Comments»

1. The Vulcanista - October 26, 2007

Man, this site moves at warp speed!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

2. CmdrR. - October 26, 2007

Thanks, Anthony. I needed a laugh.

3. Danya Romulus - October 26, 2007

Hahaha the part with the Chinese finger trap is amazing!

“I seem to be at a…”functional impasse.”

4. CocoA - October 26, 2007

Now I’m going to curl up into a ball and cry.

5. Sci-Fi Bri - October 26, 2007

these videos are the best. cannon schmannon…
all of the comicbookguys can complain all they want but i don’t care,give me a re-designed enterprise that looks _futuristic_ for Star Trek XI

6. JeffD - October 26, 2007

Very good, thanks for posting!

Although a better contrast in appearance for the episode “The Pegasus” vs. the Enterprise finale is Troi instead of Riker. If memory serves.. we only see her at the very beginning of the TNG episode where she is assisting Picard in selecting a winner of the Captain Picard Day contest. There, her hair is poofy and very curly, consistent with her appearance throughout all of Season 7 of TNG (after the first few episodes). But her hair during the Enterprise finale, strangely enough, is almost a perfect match for the way it appears in Star Trek: Nemesis. Hmmmm…..

7. Jeyl - October 26, 2007

“This was the first Enterprise. Consitution Class.”

And it always will be the first.

8. Ty Webb - October 26, 2007

Quite amusing, this guy must know the episodes backwards to remember some of this stuff.

9. Jordan - October 26, 2007

Its a TV show people. You can’t sit down and write the entire canon. You can’t anticipate whats going to be writen. Get a life :P

10. Ro-Dan - October 26, 2007

Canon? Who needs canon? Give me a Trek where “Strangers From the Sky” and “First Contact” co-exist in peace and harmony. ;)

11. Johnny Ice. - October 26, 2007

I have come to the conclusion. Star Trek franchise really need a reboot .

12. Trekker670 - October 26, 2007

There are some that are true, but I feel this one is even more of a stretch than the last one. Most of them could have a logical and reasonable explanation!

13. Darkthunder - October 26, 2007

One could always argue, that the Constitution class Enterprise was the first [b]Federation[/b] built Enterprise, whereas the NX01 was the first [b]Human[/b] built Enterprise.

Suffice it to say, Trek has so many inconsistencies, it’s hard to say what is and what isnt canon. As Johnny Ice suggested: Trek needs a reboot :P

14. Ty Webb - October 26, 2007

If the new movie creates an alternative time-line, then we can have as many mistakes and inconsistencies as we want.

15. T2 - October 26, 2007

funny stuff, although i’m sure some of these could’ve been explained, maybe worf thought of phase pistols differently than phasers, or maybe the Enterprise-D was refit with new doors so they couldn’t as easily break if someone is thrown through them. And in regards to warp 10, if 10 is the theoretical limit, how can the Enterprise-D in “All Good Things” go Warp 13 or whatever? Nothing’s perfect

16. Miguel - October 26, 2007

The last one was the best.

17. THIS SUX - October 26, 2007

LOL this entire film will be a goof and an inconsistency.

18. James - October 26, 2007

#13, actually the sailing ship was the first HUMAN built Enterprise. THen came the aircraft carrier, then the space shuttle, some other random one we’ve seen in diagrams, and then the NX-01

19. cd - October 26, 2007

I already explained the Pepto-Bismol blood in another post.
Voyager and Enterprise don’t count.
Unintentional variations are one thing, blatant disregard is another. The names at the end say it all!

20. Headless Redshirt - October 26, 2007

Star Trek has continuity that’s at least as good as Red Dwarf.

21. Lou - October 26, 2007

lol they should do one of JUST errors where Enterprise fits into the continuity. they’ll have to split it up into about a dozen parts to fit it all in! :P

22. Craig - October 26, 2007

Notice how Sisko doesnt say its the first non Federation ship Enterprise just first Enterprise and the Temporal Cops say their have been six and they didnt say non Federation either. I also love it when Worf says their are no phasers in the 22nd Century and Also Picard with disasterous first contact with the Klingons and what Archer says.

