Strange New Worlds Star Trek: Strange New Worlds - General Discussion Thread

[Perfect Cell]

Listen, in case you haven't noticed, I've been highly praising and complimentary of the show. This is my main and really only issue. And this is only one example of many continuity errors. I don't think presenting and saying this a prequel to the original series makes sense because they are already well off that path.

My point is they shouldn't be struggling to say this is a prequel to TOS. Just say they are playing around with a brand-new sandbox, a brand-new timeline and a universe that's similar to that era but it's not the same one. It's called criticism. You don't have to agree with it. That's fine, but this is what I'm expressing.

Hey, I've said before that people are free to feel how they want. If all of this is the show's worst failing, then I think it's doing remarkably well. But...

I would say there's a net-zero chance they place this show (and Discovery) in a separate timeline from both the Kelvin universe and the Prime universe. And I don't think they're going to try to wedge this as a prequel to the Kelvin movies either. That would muddy the waters considerably, and I don't think they're secretly building to Star Trek: No Way Home in the Multiverse of Madness. It's the Prime universe, just like Picard and whatever other 15 spin-offs they're working on. They're just taking liberties with whatever freedoms they can find, to mixed results. But for every "Burnham is Spock's sister" choice in Discovery, I feel SNW has been fairly reserved in creating new things for established characters' backstories. So far, at least. You may disagree and that is totally fine.

 

[TheVileOne]

Hey, I've said before that people are free to feel how they want. If all of this is the show's worst failing, then I think it's doing remarkably well. But...

I would say there's a net-zero chance they place this show (and Discovery) in a separate timeline from both the Kelvin universe and the Prime universe. And I don't think they're going to try to wedge this as a prequel to the Kelvin movies either. That would muddy the waters considerably, and I don't think they're secretly building to Star Trek: No Way Home in the Multiverse of Madness. It's the Prime universe, just like Picard and whatever other 15 spin-offs they're working on. They're just taking liberties with whatever freedoms they can find, to mixed results. But for every "Burnham is Spock's sister" choice in Discovery, I feel SNW has been fairly reserved in creating new things for established characters' backstories. So far, at least. You may disagree and that is totally fine.

This is the prime universe, not the kelvin universe.

I think the show is doing remarkably well. But I also think the addition of Kirk's brother to the cast has yet to payoff. Was made to look like an utter dope in he second episode as well.

 

[Perfect Cell]

This is the prime universe, not the kelvin universe.

...I know, that's what I said...

It's the Prime universe, just like Picard and whatever other 15 spin-offs they're working on.

But another poster had suggested the Kelvinverse as a "canon" fit. I just threw that in to reference it.

 

[TheVileOne]

...I know, that's what I said...



But another poster had suggested the Kelvinverse as a "canon" fit. I just threw that in to reference it.

I'd just rather this was its own branching path like the Kelvin-verse so they are free to play around with things as they wish.

 

[Perfect Cell]

Look, my ideal Star Trek show would be something maybe mid-25th century, with a brand new ship and crew (hell, give me the Enterprise F or G if you want that name recognition) that is unburdened by the sheer mass of content that has come before. But, we didn't get that. Maybe some day. But I can live with canon being stretched if it's in service of a good story.

Kirk hasn't added a whole lot yet, no, but he had a decent moment with Uhura, and I'll wait and see where it goes beyond that. So far, nothing lore-wise has interfered with my enjoyment of the show, so I'm happy for it to continue on the path it's set.

But again, if Kirk gets shot in the head in episode 3 or something, we'll have concerns.

 

[misjuevos]

This was made by someone else, shows the timelines. I think it is off though. Look at the temporal incursion from the 2009 movie. It happens before these shows. So wouldn't that make that the point of a new timeline? And the new shows like DSC, and SNW an alternate timeline? I am thinking also that the TNG first two movies pulled us off the main timeline as well. Generations dealt with a time nexus and First Contact did time travel.
Well really I think all the shows did time travel so who really knows how the timeline was affected. There probably isn't a prime timeline at all. Each show is probably in a timeline with similar things that happened but maybe they aren't connected at all. One of the first episodes of TOS they accidentally time traveled. Then later time traveled a couple more times. So right there would be some split in the timeline.

 

[Perfect Cell]

This was made by someone else, shows the timelines. I think it is off though. Look at the temporal incursion from the 2009 movie. It happens before these shows. So wouldn't that make that the point of a new timeline? And the new shows like DSC, and SNW an alternate timeline? I am thinking also that the TNG first two movies pulled us off the main timeline as well. Generations dealt with a time nexus and First Contact did time travel.
Well really I think all the shows did time travel so who really knows how the timeline was affected. There probably isn't a prime timeline at all. Each show is probably in a timeline with similar things that happened but maybe they aren't connected at all. One of the first episodes of TOS they accidentally time traveled. Then later time traveled a couple more times. So right there would be some split in the timeline.

