Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread

[Noname Given]

I mean how it was explained in-universe. There's a big difference between "Actually Picard wasn't vaporised, he's undercover on the pirate ship" and the hypothetical "Actually Kruge didn't fall into lava on an exploding planet, ignore that whole scene, we're now saying that it didn't happen."

There's a fan Term that's been in use since the first Star Trek episode aired in 1966:

YATI = Yet Another Trek Inconsistency

Yet Another Trek Inconsistency - Fanlore

fanlore.org

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

If I recall correctly, Holmes returns to 221B Baker after 5(?) years or so and tells Watson that he didn't actually plummet to his death and that he managed to grab a hold of the cliff face on the way down and that he faked his death kept his survival secret from Watson for... Reasons.

Damn, he could've at least told Watson. What the hell, Holmes?

There's a fan Term that's been in use since the first Star Trek episode aired in 1966:

I own the Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers and have read it cover to cover. I am aware that they made mistakes on occasion. And people cared enough about those mistakes to print a book about them. A successful book.

 

[fireproof78]

Doesn't change the goodnesses of the story.

 

[Noname Given]

Damn, he could've at least told Watson. What the hell, Holmes?


I own the Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers and have read it cover to cover. I am aware that they made mistakes on occasion. And people cared enough about those mistakes to print a book about them. A successful book.

And the term YATI existed in Star Trek fandom long before those books themselves were written.

Not in the least surprised that someone made a buck on Star Trek production related mistakes and intentional and unintentional retcons.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Damn, he could've at least told Watson. What the hell, Holmes?


I own the Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers and have read it cover to cover. I am aware that they made mistakes on occasion. And people cared enough about those mistakes to print a book about them. A successful book.

Enough to fill several books.

 

[Dukhat]

I have all those books too. Entertaining reading until he got a cease and desist.

 

[DaveyNY]

Not sure why so many Trekkies care about continuity so much. I've always looked at continuity as being pretty loose, with each of the series being more dramatic reenactments of historical happenings within the Star Trek universe than actual documentary footage.

As a (very) Old School Trek fan, 3/4 of the fun being a Fan has always been coming up with ways to make what the episodes give us fit.

That's what having one's own personal headcanon is all about.
(and when other Fans appear to agree, it's even more fun)

 

[137th Gebirg]

As a (very) Old School Trek fan, 3/4 of the fun being a Fan has always been coming up with ways to make what the episodes give us fit.

That's what having one's own personal headcanon is all about.
(and when other Fans appear to agree, it's even more fun)

See, that’s how I know you’re old school. You used the word “fun” twice in the same post as it applies to Trek.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

As a (very) Old School Trek fan, 3/4 of the fun being a Fan has always been coming up with ways to make what the episodes give us fit.

That's what having one's own personal headcanon is all about.
(and when other Fans appear to agree, it's even more fun)

Oh I dont stop at Trek. Desperate excessive headcanon for near every franchise is the only thing that keeps me able to pass as sane.

 

[Cyrus]

I didn't check this forum for a few months and now CoolEddie is a moderator? Hopefully I won't get banned. He is still very cool.

 

[Jayson1]

Fun is only canceled if you were ever the head of UPN.

Too soon?

Respecting canon is the ultimate fun. Sadly hating people respecting canon is the last accepted prejudice allowed in society.

I have a dream we will live one day in a fandom were our Trek shows are are not judged by quality of storytelling from them, but by the content of their characters respect for canon.

 

[cooleddie74]

I always respect the cannon.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Jayson1]

One of these days we need a Trek show that has not just phasers but phaser canons. Big giant phaser canons on the hull.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

 

[cooleddie74]

One of these days we need a Trek show that has not just phasers but phaser canons. Big giant phaser canons on the hull.

The NX-01 sort of had that with the early, retractable phase cannons.

 

[137th Gebirg]

I always respect the cannon.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fireproof78]

One of these days we need a Trek show that has not just phasers but phaser canons. Big giant phaser canons on the hull.

Yeah, but All Good Things must come to an end.

 

[Nerys Myk]

A ship that’s a phaser canon with nacelles.

 

[Jayson1]

Nacelles that turn into phaser canons is where it is at. Lets face it. It is also time space fighter jets replace shuttlecrafts.

 

[Daedalus]

I didn't realise this would be a controversial subject!

I also didn't realise that when some people say 'Why are people uncomfortable with change?' they literally meant altering past events and even established designs instead of things changing in-universe due to a progression of time. Because I'm not just uncomfortable with that idea I am absolutely 100% against it, passionately.

This doesn't appear to be the best place to express such an opinion.

I don't particularly like changing established designs either, polishing yes, but nothing too substantial. I had no problem with the Falcon looking shinier in  Solo, for example