23. Joseph Brown - October 26, 2007

15. T2: Most of “All Good Things” took place in alternate timeline, so, the Enterprise going warp 13 doesn’t technically count. If that explanation doesn’t work for you, there’s another one that sort of goes hand in hand with it: the warp factor scale was changed (like it was sometime between TOS and TNG because Kirk’s Enterprise went over warp 10 on a few occasions) making warp 10 no longer infinite velocity. Of course, the warp 10 as infinite velocity was a retcon, but it’s still canon anyway.

24. toddk - October 26, 2007

The number of ships called enterprise has bugged me since “enterprise”

25. T2 - October 26, 2007

#23, thanks for clearing that up, that always confused me. maybe someone can clear this up, it’s got to fit in there with continuity, in a loose sense. how is the voyager technology upgrade explained? in one episode, sometime in the 2nd season, we see the phasers, tricorders, and simms beacons all change to the standard federation issue back in the alpha quadrant. the phasers switch from TNG to the boomerang, the tricorders move up a mark, and the flashlights go from square lights to simms beacons on the wrist…how did that happen if voyager was not in contact with starfleet? (Not to mention how in the episode “Fury” they flashback to Janeway/Kes using the boomerang phaser, yet in that time period the technology hadn’t upgraded yet)

26. Cox of Seagulls - October 26, 2007

:D Hilarious. I do think that the last one can be easily explained though. There have been more than 6 Enterprises according to trek canon by the time of Trials already. If you included the Space Shuttle Enterprise and the one you could see in the recreation deck in TMP. I assume Sisko and the agents meant Federation Enterprises.
Great video though.

27. Laserlvoer2254 - October 26, 2007

yeah, Jeryl.

28. Miguel - October 26, 2007

#21, those incosistencies would make a nice Fan Collective Box set, don’t you think? I’d pay for it.

29. trektacular - October 27, 2007

Anthony is buttering us up for the inevitable redesign of the 1701.

30. Paul Martin - October 27, 2007

STARSHIP class!!!

31. redshirt - October 27, 2007

Guys…you all seem to forget…

it is not continuity error… it’s ALTERNATIVE TIME LINE!!!
IT”S ALL CANNON!!!
YEAH!
[so does that mean Shat’s in?!?!?!?!?]

32. valentine - October 27, 2007

As long as you don’t screw up the big things, it really doesn’t matter if there are small continuity errors here and there. Does it REALLY matter in the grand scheme of things how many ships named Enterprise there are? It’s certainly not worth calling for a reboot over, and throwing away 40 years of history.

There is not a series in existence, not a single one that doesn’t have continuity errors of some sort. You should feel lucky that the Star Trek continuity is as solid as it is.

33. Cervantes - October 27, 2007

Will this rebooted Movie prove to be one big mistake I wonder…

34. redshirt - October 27, 2007

re:33
no

I’ve got a gut feeling these people “get it”…
It wont be quite what anyone expects and yet I think it will work… just a gut feeling…

I want them to boldly go where no spin-off has gone before.

35. Cervantes - October 27, 2007

#34 redshirt

I truly hope you’re proved right, but my gut seems to have a different feeling at the moment…

Maybe it’s that curry I had last night.

36. Jeyl - October 27, 2007

#18 James: “actually the sailing ship was the first HUMAN built Enterprise. THen came the aircraft carrier, then the space shuttle, some other random one we’ve seen in diagrams, and then the NX-01″

Ya, but you don’t see the NX-01 on the wall display where Decker points out “All those vessels were named “Enterprise” in Star Trek: The Motion Picture now, do you?

37. Syöppö - October 27, 2007

Star Trek Enterprise - Enterprise (NX-01) Beta Class (but not first)
Star Trek TOS - USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) First constitution class

38. Jeyl - October 27, 2007

#37

The NX-01 and the TOS Enterprise were both Starships of Starfleet. I fail to see why it wouldn’t be regarded as the first.

