Topic: Star Trek re-boot that never was  (Read 9929 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2008, 05:21:15 pm »
There was also first contact with the Klingons, human use of transporters, probably much more but those are the two I recall. With the exception of a racing yacht and a Goodyear blimp it was every US ship named Enterprise at that time. Not likely that they'd leave out such a famous member of their line. Not a big one for me though, the "ring ship" never fit anyway. The aft torpedo thing isn't worth bothering with, but I kind of wish the lame "not enough money for one more shot", when you could have hand painted the shot on an existing still of the ship which was done several times with phasers, excuses would stop. A reboot and a re-imagining are pretty much the same thing, any reboot of TOS Trek would almost certainly be a re-imagining. TNG and ENT both tell different stories in the same canon universe as TOS, it'd be like calling the "Starship Farragut" or "Tales of the 7th Fleet" series a re-imaging of the TOS series.

Edit: oh Nem got the first one already.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2008, 05:32:05 pm »
There was also first contact with the Klingons, human use of transporters, probably much more but those are the two I recall. With the exception of a racing yacht and a Goodyear blimp it was every US ship named Enterprise at that time. Not likely that they'd leave out such a famous member of their line. Not a big one for me though, the "ring ship" never fit anyway. The aft torpedo thing isn't worth bothering with, but I kind of wish the lame "not enough money for one more shot", when you could have hand painted the shot on an existing still of the ship which was done several times with phasers, excuses would stop. A reboot and a re-imagining are pretty much the same thing, any reboot of TOS Trek would almost certainly be a re-imagining. TNG and ENT both tell different stories in the same canon universe as TOS, it'd be like calling the "Starship Farragut" or "Tales of the 7th Fleet" series a re-imaging of the TOS series.

Humans use of transporters was a slight retcon.  Rather than humans not having the technology, it was that they had it, but it was far less reliable.  Remember season one had a guy beamed up, and the leaves that were blowing around him became embedded in his skin.  As for the list.  there were something like six Enterprises in the US navy, including the most decorated carrier of WWII, and the first nuclear aircraft carrier.  The Royal navy also had several Enterprizes.  Most of these ships were not included.  I consider the spinoffs to be reboot light.  Basically, they drastically change the nature of the ship, its capabilities, and the galactic political environment, much the same way that a reboot does.  The only difference is that an effort was made to do this, but preserve the original cannon.

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2008, 05:48:52 pm »
A "retcon" is still an explicit break of canon it's even defined as "the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction". Reread the post I said every US ship named Enterprise as of 1979, the WWII Enterprise was scrapped in 1958. As I said I give that one a pass, because I never liked the ring ship and I really don't expect an image that won't be created for 30+ years to appear anyway. "re-boot light"? *sighs* that'd make every movie of every genre a reboot/re-imagining/reboot-light of every single other movie in that genre, it makes "We Were Soldiers" a reboot of "Apocalypse Now". "The Jeffersons" was not a "reboot light" of "All in the Family", "Laverne & Shirley" was not a "reboot-light" of "Happy Days" neither was " Joanie Loves Chachi", see where that's going.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2008, 06:04:01 pm by Vipre »
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13060
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2008, 05:53:35 pm »
Also, where in cannon was it stated that first contact with the Klingons was 2218?

Day of the Dove.

The cloak in enterprise seemed to be one of many technologies that the romulans were toying with.  Early cloaks might have been abandoned by the time of the war.  In balance of terror, the primary source of information on Romulan capabilities that Kirk had to work with came from war records.

I would have to watch it again but I'm nearly positive that it is stated that the cloak is brand new and never seen before in Balance of Terror.

Voyager states that knowledge of the borg was much more extensive then we were originally led to believe, but it was restricted to the admiralty.  Picard would not have had access to the technology during Q-who.

Like I said, Enterprise played loose with cannon, but never exlicitly broke it.

I haven't watched very much Voyager so I will have to take your word for that. 

Moving the contact with the Klingons ahead to before the Earth Romulan war is an explicit break of canon.

