Transition and explanation of SNW into TOS technology

[Turtletrekker]

Reconciling the look of TOS and SNW only matters to Thermians who considered the original series to be historical documents.

Honestly, the further away we get from Galaxy Quest, the more positive I am that Thermians are supposed to represent fandom.

 

[Firebird]

Honestly, the further away we get from Galaxy Quest, the more positive I am that Thermians are supposed to represent fandom.

Thermians were 100% a comment on fandom.

 

[Frankenerd]

As long as when Kirk takes command, the ship looks like WNMHGB, inside and outside, I will be content.

What does "WNMHGB" mean?

 

[Firebird]

Where No Man Has Gone Before, the second TOS pilot.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Reconciling the look of TOS and SNW only matters to Thermians who considered the original series to be historical documents.

Honestly, the further away we get from Galaxy Quest, the more positive I am that Thermians are supposed to represent fandom.

They were. But Galaxy Quest loved fans.

You're just being insulting.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They were. But Galaxy Quest loved fans.

You're just being insulting.

Who are you saying doesn't love fans?

 

[Turtletrekker]

They were. But Galaxy Quest loved fans.

You're just being insulting.

Sure, if you say so.

All you've done with that statement is unironically prove my point.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Yeah, don’t do that passive aggressive shit.

Bottom line, the ones who own the rights and make the show are the ones who dictate what is and isn’t canon. Any other debate is meaningless fanwank.

Good for you, you accepted the corporate PR stance on the subject.
It doesn't changed what they delivered on screen and their own internal contradictions including what was stated on screen as to how it contradicted itself.

But there's always been changes in the timeline. By your logic, every single time there has ever been a single instance of time travel, we've switched to a different timeline. Hey! Maybe the removal of George and Gracie from the timeline in the 80s is what delayed the Eugenics War! Or maybe it was Kirk talking to that cop in City on the edge of Forever? Yes, the timeline will have been changed countless times, but Star Trek's rules of time travel, with its literal Timecops, seems to be that the one timeline bends and moves, but stays "close enough" to whatever it's "supposed to be".

TNG's Parallels & LD's Series Finale clearly show multiple Parallel Timelines / Quantum Universes do exist and co-exist.
What's a "Prime Timeline / Universe" is only from their personal Perspective.
You can call any arbitrary TimeLine "Prime" and it's what we're focusing on today or for now.
It doesn't delete or deny any of the previous actions from the other shows including their own respective timelines.

It's the only line that officially matters.

Great, you accept the PR Stance on the Subject Matter instead of using logic & on-screen evidence to form your own opinion.

Because after 60 years, there's gonna be some contradictions. Again, I'll ask.... When was World War 3?

Depends on which Timeline you're talking about, apparently there are 2x starting points based on which Timeline you're viewing.

What's Kirk's middle initial?

Depends on which Timeline you're viewing from.
But most accept it as T for Tiberius.
If you accept only that one episode as the only timeline where it was "James R. Kirk", then that becomes Canon for that specific timeline.

Sometimes shit happens and we have to accept it's a fictional TV show and not a historical record.

That's not the way I and some other fans interpret Star Trek.
We treat it as Futuristic Historical Period Pieces.

Star Trek Is A "Historical Show," Not Fantasy Says Picard Production Designer

ST:PIC Production Designer Dave Blass treats designing Trek as a Historical Period Piece.

I think that [Easter egg] becomes almost a negative term because it becomes that thing of, like, ‘Oh, we’re just doing it to get fan service.’ And for me, it’s actually about adding as much history into the show as possible, because Star Trek isn’t a fantasy show; it’s a historical show that has sixty years of history. So, it’s about world-building and putting elements of the past of Star Trek into that.

Production designers working on historical period dramas, for example, already have a blueprint for the look they should go for, but science fiction shows like Star Trek do not have that luxury. In the above-mentioned interview, Dave Blass talks about the thought process that goes into designing a show like Star Trek:
The challenge with Star Trek is you’re designing for the future and you have to spend more time envisioning what things could be, so everything becomes more of a thought process. It’s about considering what the methodology is of doing whatever you’re going to do in the future. It’s like, you don’t put a pencil on the set of Star Trek. It has to be something, so everything has to be created, everything has to have thought go into it, so that is always a challenge. Because if you’re doing a historical show, you may have to fabricate things to make them historically accurate, but you know what you’re going for. Whereas in Star Trek, it’s more envisioning what it might look like and even if I think something doesn’t have to function, it needs to look like you have put some thought into it about how it would function if it did.

Good for you. It's not. But good for you.

You don't accept it as that, we do.
It's a difference of opinion.
If you believe that you're absolutely right and we're wrong.
We can argue to the heat death of the Universe about it.

You treat them however YOU want. You do you. But the official position is that they're the same characters.

Official Position can be wrong and changed at the whim by whomever is in charge on that day.
How "Solid" of a position is that if it's that mutable?
Especially given the in-universe logic that happens that shows multiple timelines occuring.

Seems to be that's exactly what they're doing.

