USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
it's a prequel. we've got to see the moment he purchases the hat, puts it on, is immediately told it's stupid, and dejectedly leaves it on his console TV for the rest of his service aboard the enterprise.
now that's good television.
Kirk just had a thing for garish bright red and grey. In your face.
Picard, on the other hand, was just more into his beige. Classy and understated.
Oh the continuity where he spent forty years as a man in his late thirties?
I'd call @Serveaux many things, but "weird" isn't top of the list.
I would also put forth that the Brosnan films would be reboots, by the content of those films as well.
Yeah, kinda hard to reconcile phone calls via the operator with cloaking technology on cars or remotely hacking satellites.
Is that your opinion or a factual statement based on some nebulous "expertise"?
The Bond films do not have a shared history or timeline or whatever. That would be fucking ridiculous. They are, however, the perfect representation of how continuity works with everything - that is, it's just this nebulous nugget of familiarity writers can cherry pick to suit their purposes but are not beholden to.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Also wrong.
The current climate we live in has made it more acceptable for people to make up their own facts and insist on standing by them even though the actual facts contradict them, but that's not actually how the world works.
Damn, Brosnan looked pretty good for a guy who was like 90.
You seem to have no problem making up your own facts. So, hey...
It's good to know we have a resident totally credible expert we can rely on to tell us how the world works. Someone we take really seriously
OK, so you aren't saying why those things are wrong. How the world does work is if you feel something is wrong, you put your opinion out to explain why you feel something is wrong.
The Bond films have some shared history, but not a completely and firmly tied together one. The Aston Martin DB5, etc. are seen here and there, but other parts of the Bond films go on their own path. What they do is root the character in parts of his history, but other parts are started anew.
Even when Brosnan started with the role, Barbara Broccoli stated that they wanted to capture the essence of the classic Bond movies, but take it in a new direction as well. Part nostalgia, mostly starting over to accommodate the new actor.
I've never heard or read anything to that effect. And even were it so, Cubby Broccoli (and his heirs) are nothing more than people who bought the film adaptation rights to a piece of IP... creatively speaking, they've really never had either input or insight. And even if they had, that would still have nothing to do with this...
...which is what the discussion is actually about. This proposition is laughable. It's obviously undermined by pretty much any discussion of the Bond film franchise had by fans thereof any time in the last 30 years, because (as I noted earlier) theories about the character and his continuity are myriad. And pretty much every one of those theories can be both supported and knocked down by evidence from the films themselves. There really is no obvious answer.
When making assertions about "factual reality," it's always important to make sure that your facts are not actually mere inferences. And equally important, for that matter, to make sure that your inferences are not mere assumptions. And to show your work when doing so.
FWIW, in the comment you're referring to I took mos6507 to be saying it was "the Kelvin [timeline's] design [for the Enterprise]" that sucked, not the U.S.S. Kelvin itself. (A statement with which I would agree.) But I can see the ambiguity there...
I'm not even going to go there.
Probably best
Similar threads