And as I said already:
Quote
The Borg on the Enterprise NX 01 would have been in the Federation databanks and that would have been made available to Picard at least after his report of the Borg contact.  That would include the knowledge of Cochranes report of an attack from the FUTURE defeated by others from the future.  Again that includes knowledge of time travel.

It would have been made available to Picard after his first encounter with the Borg but there is no sign that it was.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #24 on: May 11, 2008, 06:05:39 pm »
A "retcon" is still an explicit break of canon it's even defined as "the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction". Reread the post I said every US ship named Enterprise as of 1979, the WWII Enterprise was scrapped in 1958. As I said I give that one a pass, because I never liked the ring ship and I really don't expect an image that won't be created for 30+ years to appear anyway. "re-boot light"? *sighs* that'd make every movie of every genre a reboot/re-imagining/reboot-light of every single other movie in that genre, it makes "We Were Soldiers" a reboot of "Apocalypse Now".

So the sailing ship Enterprise pictured was still in existence as of 1979?  I never said that small changes were not appropriate, and also, rather than completely ignoring the previous statement about 22nd century transporters, Enterprise tried to re-interpret it.  Every new film in a genre is not a reboot light.  Rather if an effort is made to tie the new work to a previous one, but at the same time do a drastically different depiction it is a reboot.  If an effort is made not to dismiss the previous work, its a reboot light.

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2008, 06:14:25 pm »
Also, where in cannon was it stated that first contact with the Klingons was 2218?

Day of the Dove.

The cloak in enterprise seemed to be one of many technologies that the romulans were toying with.  Early cloaks might have been abandoned by the time of the war.  In balance of terror, the primary source of information on Romulan capabilities that Kirk had to work with came from war records.

I would have to watch it again but I'm nearly positive that it is stated that the cloak is brand new and never seen before in Balance of Terror.

Voyager states that knowledge of the borg was much more extensive then we were originally led to believe, but it was restricted to the admiralty.  Picard would not have had access to the technology during Q-who.

Like I said, Enterprise played loose with cannon, but never exlicitly broke it.

I haven't watched very much Voyager so I will have to take your word for that. 

Moving the contact with the Klingons ahead to before the Earth Romulan war is an explicit break of canon.

And as I said already:
Quote
The Borg on the Enterprise NX 01 would have been in the Federation databanks and that would have been made available to Picard at least after his report of the Borg contact.  That would include the knowledge of Cochranes report of an attack from the FUTURE defeated by others from the future.  Again that includes knowledge of time travel.

It would have been made available to Picard after his first encounter with the Borg but there is no sign that it was.

I will have to watch day of the Dove again to see what you are talking about with regards to the Klingons.  Kirk seemed to know surprisingly little about Romulans at the beginning of balance of terror.  Stiles had to tell him that Romulan ships during the war were painted like a bird of prey, and there was very little mention of other Romulan technology.  As I stated scientists of the time determined that time travel was impossible, and throughout Enterprise pretty much ignored evidence of it when it was staring them in the face.  As I stated before about Archer's encounter with the borg, they didn't know what they were dealing with, and unless someone put 2 and 2 together 200 years later, they would not have realized that is what they encountered.  Even if that isn't the case, it might not have been mentioned because the tactical abilities of a borg cube are going to be far superior those of a modified 22nd century freighter.  After TOS showed it could be done, the records would have been sealed to prevent contamination of the timeline.  In Voyager, 7 of 9's parents were scientists who the admiralty sent to study the borg several years before TNG.  They were brilliant but stupid.  They developed technologies that allowed them to approach the borg ships without detection, but the tended to take unnecessary and dangerous risks.  Eventually, their shields were briefly knocked down during an ion storm, and they were detected and assimilated.  It does make sense that someone at a high paygrade knew about the borg if they were taking Elaurian refugees in ST Generations.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2008, 06:44:04 pm by knightstorm »

