test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

STar Trek Discovery

1246715

Comments

  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...​​

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,091 Arc User
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    ...I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans...

    Ultimately that is what will make or break the series, regardless of what it looks like.

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.​​

    Kurtzman is that you?
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    Look all I'm saying it will be interesting to see how we get from the DSC uniforms to capris and mini skirts in 10 years and how we get from that level of tech to people throwing switches with blinking lights. Should be entertaining to see how they establish that.
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????​​

    I do understand what a surprise is. Even a lame one you could see a million miles away. Just figured you might be Kurtzman seeing I hit a nerve.
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????

    I do understand what a surprise is. Even a lame one you could see a million miles away. Just figured you might be Kurtzman seeing I hit a nerve.

    What nerve? You said something wrong and were corrected on it and had the answer explained to you. It didn't even get personal, never mind nerve hitting.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????

    I do understand what a surprise is. Even a lame one you could see a million miles away. Just figured you might be Kurtzman seeing I hit a nerve.

    What nerve? You said something wrong and were corrected on it and had the answer explained to you. It didn't even get personal, never mind nerve hitting.​​

    He still lied no matter how you spin it.
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????

    I do understand what a surprise is. Even a lame one you could see a million miles away. Just figured you might be Kurtzman seeing I hit a nerve.

    What nerve? You said something wrong and were corrected on it and had the answer explained to you. It didn't even get personal, never mind nerve hitting.​​

    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    I don't know how much more simply I can explain the concept of a suprise to you.
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,091 Arc User
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    According to that warped sense of logic, everyone else involved with the production - including Cumberbatch himself - "lied. "

    Do you honestly believe they concealed his identity just to TRIBBLE you off and get a laugh out of it or do you think it might have been to keep a surprise in the story for when the film gets released?

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 838 Arc User
    Rabbit Season!


    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    darakoss wrote: »
    Rabbit Season!


    Klingon season!​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 838 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    darakoss wrote: »
    Rabbit Season!


    Klingon season!​​

    RABBIT SEASON!!!!!!!
    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 8,459 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    According to that warped sense of logic, everyone else involved with the production - including Cumberbatch himself - "lied. "

    Do you honestly believe they concealed his identity just to **** you off and get a laugh out of it or do you think it might have been to keep a surprise in the story for when the film gets released?
    It was a massive conspiracy, aimed specifically at him and perhaps a few others (because I for one didn't give half a damn about it).

    However, one other misstatement gets on my nerves. Kurtzman didn't "work for" Bad Robot any more than he "worked for" Marvel Enterprises when he and Orci wrote the Amazing Spider-Man 2, or Hasbro when they wrote Transformers. He was a scriptwriter on all those projects. He didn't direct, he didn't cast, he didn't even design sets or costumes - he wrote (or, more accurately, co-wrote) the script. You can blame him for Snotty Kid Kirk, for the crew being pulled together through annoying levels of contrivance, even for the cold-fusion and tribble-blood things - but the Apple Store bridge wasn't Kurtzman's responsibility.

    And so far as I've heard, he hasn't written (or co-written) any of the scripts for TRIBBLE, so again his past experience informs but does not predict his future performance. He's one of several producers. That's it.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 838 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    According to that warped sense of logic, everyone else involved with the production - including Cumberbatch himself - "lied. "

    Do you honestly believe they concealed his identity just to **** you off and get a laugh out of it or do you think it might have been to keep a surprise in the story for when the film gets released?
    It was a massive conspiracy, aimed specifically at him and perhaps a few others (because I for one didn't give half a damn about it).

    However, one other misstatement gets on my nerves. Kurtzman didn't "work for" Bad Robot any more than he "worked for" Marvel Enterprises when he and Orci wrote the Amazing Spider-Man 2, or Hasbro when they wrote Transformers. He was a scriptwriter on all those projects. He didn't direct, he didn't cast, he didn't even design sets or costumes - he wrote (or, more accurately, co-wrote) the script. You can blame him for Snotty Kid Kirk, for the crew being pulled together through annoying levels of contrivance, even for the cold-fusion and tribble-blood things - but the Apple Store bridge wasn't Kurtzman's responsibility.

    And so far as I've heard, he hasn't written (or co-written) any of the scripts for TRIBBLE, so again his past experience informs but does not predict his future performance. He's one of several producers. That's it.

