Yes the IP holder can say what is and is not canon. The fans can also just override them enough until it makes no differnce...or even have the offending content redacted. See the highlander series for examples of this. Even the IP holder had to relent and finally say the second movie and animated series does not exist.
And that's why it died.... I guess it wasn't immortal...
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
Isn't the whole point of being immortal is that you can't die? Of course, there could be different types of immortality such as being immune to aging and disease, but still susceptible to decapitation or immune to anything. Being tossed in a wood chipper would just cause the chunks to reform back into a body. Baccano has a few good examples of immortality. Although, the order of the scenes are in a complete mess which makes it surprising how it can be understood relatively easily.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
invincibility is what makes you immune to death, period
Actually, invincibility makes you immune to unnatural death by making you immune to external damage. Being immune to natural death is not necessarily part of it.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Speaking of cop shows, msybe in futre a CSI: Alpha Quadrant?
Hast thou not gone against sincerity
Hast thou not felt ashamed of thy words and deeds
Hast thou not lacked vigor
Hast thou exerted all possible efforts
Hast thou not become slothful
Again, most people reject cognitive dissonance, and to repeat the example, being served noodles in ketchup, is not being served spaghetti in maranara sauce, despite what the restaurant Says it is
The discussion isn't really about ketchup though, but if you insist on using it as an analogy, then at least to me it has been dis-proven. TNG was the "noodles and ketchup" to a great many people when it first aired, even though the CBS restaurant sold it as spaghetti in marinara. Here we are 30 years later and it's still spaghetti in marinara to the overwhelming majority, among whome many would claim is the best spaghetti dish ever.
Sure, there will be people who don't see it that way for various reasons. That's their opinion though and IMO history proves them wrong.
Nonononono, you're entirely missing the point of what I was meaning with the analogy: I'm not making a comparison relating to the quality of the meals(shows) in question, but the most basic observation that noodles in ketchup, is not spaghetti in maranara sauce, and just because the restaurant's menu board says 'spaghetti in maranara sauce', is not going to change the fact that what's on the plate, is noodles in ketchup. Translation: They can say this is Prime Timeline, but everything about its presentation, says Kelvin Timeline.
The point myself and others have made, is that the show offered, is not what it is being described as. Nothing whatsoever to do with the quality, but the discrepancy between what was announced, and what is getting released.
But they haven't had the stones to create a new series as their streaming service's flagship show, they had to ride the Trek franchise's coat-tails. It's 'outside-but-pressed-right-up-against-the-box' thinking, not having the stones to do something really innovative, which could have also attracted an audience on its own merits.
Disagree entirely. CBS already has a very impressive library to begin with and they could have used any one of their already existing properties to use as a "flagship series". CBS has also proven many times over they can come up with successful programs (see Big Bang Theory, NCIS and CSI franchises just to name a few in recent history). Personally, I think it makes perfect sense to use one of their most successful franchises as the front runner to attract customers to their new streaming service.
And you're free to disagree.
Point being, they could have chosen anything as their flagship, but they didn't. They chose Star Trek as the bait for the hook. It's going with safe and familiar, rather than taking a chance and releasing something entirely new and having the stones to call it something new (such as The Orville, or Defiance) Training wheels.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
The answer is far simpler than most of you guys think:
TV producers don't understand Sci-fi.
It's that simple. They don't understand the concepts we fans take for granted, and assume Sci-fi is just action/adventure with spaceships.
Who remembers Space, Above And Beyond? It was simply brilliant. It lasted one season, most of which I missed because the local station kept airing it at different times and on different days, attempting to find a replacement in its original timeslot even before the show had a chance to find itself or an audience. Babylon 5 did better as a rerun on the Sci-fi channel for this same reason.
You can make a similar case for almost every sci-fi franchise since the end of Lost In Space. If it's not also a family dramedey or a cop show, the networks and local stations have no clue what it is, and they certainly don't understand the wants of the sci-fi demographic.
It's no mystery that the aesthetics were 'modernized'. TV guys know how to copy blockbuster movies, after all.
It's no mystery why they alter canon: it's an inconvenince that interferes with their 'artistic vision'.
