test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

So what happened to Enterprise-E and Data?

1356

Comments

  • thedoctorblueboxthedoctorbluebox Member Posts: 749 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Let's define "Fan"

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fan
    1: an enthusiastic devotee (as of a sport or a performing art) usually as a spectator
    2: an ardent admirer or enthusiast (as of a celebrity or a pursuit) <science-fiction fans>

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_(person)
    A fan, sometimes also called aficionado or supporter, is a person who is enthusiastically devoted to something, such as a band, a sports team or entertainer.

    No person can judge if you are a "fan." The requirement is that you are: "Enthusiastically devoted" or "an enthusiastic devotee" of something. If you are, you are a "Fan."

    Only the individual person can judge for themselves if they are a fan of said thing.

    "True Fan" is a misnomer, you either are a fan, or you are not.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,454 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    That is the most ignorant, insulting, and stupid thing I've ever heard in my life.
    And he contradicts it himself, as he also maintains that there are certain things that "true Trek fans" don't like, but I do. And I did grow up watching TOS, while it was being aired on NBC. So there you go - the "no true Scotsman" fallacy in all its glory.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • edwardianededwardianed Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Know what I don't get. Why people DON'T like JJs version. Cause guess what it has ZERO bearing on what is cannon.

    Well in my personal opinion, the reason I don't like JJ Trek nearly as much as the rest is that I find it's too reliant on style over substance. I'm not opposed to style, and what substance exists is quite nice; but I feel that JJs vision is too focused on pew-pew, big action, big drama, whereas TV Trek always had the luxury of being able to focus on the quiet, intellectual issues of a story.

    My two quatloo's.
  • tigerariestigeraries Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Thanks for the update.

    As for Shon who gets to command the new flag ship by having your old ship get shot to bits at the right moment, deserves to captain the new flag ship.

    1st time your introduced to him is in the Bajoran 2800 storyline.

    Is STO even cannon to the STU? Does CBS sign off on all these stories and events that if they ever do a new movie/show based on this timeline, these events carry over?

    As for JJs version... it's fine and works for what it is. Movies are inherently different than TV. To compare the new movies with the TV series is lame. TV series doesnt have the big budgets and special effects. Compare these movies to the other movies. They are all big explosions and fights. You go in to these movies knowing the characters already.
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    tigeraries wrote: »
    Is STO even cannon to the STU? Does CBS sign off on all these stories and events that if they ever do a new movie/show based on this timeline, these events carry over?

    For the umpteenth time, a canon is a policy on what is official in a body of literature. A cannon is a large gun. And English has too many homophones. :D

    Paramount's official policy is that only the TV shows, including TAS, and the movies are considered canon. And yes, as the copyright holders CBS does have veto power over Cryptic's proposals.
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,454 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    "Cannon" are large weapons, often fired off of ships (my Klingon is quite fond of his Dual Heavy Cannons forward).

    "Canon" is the Holy Writ of a religion, and by extension those works that define the officially-accepted parameters of a fictional universe with multiple authors. For the purposes of Star Trek, canon consists of what has appeared on film, both on television and in movies. Yes, that means even those episodes or movies we dislike are canon. (Believe me, I'd love nothing more than to disregard Nemesis, as I feel that it treated the TNG characters even worse than The Final Frontier treated the TOS characters, but unfortunately it's still canon.)

    Complicating matters is what's called "headcanon" - that is, a canon defined by one particular person, or a small group of people, who are not in charge of the main canon. There's a fascinating headcanon going on in a group of linked tales in the Ten Forward Lounge subforum, in which Admiral Quinn is an Undine imposter (although he seems to be going native in his most recent appearances) and the galaxy is about to be attacked by a Lovecraftian/Barkerian (as in Clive Barker's Hellraiser) menace from prehistory, one that makes the Iconians look like kindergarten children playing with flies by comparison. It's leading into a universe that is almost totally unlike the standard Trek, but it's both fascinating and internally consistent.

    STO is not canon, as it's not filmed. Its backdrop is canonical; that is, the last thing we saw happening in this universe on film was the destruction of Romulus and the disappearance of both Ambassador Spock and the crazed Romulan miner Nero. Everything since then is so far non-canonical, although of course if CBS/Paramount choose to one day continue in the Primeverse they're free to pick up on anything they like from STO.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    jonsills wrote: »
    Yes, that means even those episodes or movies we dislike are canon.

