I prefer sticking with canon. Most books I have read stick to a storyline or "canon" for the most part. If you like Trek books read the Titan series (Riker's first command or Destiny series (borg invasion). I like know the history of characters, ships, races, etc. I really don't want that history screwed up for the Non-fan, hoping they will become a trekkie. My girlfriend wasn't a trekkie, not even close but after sitting a watching every eposide of ST: VOG she became the biggest fan of the fanchise. Star Trek isn't for everyone, period!! Why ruin years of history to bring it to the masses in the hope of "trek mania". I wonder what Gene would think? Don't miss understand me though, I will go see the movie and probably enjoy it but I'm just a concerned fan.
The Canon/Continuity Debate
- Thread starter Butters
- Start date
you got me there!! I still prefer to keep the timeline close to canon. I think most Trekkies would agree. Maybe?
You're absolutely right, of course. I suppose I meant to say the above is true when we are working in the TOS timeframe.
We do, the thing is this movie appears to be 90% accurate to continuity and canon with a couple of exceptions that really don't make any difference to the story of Star Trek. People still bitch.
I also wonder why some people think TOS and the rest of the series were any more internally consistent than this movie is, because they certainly weren't. They played with or ignored or ret-conned small pieces of trivia all the time!
All the major characters are there, the Enterprise is there. We've got Romulans and Vulcans and the Federation and Starfleet. I don't give a shit about some detail mentioned on a TV show 40 years ago that was never mentioned again and had absolutely no impact story-wise on anything that every came after it. I just don't. And some people on this board claim that makes me not a "true fan" of Star Trek. BS.
Last edited:
Similar threads
