It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
IronArcturus: Well the ship design they're showing is from "Phase II." It was the prototype for Star Trek: TMP. So that could mean they're making another TOS/pre-TOS series. I'm afraid it would be doomed to failure if that is the case.
avatar
snowkatt: but pre tng ?
because that 75 year period is a blank in so far i know
According to the main Timeline, the TOS movies covered a lot in that era. This is why we need a future show. TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, all have their own arcs and stories. Another "past" show will just needlessly tangle up the lore of Star Trek.
Post edited July 24, 2016 by IronArcturus
I went over the trailer again and noticed the NCC number for the USS Discovery was NCC-1031. Historically in Star Trek, the NCC number tells what order the starships were constructed in. For example, the USS Voyager has NCC-74656 while the USS Defiant has NCC-75633. The Defiant was clearly made after Voyager. Given the fact that the original USS Enterprise is NCC-1701, it is likely the Discovery was created prior to the Enterprise and that this series is set before "TOS" but after "Star Trek: Enterprise". It's not an exact confirmation of when in the timeline the show is set in but I think it's a plausible theory.
avatar
BenKii:
so this series can be a prequel.
avatar
BenKii:
The NCC-75633 Defiant is the replacement ship orignally constucted as the Sao Paulo. The original was NX-74205.
avatar
IronArcturus: As a longtime fan of Star Trek, I sincerely hope they're not going to make another "past" Star Trek show. That was arguably one of the main reasons why "Enterprise" failed. When a show is arbitrarily set in the past, it screws up the stories and the timeline. Why can't they make a Star Trek show set after the Voyager/Nemesis era? They should keep it in the "Prime" timeline. It would make so much more sense to do this.
I don't see your point. In fact there are so many inconsistences between different series that it doesn't matter, what time period a new show is set. In fact there were a lot of episodes which included time travel, so why is setting the series in some alternate timeline (and I don't mean specifically JJ-timeline) is bad?
avatar
LootHunter: I don't see your point. In fact there are so many inconsistences between different series that it doesn't matter, what time period a new show is set. In fact there were a lot of episodes which included time travel, so why is setting the series in some alternate timeline (and I don't mean specifically JJ-timeline) is bad?
For instance, let's take on the discovery of the Borg. Originally the Federation/Humanity first met the Borg in the TNG episode "Q Who." Q sent the Enterprise-D to meet the Borg to prove a point. However, in ENT they decided to retcon the Borg in the episode "Regeneration." So now the viewer is left to wonder, "How could humanity first meet the Borg twice?"
One of the first scenes of first Star Trek movie of the "new" series is Kirk driving around in Iowa like a pro. Never mind that anyone who ever watched the series knows that Kirk couldn't drive a car. Later on, Chekov joins him on the Enterprise as one of the original crew members, which anyone who watched the show knows didn't happen till Season #2. ;P

The shows, the movies, and I'm convinced even the lunch boxes, are loaded with these inconsistencies and you can either ignore them, go the 'alternate timeline route, or drive your self fucking insane trying to make sense of it all.

I say you just ignore it and enjoy them.
Post edited July 24, 2016 by tinyE
avatar
IronArcturus: For instance, let's take on the discovery of the Borg. Originally the Federation/Humanity first met the Borg in the TNG episode "Q Who." Q sent the Enterprise-D to meet the Borg to prove a point. However, in ENT they decided to retcon the Borg in the episode "Regeneration." So now the viewer is left to wonder, "How could humanity first meet the Borg twice?"
Actually, that is a rather neat time loop. First Contact leaves a few damaged drones on Earth. In Enterprise, those drones reactivate, assimilate a ship, attempt to contactthe collective. They are stopped, but they managed to send a message to the collective, and that message is what leads to the Borg sending a ship to the Alpha quadrant and the Borg activity (not revealed to be Borg untill Best of Both Worlds) in the episode Neutral Zone, the finale of TNG first season. And all that follows leads to First Contact. Also, the record of the Enterprise NX-01 encounter with the Borg explains why the parents of Seven of Nine would be investigating the Borg years before the events of "Q Who" (presumably those records and combined with what was learned from the El-Aurian survivors from Generations).

Enterprise gets a lot of shit unjustly, and that includes messing with canon. I really don't think there was anything major in Enterprise that would mess up anything we knew from the other series or movies. Quite the contrary, I think they even managed to explain a few thing well, like the "klingon foreheads" isssue.
Post edited July 25, 2016 by Breja
avatar
LootHunter: I don't see your point. In fact there are so many inconsistences between different series that it doesn't matter, what time period a new show is set. In fact there were a lot of episodes which included time travel, so why is setting the series in some alternate timeline (and I don't mean specifically JJ-timeline) is bad?
avatar
IronArcturus: For instance, let's take on the discovery of the Borg. Originally the Federation/Humanity first met the Borg in the TNG episode "Q Who." Q sent the Enterprise-D to meet the Borg to prove a point. However, in ENT they decided to retcon the Borg in the episode "Regeneration." So now the viewer is left to wonder, "How could humanity first meet the Borg twice?"
Different timelines obviously. "Regeneration" takes place "after" Borg attempted to change history in "first contact".

Ups, there is answer already.
Post edited July 25, 2016 by LootHunter
lots of complaining about the design on the official site...


I kinda like it....I always for some reason really liked the Ralph Mcquarrie design >_>

dont shoot me.
avatar
Lord_Kane: lots of complaining about the design on the official site...

I kinda like it....I always for some reason really liked the Ralph Mcquarrie design >_>

dont shoot me.
burn the heretic !
The last Trek series Enterprise was painfully boring...also the most politically correct of all the Star Trek shows. It felt strangely sterile...didn't have any of that exciting sense of exploration and adventure that TOS had.
If they're doing another prequel series set before TOS they should rectify that...and no more stupid retcons please.
avatar
itchy01ca01: Welp, that ship looks exactly like a FASA design. I know this is test footage but still... WOW.
I am definitely not optimistic at all. Im a die-hard Trek fan and I love every one of the series (we don't talk about Enterprise or the last few movies). Let's see how this plays out and how many fans become shills.
Nah it looks like the phase 2/ Motion Picture concept art.
At least it's not Star Trek: SJW.
Thank god the show is not set in the JJ-verse. Not a big fan of the ship design so far, it looks like the love child of the original Enterprise and a Klingon Bird-of-Prey.