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

I noticed many cannon objections (here) to ST XI\

johnd777

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1029

Report this Jan. 02 2010, 9:43 am

... were over what JJ Abrams and staff referred to on the CD as "gags." Hitting the head on the overhead piping on the shuttle, saying "you can whistle really loud..." the awkward moment on the transporter pad after the kiss between Spock and Uhura... her first name being an ongoing gag... etc.

These things are effective and necessary in story telling of any kind to prevent the movie or book from being like an essay assignment in high school and a total bomb at the box office.

So, chill, my Trek(ker /kie) brethren.

Give the kid a chance.

This canon devotees to ST are so desperate to defend to the death is contradictory itself.

The Romulan  War was allegedly fought with sublight ships using nuclear bombs... TOS episode.

The galaxy barrier (which is itself a joke) at the edge of the galaxy was also alleged to have been reached by non-interstellar sublight ships 100 years before the hyper light starships ever even bothered to go back out that far...

THIS kind of canon is what you are willing to defend to the death of Star Trek itself?

ST XI is certainly not without its errors (like delta vega being within eyeshot of Vulcan) a planet which has no moon until ST TMP it suddenly has two or three of them...

It's science FICTION, people. Let's just enjoy it and have fun with it. Please don't wear down JJ Abrams the way Trek brethren wore down Rick Berman.

Some Star Trek is better than no Star Trek.

Sheesh!

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 02 2010, 10:30 am

Their will allways be some Trek fans nitpicking Trek Canon.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jan. 02 2010, 11:50 am

Star Trek is a fictional universe with many flaws, inconsistencies, and impossibilities.

I, for one, do NOT base my enjoyment of a fictional universe on how "real" I perceive it to be. I do not get bent out of shape when a ship's size doesn't make sense. I don't get my nose out of joint when something is inconsnstent with something else that was established before. I don't throw a miniature tantrum when some piece of "science fantasy / technobabble" is clearly idiotic.

I watch Star Trek becuase it is fun, entertaining, and awesome. I don't watch it because I like to believe that this "could" happen for real. I don't build my whole love for the franchise around this illusion of continuity and canon.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 1:23 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 04 2010, 1:02 pm)
Quote (Vger23 @ Jan. 02 2010, 11:50 am)
Star Trek is a fictional universe with many flaws, inconsistencies, and impossibilities.

I, for one, do NOT base my enjoyment of a fictional universe on how "real" I perceive it to be. I do not get bent out of shape when a ship's size doesn't make sense. I don't get my nose out of joint when something is inconsnstent with something else that was established before. I don't throw a miniature tantrum when some piece of "science fantasy / technobabble" is clearly idiotic.

I watch Star Trek becuase it is fun, entertaining, and awesome. I don't watch it because I like to believe that this "could" happen for real. I don't build my whole love for the franchise around this illusion of continuity and canon.

But then, Vger, the reason many of us do take things like the size of the ship making sense, and continuity, and a level of scientific accuracy...is because we believe this "could" happen for real... ;)

:logical:

Fully appreciated and accepted!

I was simply saying that, from my individual point of view, expecting a franchise as long-running and as complex as "Star Trek" (that has had as many different "hands in the pie" as it has had different objectives and business goals) to appear realistic enough to hold up under the kind of fan-scrutiny that Trek fans are famous for is a bit insane. Therefore, I resolved long ago not to base my enjoyment of a Trek product on "realism" or "continuity" but rather on the pure enjoyment of the characters and the story.

I'm a proud owner of the Tech Manuals, Chronology, Compendiums, Companions and Encyclopedia just like any good Trek fan is...but I read those for fun and enjoyment, NOT to validate or invalidate a particular Star Trek story as being "real" or even "good." I base that judgement with my "gut and heart, and not always my head," is what I guess I'm trying to say.

GRKiller

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 125

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 1:53 pm

Well, seeing as how this is an alternate reality, alot of these so-called cannon issues are non-existent. But yeah, theres always someone there to pick apart something new.

GRKiller

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 125

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 2:14 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 04 2010, 2:10 pm)
Then there should be no issue.

They're cannons.

They're in Star Trek.

:p

:logical:

:D


Agreed. No issues here.

GRKiller

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 125

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 2:20 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 04 2010, 2:16 pm)
Now if those cannons are canon or not, that's another issue...

They are canon for the new timeline, but should the cannons be canon for the prime timeline?

:laugh:

:logical:

Then what of the cannons of the Prime timeline? Are they no longer cannon cannons? Or are the new cannonsthe same cannons and therefore cannon for all timelines?

This cannon talk excites me!

RomulusRemus

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 283

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 4:36 pm

Quote (johnd777 @ Jan. 02 2010, 9:43 am)
... were over what JJ Abrams and staff referred to on the CD as "gags." Hitting the head on the overhead piping on the shuttle, saying "you can whistle really loud..." the awkward moment on the transporter pad after the kiss between Spock and Uhura... her first name being an ongoing gag... etc.

These things are effective and necessary in story telling of any kind to prevent the movie or book from being like an essay assignment in high school and a total bomb at the box office.

