ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Remake TREK... what will the books do?

NuclearWessels

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9845

Report this Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am

Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ¿:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ¿It's bending it at the very most. ¿Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ¿As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ¿If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ¿If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ¿It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that.  I still consider these violations.  If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that.  However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being).  I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

brcarthey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2608

Report this Feb. 04 2008, 4:44 pm

Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ¿I still consider these violations. ¿If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. ¿However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ¿I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

unfortunately, some deleted scenes explained why worf and wesley are back in SF.  whatever genius decided to omit these scenes should be embarrassed.

NuclearWessels

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9845

Report this Feb. 04 2008, 5:05 pm

Quote (brcarthey @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:44 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ?I still consider these violations. ?If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. ?However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ?I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

unfortunately, some deleted scenes explained why worf and wesley are back in SF. ¿whatever genius decided to omit these scenes should be embarrassed.

well there wasn't much of an explanation for either.  For wesley they just said he's the assistant engineer for the titan.  they didn't mention why he got back.  As for Worf, he just said "i was not suited for the life of a diplomat".  Still wasn't enough of an explanation of why both are back.

bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJ
oint

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6072

Report this Feb. 06 2008, 2:08 am

Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that.  I still consider these violations.  If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that.  However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being).  I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

But it's not really a violation if something somewhat plausible happens and there's just no explanation for it.  It's only a violation if it blatantly goes against established history/facts.

Dughlas68

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3

Report this Feb. 06 2008, 8:32 pm

I will freely admit to knowing nothing about the new Trek movie except the one theater trailer I saw. I'm still questioning even the viability of such a venture if it really does go back to the beginning of TOS television history - either a remake or a re-visioning.

As for the appearance of the Enterprise in space-dock, that can be easily explained as the ship being in refitted for her new captain. Keep in mind that Kirk only captained her for the last decade of her service life. "Unofficial cannon" states that she had been captained by two others before Kirk.

Refitting the ship for the modern audience as opposed to keeping with the '66 to '68 design, well, maybe they figured a better design to bridge ST:E and ST:TOS would be a good idea. I, for one, will concur with that.

Outside of those thoughts, I'll leave any further opinion-making on my part until better explained trailers (theater or TV) come along.  :logical:

NuclearWessels

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9845

Report this Feb. 06 2008, 11:25 pm

Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 06 2008, 12:08 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ¿I still consider these violations. ¿If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. ¿However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ¿I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

But it's not really a violation if something somewhat plausible happens and there's just no explanation for it. ¿It's only a violation if it blatantly goes against established history/facts.

Well in that case then where do we draw the line between plausible situations and blatant canon violations? Its sci-fi, anythings plausible (ex - everybody considered the Klingon ridges in ENT to be a violation, until it was officially explained in Affliction/Divergence). But if the writers really did care about respecting canon they would've provided us with an explanation as to why they decided to 'undo' recent developments for these characters. The fact that they had a chance to provide us with one, but decided not to, proves to me that they were indeed ignoring canon (I admit, violation may have been too strong a word).

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I think we should get some sort of an explanation if characters get rolled back like that.  IMO, its a violation until explained otherwise.

bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJ
oint

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6072

Report this Feb. 08 2008, 4:22 am

Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 06 2008, 11:25 pm)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 06 2008, 12:08 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ?I still consider these violations. ?If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. ?However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ?I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

But it's not really a violation if something somewhat plausible happens and there's just no explanation for it. ?It's only a violation if it blatantly goes against established history/facts.

Well in that case then where do we draw the line between plausible situations and blatant canon violations? Its sci-fi, anythings plausible (ex - everybody considered the Klingon ridges in ENT to be a violation, until it was officially explained in Affliction/Divergence). But if the writers really did care about respecting canon they would've provided us with an explanation as to why they decided to 'undo' recent developments for these characters. The fact that they had a chance to provide us with one, but decided not to, proves to me that they were indeed ignoring canon (I admit, violation may have been too strong a word).

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I think we should get some sort of an explanation if characters get rolled back like that.  IMO, its a violation until explained otherwise.

I totally understand where you're coming from.  While I still don't necessarily think that the problems you mentioned are canon violations, I totally agree that they should have either been explained or shouldn't have existed at all.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Feb. 12 2008, 6:23 pm

Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 07 2008, 8:25 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 06 2008, 12:08 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ?I still consider these violations. ?If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. ?However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ?I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

But it's not really a violation if something somewhat plausible happens and there's just no explanation for it. ?It's only a violation if it blatantly goes against established history/facts.