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2008, 06:57:29 pm »
So the sailing ship Enterprise pictured was still in existence as of 1979? I never said that small changes were not appropriate, and also, rather than completely ignoring the previous statement about 22nd century transporters, Enterprise tried to re-interpret it. Every new film in a genre is not a reboot light. Rather if an effort is made to tie the new work to a previous one, but at the same time do a drastically different depiction it is a reboot. If an effort is made not to dismiss the previous work, its a reboot light.
In my first example, both movies are about soldiers on missions during the Vietnam war, that is the exact same tie in between TOS, TNG and ENT all are set on ships from Starfleet sent to explore the unknown. If you made two movies, one about the Enterprise during WWII and the other about the Enterprise today they wouldn't be considered "reboot-lights" of each other just because they're both set on ships named Enterprise during a war. And no that ship wasn't around but the theme of the displays went "Sailing/Colonial era", "Modern Naval era (ours)", "Birth of space travel", "Deep space travel (presumably could also be intrasolar), "Current (theirs)" so they took one of the many Colonial/early Enterprises, the existing naval in 79 Enterprise, the shuttle Enterprise, a filler ship and the TOS E.

Quote
the ships are according to Okuda's DVD text commentary, an 18th century frigate, the much decorated World War II carrier, the space shuttle prototype, an unseen ship which was actually an early Matt Jefferies design for the TV Enterprise and of course, the original configuration of the Enterprise from the original series

My mistake, it was the WWII E and not the existing one. But as I've said I agree with you that the argument that ENT didn't happen/isn't canon because it's picture wasn't in TMP is a ridiculous one.


Quote
if an effort is made to tie the new work to a previous one, but at the same time do a drastically different depiction it is a reboot
That's a "spin-off"

"Something that is imitative or derivative of an earlier work, product, or establishment; especially : a television show starring a character popular in a secondary role of an earlier show"

The problem is you keep getting your definitions mixed up, calling spin-offs reboots and re-imaginings. Look up reboot on Wiki and read up on BSG (new) and especially the Wonder Woman Comic series which has a great example of how reboots work. Shows about different people in different times doing different things within the same canon universe are not reboots, reboots are about the same people in a different canon.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #27 on: May 11, 2008, 07:07:16 pm »
That's a "spin-off"

"Something that is imitative or derivative of an earlier work, product, or establishment; especially : a television show starring a character popular in a secondary role of an earlier show"

The problem is you keep getting your definitions mixed up, calling spin-offs reboots and re-imaginings. Look up reboot on Wiki and read up on BSG (new) and especially the Wonder Woman Comic series which has a great example of how reboots work. Shows about different people in different times doing different things within the same canon universe are not reboots, reboots are about the same people in a different canon.

A spinoff is usually something less extreme.  I consider TNG and Enterprise to be reboot lite because of the sheer levels of changes when compared to the original.  The different eras were used as a tool to try to tie them into the existing cannon.  Likewise, I do not consider DS9 and Voyager to be reboot lite.


But as I've said I agree with you that the argument that ENT didn't happen/isn't canon because it's picture wasn't in TMP is a ridiculous one.

so why are we arguing about this again?
« Last Edit: May 11, 2008, 07:21:39 pm by knightstorm »

Offline Vipre

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3105
  • Gender: Male
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #28 on: May 11, 2008, 07:22:56 pm »
Quote
A spinoff is usually something less extreme.  I consider TNG and Enterprise to be reboot lite because of the sheer levels of changes when compared to the original.


"MASH"/"AfterMASH"/"Trapper John, M.D." nuff said.

Edit: Really though this could go on forever, I don't consider sushi real food that doesn't make it true. Consider them reboots if you like, same standard applies.
Lapsed Pastafarian  
"Parmesan be upon Him"

"Dear God,
   If aliens are real please let them know that I'm formally requesting asylum from the freakshow that is humanity."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Star Trek re-boot that never was
« Reply #29 on: May 11, 2008, 07:42:15 pm »
Quote
A spinoff is usually something less extreme.  I consider TNG and Enterprise to be reboot lite because of the sheer levels of changes when compared to the original.


"MASH"/"AfterMASH"/"Trapper John, M.D." nuff said.

Edit: Really though this could go on forever, I don't consider sushi real food that doesn't make it true. Consider them reboots if you like, same standard applies.

The only series on that list that I recognize is the original.  If you click on my profile, you'll understand why.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but my point is that setting the spinoffs in different eras was an attempt to accomplish what BSG did without rejecting the cannon, and in that way, it is like a reboot.