It's debate-able on some shows how hard they're trying.
Some shows display better effort than others.

The sheer absurdity of this statement boggles my mind. The self entitlement too.

You want to debate me on that, come at me.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You want to debate me on that, come at me.

What's to debate? The "eat the company line" statement is ridiculous. Dislike their decisions all you want but spare us the hyperbole.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

What's to debate? The "eat the company line" statement is ridiculous.

It's also true.

Dislike their decisions all you want but spare us the hyperbole.

I'm not exaggerating anything.
I'm stating it as is.
Fact for fact.
When things don't line up, I'm going to call them out on it.

They had many "Easy Options" to make it all line-up w/o causing too much of a issue.
They chose not to do so, and be obstinate about it, despite their own evidence and what is shown on screen in their own show.

 

[HotRod]

Good for you, you accepted the corporate PR stance on the subject.

It's the position of those who own the Intellectual Property. They own it, they can say whatever they want and that becomes the official position. Anything beyond that is head canon or fan wank.

It doesn't changed what they delivered on screen and their own internal contradictions including what was stated on screen as to how it contradicted itself.

Every single series has contradictions without exception.

TNG's Parallels & LD's Series Finale clearly show multiple Parallel Timelines / Quantum Universes do exist and co-exist.

Which itself flies somewhat in the face of what we've seen throughout the franchise. Why do we need timecops to go around fixing the timeline if the timeline splintering off is no big deal?

Great, you accept the PR Stance on the Subject Matter instead of using logic & on-screen evidence to form your own opinion.

On screen evidence tells me a whole bunch of things. In the end, it's a TV Show that is under no burden to be 100% accurate to its own history. Good story should always come first before they worry about the tiny minutia that maybe 1% of the fandom would actually catch.

Depends on which Timeline you're viewing from.
But most accept it as T for Tiberius.
If you accept only that one episode as the only timeline where it was "James R. Kirk", then that becomes Canon for that specific timeline.

Or...... or it's a TV show that didn't have all their details cemented in place. It's far easier and more simple to accept that reality than it is to create a whole convoluted story behind it.

That's not the way I and some other fans interpret Star Trek.
We treat it as Futuristic Historical Period Pieces.

Good for you. You can treat it however you want. The universe is still under no obligation to go with your personal interpretation.

ST:PIC Production Designer Dave Blass treats designing Trek as a Historical Period Piece.

Good for him. Doesn't make him right. Clearly the production designers on other series don't share his personal interpretation.

Official Position can be wrong and changed at the whim by whomever is in charge on that day.
How "Solid" of a position is that if it's that mutable?
Especially given the in-universe logic that happens that shows multiple timelines occuring.

Again, they own the intellectual property. It's pretty damn hard for them to be wrong. And when has it been changed? Outside of the rare example of The Animated Series bouncing around being canonical or not, the official position has always been that whatever is on screen is part of the canon, even the contradictions.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's also true.

What's true?
We're talking about an entertainment franchise here. You and I are consumers of a product.

I'm not exaggerating anything.

Using phrasing like "the company line" in a pejorative sense is hyperbolic absurdity.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

LOL . . . that's not how dictionaries work. Dictionaries are word usage recording devices and they are typically not that quick with updates . . . it was only in October 2024 or so that they added "true crime", for instance, a genre that is at least a century old. While a helpful resource in that way, they are not defensive fortifications against the insidious forces of quasi-neologisms, as you seem to suggest here. Otherwise, "computers" would still be human.

Don't get me wrong . . . I appreciate the impulse. I hate the use of "drone" to refer to remotely piloted quadcopters and the use of "artificial intelligence" or even "large language model" to refer to simple associative token models that possess no more inherent comprehension than the system or occupant of Searle's Chinese Room.

However, "period piece" to refer to a fictional period doesn't come anywhere remotely close to those abuses, because it isn't an abuse at all . . . it's a perfectly valid minor extension of the term. If you wish to use it with an adjective to try to preserve the original limited definition, feel free to do so, but everyone is going to (and already has) understood the meaning when used in relation to TOS. Ergo, again, the ship not only sailed . . . it's gone to warp.

So... you've got nothing, not one single citation.

 

[Ithekro]

Show didn't exist when I made that more than a decade ago.

New project?

 

[Turtletrekker]

The company line is far preferable to the gatekeeper line.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

It's the position of those who own the Intellectual Property. They own it, they can say whatever they want and that becomes the official position. Anything beyond that is head canon or fan wank.

Guess where we are on, a fan forum, filled with some of the most hardcore Trek Fans within the fandom.

Every single series has contradictions without exception.

And they offered their own easy solution to explain it all away.

Which itself flies somewhat in the face of what we've seen throughout the franchise. Why do we need timecops to go around fixing the timeline if the timeline splintering off is no big deal?

Because they want things to resemble what they know, which is the Timeline they came from.
For better or worse.
They're afraid of change.

On screen evidence tells me a whole bunch of things. In the end, it's a TV Show that is under no burden to be 100% accurate to its own history.

That makes for a bad TV show then.

