posted
the 'original series' for many of the newer fans of the franchise. As for the original 'original' series, this series will be seen as something that their parents or grandparents watched and may not be accessible to the new viewership.
I applaud the producers for attempting to create a new 'orignal' series. Wheter or not the series will succeed, the attempt is a noble endeavor.
posted
What makes you feel that this will be the 'orignal' series for new fans. Surely that falls to the Next Generation. I agree that many of the newer fans will have probably never heard of the Original Series I dont think that Enterprise is going to be the new start for the series. The Enterprise series seems to safe to be the next big thing in trek, it lacks something.
Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Enterprise is intended to be the 'starting' point for the past three series. This makes the show the 'original' show. TNG, DS9, and VOY are successors to this show. TOS, which dates back at least three generations (grandparent, parent, child), is less known today unless you happen to be a deep core fan. I am a deep core fan, and I know this series is not intended for me. The show would be intended for the children of the parents who watched TNG. The children would see this show and would learn how TNG, DS9, and VOY came to be what they are.
This last point is supported by Producer Berman's comments that the show is heavily based on the last three series.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: targetemployee ]
posted
I fall into the "child" category here -- my first "Trek" was DS9, my grandparents were adults in the 60s (they never watched the show), and my parents were children when the show first aired.
And yet TOS still remains "the original series" for me. And I am seriously worried because it appears that B&B are planning to rewrite Trek history.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
posted
That's strange... I've never seen any indication so far that any aspect of Enterprise will violate continuity with any later series. That would seem to be the defining point of rewriting Trek history, yet Enterprise gives no hint of doing so. To take a look at a few of the contested points (major spoilers for those who care).
Transporters: Earliest known usage is 2209, with no statement of technology age at the time. There is no contradiction to have them first approved for living matter in 2151. In fact, this is supported by "The Terratin Incident" (TAS) in which a pre-Federation Earth colony knew of transporter technology. No conflict.
Klingon first contact: The only statement of when this event occurred was in "First Contact" (TNG), describing it as "centuries ago." Since that episode was set in 2367, anything before 2167 would work... and Enterprise is before 2167. No conflict.
Starfleet: Nowhere was it ever stated that Starfleet was founded with the Federation; that is an assumption fans have made but nothing more. While Starfleet was certainly the Federation's military branch at the time of its founding, there is no pressing reason why it couldn't predate said Federation. All we know is that Starfleet Academy was founded in 2161, and even that is based solely on Roman numerals on a barely-visible flag. No conflict.
Enterprise Design: Despite it's appearence from above, the Enterprise bears only a superficial relation to the Akira class... and then, only a superficial resemblence when seen from above! The only similarities that I can see are the catamaran hull and "weapons pod" (which may or may not be a weapons pod on Enterprise). The refit Constitution and Excelsior would be a good analogy; a small original ship and big older brother that share the placement of parts but not the parts themselves. The Enterprise design shares about that much with the Akira, but for some reason people object. Actually, with the dramatically altered nacelle placement, the Enterprise shares less with the Akira! Differences include: upward slanting pylons rather than down, pylons connecting at front of nacelles rather than back, round primary hull rather than elliptical. Stong continuity connections to the Constitution class include: markings surrounding running lights on saucer match those from "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before," golden deflector on the front (another change from the Akira), TOS-style round nacelles. Additionally, we've never seen the ship from the side... the front-mounted deflector dish suggests that she is probably not "sharp-edged" on the saucer like the Akira, which could make the saucer much more Constitution-like, with a multi-deck rim rather than sloping to a point. I think that is probably the biggest flaw in all of the fan renderings. We also don't know what the bottom of the saucer will have on it... obviously not the deflector (another change from the Akira).
Future-Villian: One thing Star Trek has been clear about is that in its universe, time travel is sometimes an integral part of the way things "should" have happened. While I find it distasteful, I don't see having a future-villian as inherently a continuity problem, because clearly, it is part of the "correct" flow of events. The villian always tried, and Enterprise always foiled him. Maybe that's what led to the Temporal Prime Directive and the Department of Temporal Investigations.
