XPost: alt.tv.star-trek, alt.startrek, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: dtravel@sonic.net   
      
   On 6/28/2017 10:51 AM, Wouter Valentijn wrote:   
   > Op 27-6-2017 om 23:46 schreef Dimensional Traveler:   
   >> On 6/27/2017 12:51 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:   
   >>> For your reference, records indicate that   
   >>> Obveeus  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> Using a phaser that looks closer to STAR TREK (The Original Series)   
   >>>> The complaints about the Klingon looks or the look of the transporters   
   >>>> or the look of the phasers is right on par with the complaints about   
   >>>> SUPERMAN's outfit being the wrong shade of blue or WONDER WOMAN's   
   >>>> outfit   
   >>>> not being flaggy enough.   
   >>>   
   >>> I would disagree a bit with that, and even then only from a continuity   
   >>> perspective.  It *would* be fair comment if a *single* representation   
   >>> of S or WW had their costume change without explanation.  And it would   
   >>> be *very* wrong to suddenly replace the person themselves with a   
   >>> blonde (or give them head ridges :-).  Unless it’s a reboot, you do   
   >>> *not* get to exercise your “creativity” in those sorts of aspects of   
   >>> the universe.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Were you guys sitting around the water cooler back in the 80s griping   
   >>>> about how much the new BUCK ROGERS TV series sucked because the   
   >>>> ships no   
   >>>> longer swung back and forth on pieces of fishing line like they were   
   >>>> supposed too?  ...and they failed to have cigarette smoke wafting   
   >>>> randomly out of the back like was coda?   
   >>>   
   >>> Well we’re sure as hell not going to complain about Wilma Deering’s   
   >>> outfits!  :-)  But seriously, you have to make a distinction between   
   >>> what is a surface difference and what is being changed in an   
   >>> established story line for the wrong reasons.  If they didn’t want to   
   >>> do “Prime” Trek, they should have created yet another timeline, or not   
   >>> made it a Trek property at all.  Simple as that.   
   >>>   
   >> The problem is they DID start a new timeline.  And in the process said   
   >> "this is the only Trek now, we have destroyed the timeline of the prior   
   >> serieses and movies."   
   >>   
   >   
   > That was basically what JJ wanted. He was not amused that the CBS half   
   > of the franchise refused to give up their goodies in favor of 'only   
   > Kelvin timeline stuff'.   
   >   
   Which just shows how over-inflated Abrams' ego is.   
      
   > And as far as I'm concerned Discovery is yet /another/ timeline.   
   >   
   I think that's official.   
      
   --   
   Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation   
   instinct are running screaming.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)