Well in that case then where do we draw the line between plausible situations and blatant canon violations? Its sci-fi, anythings plausible (ex - everybody considered the Klingon ridges in ENT to be a violation, until it was officially explained in Affliction/Divergence). But if the writers really did care about respecting canon they would've provided us with an explanation as to why they decided to 'undo' recent developments for these characters. The fact that they had a chance to provide us with one, but decided not to, proves to me that they were indeed ignoring canon (I admit, violation may have been too strong a word).

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I think we should get some sort of an explanation if characters get rolled back like that. ¿IMO, its a violation until explained otherwise.

You really need an explanation for every single nanosecond?

What about Riker having a beard in TNG's second season? Why didn't they talk about that? Was that a canon violation? Let's not forget the uniform changes, the ship refits, the new phasers...

Do you really want all the characters to tell everyone "Look at my new phaser! Those were introduced in 2371 replacing the old Mark 2..."

Come on... do you explain to everyone why you bought yourself a new jeans???

NuclearWessels

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 9845

Report this Feb. 13 2008, 8:13 am

Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 12 2008, 4:23 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 07 2008, 8:25 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 06 2008, 12:08 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 04 2008, 10:02 am)
Quote (bensmalls_is_a_BigYellowJoint @ Feb. 04 2008, 2:11 am)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 03 2008, 2:12 am)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ Feb. 02 2008, 4:19 pm)
Quote (NuclearWessels @ Feb. 01 2008, 9:16 pm)
Well Nemesis decided to ignore canon, and the authors created the "A Time To.." series to fix that.

And how did it ignore canon? ?:eyesroll:

-wesley crusher and worf back in starfleet
-data's emotion chip

I wouldn't call that *ignoring* canon. ?It's bending it at the very most. ?Remember, a bit of time passed between 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis' and I don't think it's that wildly improbable for Worf or even Wesley (who may have returned to Starfleet to defend his friends during the Dominion War) to return. ?As far as Data's emotion chip goes, in 'First Contact' it was established that he had the ability to turn it off and on, so it's implied that he simply had it off for all of 'Nemesis'.

If suddenly Tasha Yar was back on the bridge, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Picard was suddenly commanding the Enterprise D again, I'd consider that ignoring canon. ?If Data had actually stated that he had never encountered another Soong-type android before, that would be ignoring canon.

The problem with 'Nemesis' had nothing to do with canon errors. ?It had to do with the fact that it's awful.

Other than the fact that it was awful, no denying that. ?I still consider these violations. If it was a change that moved these characters forward, (i.e - promotion), then yes I can understand that they don't need to explain that. However, changes like Data's chip, or Worf/Wesley back in Starfleet were a step back from when we last saw them (especially Wesley, whom we last saw evolved into a higher state of being). ?I think it should be explained whenever that happens to a character (like they did with Tom Paris getting demoted).

But it's not really a violation if something somewhat plausible happens and there's just no explanation for it. ?It's only a violation if it blatantly goes against established history/facts.

Well in that case then where do we draw the line between plausible situations and blatant canon violations? Its sci-fi, anythings plausible (ex - everybody considered the Klingon ridges in ENT to be a violation, until it was officially explained in Affliction/Divergence). But if the writers really did care about respecting canon they would've provided us with an explanation as to why they decided to 'undo' recent developments for these characters. The fact that they had a chance to provide us with one, but decided not to, proves to me that they were indeed ignoring canon (I admit, violation may have been too strong a word).

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I think we should get some sort of an explanation if characters get rolled back like that. ?IMO, its a violation until explained otherwise.

You really need an explanation for every single nanosecond?

What about Riker having a beard in TNG's second season? Why didn't they talk about that? Was that a canon violation? Let's not forget the uniform changes, the ship refits, the new phasers...

Do you really want all the characters to tell everyone "Look at my new phaser! Those were introduced in 2371 replacing the old Mark 2..."

Come on... do you explain to everyone why you bought yourself a new jeans???

next time read.

You're comparing minor technological differences to, IMO, major character developments? I bet you wouldn't even flinch if all of a sudden Troi was back with Worf in Nemesis, or hell if Picard was suddenly a male. Besides, all those examples you just gave were steps forward, as far as technology goes. ¿hell they even explained what happened to rikers' beard in Insurrection! ¿

yea, next time read.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: 22123magic

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum