Star Trek: All of Em

[beatboks]

You aren't grasping my statement. As a former fan, I honestly don't care about it being made in the 1960s. Enterprise and Discovery should have maintained the general style of that era and before because it is where they fit in the fictional timeline. IMO, this is a significant part of why those series have failed to a large degree. They want to be more or rather different than what they are. If the style is too "dated" fine then set those series post-Voyager the problem is solved, otherwise, stick with the aesthetic already established.

Neither series failed. They both had more viewers than TOS. There were complaints from hard core fans but the shows drew in new viewers that they wouldn't have if they had done as you suggest.

Secondly Enterprise was made stylistically to be older and lower tech than TOS. it had the same design traits but was "chunkier" and less smoothe in design. Meanwhile Voyager was a top secret experimental ship with new experimental tech that got lost. All the other ships of the era remained consistent

[superduperman]

I didn't mean to start a fight. I was just wondering if there was some sort of in universe explanation for the discrepancy. I actually agree with adjusting the technology to the changing times. But I also think that they should just come right out and make it a separate universe. Like a superhero TV show. For the last 20 years, Paramount has gone out of their way to try to retrofit TOS into canon. Starting with Enterprise and the Abrams movies. The unfortunate truth is that there is no in universe way to make it work. The 23rd century isn't going to be push buttons and punch cards. It might be time to just come right out and start from scratch.

[ChrisIII]

Star Wars is a dozen or so movies grouped in a close time frame versus how many Star Trek episodes over how many decades? It's easier to keep Star Wars consistent with the limited set pieces it has vs Trek.

SW also doesn't depend on technology for storylines like ST does. SW is pew-pew blowem up and ST is reversing polarity while bypassing the neutron flow capicitor gobbledegook, requiring more set pieces with technology in the forefront. It's more believable to do that with more up to date technology.

I remember some criticisms that Phantom Menace's technology was too 'shiny' but I think that's in part mainly to the Naboo's tech. If you look at the Trade Federation and Tatooine it's still very much "used universe".

[Celgress]

Neither series failed. They both had more viewers than TOS. There were complaints from hard core fans but the shows drew in new viewers that they wouldn't have if they had done as you suggest.

Secondly Enterprise was made stylistically to be older and lower tech than TOS. it had the same design traits but was "chunkier" and less smoothe in design. Meanwhile Voyager was a top secret experimental ship with new experimental tech that got lost. All the other ships of the era remained consistent

I seriously doubt the first point is true when you consider how many years TOS has been in reruns around the world lol.

[Celgress]

I remember some criticisms that Phantom Menace's technology was too 'shiny' but I think that's in part mainly to the Naboo's tech. If you look at the Trade Federation and Tatooine it's still very much "used universe".

Indeed it is, and I love the internal consistency, unlike the all over the place crap we get in Star Trek prequels.

[Celgress]

Star Wars is a dozen or so movies grouped in a close time frame versus how many Star Trek episodes over how many decades? It's easier to keep Star Wars consistent with the limited set pieces it has vs Trek.

SW also doesn't depend on technology for storylines like ST does. SW is pew-pew blowem up and ST is reversing polarity while bypassing the neutron flow capicitor gobbledegook, requiring more set pieces with technology in the forefront. It's more believable to do that with more up to date technology.

You forgot the Clone Wars series (both of them), the Bad Batch, the Mandolorian, countless comics, video games, etc all of which are amazingly consistent in their aesthetic.

[WebLurker]

Except it's not at the expense of internal logic or consistency. Star Trek is a TV show that's 55 years old now and the look of the original series was simply the best they could do at the time and now they can do better so it looks different. The fiction is that the Federation and all its technology is the future, the shows are adaptations of that idea and are limited to the technology of the times they were made so differences in design and technology is to be expected and is not counter to the premise or logic of the show.

As was established in "Trials and Tribble-Lations" (DS9), "In a Mirror, Darky, Parts I and II" (ENT), and "The Naked Now" (remastered TNG), the look of TOS wasn't just artistic license, but literally how it all looked (not to mention how "If Memory Serves" [DSC] also confirms the accuracy of the TOS designs). It's the choice of the Powers That Be if they wanted to be accurate or reimagine it, but it is a change and one that undermines the show's attempt to tie itself to the larger franchise.