Regardless, naming the NX-01 (Even the whole series) ENTERPRISE was a stupid idea.

39. Jay - October 27, 2007

Enterprise makes my skin crawl… it was laclustre, dull, in inventive and stuck about as much to canon as the Enterprise-E’s decks!!

40. NCC-73515 - October 27, 2007

even holy TOS had mistakes:
stafleet / uespa / space command / space central / star service
which organization were they in? XD

41. Driver - October 27, 2007

The look on Riker’s face at the end says it all. Oh, Brother!
Just try not to sweat the small stuff.

42. Darkthunder - October 27, 2007

NCC-73515 has a valid point :P

43. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 27, 2007

Sisko calling the Constitution-class Enterprise the first definitely implies the conversation is limited to Federation ships. I don’t have a problem with that.

I’m not an Enterprise basher, in fact I like the show, but it does suffer from more than the average number of violations of canon. It has been a long established fact of Star Trek, from TOS on, that Vulcans are stronger and faster. Archer should not have been kicking butt like that.

44. Trek Or Treat - October 27, 2007

Don’t forget the Trill.

In TNG they had weired heads, no spots, and couldn’t use the transporter because it would kill the symbiont.

Doesn’t have much in common with The Dax we all came to love and know does it?

45. Knut - October 27, 2007

Sorry i forgot, if Archer still had Suraks Katra in this scene. This could be the reason. But this does not matter, because Archer is a starfleet captain. Starfleet captains are some kind of heroes ;)

46. Sean4000 - October 27, 2007

#36 they wayted to put a shot of the NX01 in that scene with Decker in ST1 but time and shot framing prevented them from doing that. That would have been an okay tie in with Ent.

47. Pragmaticus - October 27, 2007

I’d like to point out that 99% of these continuity errors are post-TOS. So the post-TOS writers were just sloppy.

48. I AM THX-1138 - October 27, 2007

I still think the best mistakes were in the last set of mash-ups of Spock finding the newest, hardest substance known every other week. I’m still waiting for my first copy of “Hard Substances Magazine” though.

49. Deflator Mouse - October 27, 2007

First of all, nearly all of the borg errors have to do with the growth of the species. There was a lot of change going each time a starship ran into the borg — particularly Enterprise and Voyager. This is a species where one little change reveals new facets of the species in its on-going attempt to adapt and realign itself. Frankly, the borg stuff is only a mistake if you ignore the stories that led to them.

Which brings up my ultimate point. This entire thing is playing on a general lack context. To name just a few:

> Data’s door was programmed specifically so that his cat could not escape. What does that have to do with the teleporter door?

> When someone is specifically intending to play loud music, he or she would absolutely establish a dampening field around his or her quarters because in the time of Star Trek, people respect their neighbours. Find that quote. I know it’s out there somewhere.

> Data and Picard are in Sickbay when their door is being battered. Geordi was thrown out of temporary crew quarters. I would not expect those doors to be built with similar resistances — just as I don’t expect the cargo bay doors and the turbolift doors to be the same.

> Of course the Ferengi barter with gold. To them it is worthless. Others seem to like it, so they tempt others with it. After all, what gives something value is scarcity — and Ferenginar is full of gold. So how useful it it, except as an item to be used to get more valuable substances.

> Yeah. In TNG they needed two people to set auto-destruct. In TOS, the Search for Spock, they needed three. Makes sense that Picard could set it himself in Nemesis if that is how the procedures are developing.

> Phasers are not phase pistols. Just as Phasers are not Disruptors.

Anyway, I’m done here. Don’t just take people’s word for things. Understand it yourself.

Inconsistencies exist, but then again, Roddenberry was upset when they started placing ranks on officer’s uniforms in The Wrath of Khan. He didn’t like those kinds of tight-nit rules.

50. Ben - October 27, 2007

#37. Syöppö

Star Trek Enterprise - Enterprise (NX-01) Beta Class (but not first)
Star Trek TOS - USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) First constitution class

I stopped watching Enterprise soon after it started so I don’t know exactly what you mean when you say it’s “Beta class but not the first,” but surely if it’s registry is NX - 01 it MUST be the first of its class as, in all other Star Trek stuff that I’m aware of, the first vessel in a new line is given the experimental tag NX before being upgraded to NCC. I don’t know what the case is with that show though and seeing as they felt it necessary to ignore so many other things I wouldn’t be surprised if they threw the old registry system out too.

Anyway, to the point; the TOS Enterprise wasn’t the first Constitution class. The USS Constitution NCC - 1700 was the first Constitution Class. That’s all I really wanted to say but the NX thing confused me.

51. Darkthunder - October 27, 2007

Ben: Your forgetting the USS Constellation with the registry NCC-1017. How does that fit into the grand scheme of things, when the so-called “First ship of the class” has alot higher registry then a ship already pre-existing of the same class?

52. Hawkeye - October 27, 2007

Goodness, to people not realize once something is set in stone, it’s actually set?

As for some of these errors: #49, you are right. As the series progresses, we learn more and more about the Borg. However, I thnk yor’re off on your theory on the doors. I’m more inclined to think that Super Quinn might have thrown Geordi HARDER against the door than Cro-Magnon Worf was pounding.

What disturbs me more about the holodeck than the inconsistencies is that more than 1 episode was made of a holodeck malfunction. In real life, you have “recalls.” I don’t know about you, but if I were an Enterprise, DS9 or Voyager crewman, I don’t think I’d go anywhere near a holodeck or holosuite after hearing of all these “malfunctions.” I mean, does anyone still ride in or drive a Ford Pinto? Do they make “lawn darts” anymore?

53. MichaelJohn - October 27, 2007

I think this video is a perfect example of why I absolutely hate all the arguements about so called “canon” on this site. Star Trek is still a “work in progress” and we should all expect many more inconsistencies, contradictions and outright errors in the future.

Since Star Trek was never based on a novel or a set of books like JRR Tolkein’s Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, it’s not surprising that they have made so many mistakes and errors along the way. The probabilty of making an episode that contradicts another is quite high, considering the large number of writers involved in five live action series, an animated series and ten movies.

I guess it could be argued from a “Trek Nerd’s” point of view that that the writers and directors should have done a better job of researching and referencing all the information from previous episodes. This way they would have minimized these continuity errors and mistakes. But I honestly believe that the vast majority of fans could probably care less, myself included, and few of us would have even noticed these minor mistakes.

I don’t overexamine Star Trek or study it as many fans do. As long as Trek is fun and exciting and good science fiction, that’s all that counts to me.

Mike :o

54. T2 - October 27, 2007

i was watching the DS9 episode “Trials and Tribble-ations” today and putting aside the number of Enterprises, I noticed a rather unusual error. When Sisko finds out that a bomb was planted in a tribble on K-7, we are shown the tribble sitting in the storage compartment, as the camera zooms in. The rigged tribble is big and dark brown. About 5 minutes later when Sisko is in the compartment and finds the rigged tribble, it’s suddenly a lighter brown with streaks in it. Obviously not the same tribble.

55. Headless Redshirt - October 28, 2007

The light brown tribble ate the other one.

56. Trek Or Treat - October 28, 2007

#49

I agree with you. A lot of these errors could easily be explained away.

A lot more of these errors result from the writers’ development of said alien species, including the trill which I mentioned before.

The “Q who” error about the borg being neither male nor female was obviously an attempt to make the species seem even more alien than others that had come before. There was no way they could have known they would have Jeri Ryan playing a borg 10 years later. Even a year later in the all time best star trek episode “the best of both worlds” they decided that the borg would assimilate captain picard. The shock of first seeing Picard as Locutus was well worth a little continuity error for me. Had they stuck to close to established canon what would they have done? Neutered the good captain so that he was “neither male nor female?” No! they expanded the species to introduce the danger and horror of assimilation, which made them that much better as villains.

IMHO SOME of these continuity errors are sloppy. SOME made the series better. ALL of the series had continuity errors with TOS being no exception.

57. ramy - October 28, 2007

Headless Redshirt is right! Tribbles have a very powerful apetite.
its logical to assume that they eat their own dead.
the tribble ate the dead tribble and thus the bomb was now inside the new tribble. or in one of his offsprings

58. sean - October 28, 2007

Okay, some of these are ridiculous. It’s been established that the Klingon blood was purple to avoid an R-rating for STVI. And Bendon (or whatever his name was) wasn’t IN Starfleet. The episode is about the officer exchange program. Riker wasn’t IN the Klingon Military just because he was serving on a Klingon Ship. Mordoc still could have been the first Benzite in Starfleet. Come on guys, if you’re going to pick on the continuity at least pick on the right things.

59. LOYAL STAR TREK FAN - October 29, 2007

#49

I think you’re exactly right about this. Phase Pistols were obviously meant to be a precursor to the Phaser (the middle version between Lasers and Phasers.) I know Lasers were used in TOS “The Cage,” but then again those same weapons were used in a later episode of TOS and were called “Phasers.” Further, the self-destruct time limits (5 min. in TNG “11001001″ and variable in the other TNG episode) can easily be explained by a starship refit. If you notice, the bridge has been slightly changed between Season 1 and 2 (the side panels where the Red Alert lights flash) and the same goes with Sickbay. “Star Trek: Enterprise” premiered close to 15 years AFTER TNG and several years after DS9. No one could have known that the creaters would do a prequel series. It is clear why the name “Enterprise” was chosen; when people hear that name they think STAR TREK! As a result it was clearly the right choice. The Archer-Vulcan fight scene was done for dramatic license (remember Kirk held his own against Spock a couple of times). In TOS they kept on saying they worked for various organizations (the two most known being the United Earth Space Probe Agency (UESPA) and Starfleet) and someone also noted the “hardest substance known to our science” changing every week. (One further note on Phase Pistols, that name was also chosen because Phased weapons are synonomous with STAR TREK.) The Borg errors also changed with time. (The TNG book “Resistance” makes a big deal about the Borg being “male” and how they have a process to make one “female” the “Queen”. So again these things have been changing. Remember the Seven of Nine’s parents knew about the Borg before they were encountered in TNG but they also said “I’m beginning to believe that the Borg are nothing more than rumor and sensor echos.” (Seven’s parents may have known about the encounter in the ENT episode of season two (I don’t remember the name.) The date of the Eugenics Wars changed multiple times. In TOS it was 1992-1996 and was “the last world war on your planet.” ST: FC “2063…ten years after the last World War.” DS9 “two hundred years ago” ENT Archer: “My great-grandfather” (which would place sometime in the 21st century - possibly around the time of World War III making Spock’s statement about it being the last world war correct) but in the “Augment” three-parter Dr. Phlox said “twentieth century genetic engineering.” Also, in ENT one seal read “United Earth Space Probe Agency” on top and on bottom it read “Starfleet Command” VOY changed weapons and tricorders because DS9 was using those and it was more cost effective (it’s not as if they changed the VOY uniforms which would have been more obvious). The facts are nothing is perfect and things have changed multiple time in STAR TREK yet I don’t remember anyone complaining when DS9 or VOY did it at the time. Yet, all of a sudden when a few errors were made in ENT so-called fans attack everything and never gave the show a chance! (The PRIMARY REASON the show was CANCELLED and we’re without STAR TREK today. So-called “fans” stopped watching - the show’s ratings fell and there were constant talk of “cancel it now.” So they did. As for this stupid reboot idea - the writers claim that they “respect canon” and want to bring in new writers - is absolute nonsense. Of course, why should Paramount respect STAR TREK when the so-called “fans” don’t!!) Figure it out! Nothing and nobody is perfect. These errors are MINOR (it’s not as if they said TOS never happened!) So live with it and stop complaining!

