The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Star Trek Canon Does Not Exsist
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-09-2008, 02:29 PM
CAPTAIN MOUSE's Avatar
CAPTAIN MOUSE CAPTAIN MOUSE is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Placerville,CA
Posts: 2,564
Post Star Trek Canon Does Not Exsist

I must preface this thread with message telling all that read it, not to take this as a single person blasting everyone out of the water. First off that is not possible. Instead please take this new thread as a possibility for a new thought.

As I said in the title of this thread "Star Trek canon does not exsist." I have read various threads and heard many conflicting point of view to support this. I have noticed that when one person brings up a particular fact about Star Trek Canon...another person has a equally viable fact to dispute it 98% of the time. So that leads to one conclusion that Star Trek replete with inconsistancies.
Now we have a new film coming out. We will all go see it. In my opinion what ever that has happened in Star Trek is now to be set aside(not forgotten) to establish maybe a new canon this time without a conflicting history that all can enjoy anew for years to come. This is a reboot ...a new chance for more stories with legends that we love.
__________________
CAN YOU CATCH SECOND HAND STUPIDITY? OR SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WATER HERE? - JEFF DUNHAM
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-09-2008, 02:49 PM
Sybock's Avatar
Sybock Sybock is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sha Ka Ree (Vulcan Heaven)
Posts: 451
Default

I'd like to know what is canon and what is not! The movies, TV shows, comic books, Video Games (With cast members or not) and novels .... where do you draw the line! Personally I agree with you that canon does not exist, at least for me. I'll take what I can get and fit it into what I already know of these characters and their history.

I totally respect those that follow canon except when they are fanatical and rude to others. Most of them can really explain their points without bashing others and that I find attractive.
__________________
Spock: "Random chance seems to have operated in our favor"
McCoy: "In plain, non-Vulcan English, we've been lucky"
Spock: "I believe I said that, Doctor" (The Doomsday Machine)

Vulcan Smiley by DNA-1842
  #3  
Old 12-09-2008, 02:52 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN MOUSE View Post
I must preface this thread with message telling all that read it, not to take this as a single person blasting everyone out of the water. First off that is not possible. Instead please take this new thread as a possibility for a new thought.

As I said in the title of this thread "Star Trek canon does not exsist." I have read various threads and heard many conflicting point of view to support this. I have noticed that when one person brings up a particular fact about Star Trek Canon...another person has a equally viable fact to dispute it 98% of the time. So that leads to one conclusion that Star Trek replete with inconsistancies.
Now we have a new film coming out. We will all go see it. In my opinion what ever that has happened in Star Trek is now to be set aside(not forgotten) to establish maybe a new canon this time without a conflicting history that all can enjoy anew for years to come. This is a reboot ...a new chance for more stories with legends that we love.

Bravo...I completely concur.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-09-2008, 03:02 PM
Beetlescott's Avatar
Beetlescott Beetlescott is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN MOUSE View Post
I must preface this thread with message telling all that read it, not to take this as a single person blasting everyone out of the water. First off that is not possible. Instead please take this new thread as a possibility for a new thought.

As I said in the title of this thread "Star Trek canon does not exsist." I have read various threads and heard many conflicting point of view to support this. I have noticed that when one person brings up a particular fact about Star Trek Canon...another person has a equally viable fact to dispute it 98% of the time. So that leads to one conclusion that Star Trek replete with inconsistancies.
Now we have a new film coming out. We will all go see it. In my opinion what ever that has happened in Star Trek is now to be set aside(not forgotten) to establish maybe a new canon this time without a conflicting history that all can enjoy anew for years to come. This is a reboot ...a new chance for more stories with legends that we love.
BRAVO! WELL SAID! I feel that there are too many people coming up with this or that and everyone gets bent out of shape. I love Star Trek, not a day goes by that I don't think about it. I do have a life that has nothing to do with Star Trek, I will NOT allow all this trying to figure canon out, to affect my life. It doesn't matter. It is a wonderful escape for 2 hours, I love it.
__________________
LET'S MAKE SURE HISTORY NEVER FORGETS THE NAME ENTERPRISE!!!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-09-2008, 03:02 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,574
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sybock View Post
I'd like to know what is canon and what is not! The movies, TV shows, comic books, Video Games (With cast members or not) and novels .... where do you draw the line! Personally I agree with you that canon does not exist, at least for me. I'll take what I can get and fit it into what I already know of these characters and their history.
Currently, as I understand it, Paramount holds everything that appeared on the big and small screen to be canon, excluding video games.