Suliban: How many races were seen in TOS and never again? Even "important" races, like the Tellarites, were seen in the 2260s, but never in the 2360s-70s. Does adding one more race to the list really cause too many problems? I don't find it hard to believe that, with thousands of encoutnered races, nobody has mentioned a particular race. All that tells us is that the Suliban didn't do much after the 2150s.
Any other preceived continuity problems?
-=Ryan McReynolds=-
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
I may only be 22 years old, but I grew up on The Original Series. My mother was a fan in the 1960s, and she instilled that same love of Trek in me that she herself possesses. To me, my two favorite Trek series are TOS and The Next Generation.
I don't know where a lot of people are getting the idea that Trek history is being rewritten. I certainly don't see and haven't seen any evidence of that. There is nothing on-screen that seems to contradict what I grew up watching. As for the new series, I see no indication that it will attempt to rewrite Trek history either. I could be wrong, since the show hasn't premeired yet, but it's always a good idea to not jump to conclusions.
posted
AndrewR: substitute Scalosians, or Elasians, or Platonians, or whatever. Even better, can we say, "Organians?" That's a near-perfect analogue. A major race, integral to the peace and prosperity of the Federation, capable of immense power, and there hasn't been a mention of them since. Not a peep. The Suliban don't seem to be anywhere near the importance of the Organians, so there's even more reason for them to be essentially ignored in future times. And maybe between scenes the TNG, DS9, and Voyager crews spend long hours discussing the Suliban; we just never catch them.
Siegfried: Glad you agree. I'm 21; I was raised on TNG, I loved DS9, I think Voyager blows, and my favorite series is TOS. I have no reason to believe that the new series will be any good, since it is made by the staff of the one show I didn't enjoy. Nevertheless, I feel that one should always have a "wait and see" attitude... and certainly not assume that the show will violate continuity and rewrite history when, so far there is no evidence to support that conclusion. I'm sure there will be a fair share of goofs, missed references, and watnot, but I have not seen any reason to believe that they will intentionally screw up anything. Time will tell, and I'm not going to jump to conclusions.
-=Ryan McReynolds=-
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
posted
I'm an original 'Trekkie', I grew up watching reruns of TOS in the 70's. For me tht is the original series, even though I consider myself an even bigger fan of 'new Trek' ie from TNG onwards. But I see each Trek incarnation as different chapters or installments from the Trek universe, no less valid than each of the others.
TOS will still be the 'original' (for me), and Enterprise will just be a new chapter, only detailing an earlier time-frame in Trek history.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
Well, Ryan, I have to disagree about Voyager. I actually enjoyed it quite a bit, but I admit that it sure did have its fair share of problems. A lot of these I'll consider Berman and Braga responsible for so far as they are the producers (in particular Berman is the head of the Star Trek family) and have the final say on issues of major trends in plotlines and character development. Yeah, Enterprise has Berman and Braga as the producers, but the writing staff (at least the last time I say notice of it) is going to be completely new with no veterans of the earlier series. This, of course, could be good news or bad news depending on who's checking the scripts for alignment with established canon. But, we'll certainly find out on September 26th.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Just to interject, but Berman dropped a rather tantalizing hint in the TV Guide interview that there is a very good reason why we haven't seen or heard of the Suliban in the 23rd and 24th centuries.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: Just to interject, but Berman dropped a rather tantalizing hint in the TV Guide interview that there is a very good reason why we haven't seen or heard of the Suliban in the 23rd and 24th centuries.
Yes, I read that... though saying that they were a minor race before the time-travel could mean that they were a minor race fromp pre-history until 2151, when the time-travel occurred; it doesn't have to mean that they were a minor race in the mainstream universe and now the timeline has changed. I don't know if that makes sense or not, but hopefully it does.
I'm curious as to if, by the end of Enterprise, this temporal cold war will have affected the future timeline or not. Until I see otherwise, I'm going to assume that the time-travel aspect "always happened" in the standard timeline we know and love. If the producers want to have the time-travel change things, more power to them. Although I'd enjoy seeing the "real" birth of the Federation, seing an alternate version would certainly excuse continuity mistakes, even if it ceases to have relevance in the "real" timeline. I hope it doesn't turn out that way.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