    Actually there is one exception to that. Even the writers thought VOY: "Threshold" was patently terrible, so they retconned it out of existence in "Day of Honor" with Tom Paris saying he's never traveled at transwarp.
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • raphaeldisantoraphaeldisanto Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Indeed. The owners of an IP are allowed to recon their canon at any time. Just ask George Lucas ;)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Indeed. The owners of an IP are allowed to recon their canon at any time. Just ask George Lucas ;)

    Indeed. Infact in his terms, most of the books that happen, are not even Cannon. Luke never got married, Han and Leia never had kids, Vong never happened.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Indeed. Infact in his terms, most of the books that happen, are not even Cannon. Luke never got married, Han and Leia never had kids, Vong never happened.

    I draw a distinction between what Lucas considers canon and what Lucasfilm considers canon. According to the latter, by way of their hiring Leland Chee to be the keeper of the canon, the EU storylines are canon as long as they don't directly conflict with the films and TV shows, in that order.
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • gonaliusgonalius Member Posts: 893 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Indeed. Infact in his terms, most of the books that happen, are not even Cannon. Luke never got married, Han and Leia never had kids, Vong never happened.

    Not most - None of the books ever happened. The only canon events are what happened in the films, or the Clone Wars cartoon. That's the official line from Lucas. What Disney think... Well that's a whole 'nother matter. (Even the slight expanding done in the novelizations of the films are officially considered non-canon). Which given the sheer pile of rubbish written (With a few gems hidden deep, deep inside), is probably a good thing... There is however what they consider a... Side universe as you will - The Extended Universe. All official books are supposed to be canonical in that - Which has led to some crazy explanations for events that were downright contradicted by the new films.

    With regards to the canonicity of STO... I choose to believe we're in yet another alternate timeline, just like the new films.
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Fine, then state that. Don't say "they didn't make money at the box office." Plenty of proof otherwise.

    I think the bigger reason that cast stopped after nemesis, many of them getting a tad old.

    That is not it as Bermon and Braga were fired due to the low sales of The TNG movies and the handling of Enterprise.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    sohtoh wrote: »
    According to your own source, it was number 1 in the box office in its opening weekend and for its opening week.

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=startrek8.htm

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekly&id=startrek8.htm

    And it wasn't until the following week, when 101 Dalmatians was released that it slipped to number 2. And the week after it slipped to number 3 when Daylight was released. On its 4th week of release it dropped to number 7 when Jerry Maguire, Mars Attacks, and The Preacher's Wife was released.

    I'm sorry but your facts are wrong.

    That maybe the opennig day but in the end it lost money as to what is was budgetted for it.It lost revenue simply put.

    To the rest of you you don't know what you are talking about and true fan of anything likes the original.I much like the 1960 Batman and Batmoble over the Movies,the same goes with Battlestar Gallatica as with Stabuck being a man instead of woman which he is.

    I will say the same with Charlies Angels with Farrah Fawcett and Hawaii 50.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,454 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Okay, you're definitely no true Batfan if you actually liked Adam West's portrayal of a slightly-overweight bombastic fool as the Dark Knight Detective...

    ...and you still haven't told us how those of us who did grow up watching (and enjoying) TOS can't be "true Trek fans" because we like some aspect of newer shows or movies that you don't. Maybe you need to reread the explanation of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy again.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    age03 wrote: »
    That maybe the opennig day but in the end it lost money as to what is was budgetted for it.It lost revenue simply put.

    We have already shown data showing it didn't. But just because I find proving you a nitwit amusing, here are more hard numbers, a concept you seem to be terminally unfamiliar with. Star Trek: First Contact had a budget of $46 million. It grossed $30 million in the first three days it was out and $25 million in the next seven. 30 + 25 = 55. 55-46 = 9. Therefore First Contact made back its budget, with profit, in less than two weeks after release. Its final domestic gross was $91 million, a little less than twice its budget. That's a good performance for any feature film.

