• 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!

Super Hi Res Enterprise

Captain Robert April said:
In the same way that you can't be only partly pregnant, TAS isn't partly canon. In Kor's last episode on DS9, he makes reference to his old ship, the Klothos, which is a direct reference to TAS' "Time Trap". In another episode, Garak makes a reference to Edosian orchids, a reference to the home planet of Lt. Arex. And so on and so on...
Click to expand...

Nah. That just means it is canon that Kor once had a ship named Klothos and that there are orchids named after a planet, continent, or person named "Edosian."
 
number6 said:
Captain Robert April said:
That's the best comeback you can muster? "No it's not"? That's not refutation, that's just simple naysaying.
Click to expand...

How's this, then??

Taken directly from StarTrek.com:
As a rule of thumb, the events that take place within the live-action episodes and movies are canon, or official Star Trek facts. Story lines, characters, events, stardates, etc. that take place within the fictional novels, video games, the Animated Series, and the various comic lines have traditionally not been considered part of the canon. But canon is not something set in stone; even events in some of the movies have been called into question as to whether they should be considered canon! Ultimately, the fans, the writers and the producers may all differ on what is considered canon and the very idea of what is canon has become more fluid, especially as there isn't a single voice or arbiter to decide. Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry was accustomed to making statements about canon, but even he was known to change his mind.
In the publishing world, there used to be two exceptions to the novel rule: the Jeri Taylor- penned books "Mosaic" and "Pathways." Many of the events in these two novels feature background details of the main Star Trek: Voyager characters and were to be considered as references by writers on the show. Now that the show is over, some of those events may never be incorporated into a live action format, so the question of whether details from these novels remain canon is open to interpretation.

With regard to the Animated Series, there are a few details from the episode "Yesteryear," written by D.C. Fontana, that reveal biographical background on Spock and planet Vulcan. Details from this episode have been successfully incorporated into the canon of Star Trek (such as in "The Forge") and now that the Animated Series is out on DVD, we hope that even more can make its way in!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
You guys know that there IS a way to accept TAS without having to 100% accept it.

My "willful suspension of disbelief" prevents me from accepting that Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were every actually made of pen-and-ink drawings on animation cells. I can accept that they "were" real human beings, but not drawings.

So... what we see in TAS is simply a "dramatization of 'real' events" which occurred in the Star Trek universe.

SOMETHING "real" happened. And what we're getting is a second, or third-hand presentation of what happened. Stylized and perhaps wrong in a few details here and there, but substantially true nevertheless.

SO... if you have a problem with this bit, or that bit, of TAS... as long as it's not totally unreconcilable... just treat that as "presentation error" as the ship's logs were translated into animated representations. Heck, treat them as intentional distortions intended to hide classified information if you wish!

That way... you still get to keep all the good stuff from TAS while ignoring the other stuff, or at least "tweaking" that other stuff into a more palatable form.

(By the way, that's also how I look at "And the Children Shall Lead," "Spock's Brain," "The Way to Eden," and so forth. The "real" events were probably much different than what we saw on-screen, but something substantially similar did happen, nevertheless. Just with less lameness. ;)

That way, you can say "they're not canon" because they're not 100% accurate representations... but that what they are representing (inaccurately) IS "canon."
 
Cary --

I never said I didn't enjoy TAS, I just said I don't consider it canon.

Take 'The Terratin Incident' for example...
Did I think it was a fun episode? Of course I did.

Does that mean that when I think about the fictional history of Star Trek, do I think Kirk, Spock, and the crew once shrunk down to 4 inches high? No, I don't.
 
Jackson_Roykirk said:
Cary --

I never said I didn't enjoy TAS, I just said I don't consider it canon.

Take 'The Terratin Incident' for example...
Did I think it was a fun episode? Of course I did.

Does that mean that when I think about the fictional history of Star Trek, do I think Kirk, Spock, and the crew once shrunk down to 4 inches high? No, I don't.
Click to expand...
So, what COULD it have involved?

It's an interesting exercise... how could you "reimagine" "The Terratin Incident" so that it was in SOME way based upon something ... ahem... "real"... that happened in the Star Trek universe?