It's no coincidence that they call their version 'Prime Timeline' because they want the old Trekkies to fund their project.
All of this is par for the course. People who love Trek are a cipher to television executives. We are explained away as nerds who have no lives and sit in dank basements watching reruns of 50 year old TV shows. As a target audience, to them anyway, we don't count. We are a significant minority of a niche audience. Our participation in their new series won't make an impact on their revenue.
Their target audience, women aged 20 - 30, who have the family remote as well as the family purse, are the only demographic that matters, and it's a sure bet the vast majority of those women never even heard of Star Trek canon, having had their first Trek experience in a theater with some overly excited young man who wanted to see the Nu-Trek movie.
The fact that these same women appear to have rejected STID and Beyond just means they have to have a hook to induce women to watch. Oh, I know, let's make the star a woman, that'll work. And after she proves herself the equal of any man, let's throw in a twist: have her reassigned under a man so she can prove he's a jerk while she goes around fixing his stupid mistakes.
Yes, calling it Prime Timeline is a marketing hook. Yes, it's bait to draw interest from existing Trek fans.
But it's not bait and switch because the new Trek was never going to be like old Trek, and certainly vastly different from the pilot episode that was so soundly rejected by the TV networks of the time.
The answer is far simpler than most of you guys think:
TV producers don't understand Sci-fi.
It's that simple. They don't understand the concepts we fans take for granted, and assume Sci-fi is just action/adventure with spaceships.
Who remembers Space, Above And Beyond? It was simply brilliant. It lasted one season, most of which I missed because the local station kept airing it at different times and on different days, attempting to find a replacement in its original timeslot even before the show had a chance to find itself or an audience. Babylon 5 did better as a rerun on the Sci-fi channel for this same reason.
You can make a similar case for almost every sci-fi franchise since the end of Lost In Space. If it's not also a family dramedey or a cop show, the networks and local stations have no clue what it is, and they certainly don't understand the wants of the sci-fi demographic.
It's no mystery that the aesthetics were 'modernized'. TV guys know how to copy blockbuster movies, after all.
It's no mystery why they alter canon: it's an inconvenince that interferes with their 'artistic vision'.
It's no coincidence that they call their version 'Prime Timeline' because they want the old Trekkies to fund their project.
All of this is par for the course. People who love Trek are a cipher to television executives. We are explained away as nerds who have no lives and sit in dank basements watching reruns of 50 year old TV shows. As a target audience, to them anyway, we don't count. We are a significant minority of a niche audience. Our participation in their new series won't make an impact on their revenue.
Their target audience, women aged 20 - 30, who have the family remote as well as the family purse, are the only demographic that matters, and it's a sure bet the vast majority of those women never even heard of Star Trek canon, having had their first Trek experience in a theater with some overly excited young man who wanted to see the Nu-Trek movie.
The fact that these same women appear to have rejected STID and Beyond just means they have to have a hook to induce women to watch. Oh, I know, let's make the star a woman, that'll work. And after she proves herself the equal of any man, let's throw in a twist: have her reassigned under a man so she can prove he's a jerk while she goes around fixing his stupid mistakes.
Yes, calling it Prime Timeline is a marketing hook. Yes, it's bait to draw interest from existing Trek fans.
But it's not bait and switch because the new Trek was never going to be like old Trek, and certainly vastly different from the pilot episode that was so soundly rejected by the TV networks of the time.
I completely agree with everything you've said, except the last point: When DS 9 and Enterprise revisited the era (or close enough to that era for the purpose of discussion) they recreated that look in a modern way. Just as Axanar was doing, and just as Star Trek Continues, well, continues, to do. They could have recreated the aesthetics and style of the era of The Cage (the era they chose to set their new series in) but as you pointed out, they just lifted the look of the recent movies. While technically speaking, the strict definition of bait and switch doesn't precisely apply, there's still been a fair bit of baiting and switching occurring between what was announced to be released, and what we're now seeing in the trailers
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
...They could have recreated the aesthetics and style of the era of The Cage (the era they chose to set their new series in) but as you pointed out, they just lifted the look of the recent movies. While technically speaking, the strict definition of bait and switch doesn't precisely apply, there's still been a fair bit of baiting and switching occurring between what was announced to be released, and what we're now seeing in the trailers
I don't recall CBS saying "it's set 10 years before Kirk and it's going to look exactly like The Menagerie did..."
