Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Continuity has been changed,...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The_Tom: [qb]Anyway, while the 1996 date is certainly the most blatant timestamp for the Eugenics Wars, the "two hundred years ago" line, as I'm assuming you're working with, certainly contradicts this when one considers the mid-23rd century placement of TOS that has been locked in since the show went off the air. Doesn't "Dr. Bashir I Presume" also cast something of a shadow over the 1996 timeframe, too?[/qb] [/QUOTE] Yes and no. [QUOTE]Originally posted to the AOL Message Board by Ronald D. Moore: [qb]This is my personal screw-up. When I was writing that speech, I was thinking about Khan and somehow his dialog from "Wrath" starting floating through my brain: "On Earth... 200 years ago... I was a Prince..." The number 200 just stuck in my head and I put it in the script without making the necessary adjustment for the fact that "Wrath" took place almost a hundred years prior to "Dr. Bashir." I wrote it, I get the blame.[/qb] [/QUOTE] So, on the one hand, Moore does say that he screwed up and the Eugenics Wars were not two hundred years before "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?" On the other hand, he doesn't dispute the idea that it is only two hundred years before [i]The Wrath of Khan[/i]. Incidentally, in my own research, I divide dates into three categories, generally prioritized in the following order: (1) Gregorian date directly given ("1996"). (2) Relative date directly given ("two hundred years ago"). (3) Relative date approximately given ("about two hundred years ago"). I also consider who says what. In this case, given that Khan is [i]from[/i] the era of the Eugenics Wars, it seems likely that he would know better than anyone else what the date was when he left. [QUOTE] [qb]I like to think of the show being forced to balance authenticity and continuity. And while 10% of the audience might be quite willing to ignore authenticity ("well, Trek's in a parallel universe...") in favour of a rigid continuity-fundamentalism ("The bastards didn't show the Eugenics Wars in 1996!") the vast majority of people are more likely to pick out authenticity errors than continuity ones. Even Sternbach and Okuda, I'd venture, fall into the latter camp -- for example, [i]Ares 4[/i] reflects how we see technology behaving 30 years from today, not 30 years from the DY-100.[/qb][/QUOTE] I agree. Personally, I'd prefer if they just avoided mentioning any events prior to 2050 or so, just so that anyone watching the show will be old enough to not care anymore when things don't come to pass. :) [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3