    Yeah I agree but he was also EP of all those shows. My opinion and mine alone is that everything he produces turns out to be TRIBBLE. I just wish he was not involved with TRIBBLE (DSC).
    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,201 Bug Hunter
    jonsills wrote: »
    It was a massive conspiracy, aimed specifically at him and perhaps a few others (because I for one didn't give half a damn about it).

    There seems to be quite a lot of conspiracies aimed specifically at a few fans in particular. I wonder how the busy showrunners and writers find the time to take the time for the personal touch in denying some obviously very important fanbois demands requests. Which is odd because the shows were promised specifically to them and not for general audiences or anything silly like that.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 33,886 Arc User
    darakoss wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    darakoss wrote: »
    Rabbit Season!
    Klingon season!​​
    RABBIT SEASON!!!!!!!
    Darakoss season!
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,091 Arc User
    Really sucks when people who care nothing for star trek are makeing stsr trek.

    You know what, you're right. I mean, look at people like Harve Bennett. He knew nothing about Star Trek. Oh, and I forgot - that Nicholas Meyer guy. He didn't know much about or really care about Star Trek either. What did either of them ever do for the Trek franchise anyway??








    Oh wait....
    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 838 Arc User
    darakoss wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    darakoss wrote: »
    Rabbit Season!
    Klingon season!​​
    RABBIT SEASON!!!!!!!
    Darakoss season!

    Nah....not this season.
    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    Are you me? Because that's almost the reply I was going to post.

    I say almost because I'd have certainly been more blunt, but yeah...

    The timespan between TOS and TNG was what, 70 years? And how much time between ENT and TOS, around the same amount? I can see style and technology changing in that amount of time opposed to say the 10 year gap between DSC and TOS. If DSC was set 30 or 50 years after TNG I think the aesthetics would be more understandable.

    I also accept that this is not a Bad Robot production. However, Alex Kurtzman works for or has worked for Bad Robot. He also worked on the Kelvin era films and it looks like he brought that aesthetic with him. I believe he was one of the writers on those films. I also believe it was him or Orci who swore up and down saying Benedict Cumberbatch was not playing Khan. Those "dumb" fans who saw it coming a million miles away. I say dumb because that's how they seem to look at the fanbase.

    I for one couldn't give a damn if this is a reboot, a reimagining, a retooling or a rehash. I'm just hoping for a damn good story. But, please don't insult your fans. Honesty is still the best way to go.

    And they are being entirely honest. This show is Prime, it is set in Prim, it is completely unrelated to the USS Kelvin in any way, shape, or form. That is the showrunners (of which Kurtzman is not one, that would be Fuller).


    As for the Khan thing, do people not understand how surprises work? Is it really such a difficult concept to understand for so called adults? Kurtzman and Co. did not lie to you about Harrison, they concealed the truth for artistic purposes. Your opinion on the reveal or its merits is not a reflection on what they did. If they look upon the fanbase as dumb and this is the same fanbase that dosn't understand what concealment of a plot twist is then they have one hell of a point.

    Kurtzman is that you?

    ????

    I do understand what a surprise is. Even a lame one you could see a million miles away. Just figured you might be Kurtzman seeing I hit a nerve.

    What nerve? You said something wrong and were corrected on it and had the answer explained to you. It didn't even get personal, never mind nerve hitting.​​

    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    I don't know how much more simply I can explain the concept of a suprise to you.

    Maybe truth is a foreign concept to you. Point is they can tell a lie and justify it. Okay maybe lie is too harsh but it's not hte truth never the less.

    I'm just curious if this is prime universe how we get from the slick technology of Discovery to the buttons and flashing lights of TOS. Explain that, maybe you have an answer for that.
  • nefarius2nefarius2 Member Posts: 107 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    According to that warped sense of logic, everyone else involved with the production - including Cumberbatch himself - "lied. "

    Do you honestly believe they concealed his identity just to **** you off and get a laugh out of it or do you think it might have been to keep a surprise in the story for when the film gets released?

    I never said it upset me. I just pointed out it was not the truth. Justify it all you want it is not the truth. Can you not wrap your mind around that? Or is the truth a foreign concept to you as well? My point is folks in Hollywood will lie and justify it meaning they could be telling half truths or untruths even now. Maybe it's the Prime universe. Is it THE prime universe? Or a newly imagined prime universe. If TOS with William Shatner is gospel cannon then how do we go from the look and tech of Discovery to the TOS in ten short years?

