that was definitely the intention. It’s the reason the nacelles weren’t round anymore and you could see two Bussard collectors for each nacelle.
Where does the Vancouver rank in Star Trek "sexiness"? It's not a Galaxy or Sovereign class vessel but the Lower Deckers ooo and awww over it like it is one. I'm thinking the Cerittos is basically the "New Miranda" class vessel and fulfills that ship's role as the butt monkey of Star Fleet. Star Trek Online helps me here as our antiheroes are on a Tier 1 vessel. But is the Vancouver a Tier 6? Or just a Tier 2? It's better than the Cerittos but by HOW MUCH.
At the risk of splitting hairs: Canon is whatever ends up on the screen. So “whatever the person currently in charge says” in that sense only means what they put into the script and what ends up in the show. Anything else they might say in interviews etc. is still decidedly not canon.
it’s not impossible he could, in theory. In practice the fan backlash would be ginormous so it won’t happen. But they are telling you that the Connie looked different and that Spock, Pike And so on had different faces, aren’t they?
But that’s technically not true. If the Star Trek IP suddenly falls into the hands of, say, Netflix, and Netflix decides that, say, ENT is no longer canon even though it was shown on screen when it was a UPN property, and then proceeds to produce a new Trek show that completely contradicts ENT, then ENT is no longer canon because the people currently in charge of the IP have said it’s not, and their new show is. Netflix could also say that Star Trek novels written after, say, 2025 are now canon even though they are not shown on screen, and they’d have the right to do so because they’re now in charge. Do I honestly think any of that will happen? No, if only because CBS will never sell the Star Trek IP and seem to have no desire to suddenly declare a specific show to be non-canon. But my point is that it’s not an impossible scenario. Not Kurtzman, because he doesn’t own the IP. CBS does. Kurtzman just works for CBS.
So, again, the Msd and the Exterior shots don't match.. The Vancouver class this time. The exterior shows the same 3 deck lights on the saucer edge as the Cerritos, and the Msd has it as... 1
clearly it's a conceit of the animated medium, like the character design. Boimler doesn't actually have perfectly round eyes. Where's the Shuttlebay on the Vancouver? Is it the two insets on the backs of the nacelle strut superstructure?
The same thing happened with Super Dimension Fortress Macross. Macross II was the sequel to SDFM until someone decided, 'nope, Macross II sucks, so we're going to ignore it and make the new Macross Plus the true sequel to SDFM.' Macross II is now considered to take place in an alternate universe as far as fans are concerned.
True, but to their credit at least they're not trying to say that 'it all fits together!' like the current iterations of Star Trek are trying to do.
And that's totally OK too. Honestly, what I appreciate is that they are all a part of the same overall world building efforts. To quote Garak "It's all true. Especially the lies." As for "canon status" who the cares what the powers that be say? Honestly, I want to see what difference it has made to people's personal enjoyment when sitting down and watching their favorite episode of whatever Star Trek and in the back of their mind they're going "It's not really canon?" Is that seriously a thought process?
Which of course reminds me when TAS was recanonized as the DVDs came out...and we got giant Spock and the kzinti war out of it (and the environmental belts, which were a great concept that doesn’t appear elsewhere)
Pfft. Highlander did it first, each new movie/series episode decanonizing whole swaths of what came before..
While I do care about canonicity as it pertains to Star Trek, I don’t let it interfere with my enjoyment of the shows. CBS says that DSC is a prequel to TOS, and I simply don’t believe them. Yeah, they have a right to say what’s canon or not because they own the IP, but I think their edicts for what’s canon or not are based primarily on monetary concerns rather than if it really truly fits in with the overall universe. On its own, DSC is just fine. But as a prequel to TOS it’s an epic fail for me.
That's exactly the point. My question is more "Are people actually going 'This isn't canon'" as they watch it? If not, then why does it matter what CBS says or doesn't say?
To me, DISCOVERY is more of a sequel to ENTERPRISE than a prequel to TOS. But that is because I subscribe to the idea that the Temporal Cold War changed the timeline ever so slightly, despite Daniels best attempts to contain the damage. TOS still occurred as we've seen it, but it got bumped slightly ajar and now we're seeing the results of that slightly altered timeline. This also gives me an out if at some point in my lifetime, They decide to show us a new Kirk and the gang. I'm kinda-sorta hoping They actually do eventually go there with "Strange New Worlds".
Let me rephrase: it’s all ‘canon.’ Even the Kelvin universe films are canon though they take place in an alternate universe. The question I ask myself is ‘is this show going to be in continuity with what it’s supposed to be a prequel/sequel to?’ In DSC’s case, I find it to be much less in continuity with TOS than, say, DS9 is to TNG. But do I let that decrease my enjoyment? No. As I said, I like DSC as a stand-alone show not really in continuity with TOS or TNG onwards.