Good story should always come first before they worry about the tiny minutia that maybe 1% of the fandom would actually catch.

Both are important. Especially if you intentionally reference it in the show and point it out.

Or...... or it's a TV show that didn't have all their details cemented in place. It's far easier and more simple to accept that reality than it is to create a whole convoluted story behind it.

The only convoluted thing came from the Writers stating 1x thing and it getting changed later on within it's own life-time.
Blame the original writers for changing it.

Good for you. You can treat it however you want. The universe is still under no obligation to go with your personal interpretation.

The Universe doesn't have to follow your strict interpretation of the company line.
Fandom doesn't have to follow or care about what Paramount says either.
It works both ways.

Good for him. Doesn't make him right. Clearly the production designers on other series don't share his personal interpretation.

Depends on who's PoV you're following.

Again, they own the intellectual property. It's pretty damn hard for them to be wrong. And when has it been changed?

ST:SNW.S2.E03 - Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow.
The Romulan Temporal Agent came back in time in 1992 to kill Khan Noonien Singh to prevent his conquest of Earth during the Eugenics War (1992-1996), which would eventually lead to the rise of the UFP.
But Khan didn't exist for some reason because of all the various Time-Travel Shenanigans due to the Temporal War.
That's why she was stuck on Earth for 30 years and couldn't find Khan until 2022, and Khan was just a child in 2022, which means his eventual conquest will happen much later into the future at some point in the 21st Century instead of the 20th century.

Spoiler: Certifiably InGame - This Changes Everything ｜ ST:SNW.S2.E03 Lore Drop

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

Outside of the rare example of The Animated Series bouncing around being canonical or not, the official position has always been that whatever is on screen is part of the canon, even the contradictions.

TAS is now Canonical BTW.

That also includes the fact that the Khan Noonien Singh we see in SNW is a different Timeline Variant since he was born MUCH later and won't conquer Earth until Much later.
Which has huge implications for the UFP Timeline and the formation of the Federation.

What's true?

That he just accepts whatever the Paramount Official claims is "Canon", even if it contradicts their own work that they show on screen.

We're talking about an entertainment franchise here. You and I are consumers of a product.

We're far from just mindless consumers who treat Star Trek as "Disposable Entertainment".
We're Trekkies, we're the most hardcore of Nerds.
We all wouldn't be on this forum discussing the most detailed of minutiae if we were "just a consumer".

Using phrasing like "the company line" in a pejorative sense is hyperbolic absurdity.

It's also factually true given how HotRod interprets whatever Paramount states, even if it contradicts what is shown on screen.

 

[blssdwlf]

Reconciling the look of TOS and SNW only matters to Thermians who considered the original series to be historical documents.

Honestly, the further away we get from Galaxy Quest, the more positive I am that Thermians are supposed to represent fandom.

I'd argue the Thermians would've taken all of the inconsistencies in Star Trek and made it work even if it they had to build time travel devices to continuously alter history. They would have built all the crazy stuff they saw and not judge if it made sense or argue about inconsistencies or if it was good or bad.

I cannot see fandom doing that. YMMV.

 

[Nerys Myk]

That he just accepts whatever the Paramount Official claims is "Canon", even if it contradicts their own work that they show on screen.

So? They make the show.

We're far from just mindless consumers who treat Star Trek as "Disposable Entertainment".
We're Trekkies, we're the most hardcore of Nerds.
We all wouldn't be on this forum discussing the most detailed of minutiae if we were "just a consumer".

We're just consumers, no matter how much trivia we memorize. It doesn't give us proprietary rights. It's absurd to think it does.

It's also factually true given how HotRod interprets whatever Paramount states, even if it contradicts what is shown on screen.

I don't think he's "interpreting" anything. As has been pointed out to you, contradictions abound. It's not the problem you think it is.
What's factually true is Paramount is in charge of creating Trek content. So they pretty much have the final say, like it or not.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

So? They make the show.

That doesn't absolve them from criticism when they screw up or intentionally show their homework so that we can see where they're going.

We're just consumers, no matter how much trivia we memorize. It doesn't give us proprietary rights. It's absurd to think it does.

But the staff at Paramount doesn't have a right to insult our intelligence either with the answer they gave.
If they want the fans to accept it, come up with a better answer, or one that meshes with what you show on screen.

I don't think he's "interpreting" anything. As has been pointed out to you, contradictions abound. It's not the problem you think it is.
What's factually true is Paramount is in charge of creating Trek content. So they pretty much have the final say, like it or not.

Doesn't mean we have to accept whatever their PR talking head states as true because their own Show Runners & Creators state otherwise within their own show.

 

[Nerys Myk]

That doesn't absolve them from criticism when they screw up or intentionally show their homework so that we can see where they're going.


But the staff at Paramount doesn't have a right to insult our intelligence either with the answer they gave.
If they want the fans to accept it, come up with a better answer, or one that meshes with what you show on screen.


Doesn't mean we have to accept whatever their PR talking head states as true because their own Show Runners & Creators state otherwise within their own show.

Wow. Just wow.