• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Discovery Theory

Okay. Being serious now: people speculate. I honestly don't think people believe it can't be Prime Timeline. In any case, people will believe what they want, facts and Word of God or no. Does it really matter, in the end?
 
No, that's not the "discussion" at all. People keep on insisting that DSC cannot be set in the Prime Timeline because, aesthetically , it looks like the Kelvin Timeline, even though, as I keep on having to point out, its aesthetic is FROM the Prime Timeline because its an extension of the USS Kelvin's aesthetic.
Unless, of course, one believes as I do that the Kelvin Timeline actually branched off at the events of "Star Trek: First Contact", ran through "Star Trek: Enterprise", and then on to the nuTrek movies... :P
 
There does not need to be an in-universe explanation for the aesthetic of DSC and its similarities with the aesthetic of the Kelvin Timeline because its aesthetic is based on the USS Kelvin itself, which, as I seem to be forced to continually point out, existed/originated in the PRIME TIMELINE.
Yknow, if anything the current new aesthetic is more like the USS Franklin, not the Kelvin and such, puts it very firmly in the Prime universe.
 
No, that's not the "discussion" at all. People keep on insisting that DSC cannot be set in the Prime Timeline because, aesthetically , it looks like the Kelvin Timeline, even though, as I keep on having to point out, its aesthetic is FROM the Prime Timeline because its an extension of the USS Kelvin's aesthetic.

I'm treating it as a reboot, because I can't make the visual round peg that is Discovery fit into the square peg that is TOS.

Betting that CBS doesn't care as long as they get my money.
 
Seeing as how the trailer shows no sign of the U.S.S. Discovery, Captain Lorca and seems soundly entrenched in the NuTrek universe, might this series be a bridge between them?

Something happens to Lt. Commander Burnham that propels her from the other universe to the Prime one, where she ends up onboard the Discovery, maybe with some plot that spans both?

Just a thought.

The whole point of why DSC does not take place in the Kelvin universe is so that there wouldn't be any story conflict between the TV show and the films. So there isn't going to be any references to the Kelvin universe in DSC.
 
1. CBS owns all rights to the Trek universe, including the stories they "let" Paramount depict in the movies, and the stories told in novels and comics. There's no "legal" reason CBS can't set their first "Star Trek" series in any universe they want, since they own the story rights to ALL the previous Trek episodes and movies. (Paramount needs permission from CBS to use Trek characters and storylines in its movies, not the other way around.)

2. Given the pervasive time travel shenanigans depicted as part of the Temporal Cold War on "Enterprise" 100 years earlier, I have no problem buying that an alternate "Prime" timeline was created 100 years later, with technology, uniforms, and ship designs that are different from the "original" timeline.

As one example, in "Yesterday's Enterprise," Lt. Yar went back in time just 20 years, creating the new TNG timeline where uniforms were different and the Enterprise-D bridge had a different design and lighting scheme than her original timeline. Just imagine if time travelers went back in time seven or eight centuries and changed history, like the Suliban Cabal and Xindi were doing in "Enterprise." That could easily explain differences in uniforms between the "Discovery" timeline and the same time period with Captain Pike and Spock depicted in "The Menagerie" -- if we assume the time travelers involved in the Temporal Cold War were from the future of the TOS timeline, and were actively changing their own past (i.e., the history shown in TOS), as depicted in multiple episodes of "Enterprise," then it's possible the U.S.S. Kelvin and U.S.S. Discovery both originated in this post-Temporal Cold War "Prime" timeline, not the "original" TOS timeline.
 
1. CBS owns all rights to the Trek universe, including the stories they "let" Paramount depict in the movies, and the stories told in novels and comics. There's no "legal" reason CBS can't set their first "Star Trek" series in any universe they want, since they own the story rights to ALL the previous Trek episodes and movies. (Paramount needs permission from CBS to use Trek characters and storylines in its movies, not the other way around.)

2. Given the pervasive time travel shenanigans depicted as part of the Temporal Cold War on "Enterprise" 100 years earlier, I have no problem buying that an alternate "Prime" timeline was created 100 years later, with technology, uniforms, and ship designs that are different from the "original" timeline.

As one example, in "Yesterday's Enterprise," Lt. Yar went back in time just 20 years, creating the new TNG timeline where uniforms were different and the Enterprise-D bridge had a different design and lighting scheme than her original timeline. Just imagine if time travelers went back in time seven or eight centuries and changed history, like the Suliban Cabal and Xindi were doing in "Enterprise." That could easily explain differences in uniforms between the "Discovery" timeline and the same time period with Captain Pike and Spock depicted in "The Menagerie" -- if we assume the time travelers involved in the Temporal Cold War were from the future of the TOS timeline, and were actively changing their own past (i.e., the history shown in TOS), as depicted in multiple episodes of "Enterprise," then it's possible the U.S.S. Kelvin and U.S.S. Discovery both originated in this post-Temporal Cold War "Prime" timeline, not the "original" TOS timeline.

I'm part of the school of thinking that the events of the temporal cold war were already part of TOS history, but this is a pretty elegant way to reason they production differences. I'm just not ready to accept that the former future is no more.

Oh man I'm having 09 flashbacks.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top