60. LOYAL STAR TREK FAN - October 29, 2007

That should be “the writers say they “respect canon” and want to bring in new viewers.” The point is we don’t know if this new movie is a reboot. Leonard Nimoy being in it as “older Spock” seems to indicate that it’s not.

61. Bernd Schneider - October 29, 2007

I didn’t watch this movie yet because I am at work right now. Still I wonder how this and the previously posted link to the first “continuity” movie can possibly have any relevance pertaining to Star Trek news, any relevance within the scope of this website.

I certainly don’t expect total neutrality from Trekmovie.com (how could I of all people!). Still, a news site needs to select responsibly what is worth being reported and what not. The generic “Trek has always been inconsistent (and so the nerds shouldn’t complain about the reboot)” argument just doesn’t qualify as “news”. Especially since people like Roberto Orci seem to read all this.

You could just as well post EAS articles in support of the other side, that continuity is valuable and can be maintained with minimum effort and without pissing off the occasional viewers. Don’t mistake me, I would not want that because I evidently do not provide any relevant Trek news.

That being said, the existence of previous continuity problems is absolutely no justification to throw continuity overboard and reboot the franchise. That would be like saying “Our planet is polluted anyway. So why still give a damn on CO2 reduction? Maybe people will grow to like the climate change.”

There is no reason why the ship should look any different than the way some (few?) of us still know and love it from their childhood (of course, with detailed paneling and very subtle detail changes, I never contested that). Those who want to reboot the franchise in BSG style have plenty of more recent and more fashionable sci-fi series and movies they can choose from. Leave Star Trek alone!

62. Cervantes - October 29, 2007

#60 LOYAL STAR TREK FAN

Although all the talk of ‘alternative timelines’ would seen to indicate that it is…

‘Time’ will tell…

63. Thomas Jensen - October 29, 2007

….and that’s why the new movie should just use the best from the original Star Trek and start over. :)

64. LOYAL STAR TREK FAN - October 29, 2007

Bernd Schneider,

I have been a long-time fan of your website and I have it bookmarked on my computer. While I don’t agree with all of your arguments on your site (for example your arguments against the look of the NX-01, you made some good points but I think the STAR TREK staff made better ones) I respect your opinion. My primary argument about STAR TREK continuity was that only minor mistakes were made which is understandable over a 40 year time span and different writers and the biggest facts still exist. The Eugenics Wars occurred, WWIII occurred, the Federation was founded in 2161, the Romulan Wars occured before the founding of the Federation, all the crews adventures occured (ENT - VOY), etc. Simple mistakes like the Archer-Vulcan fight or the others shown in the video just happen. The Holodeck “nothing can exist outside the holodeck” (except apparently snowballs, paper, and water) has long been amusing to me and no big deal. I further agree with you Bernd that the writers of STAR TREK XI need to leave STAR TREK alone and not do a “reboot” or change the USS ENTERPRISE. I agree that continuity is important, but minor mistakes should not be criticized or used to say “VOY and ENT don’t count!” Of course they count. As I pointed out the “questionable decisions” like the name of the ship and the weapons (Enterprise and Phase Pistol) were done for good reasons and still managed to be able to fit in (as in, Sisko referring to Federation Enterprise’s). Remember there was some space vessel diagram of a “Enterprise” in TMP (EAS has an image of it somewhere) and yet that ship was never referred to as one of the “Starship Enterprise’s” which further points to the fact that Sisko was referring to Federation starships. Like I said, MINOR errors for the most part. The most important things never changed as listed above. STAR TREK has a rich 40 YEAR history and it should NEVER be thrown away as if it doesn’t matter. It most certainly does and must be respected so I sincerly hope that the writers of STAR TREK XI do what they say they’re doing - respecting canon.

65. Jeff - October 29, 2007

Once the new movie comes out, there will probably be about 45 or minutes to add.

