Right-click, save!
Transition and explanation of SNW into TOS technology
- Thread starter Astrostars2025
- Start date
Right-click, save!
Same person
I know
Nope.
So, that's a NO, then.
Agreed. This "alternate reality" nonsense is so tiring.
The series being so alternate with its reality is tiring.
iT's An AlTeRnATe ReAiTy!11!
The alternate reality folk must go into convulsions when they see multiple people playing Alexander or Ziyal.
The alternate reality folk must go into convulsions when they see multiple people playing Alexander or Ziyal.
My mind snapped when Sean Kenney played Fleet Captain Pike in "The Menagerie."
No, because they did it fine.
Saavik was the real mind breaker.
Plus Tim Russ playing multiple characters, or Mr. Leslie dying and coming back in TOS.
It's why this gets so strange. The line is like defining obscenity: I can't but I know it when I see it. Also, seems to be a measure of defiance against CBS.
Speaking of "nonsense" . . . I mean, if I were to reply in kind, I'd ask how you even saw the different actors back then, Stevie. Maybe go back to singing about your part-time love of continuity?
Joking aside, you are welcome to spend the mental effort on active denial of the visible, audible, tonal, and storyline differences, things that go well beyond pittances like the recasting of minor characters. Just be glad the full-scale TOS reboot show folks have talked about for after SNW isn't getting made. You'd be in a real pickle trying to handwave that.
For others, such handwaving effort not only deflates any possible enjoyment of the show, but actively suppresses it. Such folks might be able to enjoy it as an alternate universe where they can take what they see as new and unique, which is literally what the producers were trying to create, visually. And they might be able to enjoy the stories shown as not 'bending canon' as one producer suggested, but creating a parallel universe where the old rules and facts need not apply. (Such folks could similarly enjoy a "reimagine" of Master and Commander set on a flat Earth just so long as the producers or other fans weren't confusing it with the original film's universe.)
Heaven forbid.
So yes, I'm sure you find the alternate reality chatter tiring . . . but get comfortable with it, because -- short of a tremendous reset button -- it isn't going anywhere. When you literally alter the contents of the universe before adding your own material, an alternate universe is all it could possibly be, prima facie . . . meaning even without the evidence of our eyes and ears backing that up.
Condescending much?
Prima facia tells me it's a 2025 production vs. a 60 era one. That's it. There's not so many differences beyond the visuals to me.
If that's a dividing line, then so be it. But it's not as simple as "of you must be blind/in denial" to think it's the same continuity. That's a bridge too far.
Spoon fed I see
JB
Space Seed. Spock's briefing on the time period.
And I was doing it tongue-in-cheek.
Why? Because the Persian Gulf War was, in the real world, the closest thing to what was mentioned.
Condescending much?
Let's not clutch pearls after the several messages in a row deriding and mocking those who disagree, e.g. complaining that it is tiring and then strawmanning over mere recasting as being justification of "AlTeRnATe ReAiTy!11!" "nonsense", including your own "Saavik was the real mind breaker."
The bottom line is, the studio sets the rules. They are the ones deciding what is and is not set within any given timeline, and their policy is that DSC, SNW etc are all set within the same original timeline as TOS, TNG etc. Not everyone will agree with that, and that's fine, but when it come to official policy, that's the policy.
If we go by inconsistencies meaning a story is placed within an alternate timeline, do we declare ENT to be in an alternate timeline? ENT introduced the Ferengi and the Borg, well before previously-established lore said they were encountered. It gave us TNG-style phasers and torpedoes. More importantly, it brought in characters absolutely pivotal to the creation of the Federation, heroes as it were, never-before referenced in any way, shape or form. Archer was critical to the Federation, and also played a huge role in stopping the Xindi, which brings up another glaring inconsistency. An attack that killed seven million people, and started a huge mission of vital importance to save earth, against a coalition of species that had never seemingly existed till that point, despite being quite the noteworthy force.
So, is ENT part of a new timeline, and who treats it as such? Then again, it wouldn't matter, the studio regards it as part of the original timeline, and whatever disagreements may be had with their view, their view is the one that counts.
If we go by inconsistencies meaning a story is placed within an alternate timeline, do we declare ENT to be in an alternate timeline? ENT introduced the Ferengi and the Borg, well before previously-established lore said they were encountered. It gave us TNG-style phasers and torpedoes. More importantly, it brought in characters absolutely pivotal to the creation of the Federation, heroes as it were, never-before referenced in any way, shape or form. Archer was critical to the Federation, and also played a huge role in stopping the Xindi, which brings up another glaring inconsistency. An attack that killed seven million people, and started a huge mission of vital importance to save earth, against a coalition of species that had never seemingly existed till that point, despite being quite the noteworthy force.
So, is ENT part of a new timeline, and who treats it as such? Then again, it wouldn't matter, the studio regards it as part of the original timeline, and whatever disagreements may be had with their view, their view is the one that counts.
This and only this.
Similar threads