That, is a massively dishonest strawman, and if that is your recollection, or lack thereof, I suggest you refresh your memory.
The very first trailer, Very. Clearly. Stated:
*in transition*
10 Years Before Kirk
10 Years Before Spock
10 Years Before the Enterprise
There was Discovery.
That Right There sets the timeframe of the series. It does so undeniably. It does so unquestionably. To try and claim otherwise, is disingenuous and dishonest, especially when the reference material is easily available to check.
Undertaking such a set-period project (which their own words outright stated) brings with it obligations which need to be honored.
They
Chose
To set the series at that point. That was Their. Choice. That means honoring what has come before, not merely as 'what came before', but as the framework upon which They Chose to build. Not as lipservice, not as riding on coat-tails, but as an honest endeavour.
If they wanted to simply create a 'new generation' of Star Trek, they could have done so, in any timeline, and at any point along that timeline.
But they didn't.
They chose to lock themselves to a particular, known, period.
They Do Not Get the luxury of saying "we didn't know what it was like," because the existing IP material (which they are relying on as their bait to draw subscribers -- Not just viewers, but Paying Subscribers) dictates and demonstrates the aesthetic of that period.
10 Years Before the Grassy Knoll (if it expects to be taken seriously) will not have JFK dressing like Kurt Cobain.
DS9 and Enterprise, Axanar and Continues, all recreated the original aesthetic, because it was what their chosen project required.
Les Moonves and his crew? What have they done?
They chose to ape the style of the JJ Movies, because that's what one of their target demographics, recognizes as Star Trek.
They chose to use Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise as the frames of reference, because, Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise are three of the most iconic and recognizable aspects of the IP which they need to use to lure an audience of sufficient size.
They chose to say it was Prime Timeline, because they will know that the Kelvin Timeline Movies weren't universally popular, that people have been requesting more Prime Timeline material, and so they needed that lure to bring in another, different demographic of the fanbase.
If you're okay with that, if that doesn't bother you, then fine; That's your prerogative. But don't be so disingenuous as to pretend that the observations and critiques of those who have pointed out the flaws in the presentation, are somehow imagined or invalid, or to present an intentionally flawed strawman just so you can refute it. Engage and debate honestly, or not at all.
"I ordered some spaghetti with maranara sauce; I got egg noodles with ketchup..." - Henry Hill, Goodfellas
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Yeah as far as the Klingon gear look here is the answer... Glen Hetrick 'nuff said Mr. Steampunk himself... No surprise there is a KT look as well as the other person is drum roll please Neville Page whose only Trek work was for all three KT universe films.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,696Community Moderator
edited July 2017
I do admit the Klingons will take some getting used to, but we do have to consider the possibility that the Augment Virus that made the Klingons look as they did in TOS might not have affected the ENTIRE population. Its possible that some Klingons managed to avoid contact with it. Especially if they were in an isolated portion of the Empire or even Qo'nos.
The reason I cite Qo'nos as well is because if we consider the branching point for the Kelvin Timeline to be 2233, that still leaves EVERYTHING before it the same as in the Prime Universe. Thus the events of Enterprise with the Augment Klingons and the virus still happened. Yet as we saw in Into Darkness, we saw Klingons with ridges well into the time period of Klingons seen without. And once the virus started spreading, its a pretty safe bet the Klingons would have done EVERYTHING in their power to prevent it from spreading to the homeworld. And we never saw Qo'nos in TOS so we can assume they did as such in both timelines.
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
Yeah as far as the Klingon gear look here is the answer... Glen Hetrick 'nuff said Mr. Steampunk himself... No surprise there is a KT look as well as the other person is drum roll please Neville Page whose only Trek work was for all three KT universe films.
Wait? Glen Hetrick AND Neville Page are working on Discovery?
Simon Pegg said the Narada incursion altered not only the future of the Kelvin timeline, but rippled backwards as well.