66. Bernd - October 29, 2007

#64 LOYAL STAR TREK FAN
I think we agree on the essential points regarding continuity as a concept of quality , only with different emphasis. Certainly it is no way to deal with continuity issues like “If the ship doesn’t look right then I boycott the whole series” or “I disregard Voyager and Enterprise because it is full of crap”.

Well, I don’t agree that Trek fans who kept criticizing Enterprise ruined the series though (They were such a small minority that B&B didn’t bother listening to anyway). On the contrary, at latest with the fourth season and a new producer the series was developed to what many long-time fans had expected it to be from day one. Manny Coto finally listened to the fans.

I hope that Abrams does the same, and that he doesn’t see it as a mere chance for cheap “name-dropping continuity” (”Hey we have all the old crew on board, plus Pike, so why do you complain?”). Also, I hope that he doesn’t think that if they get some basic facts right they can “afford” to turn the ship into something like Gabriel Köerner’s Battlestar Enterprise. Continuity is a quality that a Trek producer or writer must embrace, or Star Trek will become another run-of-the-mill space flick.

67. Anthony Pascale - October 29, 2007

Bernd,

thanks for dropping by and as we have discussed before, I am a fan of your site as well. Just to be clear, this site is more than just a news site…it is a star trek site. Posting new amusing videos has always been part of this site. No they arent ‘news’, but I thought they were well made and people seem to enjoy them.

Don’t read too much into it

But for the record. I do have opinions and have expressed them here regarding canon and continuity. I think they are important, but not of paramount importance. I am flexible. I really do not think a fun video is going to effect the film one way or another. But I do think people forget that Star Trek has always had a flexible continuity…and that is OK.

68. I AM THX-1138 - October 29, 2007

Well put, Anthony. Plus, too, what’s more, is that Trek on TV is about a gazillion hours long, it’s bound to conflict with itself somewhere.

TV show, folks.
Funny youtube clips.
The out-takes aren’t canon either.
Breathing now, all better.

69. Bernd Schneider - October 30, 2007

Anthony,

I have watched the second video by now. While I don’t agree that everything in it is a “mistake” as the title says, it is exactly the kind of stuff I care about at EAS, so how could I complain about its content. I enjoyed it!

Well, I still don’t think that placing the video somewhere between “Quinto says it will be great” and “Abrams promises to respect continuity” is the best choice. But I certainly respect your concept of the site and I appreciate the great work you are doing here.

As I AM THX-1138 put it, it lies in the nature of a long running TV show that it frequently contradicts itself. Right, some people need to be reminded that there are loads of previous continuity problems. But there is a huge difference between accidental errors that occur because authors were not aware of some facts on one hand and the deliberate alteration of history on the other hand. Some other people need to be reminded that Star Trek is not The Simpsons, King Kong, Batman or even BSG. Continuity is one of Star Trek’s principal virtues that has been basically upheld since its inception — it is impossible to re-invent or re-imagine it.

Once you (as a producer) lower the bar, for instance by having all kinds of stuff redesigned that should have remained the same, continuity will inevitably run out of control (entropy). This is particularly clear when your movie revisits a time whose characters, technology and events are so well known as in TOS. It may sound trivial, but small errors that would not matter a lot as long they remain isolated (like unexplained changes of uniforms, an actor who is replaced, improved ship models and effects), will accumulate. That’s what I’m worried about. If really everything is designed to look a bit different, I may not be able to accept it as being the same universe.

70. neo - October 30, 2007

perhaps a different clip would be better to show the contrast in vulcan strength. if i recal correctly, the man archer is shown fighting in the video is a romulan.

71. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 30, 2007

Bernd Schneider — I think these clips are useful as “comic relief” on a site where all too often emotions escalate. I really don’t think there is an underlying normative message coming from the management of this site, or at least not a hugely serious one.

72. Bernd - October 30, 2007

I think you are right. Anthony does an admirable job to keep this place running and to preserve a pleasant atmosphere. Personally I wouldn’t have posted fun videos among news items, but then again the concept is successful.