Spoilers The Strange New Worlds Starship Thread™
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Because there is not a problem. There is a preference to how it is presented. There is the desire for uniform continuity, which is fine but not my preferred way. Then there is the "dramatic presentation way" which is how I treat TMP going forward.
If it appeals to the strict continuity adherents' sense of justice then the timeline diverged slightly, with the events happening the same, the people the same, the tech changed due to temporal incursions. Which, Trek has way too damn many of to think that TOS somehow escaped continuing on unaltered.
The differences in the Enterprise does nothing to alter the continuity of TOS or Ent beyond a visual standpoint.
As I mentioned way back, it's no different then an actor being recast. The Enterprise is the SAME Enterprise, it just looks different.
No it doesn't.
Existing continuity (The Cage/The Menagerie/DSC Season 2 Previously On) says the ship should look more like the TOS Connie already.
Existing continuity says Uhura should look like Nichelle, but she doesn't.
Changing the Enterprise is no different from Recasting.
and tng and ds9.
recasting happens when it's necessary.
redesigns breaking continuity are not necessary.
Enterprise is a character. Can be recast.
Right becaus TOS standardized on one model in 1966 and didn't have multiple shots using models that were demonstratively different and looked different on screen, sometimes even in the same episode...oh, wait...
As someone who saw TOS first run on NBC starting in 1969 (I was 6), to be fair I would prefer they use the overall original 60s exterior design too; but they didn't, and they decided to give the hero ship a 21st century looking update for 21st century audiences. That honestly has zero effect on overall story continuity, and who knows when they get to what they know is the final episode for Strange New Worlds - after many Seasons I hope - they could do one quick shot and a mention that the ship is being refit, and end with a shot of the 60s design.
However if they don't it won't harm my enjoyment of strange new worlds; nor the original Star Trek which I still watch almost nightly. In the end I think people make too much about the overall continuity of the Star Trek franchise in general, especially when various Productions from the 60s all the way up to today have always stated story and entertainment value comes first; bulletproof continuity is a very distant second and they will discard continuity whenever they feel like it.
And that goes for every era of Trek from the TOs days through the Berman era, and now to the Kurtzman era. <--- Hell, that's the one thing that's been absolutely consistent since the very first pilot in 1964.
Again, what continuity has been broken?
Visual. The most important kind...or so I've been told.
Apparently.
They are when the design is no longer believable as a futuristic starship.
Hunters design is the winner, “In my opinion”
See the fan art section, “In my opinion, the best of the forums on here, generally free of self appointed thought police and trolls and replete with warm thoughts and creativity, what Star Trek and Star Trek fandom really used to be about”
See the fan art section, “In my opinion, the best of the forums on here, generally free of self appointed thought police and trolls and replete with warm thoughts and creativity, what Star Trek and Star Trek fandom really used to be about”
It does not 'gotta'. You wanna. There is a difference. Expecting one's personal desires to be the same as absolute truth/necessity is falsehood. There are so many fans on this forum alone who don't care what she looks like when the series ends. Which automatically translates in to 'does not gotta'.
And The Wrath of Khan established that Saavik looked like Kristie Alley. Yet a few years later, she looks like Robin Curtis. HOW CAN THEY BOTH BE SAAVIK!? Which one is the canonical Saavik?
Robin Curtis is Saavik. The other person has become somewhat unsavoury.
Beside that, I cannot refute your argument. What is the logical reason that I can accept an actor swap - or the Ferengi shuttle from The Prize and it’s sequel has a different interior - but not that the Enterprise in 2265-69 would have a different look?
Perhaps it’s because the look of the mid-2260s Constitution class had been consistent across several shows, whereas Saavik only appeared in movies and comics?
Or because STO establishes the Connie variants as separate - both class versions are active in the 2410s, and you can see the 2260s Connie alongside a 2250s Connie.
Plus, it’s easy to rationalise that the Enterprise was refitted back and forth between both styles, so why should one version suddenly supplant the other?
In short, the actress had to be replaced, it was not possible to anything else. But there is no reason to randomly replace the Enterprise in TOS with another design.
Beside that, I cannot refute your argument. What is the logical reason that I can accept an actor swap - or the Ferengi shuttle from The Prize and it’s sequel has a different interior - but not that the Enterprise in 2265-69 would have a different look?
Perhaps it’s because the look of the mid-2260s Constitution class had been consistent across several shows, whereas Saavik only appeared in movies and comics?
Or because STO establishes the Connie variants as separate - both class versions are active in the 2410s, and you can see the 2260s Connie alongside a 2250s Connie.
Plus, it’s easy to rationalise that the Enterprise was refitted back and forth between both styles, so why should one version suddenly supplant the other?
In short, the actress had to be replaced, it was not possible to anything else. But there is no reason to randomly replace the Enterprise in TOS with another design.
Last edited:
The could have easily eliminated Saavik and had Curtis play a new character.
As for the Enterprise, it's change is acceptable depending on your perspective. Either as a recast just like recasting Spock, or as an update like the TMP refit because of a new format.
But, then, I don't believe in Trek as needing historical style recreation. Mostly because I have buy in to the verisimilitude of the presentation of a real working ship.
TOS also established what the ship looked like in the 2250s. Discovery even showed it.
There are reasons, you just don’t agree with them.
STO isn’t canon, so I’m not sure why you brought that up. But the reason they’re separate variants is because of the size difference between the two. It’s a game technical reason not a lore reason. Had the redesign been the same length or close to it, it probably would have been able to use the TOS skin.
Last edited:
That's what they said of TAS for years, thanks to GR's temper tantrums towards D.C. Fontana. The same was said of FJ's seminal work, despite its blatant inclusion in various Trek projects over the decades, starting with TMP.
Re. STO canonicity: Parts of it are canon now, like it or not, to the showrunner's own admissions. And I fully predict a further (and welcome) embracing of fan-made ideas from multiple sources which can sometimes be better than "official" sources, the latter whom often demonstrate an unfortunate deficit of fresh ideas.
Similar threads