    So. Your options are:
    -- Concede that you are wrong.
    -- Claim that you live in some alternate universe that interacts with our Internet via <insert technobabble as needed>, where First Contact indeed did not make a profit.
    -- Admit that you're insane. (Fun fact: Under the technical definition of insanity, i.e. "doing the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result", you actually are.)
    -- Admit that you flunked out of elementary school because you suck at basic arithmetic.
    -- Admit that you're deliberately trolling.
    To the rest of you you don't know what you are talking about and true fan of anything likes the original.I much like the 1960 Batman and Batmoble over the Movies,the same goes with Battlestar Gallatica as with Stabuck being a man instead of woman which he is.

    I will say the same with Charlies Angels with Farrah Fawcett and Hawaii 50.

    As previously stated, this entire argument is fallacious. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has the right to decide who is and who is not a true fan of anything.
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    starswordc wrote: »
    We have already shown data showing it didn't. But just because I find proving you a nitwit amusing, here are more hard numbers, a concept you seem to be terminally unfamiliar with. Star Trek: First Contact had a budget of $46 million. It grossed $30 million in the first three days it was out and $25 million in the next seven. 30 + 25 = 55. 55-46 = 9. Therefore First Contact made back its budget, with profit, in less than two weeks after release. Its final domestic gross was $91 million, a little less than twice its budget. That's a good performance for any feature film.

    So. Your options are:
    -- Concede that you are wrong.
    -- Claim that you live in some alternate universe that interacts with our Internet via <insert technobabble as needed>, where First Contact indeed did not make a profit.
    -- Admit that you're insane. (Fun fact: Under the technical definition of insanity, i.e. "doing the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result", you actually are.)
    -- Admit that you flunked out of elementary school because you suck at basic arithmetic.
    -- Admit that you're deliberately trolling.



    As previously stated, this entire argument is fallacious. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has the right to decide who is and who is not a true fan of anything.
    This is how mature you are in personally attacking me I ma fing out here.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    age03 wrote: »
    This is how mature you are in personally attacking me I ma fing out here.

    Wow proving you wrong is an ATTACK? WOW....
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • thedoctorblueboxthedoctorbluebox Member Posts: 749 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    age03 wrote: »
    This is how mature you are in personally attacking me I ma fing out here.

    Can I have your stuff?
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Wow proving you wrong is an ATTACK? WOW....

    Welcome to Internet debating. Nothing I haven't seen before. Sometimes I wish StarDestroyer.net's debating rules applied to the whole Internet. Debating tip for anyone else reading this thread: An argument that contains insults is not automatically an ad hominem.

    Ad hominem = "My opponent is an idiot."

    Insulting but valid argument = "<makes argument and cites data backing up argument>, therefore my opponent is an idiot."
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    starswordc wrote: »
    Welcome to Internet debating. Nothing I haven't seen before. Sometimes I wish StarDestroyer.net's debating rules applied to the whole Internet. Debating tip for anyone else reading this thread: An argument that contains insults is not automatically an ad hominem.

    Ad hominem = "My opponent is an idiot."

    Insulting but valid argument = "<makes argument and cites data backing up argument>, therefore my opponent is an idiot."

    Oh trust me I know. it's just sad across 3 forums I see these kinds of people. World of Tanks, Battlestar Galactica and here. I was hoping to not see more of the same. Alas...it is for naught.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • morchadesmorchades Member Posts: 123 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Whilst I don't think a great deal of Captain "rewarded with the Enterprise for getting his old ship blown up" Shon, I can't see any scenario where Data would be given command of the Enterprise-F by default.

    Really, though, isn't it the player character's fault that ship got blown to bits? He shows up to help, we're usually in a Tier 4 ship, he's in an escort (and his Defiant is probably the free ship and not the fleet Defiant) which can do a lot of damage but can't really tank and he takes all the shots from the enemy while we just... sit there and then run off when he's done. I mean, in an STF, which ship dies first if no one heals it? The escort with the tactical Captain. What is the Belfast? An escort with a tactical Captain.

    Man, and he showed up to help us out. I feel bad now.

    *Ahem* As for Data coming back, I'm with you there. Data's a character based on continued growth, and if he's no longer Captain it means he grew beyond that role.
  • feiqafeiqa Member Posts: 2,410 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I feel I am going to regret this. Because I am not quite old enough to have seen the original airing of Star Trek (I am old enough to have grown up on the syndication however.) I am not a true fan. :(

    But there does need one fact correction. One TNG movie did lose money.