Is that possible? Perhaps, for instance, the size reduction wasn't nearly so significant? Perhaps it was some dimensional rift that seemed to reduce size while actually was transitioning the humans and other organic matter into another realm of "space/time" (perhaps one that was... from a quantum point-of-view... "smaller?")

You could come up with SOMETHING... albeit something horrifically complicated and certainly not suitable for children's entertainment... that might be able to make this "click," I think.

Then again... I still mentally retcon "Return of the Jedi" to have savage Wookies (distant cousins of Chewbacca), rather than cute cuddly teddy bears, be the ones who defeated the Empire's best troops. :techman:
 
Jackson_Roykirk said:
Captain April --

You keep referring to items from TAS that were referenced by other live action episodes/movies, and that's fine -- those items are now canon.

However, just because something is referenced from source such as TAS does not make the entirety of that source canon.

Take Kirk's mother's name for example. The name "Winona Kirk" is found nowhere but in novels and a comic. However in Abrams' new film, Kirk's mother will be given the name Winona. This will be the first use of that name in a live action TV show or film, so it will become canon when the film is released.

However, once "Winona" as Kirk's mother's name becomes official canon, that does NOT automatically canonize the original source of the reference. "Winona" is canon, the source novels are not. Kor's ship "Klothos" is was canonized by DS9, so it is now canon; the original source (TAS) for the ship's name is not.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that Captain A knows all of that as well as anyone here.

Meanwhile...

number6 said:
Um... yeah.

Does anyone remember the topic anymore??
Click to expand...
Dukhat said:
Yes. It's about the Super Hi Res Enterprise.:)
Click to expand...
Yes! A winner! :)

Finally...
Cary L. Brown said:
number6 said:
Captain Robert April said:
<snip>
Click to expand...
<snip>

Taken directly from <snip>.com:
<snip>
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
<snip>

My "willful suspension of disbelief" prevents me...
<snip>
Click to expand...
The term is properly "willing suspension of disbelief". Briefly:
Suspension of disbelief or "willing suspension of disbelief" is an aesthetic theory intended to characterize people's relationships to art. It was coined by the poet and aesthetic philosopher Samuel Taylor Coleridge in 1817. It refers to the willingness of a person to accept as true the premises of a work of fiction, even if they are fantastic or impossible. It also refers to the willingness of the audience to overlook the limitations of a medium, so that these do not interfere with the acceptance of those premises.
Click to expand...
It involves acceptance, which I think is the point you were intending to make, and doesn't prevent you from doing anything.

Now... can we please get back to the topic mentioned immediately above your quoted post? The Enterprise, in high-res?
 
^
^^ Except for the CG parts, since they are computer animated.

...therefore, back to topic, Abrams' Super Hi Res (CG) Enterprise is not canon. :evil:
 
Jackson_Roykirk said:
Captain April --

You keep referring to items from TAS that were referenced by other live action episodes/movies, and that's fine -- those items are now canon.

However, just because something is referenced from source such as TAS does not make the entirety of that source canon.

Take Kirk's mother's name for example. The name "Winona Kirk" is found nowhere but in novels and a comic. However in Abrams' new film, Kirk's mother will be given the name Winona. This will be the first use of that name in a live action TV show or film, so it will become canon when the film is released.

However, once "Winona" as Kirk's mother's name becomes official canon, that does NOT automatically canonize the original source of the reference. "Winona" is canon, the source novels are not. Kor's ship "Klothos" is was canonized by DS9, so it is now canon; the original source (TAS) for the ship's name is not.

It seems that using your argument, since Abrams and crew are using the novels 'Best Destiny' and 'Final Frontier' as references for the name of Kirk's mother, then those novels themselves should become canon.
Click to expand...
JACKPOT! THE BEST EXPLANATION YET.

Dukhat said:
CaptainHawk1 said:
Dukhat said:
Dude, what the hell is your problem? Because you don't agree with what I'm saying, you resort to personal attacks against me? First of all, don't patronize me by calling me "junior." I'm older than you are. And my "distinction" came straight from the mouth of Ronald D. Moore, when he was working on ST at the time.
Click to expand...
First, it wasn't a personal attack, Mr. I joined in 2007 and have 144 posts. Second, I went to your profile too and this is the one thing I got out of it:




I'm just busting your balls, relax. But seriously, Ron Moore doesn't decide that shit either.
Yeah, I know that. That's why I said they were "official," not canon. Go back and read what the fuck I said before copping your self-righteous attitude.
Click to expand...
I read it and it's still wrong, sorry.