View attachment 55738

Star Trek time travel rules have always been wonky and contradictory, because they're just flying by the seat of their pants. It's never really made sense. Sometimes they travel back in time and change things (like Sisko taking Gabriel Bell's place in the Bell Riots), and they're still able to return to their original timeline. Other times, time travel creates an entirely new timeline (like in the Abrams movies).

But the timelines are these (as they intend it; like you said, they time travel like crazy and most times there are no consequences)

Prime Timeline:

ENT -> DIS -> SNW -> TOS -> Movies 1-6 -> TNG -> DS9 -> Generations -> VOY -> Movies 8-10 (with a few small scenes from ST2009) -> LD -> PIC

Kelvin Timeline:

ENT -> ST2009 -> STID -> STB

Enterprise is in both because it occurs prior to the Narada travelling back in time. Everything up to the Kelvin being destroyed is identical in both the Prime and Kelvin timelines (supposedly). But once the Narada comes through, it splinters into two timelines. The Prime one, where the Narada never came back in time, and Kirk's dad survived, and the Kelvin timeline, where it did and he didn't.

Khan being lily-white Benedict Cumberbatch in one and Ricardo Montalban in another does not help matters, though. It's enough to make you go cross-eyed.

 

[misjuevos]

Star Trek time travel rules have always been wonky and contradictory, because they're just flying by the seat of their pants. It's never really made sense. Sometimes they travel back in time and change things (like Sisko taking Gabriel Bell's place in the Bell Riots), and they're still able to return to their original timeline. Other times, time travel creates an entirely new timeline (like in the Abrams movies).

But the timelines are these (as they intend it; like you said, they time travel like crazy and most times there are no consequences)

Prime Timeline:

ENT -> DIS -> SNW -> TOS -> Movies 1-6 -> TNG -> DS9 -> Generations -> VOY -> Movies 8-10 (with a few small scenes from ST2009) -> LD -> PIC

Kelvin Timeline:

ENT -> ST2009 -> STID -> STB

Enterprise is in both because it occurs prior to the Narada travelling back in time. Everything up to the Kelvin being destroyed is identical in both the Prime and Kelvin timelines (supposedly). But once the Narada comes through, it splinters into two timelines. The Prime one, where the Narada never came back in time, and Kirk's dad survived, and the Kelvin timeline, where it did and he didn't.

Khan being lily-white Benedict Cumberbatch in one and Ricardo Montalban in another does not help matters, though. It's enough to make you go cross-eyed.

Yeah the time travel in Star Trek is very crazy. I remember in ENT T'pol sells velcro to people in the past, and in TOS a hobo kills himself with a phaser. Not to mention Scotty showing the people of the 20th century how to make transparent aluminum. These all could've changed the timeline just enough to make everything off. So yeah the timelines are messed up.

 

[Dr.]

Meant to post this in the episode thread. Oh well. In "Ghosts of Illyria," there's a special guest appearance by... Ontario Place: A park/attraction with weird architecture (including “Cinesphere” — an IMAX theater) on Toronto’s waterfront.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Listen, in case you haven't noticed, I've been highly praising and complimentary of the show. This is my main and really only issue. And this is only one example of many continuity errors. I don't think presenting and saying this a prequel to the original series makes sense because they are already well off that path.

My point is they shouldn't be struggling to say this is a prequel to TOS. Just say they are playing around with a brand-new sandbox, a brand-new timeline and a universe that's similar to that era but it's not the same one. It's called criticism. You don't have to agree with it. That's fine, but this is what I'm expressing.

Yeah, if I’m being honest, I feel like a lot of the newer shows and movies are trying a bit too hard to appease the hardcore fans. And by that I mean that I don’t think they should be all “Everything you’ve seen before is still canon!” Because they ALSO want to do things that could disrupt said canon and that just ends up enraging those people more.

I think creating an entirely different timeline in ST’09 was stupid and it was only done to placate people who were going to get up in arms about a new continuity. But a lot of those people didn’t like it anyway because there was such an emphasis on action. So they probably should have just said, “This is a reboot. Deal with it or don’t watch it.” That would have been better anyway because then it wouldn’t have mattered that Pike was a much older man than Kirk or that Carol Marcus and Khan were inexplicably English.