So, chill, my Trek(ker /kie) brethren.

Give the kid a chance.

This canon devotees to ST are so desperate to defend to the death is contradictory itself.

The Romulan ¿War was allegedly fought with sublight ships using nuclear bombs... TOS episode.

The galaxy barrier (which is itself a joke) at the edge of the galaxy was also alleged to have been reached by non-interstellar sublight ships 100 years before the hyper light starships ever even bothered to go back out that far...

THIS kind of canon is what you are willing to defend to the death of Star Trek itself?

ST XI is certainly not without its errors (like delta vega being within eyeshot of Vulcan) a planet which has no moon until ST TMP it suddenly has two or three of them...

It's science FICTION, people. Let's just enjoy it and have fun with it. Please don't wear down JJ Abrams the way Trek brethren wore down Rick Berman.

Some Star Trek is better than no Star Trek.

Sheesh!

My problem is they said they would respect canon.
They didn't.
That is blatant false advertising.
If they didn't want their hands tied with canon then should have just went ahead and done a straight remake and be done with it.
Not do a half-assed, sugar-coated, alternate timeline, remake that they did do.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 4:57 pm

Quote (RomulusRemus @ Jan. 04 2010, 4:36 pm)
Quote (johnd777 @ Jan. 02 2010, 9:43 am)
... were over what JJ Abrams and staff referred to on the CD as "gags." Hitting the head on the overhead piping on the shuttle, saying "you can whistle really loud..." the awkward moment on the transporter pad after the kiss between Spock and Uhura... her first name being an ongoing gag... etc.

These things are effective and necessary in story telling of any kind to prevent the movie or book from being like an essay assignment in high school and a total bomb at the box office.

So, chill, my Trek(ker /kie) brethren.

Give the kid a chance.

This canon devotees to ST are so desperate to defend to the death is contradictory itself.

The Romulan ?War was allegedly fought with sublight ships using nuclear bombs... TOS episode.

The galaxy barrier (which is itself a joke) at the edge of the galaxy was also alleged to have been reached by non-interstellar sublight ships 100 years before the hyper light starships ever even bothered to go back out that far...

THIS kind of canon is what you are willing to defend to the death of Star Trek itself?

ST XI is certainly not without its errors (like delta vega being within eyeshot of Vulcan) a planet which has no moon until ST TMP it suddenly has two or three of them...

It's science FICTION, people. Let's just enjoy it and have fun with it. Please don't wear down JJ Abrams the way Trek brethren wore down Rick Berman.

Some Star Trek is better than no Star Trek.

Sheesh!

My problem is they said they would respect canon.
They didn't.
That is blatant false advertising.
If they didn't want their hands tied with canon then should have just went ahead and done a straight remake and be done with it.
Not do a half-assed, sugar-coated, alternate timeline, remake that they did do.

Actually they didn't have to respect canon since it's a new Timeline and they can now start from scratch. I think they respected canon with little things, like the Enterprise name and number, TOS character names, the uniforms, the Delta Sheild ect.

JM1ICEMAN

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1633

Report this Jan. 04 2010, 10:48 pm

Not only does the new movie respect canon of the prime time line, it acknowledge's it's existence as real and still intact:


KIRK: Wait. Where you came from, did I know my father?

SPOCK PRIME: Yes. You often spoke of him as being your inspiration for joining Starfleet. He proudly lived to see you become Captain of the Enterprise.



NERO: I know your face, from Earth's history.

NERO: James T. Kirk was considered to be a great man. He went on to captain the USS Enterprise, but that was another life.

:logical:

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 5:49 am

Quote (RomulusRemus @ Jan. 04 2010, 4:36 pm)
My problem is they said they would respect canon.
They didn't.
That is blatant false advertising.
If they didn't want their hands tied with canon then should have just went ahead and done a straight remake and be done with it.
Not do a half-assed, sugar-coated, alternate timeline, remake that they did do.

But that was the "beauty" of it all.

By useing a time trasvel event to change and create an alternate reality they actually "respected" canon.

So theres no "blatant false advertising."

False advertising would have been to have changed history with out a logical "in story" reason for why it was changed.

Since they provided a logical in story reason, canon is respected.

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 5:59 am

Quote (JM1ICEMAN @ Jan. 04 2010, 4:48 am)
Not only does the new movie respect canon of the prime time line, it acknowledge's it's existence as real and still intact

I have a bit of a noob question on this then (and apologies if it's already been discussed and I missed it).

Was it already established anywhere previous to STXI that Spock was working with/helping the Romulans?

I know in TUC we see him acting as an Envoy for the Klingons, and attempting to broker a peace deal, but is this kind of role for him built on in later series's at all?

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 6:01 am

Yes there is a very good story in the Next Generation series.

:cool:

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 6:05 am

Quote (Narada @ Jan. 04 2010, 12:01 pm)
Yes there is a very good story in the Next Generation series.

:cool:

Cool! I shall look forward to that!

MrsStarbuck

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4329

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 7:36 am

^ Cool. Thanks SB!

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