As it relates to canon, there are instances where minor -- genuinely trivial -- details have changed. But they did not then change after that. In the case of Kirk's middle initial, you can explain that by saying "Typo." With regard to Spock being called a "Vulcanian", that can be explained by a species being called one thing informally and one formally, then an order coming down that the informal name was not to be used again. Two examples of details that changed exactly once. By the way, I'm speaking of TOS and the related films, not of TNG and subsequent spinoffs. If anyone would care to show even one instance of a recurring detail changing within TOS more than once, I'd love to see it.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-09-2008, 03:29 PM
MigueldaRican's Avatar
MigueldaRican MigueldaRican is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 765
Default

[quote=The Saint;128949]Currently, as I understand it, Paramount holds everything that appeared on the big and small screen to be canon, excluding video games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
As it relates to canon, there are instances where minor -- genuinely trivial -- details have changed.
Like Kirk driving, and where the ship was built, and age issues. Trivial!

The only thing I'll agree that is major is the Enterprise's new look. Is that it? That's why you refuse to see this movie?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
But they did not then change after that.
I'm still having trouble seeing your very picky rules about canon revisions that apparently Abrams must abide by in order for this movie to be worthy of your chrisening. Gene Roddenberry, simply put, had a habit of decanonizing things in Star Trek. That he was loose with canon, means canon didn't really follow some sort of official rule that all filmmakers must adhere to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
In the case of Kirk's middle initial, you can explain that by saying "Typo."
And I can explain your explanation as "cop out". Which is the same thing people on your side of the fence are accusing Abrams' supporters of doing by explaining his "canon revisions".

And it's interesting, I just got done watching "Where No Man Has Gone Before", a typo is nothing that the evolved Mitchell character would have done. Oh, it may be a typo, but if it is, it was out of ST universe, off screen, done by the writers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
With regard to Spock being called a "Vulcanian", that can be explained by a species being called one thing informally and one formally, then an order coming down that the informal name was not to be used again. Two examples of details that changed exactly once.


And if they changed more than once, aaaaah Jesus, there goes the galaxy. It's ruined! Ruined!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
By the way, I'm speaking of TOS and the related films, not of TNG and subsequent spinoffs. If anyone would care to show even one instance of a recurring detail changing within TOS more than once, I'd love to see it.
So by that logic, you don't even like TNG, right?

No, more like what you're saying is we can be apologetic about TOS' mistakes, but this is a new movie, and they have more money, and by god they better be 100% mistake free, right?
__________________
01001110011011110010000001101101011011110111001001 10010100100000011000100110110001100001011010000010 00000110001001101100011000010110100000100000011000 10011011000110000101101000

Last edited by MigueldaRican : 12-09-2008 at 04:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-09-2008, 03:30 PM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Most people get canon and continuity mixed up anyway. For example, it's possible for several works that totally contradict one another continuity-wise to be considered canon by the original property holder. So, even if Star Trek XI completely rewrites TOS history, that doesn't mean that TOS is non-canon as far as Paramount is concerned...it's still there in its original and remastered forms, IMO.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-09-2008, 03:57 PM
MigueldaRican's Avatar
MigueldaRican MigueldaRican is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 765
Default

__________________
01001110011011110010000001101101011011110111001001 10010100100000011000100110110001100001011010000010 00000110001001101100011000010110100000100000011000 10011011000110000101101000
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-09-2008, 04:42 PM
T'Aerwynd's Avatar
T'Aerwynd T'Aerwynd is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 40 Eridani A
Posts: 347
Default

As I said in another thread ... perhaps "canon" is that there is no canon.
__________________
"The best diplomat I know is a fully-loaded phaser bank."
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-09-2008, 04:55 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,574
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MigueldaRican View Post
So by that logic, you don't even like TNG, right?
What does that even remotely have to do with what you quoted? O.o

Quote:
No, more like what you're saying is we can be apologetic about TOS' mistakes, but this is a new movie, and they have more money, and by god they better be 100% mistake free, right?
No, more like what I'm saying is exactly what I said. Put away the strawmen. If you can't counter my genuine position but instead have to rewrite it, the better part of valor on your part would be to not address it at all.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:20 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.