an entertainment franchise, and I try to just enjoy the ride), I say that all of the temporal incursions and timeline manipulations over the years have caused there to be changes to the timeline. It doesn't necessarily mean that the things that occurred in "The Squire of Gothos" or The Wrath of Khan didn't happen. They just might look a little different.
Edit: Fixed some spelling and clarity issues.
Last edited:
SNW is a really fun show but is hard to think all these characters will turn into their TOS versions in just a few years. Not to mention the tech stuff and alien encounters not always lining up with what is established. Sure is heck hard to imagine Shatner standing a chance in fight with of these monster Gorns. None of this ruins the entertainment value but I do wonder why they feel so strongly the need to keep the show in the Prime Universe. Almost feels like a studio demand. Worried fans will only watch stuff if they feel it is connected to the old stuff. Might be right. Image the outrage if they did what I want them to do and that is kill Kirk and allow Pike to remain as Captain. He cheats fate somehow, thus creating a whole new timeline, existing separate from the Prime Timeline. You know. LIke Orville and the Kelvinverse.
WeeklyTrek Podcast #280 — STAR TREK: STRANGE NEW WORLDS Almost Ended with Season 4
The latest WeeklyTrek podcast is here! This week: STAR TREK heads to Comic Con, and the STRANGE NEW WORLDS showrunners discuss the show's new season... and how the series nearly ended with Season 4!
blog.trekcore.com
I do think that making it Prime Universe was the biggest mistake the SNW team ever made. The series doesn't want to line up with TOS and later shows, it just wants to have fun and tell stories about people in relationships. How is anyone supposed to care about Pike and Batel, Spock and Chapel, or La'an and Kirk etc. when we know it doesn't work out for any of them? Their futures are set.
The Nazis tried that too IIRC
Yes it does. They’re constantly doing things to make it line up. Like promoting Pike to fleet captain when Kirk first meets him.
That's just an Easter Egg for the fans. If they actually WANTED it to line up they wouldn't have Kirk on the ship all the time.
Edit: I don't really mean to say what the creators do or don't intend, I don't have special access to their inner thoughts. But I've noticed they're not overly bothered about dropping continuity to go with their own ideas.
Of course that is true for a show or movie not in the Prime Universe. Unless maybe your doing a mystery story. The Who done it, seems to be pretty important in those kind of stories and you do also need some kind of closure to any good story in order to make it feel complete.
I guess I missed that album.
Nothing about that contradicts TOS
This is so overstated, its not even funny. Paul Wesley's Kirk, to date, has appeared in exactly four stories. The first two appearances ("A Quality of Mercy" and "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow" were largely alternate version Kirks, the second having the real Kirk, only appearing briefly on a screen). He's only really been on Enterprise in two episodes. It appears that he will appear in two more stories in season three, both of which, we don't even know if Kirk is aboard the Enterprise or not at the time.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