This is plausible because our current understanding of time not only includes the idea of anti-time but the idea of simultaneous time. In other words, time is not one-way trip forward, but all events which ever happen happen right now, from the Big Bang to the Slow Freeze. Time, in this way of thinking, is not a fundamental force of the universe, but a by-product of spatial density.
Given this hypothesis, everything that is going to happen has already happened and must always happen the same. Any deviation must happen in a different universe which has its own simultaneous future/history.
Remember those math problems that had two right answers? Yeah, in hindsight those were easy!
Simon Pegg said the Narada incursion altered not only the future of the Kelvin timeline, but rippled backwards as well.
This is plausible because our current understanding of time not only includes the idea of anti-time but the idea of simultaneous time. In other words, time is not one-way trip forward, but all events which ever happen happen right now, from the Big Bang to the Slow Freeze. Time, in this way of thinking, is not a fundamental force of the universe, but a by-product of spatial density.
Given this hypothesis, everything that is going to happen has already happened and must always happen the same. Any deviation must happen in a different universe which has its own simultaneous future/history.
Remember those math problems that had two right answers? Yeah, in hindsight those were easy!
A more easy explanation is that such a major temporal event will wipe out any previous instance of time travel set after 2233 and create new temporal events. So Scotty giving Transparent Aluminum to the 20th Century and Picard saving Cochrane from the Borg in the 21st Century wouldn't happen while other changes to history will occur like Rom saving Cochrane from Tellarites.
you know things move on . i am a fan of the next generation and love the ERA but like alllways the old must make room for the new . its how its allways been whether its real life or your favourite tv show franchise
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
invincibility is what makes you immune to death, period
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Actually, invincibility makes you immune to unnatural death by making you immune to external damage. Being immune to natural death is not necessarily part of it.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
My character Tsin'xing
Hast thou not felt ashamed of thy words and deeds
Hast thou not lacked vigor
Hast thou exerted all possible efforts
Hast thou not become slothful
T.J. Hooker on Earth didn't set the bar very high though.
The point myself and others have made, is that the show offered, is not what it is being described as. Nothing whatsoever to do with the quality, but the discrepancy between what was announced, and what is getting released.
And you're free to disagree.
Point being, they could have chosen anything as their flagship, but they didn't. They chose Star Trek as the bait for the hook. It's going with safe and familiar, rather than taking a chance and releasing something entirely new and having the stones to call it something new (such as The Orville, or Defiance) Training wheels.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
TV producers don't understand Sci-fi.
It's that simple. They don't understand the concepts we fans take for granted, and assume Sci-fi is just action/adventure with spaceships.
Who remembers Space, Above And Beyond? It was simply brilliant. It lasted one season, most of which I missed because the local station kept airing it at different times and on different days, attempting to find a replacement in its original timeslot even before the show had a chance to find itself or an audience. Babylon 5 did better as a rerun on the Sci-fi channel for this same reason.
You can make a similar case for almost every sci-fi franchise since the end of Lost In Space. If it's not also a family dramedey or a cop show, the networks and local stations have no clue what it is, and they certainly don't understand the wants of the sci-fi demographic.
It's no mystery that the aesthetics were 'modernized'. TV guys know how to copy blockbuster movies, after all.
It's no mystery why they alter canon: it's an inconvenince that interferes with their 'artistic vision'.
It's no coincidence that they call their version 'Prime Timeline' because they want the old Trekkies to fund their project.
All of this is par for the course. People who love Trek are a cipher to television executives. We are explained away as nerds who have no lives and sit in dank basements watching reruns of 50 year old TV shows. As a target audience, to them anyway, we don't count. We are a significant minority of a niche audience. Our participation in their new series won't make an impact on their revenue.
Their target audience, women aged 20 - 30, who have the family remote as well as the family purse, are the only demographic that matters, and it's a sure bet the vast majority of those women never even heard of Star Trek canon, having had their first Trek experience in a theater with some overly excited young man who wanted to see the Nu-Trek movie.
The fact that these same women appear to have rejected STID and Beyond just means they have to have a hook to induce women to watch. Oh, I know, let's make the star a woman, that'll work. And after she proves herself the equal of any man, let's throw in a twist: have her reassigned under a man so she can prove he's a jerk while she goes around fixing his stupid mistakes.