It’s the same with SNW. I really, REALLY like the show so far. But I won’t deny that some stuff likely disrupts canonical things (Like a Khan relative being part of the crew). And that’s fine. Just don’t pass it off as the Sacred Timeline. Because at the end of the day, it’s never going to make sense how things that happened after this series somehow looked primitive to it (technology I mean).

 

[Sithborg]

If my time in Star Wars, both pre and post Disney has taught me anything, its don't sweat the small stuff.

 

[TheVileOne]

If my time in Star Wars, both pre and post Disney has taught me anything, its don't sweat the small stuff.

What is small and what is big though? What should be sweated out?

 

[InCali]

Gee.......I know this isn't going to go over well, but I like it because the episodes have an ending and I don't have to wait 2 months to watch/binge it.

 

[Sithborg]

What is small and what is big though? What should be sweated out?

The vast majority of it.

 

[TheVileOne]

The vast majority of it.

So...Discovery/Picard/Lower Decks?

 

[Perfect Cell]

Gee.......I know this isn't going to go over well, but I like it because the episodes have an ending and I don't have to wait 2 months to watch/binge it.

Why would that not go over well, its episodic nature is one of the most popular features of the show.

 

[Sithborg]

So...Discovery/Picard/Lower Decks?

I mean, I'm not going to complain if Riker reverts back to what we saw on Lower Decks next season. Or the Mars disaster never being mentioned again. Or when the Borg are used as enemies again.

The point is to not let continuity get in the way of a good story.

 

[misjuevos]

I mean, I'm not going to complain if Riker reverts back to what we saw on Lower Decks next season. Or the Mars disaster never being mentioned again. Or when the Borg are used as enemies again.

The point is to not let continuity get in the way of a good story.

Not sure if you are referring to those other shows or this one in particular.

I will speak to this show and say I disagree, continuity should be more important. You can still tell a good story within continuity. Yes there can be some leeway, we have seen it. But if you start changing everything why even call it Star Trek and not some generic title. They are using the name to get the built in fanbase. Continuity in this show should have more importance. The leeway they have is that a lot of the characters were unexplored in TOS. The main issue is that Spock is not one of them. We know so much about his life and culture at this point. The writers should have no excuse for how he is portrayed. There are tons of references and info on Star Trek they can use. His character is iconic and that continuity should be kept. At least in episode 3 Spock had limited screen time so they didn't have a chance to mess him up more.

 

[InCali]

Why would that not go over well, its episodic nature is one of the most popular features of the show.

Because I'm shallow and don't really care if every, single thing doesn't fit exactly what Gene Roddenberry came up with over 50 years ago. In fact, Jeffrey Hunter should still be playing Pike.

 

[Dr.]

Because I'm shallow and don't really care if every, single thing doesn't fit exactly what Gene Roddenberry came up with over 50 years ago. In fact, Jeffrey Hunter should still be playing Pike.

In a somewhat audacious flashback, Hunter did show up in a DISCO episode.

 

[InCali]

In a somewhat audacious flashback, Hunter did show up in a DISCO episode.

Right. The Menagerie. Mr. Hunter was a handsome son of a gun. Wasn't he?

 

[Perfect Cell]

Because I'm shallow and don't really care if every, single thing doesn't fit exactly what Gene Roddenberry came up with over 50 years ago. In fact, Jeffrey Hunter should still be playing Pike.

...which is what I've been saying this entire time. Thank you for the support, I always appreciate it.

 

[InCali]

...which is what I've been saying this entire time. Thank you for the support, I always appreciate it.

I'm always happy to offer myself up as fodder in order to get the approval of others.

 

[Perfect Cell]

I'm always happy to offer myself up as fodder in order to get the approval of others.

Hey, these forums wouldn't exist without the sacrifice of you and people like you. Thank you for your service, now I need you to go write a four-paragraph essay about why Morbius is a modern-day Othello. I haven't read Othello, so you're going to have to figure that part out on your own.

Also, Hunter was handsome, but Anson Mount is impossibly good-looking. To such a degree that it kinda offends me.

 

[InCali]

Hey, these forums wouldn't exist without the sacrifice of you and people like you. Thank you for your service, now I need you to go write a four-paragraph essay about why Morbius is a modern-day Othello. I haven't read Othello, so you're going to have to figure that part out on your own.

Also, Hunter was handsome, but Anson Mount is impossibly good-looking. To such a degree that it kinda offends me.

I actually have read Othello. EDIT: Saw the play too at Shakespeare Santa Cruz

Some guy gets mad cause he didn't get a job and comes up with a plot to get rid of the guy who passed him over. The plot kinda works and everyone dies.

The End

I haven't seen Morbius and unless everyone dies, I don't think I will.

EDIT: They picked a good Pike