-Shawn :borg:
Click to expand...

My apologies. I didn't realize that this site was actually Facebook, where people value their self-worth based on how many people they can tag as friends.

So basically, cutting through all this drivel, what you're really saying is, "I know I was a jerk earlier, but I'm not about to admit it to you."

OK. I can live with that.;)
Click to expand...
I never take this shit seriously and sometimes I bust balls for the hell of it. I came off like an ass with you and for that I apologize. The fact is that I took what you originally posted out of context and even though I still don't agree with the distinction, I do get it now.

I was just being five years-old with the profile thing. :)

-Shawn :borg:
 
Jackson_Roykirk said:
Take 'The Terratin Incident' for example...
Did I think it was a fun episode? Of course I did.

Does that mean that when I think about the fictional history of Star Trek, do I think Kirk, Spock, and the crew once shrunk down to 4 inches high? No, I don't.
Click to expand...

Then why are they making action figures that tall? :p

And why is it canonical when other crew members are shrunk down in a live-action episode but it's just absurd (albeit fun) for it to happen in a cartoon?

Kpnuts said:
MisterPL said:
Yeah. That's TOTALLY a window.

With a wicked cool HUD, of course.

Can't wait 'til May.
Click to expand...


Most people seem to agree :techman:
Click to expand...

Hey, if it walks like a duck...
 
Last edited:
Imo, you have to come up with some pretty convincing evidence in order to justify a revision like that, which no one can do.

...

I consider the globe hull ship to be the Daedalus. That won't change until it's directly contradicted by canon.

...

I don't give two shits one way or another about TAS.

...

There, I think that covers all the little battlefields here.
 
ancient said:
Imo, you have to come up with some pretty convincing evidence in order to justify a revision like that, which no one can do.
Click to expand...
I agree with this entirely and this has been my problem with the new ship since day one. I don't mind updating and even changing the design to make it more contemporary and less out-of-1965, but that viewscreen is a radcial departure just as the nacelles, torp launcher, dorsal section, pylons and aft section are.

I'm not thrilled about the new Enterprise, but again, those hi res pictures do a lot for it and I trust that it's going to be a good movie overall so I'll let it slide.

-Shawn :borg:
 
~ Star Trek Rhapsody ~

Is it a view screen.... Is it a window.... Caught in the fandom..... Arguing a moot point.... Open your eyes.... Look at the high res pic and see.... We're just crazy fans.... Don't you see.... Anyway the Trek goes doesn't really matter to me.....

Shatner..... Just killed a red shirt.... Put a phaser against his head.... Pulled the trigger now he's dead.... Goodbye everybody.... He's got to go.... He's not even in the new movie.... Shatner.... OOOooo.... Didn't mean not to have not be in the new movie.... Carry on, carry on.... Cause it doesn't really matter....

Too late.... to throw a fit.... the movies a done deal.... no matter how the fans feel.... you've got to give it up and face the truth.... OOOooo.... Cause it doesn't really matter....

I see a little sillowet of a fan....

SHOUTING SPOCK !
SHOUTING SPOCK !
CAN YOU WARE A SOMBERO ?

Photon Torpeedoes and Phasers verry verry frightning indeed....

Galilieo, Galilieo, Galileo, Seveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen....

I'm just a poor fan doing a parody....
He's just a poor fan doing a parody, spare him his life from this insanity !

Will I stay, Will I go, Will you let me go ?

K'plaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
We will not let you go....
K'plaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Will not let you go....
K'plaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Will not let you go....
K'plaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Oh let me gooooooooooooooooooo....
No, No, No, No, No....

Willam Shatner, William Shatner, let me go.... These crazy fans have in for me, for me, for mmmmmmmmmmmmmeeeeeeeeeeeeeee......

( head banging sequence )

So you think you can take this seriously ? So you think I can't do a parody ? OoooHhhhhhh baby, can't do this to me baby, gotta get out, gotta get right out of hereeeee....

OOOooo Yeah....
OOOooo Yeah....

Nothing really matters, anyone can see....
Nothing really matters....
Nothing really matters, to me.....
Anyway the Trek goes....

( gong )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top