[thwhtGuardian]

As was established in "Trials and Tribble-Lations" (DS9), "In a Mirror, Darky, Parts I and II" (ENT), and "The Naked Now" (remastered TNG), the look of TOS wasn't just artistic license, but literally how it all looked (not to mention how "If Memory Serves" [DSC] also confirms the accuracy of the TOS designs). It's the choice of the Powers That Be if they wanted to be accurate or reimagine it, but it is a change and one that undermines the show's attempt to tie itself to the larger franchise.

It doesn't undermine it at all, it's fiction and always open to interpretation over the years. Those other mentions you made were one offs that were just fan service which isn't something sustainable in the long haul. The only pertinent question you need to ask yourself do reel to reel computers, analog controls, pencil skirts, go go boots and chunky looking technology look like the future right now? If you're honest, then the answer is no and that's the reason things needed to change.

Basically, what you have to understand is that the look of the original series wasn't a conscious choice, it simply looks that way because it's the best they could do with the time,resources and money they had and based on what their audience at that time would find entertaining. And all of those things have changed since then so it makes zero sense to be beholden to them, and if they did it would only gain them one tiny thing: the praise from a very small subset of fans...and when weighed against the wants of the general audience that's not enough of a plus to make it sound like a good call.

[Exciter]

I’d easily overlook the aesthetic differences in the sets if the spirit and philosophy of the shows were consistent. That’s the more jarring contrast.

[WebLurker]

It doesn't undermine it at all, it's fiction and always open to interpretation over the years.

Except that, in this case, it was never up to interpretation until now (heck, even the original movie, under Gene Roddenberry, who was even more revisionist and regarded canon as being far more optional than the current makers ever have, has the in-universe explanations that the reimagining of the show's look was due to the passage of time and upgrades). There's also the point that DSC is pretty heavily integrated into TOS, which makes the differences in design really stick (it like trying to mash to different things together). Not to mention how you got other stuff like LDS that is completely faithful to canon going alongside DSC's revisionism. Can you at least get why the lack of internal consistency is annoying?

Those other mentions you made were one offs that were just fan service which isn't something sustainable in the long haul.

Seeing how they were not runoffs but the rule for most of the franchise's run, it was pretty darn sustainable. (Bear in mind there was a whole batch of episodes explaining the different Klingon makeups, which wouldn't have been needed had the franchise been running on DSC's "continuity is optional" status quo.)

The only pertinent question you need to ask yourself do reel to reel computers, analog controls, pencil skirts, go go boots and chunky looking technology look like the future right now? If you're honest, then the answer is no and that's the reason things needed to change.

And yet it worked when we saw it alongside the modern stuff in that ENT prequel. Frankly, it was fine that they went all-new with the Discovery (we'd never seen that kind of ship before); the problem is when they rendered the Enterprise, which we knew what it looked like in that era and the appearances don't work to allow for refits to make DSC work with canon in that regard.

Basically, what you have to understand is that the look of the original series wasn't a conscious choice, it simply looks that way because it's the best they could do with the time,resources and money they had and based on what their audience at that time would find entertaining. And all of those things have changed since then so it makes zero sense to be beholden to them, and if they did it would only gain them one tiny thing: the praise from a very small subset of fans...and when weighed against the wants of the general audience that's not enough of a plus to make it sound like a good call.

It's really sad to watch Rogue One faithfully recreate an outdated '70s version of the future and know that you'll never get anything like that for TOS. Very interested in the new Strange New Worlds show, but I'm probably really going to have to double down on the realization that Star Trek canon is broken and there's no going back to enjoy it.

[Celgress]

What I will never understand is why if they feel the look needs to be "modernized" they don't simply go forward in time post-Voyager rather than concentrating on the TOS Era and before? For all the faults of Lower Decks & Prodigy at least these shows are (finally) moving the timeline forward rather than trying to "reimagine" the past like Enterprise, Discovery, and the Reboot Movies do. This is my biggest problem with current Trek (the past twenty years or so). Those in power keep trying to reinvent the wheel rather than perfect it, like literally WTH!?