    Again if you bother to read my whole post I specifically said I DON'T CARE if this a reboot, reimagining, whatever. Trek needs to be updated our modern sensibilities. Kudos if they are doing this, just don't blow smoke up our tailpipes.

  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 8,459 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    The original is explained like this. Star fleet was being **** by romulans in the fed rom war so they started using old esrth tech from the 1960's but perfected so nothing could be ****. On long range mission the cramped ships used bright colors and themes to keep people from going crazy, like an experiment. Thats in cannon reasons for TOS look. Discovery is a new team of tv show makers trying to make a name for them selves by changing everything. Really sucks when people who care nothing for star trek are makeing stsr trek.
    I have no idea which opening you pried this from, but you can take my word as a lifelong Trekkie (over half a century so far!) - that load of nonsense is not canon, in any possible sense.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • alexmakepeacealexmakepeace Member Posts: 10,580 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    There's actually some merit to saying this isn't Prime. I mean, the creators say it is, and it may technically be in the same timeline, but everything I see about Discovery paints it as a drastic retooling of the style and tone of Star Trek. It may or may not turn out to be a bad re-imagining, but I get a strong impression that it's just as much of a reboot as JJ-Trek, even if the old shows and movies are still technically canon. They just don't dare to admit it after the backlash from last reboot attempt.

    So while it may be set in the Prime Timeline, the sense I get is that it's different stylistically and tonally to the point that I think it's functionally a reboot

    TNG was stylistically very different to TOS. Does that mean it's a reboot too? Enterprise was tonally and stylistically different than anything that came before it. Was it a reboot?

    Again, Discovery isn't a reboot, nor was JJ Trek. The original continuity still exists in JJ Trek as it does in Discovery.

    I'm mostly going by feel. TOS, TNG, and ENT all look and feel like they belong together (including in writing style and tone), even if there's variation between them. Discovery feels different, based all the material I've seen so far. Having the same continuity (or not) isn't really relevant to the point I'm making, I'm calling it a reboot because I sense the creators casting off/revising parts of the old material so they can go in their own direction (the darker tone, the half-cocked attempt at scientific realism for klingons, etc.).

    Reboot probably isn't quite the right word, but I don't know if a better one exists.
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 3,377 Arc User
    darakoss wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    darakoss wrote: »
    Rabbit Season!
    Klingon season!​​
    RABBIT SEASON!!!!!!!
    Darakoss season!

    Fiddler Crab!
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • shadowfang240shadowfang240 Member Posts: 31,544 Arc User
    mule fritters!​​
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!

    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."

    How Game Devs SHOULD be interacted with:
    http://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/157238832062/i-remember-your-52080-rule-and-it-was-an-awesome

    "Curiosity is bad! It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed...and more importantly, it makes you poor!"

    "Beware of dog. Or possibly, enhanced, psycho-addicted, cybernetically-enhanced nightstalker death-dealing dog from hell."
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.

    Stand with Star Trek: The Animated Series content for STO! #TASforSTO
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 838 Arc User
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    nefarius2 wrote: »
    He still lied no matter how you spin it.

    According to that warped sense of logic, everyone else involved with the production - including Cumberbatch himself - "lied. "

    Do you honestly believe they concealed his identity just to **** you off and get a laugh out of it or do you think it might have been to keep a surprise in the story for when the film gets released?

    I never said it upset me. I just pointed out it was not the truth. Justify it all you want it is not the truth. Can you not wrap your mind around that? Or is the truth a foreign concept to you as well? My point is folks in Hollywood will lie and justify it meaning they could be telling half truths or untruths even now. Maybe it's the Prime universe. Is it THE prime universe? Or a newly imagined prime universe. If TOS with William Shatner is gospel cannon then how do we go from the look and tech of Discovery to the TOS in ten short years?

    Again if you bother to read my whole post I specifically said I DON'T CARE if this a reboot, reimagining, whatever. Trek needs to be updated our modern sensibilities. Kudos if they are doing this, just don't blow smoke up our tailpipes.

    Gospel Cannon....spreading the word at the enemy via bombardment?
    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • grendel#8174 grendel Member Posts: 11 Arc User
    Time for a mod to end this thread. Too much fighting going on. I call upon the powers of badmoonrising
Sign In or Register to comment.