Yes, calling it Prime Timeline is a marketing hook. Yes, it's bait to draw interest from existing Trek fans.
But it's not bait and switch because the new Trek was never going to be like old Trek, and certainly vastly different from the pilot episode that was so soundly rejected by the TV networks of the time.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
That, is a massively dishonest strawman, and if that is your recollection, or lack thereof, I suggest you refresh your memory.
The very first trailer, Very. Clearly. Stated:
*in transition*
10 Years Before Kirk
10 Years Before Spock
10 Years Before the Enterprise
There was Discovery.
That Right There sets the timeframe of the series. It does so undeniably. It does so unquestionably. To try and claim otherwise, is disingenuous and dishonest, especially when the reference material is easily available to check.
Undertaking such a set-period project (which their own words outright stated) brings with it obligations which need to be honored.
They
Chose
To set the series at that point. That was Their. Choice. That means honoring what has come before, not merely as 'what came before', but as the framework upon which They Chose to build. Not as lipservice, not as riding on coat-tails, but as an honest endeavour.
If they wanted to simply create a 'new generation' of Star Trek, they could have done so, in any timeline, and at any point along that timeline.
But they didn't.
They chose to lock themselves to a particular, known, period.
They Do Not Get the luxury of saying "we didn't know what it was like," because the existing IP material (which they are relying on as their bait to draw subscribers -- Not just viewers, but Paying Subscribers) dictates and demonstrates the aesthetic of that period.
10 Years Before the Grassy Knoll (if it expects to be taken seriously) will not have JFK dressing like Kurt Cobain.
DS9 and Enterprise, Axanar and Continues, all recreated the original aesthetic, because it was what their chosen project required.
Les Moonves and his crew? What have they done?
They chose to ape the style of the JJ Movies, because that's what one of their target demographics, recognizes as Star Trek.
They chose to use Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise as the frames of reference, because, Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise are three of the most iconic and recognizable aspects of the IP which they need to use to lure an audience of sufficient size.
They chose to say it was Prime Timeline, because they will know that the Kelvin Timeline Movies weren't universally popular, that people have been requesting more Prime Timeline material, and so they needed that lure to bring in another, different demographic of the fanbase.
If you're okay with that, if that doesn't bother you, then fine; That's your prerogative. But don't be so disingenuous as to pretend that the observations and critiques of those who have pointed out the flaws in the presentation, are somehow imagined or invalid, or to present an intentionally flawed strawman just so you can refute it. Engage and debate honestly, or not at all.
"I ordered some spaghetti with maranara sauce; I got egg noodles with ketchup..." - Henry Hill, Goodfellas
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
I didn't catch the typo. Stupid hands. Fixed it.
The reason I cite Qo'nos as well is because if we consider the branching point for the Kelvin Timeline to be 2233, that still leaves EVERYTHING before it the same as in the Prime Universe. Thus the events of Enterprise with the Augment Klingons and the virus still happened. Yet as we saw in Into Darkness, we saw Klingons with ridges well into the time period of Klingons seen without. And once the virus started spreading, its a pretty safe bet the Klingons would have done EVERYTHING in their power to prevent it from spreading to the homeworld. And we never saw Qo'nos in TOS so we can assume they did as such in both timelines.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
SOLD!
My character Tsin'xing
This is plausible because our current understanding of time not only includes the idea of anti-time but the idea of simultaneous time. In other words, time is not one-way trip forward, but all events which ever happen happen right now, from the Big Bang to the Slow Freeze. Time, in this way of thinking, is not a fundamental force of the universe, but a by-product of spatial density.
Given this hypothesis, everything that is going to happen has already happened and must always happen the same. Any deviation must happen in a different universe which has its own simultaneous future/history.
Remember those math problems that had two right answers? Yeah, in hindsight those were easy!
A more easy explanation is that such a major temporal event will wipe out any previous instance of time travel set after 2233 and create new temporal events. So Scotty giving Transparent Aluminum to the 20th Century and Picard saving Cochrane from the Borg in the 21st Century wouldn't happen while other changes to history will occur like Rom saving Cochrane from Tellarites.