[Malvolio]

I notice no one here is commenting on the revision of social issues on Discovery. I mean, the final episode of TOS, Turnabout Intruder, sort of established that women were not yet allowed to be promoted to the rank of captain, yet we see that's clearly not true from the first episode of Discovery. Doesn't bother me at all, but I wonder if it bothers anyone else, but they're afraid of being called sexist for mentioning it?

[superduperman]

I notice no one here is commenting on the revision of social issues on Discovery. I mean, the final episode of TOS, Turnabout Intruder, sort of established that women were not yet allowed to be promoted to the rank of captain, yet we see that's clearly not true from the first episode of Discovery. Doesn't bother me at all, but I wonder if it bothers anyone else, but they're afraid of being called sexist for mentioning it?

This is why I think it's time to "retire" TOS. Just shuffle it off to it's own little universe away from the rest of the ST franchise and let it be. It doesn't work anymore. And there's kind of no way to make it work.

[superduperman]

What I will never understand is why if they feel the look needs to be "modernized" they don't simply go forward in time post-Voyager rather than concentrating on the TOS Era and before? For all the faults of Lower Decks & Prodigy at least these shows are (finally) moving the timeline forward rather than trying to "reimagine" the past like Enterprise, Discovery, and the Reboot Movies do. This is my biggest problem with current Trek (the past twenty years or so). Those in power keep trying to reinvent the wheel rather than perfect it, like literally WTH!?

I think there's this weird fixation on the part of Paramount to "fix" OTS. They know the design doesn't work anymore and have been trying to find a way to retcon it into making sense. As long as this old TV show with no budget is out there, anything else they do is going to look kind of silly. I don't think there are any good options here. Keep it as is and just kind of ignore it and hope everyone else does too, or try to find some way to either make it work and risk the wrath of fans.

[thwhtGuardian]

Except that, in this case, it was never up to interpretation until now (heck, even the original movie, under Gene Roddenberry, who was even more revisionist and regarded canon as being far more optional than the current makers ever have, has the in-universe explanations that the reimagining of the show's look was due to the passage of time and upgrades). There's also the point that DSC is pretty heavily integrated into TOS, which makes the differences in design really stick (it like trying to mash to different things together). Not to mention how you got other stuff like LDS that is completely faithful to canon going alongside DSC's revisionism. Can you at least get why the lack of internal consistency is annoying?



Seeing how they were not runoffs but the rule for most of the franchise's run, it was pretty darn sustainable. (Bear in mind there was a whole batch of episodes explaining the different Klingon makeups, which wouldn't have been needed had the franchise been running on DSC's "continuity is optional" status quo.)



And yet it worked when we saw it alongside the modern stuff in that ENT prequel. Frankly, it was fine that they went all-new with the Discovery (we'd never seen that kind of ship before); the problem is when they rendered the Enterprise, which we knew what it looked like in that era and the appearances don't work to allow for refits to make DSC work with canon in that regard.



It's really sad to watch Rogue One faithfully recreate an outdated '70s version of the future and know that you'll never get anything like that for TOS. Very interested in the new Strange New Worlds show, but I'm probably really going to have to double down on the realization that Star Trek canon is broken and there's no going back to enjoy it.

They were indeed one offs, the scene where scotty uses the holodeck to revisit "his" Enterprise was just fan nostalgia, the whole concept of the Yesterday's Enterprise story was a cost saving measure because they still had the old movie sets and Trials and Tribulations used stock footage and set replicas specifically because it was written for the 30th Anniversary of Star Trek...so more fanservice. There was never an actual on going show that used the look of the original series...and again because to do so would be seen as campy.

And again, Star Wars is a different animal, George Lucas specifically designed a look that wasn't associated with any time period specifically because he wanted to avoid the pit falls faced by sci-fi worlds like Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon and Star Trek.