So "It's a parallel universe" is now "A wizard did it"?
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Q did it!
The great thing about Montalban's performance is that it's a mix of bitterness and arrogance.
Everything he's been led to believe about his nature will not allow him to learn from his own mistakes or take ownership of them, because he believes his genetic engineering has absolved him of being capable of mistakes. Khan is constantly quoting Moby Dick, claiming (just like Ahab) that he's been wronged and that justifies his actions. But he's so arrogant that he refuses to accept the message of Moby Dick.
Khan believes he's so superior and smart enough to succeed where Ahab failed.
But Lore has just destroyed the multiverse. Does this mean that he also destroyed the dimension of the bad Cerritos?
Billups: HEY!!
David’s behavior was pretty embarrassing, yes.
That line alone justifies the comics not being canon.
I know the story. But, nevertheless, FOR ME it's overacting, it's like acting on a stage. Even his language is like a listening to a proclaiming shakespearian Patrick Steward. This is not the kind of acting, i like.
(i am sorry for my simple english).
I honestly got second hand embarassment from that.
Nothing wrong in people needing other people to be compassionate, but people like Wheaton suddenly starts charging anyone with bullshit optics if you disagree with them even the slightest bit.
Tendi: Doctor, something terrible has happened!
T'Ana: Did someone delete the "Tom & Jerry" holonovel?
Tendi: No
T'Ana: Did an evil android from another dimension destroy the multiverse?
Tendi: Yes!!
T'Ana: But the "Tom & Jerry" holonovel is okay?
Tendi: Uh-huh
T'Ana: Ah, well...
The God Squad and the Sons of Star Trek? No thanks.
So many of the comics are meh or downright ridiculous I'm glad they've never been canon, nor should be.
Ignoring installments I don't like is easier than worrying about canon or not.
The thing is, they're not ignored by other writers. Stories set the rules for the stories that come after, people start making "Well fans didn't complain when X episode did it, so you can never complain again" arguments, and what Star Trek is has been changed for as long as those creative decisions echo through new episodes.
I'm not a writer.
Look, I see your point but I don't agree. My one perspective on Trek doesn't change anything within the production teams. I'm good ignoring what I don't like. It's worked for me for 30 years.
One thing I've wondered given the various arguments people have had about this over the past decade or so is whether Star Trek should be looked at like a "saga" (i.e., similar to Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings)? Or would it be better to think of Star Trek as an interconnected "universe" of different stories?
I'm sure even this is going to get some people who disagree with this, but (to me) a saga has to have more fidelity to tone and consistency to detail with each property. Each story builds on other elements from the previous ones, and tends to center on overarching elements that are part of each iterations (e.g., Sauron and the ring, or the prophecy of the "chosen one" and the Skywalker family).
But stories in an interconnected universe can play more fast and loose with tone and details. Deadpool and Wolverine is in the MCU now with Avengers: Endgame, but they're wildly different in tone and how they deal with the material. And each movie and director brings a different vision to their slice of the universe. James Gunn's view of Guardians of the Galaxy is not exactly Taika Waititi's way of looking at Thor, or what the Russo brothers see for Captain America and the Avengers. There were open questions as to whether the Netflix/ABC Marvel shows should be counted as canon for a long while, since the movies never acknowledged them.
I could see arguments for either way of looking at Star Trek.
Each show is its showrunner's vision for the material and the stories they want to tell for their characters. But, for fans, there's a way of looking at all of the series as being one grand saga that goes from humanity's first steps as an interstellar species to being a people at the center of and leaders of an interstellar government with influence across the entire galaxy.
Maybe this is controversial, but I personally believe "765874 Unification" to be (more or less) canon and what Paramount intends for us to believe were Spock's final moments and Kirk's destiny after Section 31 got hold of his mortal remains. So many official Trek luminaries were involved with the short film that it's hard to just shelve it away as glorified, big budget fan fiction.
This should apply to Very Short Treks too then.
Similar threads
- Locked