    Nemesis:
    Budget: $60,000,000
    Gross: $43,119,879

    I read this is why they ended the movie series, and scrapped plans for DS9 or Voyager movies. Though those may have been opinions not fact.

    Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
    Network engineers are not ship designers.
    Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    age03 wrote: »
    This is how mature you are in personally attacking me I ma fing out here.
    You shouldn't take arguments so personal. If you have an emotional connection with your views, never use them in a debate with others, for this reason and others.

    Don't feel bad, this wasn't about you as a person. Okay? =)
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,923 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    zipagat wrote: »
    Brennon Braga is equally as guilty as Berman though. Their writing was so bad they managed to get Star Trek which had been on the air consistently for 18 years taken off air when Ent was cancelled.

    Also they should totally do a animated series or comic or some form of media with Captain Data, the few times he got to command a ship in TNG he kicked all kinds of TRIBBLE.

    I think ENT suffered not because of the show as much as it was on the ill fated UPN network.
    sig.jpg
  • rinksterrinkster Member Posts: 3,549 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    starswordc wrote: »
    Welcome to Internet debating. Nothing I haven't seen before. Sometimes I wish StarDestroyer.net's debating rules applied to the whole Internet. Debating tip for anyone else reading this thread: An argument that contains insults is not automatically an ad hominem.

    Ad hominem = "My opponent is an idiot."

    Insulting but valid argument = "<makes argument and cites data backing up argument>, therefore my opponent is an idiot."

    Nope, still ad hominem.

    You've already shown that the statement is un-necessary in making the argument...therefore ad hominem.


    Now, if the statement 'my opponent is an idiot' is a necessary stage in the argument you're constructing.....and by necessary I dont mean it was fun........then its not ad hominem.

    You're putting ideas against each other.

    The proponents of those ideas are only relevant inasmuch as they articulate them.
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,923 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Whilst I don't think a great deal of Captain "rewarded with the Enterprise for getting his old ship blown up" Shon, I can't see any scenario where Data would be given command of the Enterprise-F by default.

    you mean like captain I blew up my own ship then let the replacement ship get blown up Kirk?

    or I let my ship get mangled and abandoned for ferengi to find, then let my next ship get wrecked because i was not even in the captains seat Picard?

    sounds to me that Shon is fitting in nicely. in fact the only one who hung onto her ship was janeway.
    sig.jpg
  • gonaliusgonalius Member Posts: 893 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    The films did not lose money. I think the argument you are trying to make is that "They did not perform to expectations and whilst they did make a profit, it was not as high as was expected of them".
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,923 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Know what I don't get. Why people DON'T like JJs version. Cause guess what it has ZERO bearing on what is cannon.

    He basically did a spin off WHAT IF series of movies. I think it's an interesting take on Star Trek. So who cares what JJ does. He made his own little universe of Trek. So be it. Let him go play.

    Long as it doesn't change what is really cannon, [and jesus what is cannon these days] does it really matter.

    As far as Data coming back and taking over the Enterprise again, no just no. Huge disservice to Captain Shon who I believe has just as much right if not more to sit in the Captain's chair of the Enterprise.


    the thing that pisses me off about JJ trek is the Enterprise herself. from the stupid nacelles to the titanic era engineering to the superslick bridge. none of it works for me. he SHOULD have gone back to the ORIGINAL NCC 1701 with maybe a bit of embellishment, but the craptastic monstrosity he has now is enough to make me puke

    Seniority. I'm fairly certain that Data is one of the most if not THE most senior captain.
    sig.jpg
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,923 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    starswordc wrote: »
    For the umpteenth time, a canon is a policy on what is official in a body of literature. A cannon is a large gun. And English has too many homophones. :D

    Paramount's official policy is that only the TV shows, including TAS, and the movies are considered canon. And yes, as the copyright holders CBS does have veto power over Cryptic's proposals.


    actually I don't think TAS IS canon
    sig.jpg
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    actually I don't think TAS IS canon

    Actually, it is now. CBS decided that TAS or at least some of TAS is considered canon.
Sign In or Register to comment.