Star Trek Lower Decks coming Aug 6th

Sam Favate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
9,440
Real Name
Sam Favate
Roddenberry said no, and he created Trek so unfortunately that is the end of that. Pity, such a fantastic series too.
This is from Memory Alpha:
Roddenberry was adament that this show was Star Trek (i.e. the continuation of the original series) leading to it having the same title. The addition of The Animated Series to the title was not added until years later.

The series, which lasted two years, could be viewed as the completion of the Enterprise's five-year mission. D.C. Fontana personally viewed all 22 episodes as year four. StarTrek.com considers the seasons collectively to represent the fifth and final year of the mission. [1](X)

With the release of The Animated Series DVD, the studio appears to have changed its stance, and is leaning towards the animated series being part of established Star Trek canon. [2](X) [3](X) [4](X) Previously, The Animated Series was not considered part of established Star Trek canon by Paramount Pictures. References from the series have gradually become more accepted in other Star Trek series, most notably on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Enterprise (see the "questionable canon" section below for the complete list of references). Gene Roddenberry said that if he had known there would be more live-action Star Trek in the future, the animated series would have been far more logical and "canonable," or he might not have produced the animated series at all.
They get more specific:

According to Voyages of Imagination, the Animated Series was officially removed from canon at Gene Roddenberry's request in 1988, with the exception of some parts involving Spock's youth, from Fontana's episode "Yesteryear". This had already been confirmed previously by reference book author Mike Okuda in the introductions of his works. (Star Trek Chronology (2nd ed., p. vii); Star Trek Encyclopedia (4th ed., vol. 1, p. introduction); [11](X)) Paramount Pictures has followed suit by elevating the request to policy, having officially declared the series non-canon. (Star Trek Encyclopedia (1st ed., p. iii))

Despite this request, Memory Alpha recognizes The Animated Series as a valid resource. There were also strong indications from the official website that TAS was formally re-added to the official canon in 2006 by the franchise in order to commercially promote the occasion of the series' release on DVD that year. ([12](X) [13](X) [14](X); See also the content policy).
As with all things, canon is in the eye of the beholder. I consider some Star Wars stories that have been excised to still be canon.

 
Last edited:

jayembee

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
485
Real Name
Jerry
I've only seen a handful of episodes from TAS, but I've never been under the impression that anything from it -- with one exception -- wouldn't be able to be considered in canon. The one exception being all of Niven's Known Space backstory that he shoehorned into "The Slaver Weapon".
 

Sam Favate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
9,440
Real Name
Sam Favate
I've only seen a handful of episodes from TAS, but I've never been under the impression that anything from it -- with one exception -- wouldn't be able to be considered in canon. The one exception being all of Niven's Known Space backstory that he shoehorned into "The Slaver Weapon".
Spock’s backstory and the Vulcan mythology it touches on in Yesteryear has become an important part of Star Trek’s overall mythology.
 

Greg.K

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1998
Messages
2,090
Location
NY
Real Name
Greg K.
"Canon" in Trek is so messed up that I don't think it really matters much.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
23,323
Location
Albany, NY
I find it strange that this is canon, yet the original animated series is not.
I think that's more an effect of there not really being any centralized story team back then. It wasn't really until TNG that Paramount/CBS got serious about canon, and even then the early seasons weren't perfect.

But the subsequent shows could and have drawn from TAS.
 

The Obsolete Man

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
3,278
Location
Truth or Consequences, New Mexico
Real Name
Robert
Roddenberry said no, and he created Trek so unfortunately that is the end of that. Pity, such a fantastic series too.
He also said Star Treks V and VI weren't canon, and no one listens to that either.

TAS has been back in continuity unofficially since references on DS9 and Enterprise, officially since the mid-2000s. CBS said so, and that's that.
 

The Obsolete Man

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
3,278
Location
Truth or Consequences, New Mexico
Real Name
Robert
"Canon" in Trek is so messed up that I don't think it really matters much.
Not really.

Was it a TV show or a movie? Then it's in. Everything else, novels, comics, whatever, is little more than glorified fan fiction.

Onscreen is what counts.

Anyway, this is about Lower Decks. Haven't watched it, have no interest in watching it, may revisit that opinion after the entire season has been released. But I'm of the opinion "fool me once, shame on you (Discovery), Fool me twice, shame on me (Picard), fool me thrice... won't get fooled again! (Lower Decks and beyond)."
 

Greg.K

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1998
Messages
2,090
Location
NY
Real Name
Greg K.
Not really.

Was it a TV show or a movie? Then it's in. Everything else, novels, comics, whatever, is little more than glorified fan fiction.

Onscreen is what counts.
TAS should qualify then.

But what I meant is that things are already kind of messed up continuity-wise inside the official "canon".

I mean, what's a Klingon? TOS, TNG, Abrams-verse, and Discovery are all very different conceptually. Yes, there are attempted explanations for that ("mutagenic virus") but they don't really make much sense.

At some point it's hard to reconcile what is "canon" and you just have to enjoy the shows individually on their own merits.

And from Wikipedia article on Trek canon, it seems Roddenberry was a little mercurial on what he considered canon.

See, people can easily catch us, and say "well, wait a minute, in 'Balance of Terror', they knew that the Romulans had a cloaking device, and then in 'The Enterprise Incident', they don't know anything about cloaking devices, but they're gonna steal this one because it's obviously just been developed, so how the hell do you explain that?" We can't. There are some things we just can't explain, especially when it comes from the third season. So, yes, third season is canon [sic] up to the point of contradiction, or where it's just so bad... you know, we kind of cringe when people ask us, "well, what happened in 'Plato's Stepchildren', and 'And the Children Shall Lead', and 'Spock's Brain', and so on—it's like, please, he wasn't even producing it at that point. But, generally, [the canon is] the original series, not really the animated, the first movie to a certain extent, the rest of the films in certain aspects but not in all... I know that it's very difficult to understand. It literally is point by point. I sometimes do not know how he's going to answer a question when I go into his office, I really do not always know, and—and I know it better probably than anybody, what it is that Gene likes and doesn't like.[4]— Richard Arnold, 1991
Another thing that makes canon a little confusing. Gene R. himself had a habit of decanonizing things. He didn't like the way the animated series turned out, so he proclaimed that it was not canon. He also didn't like a lot of the movies. So he didn't much consider them canon either. And – okay, I'm really going to scare you with this one – after he got TNG [Star Trek: The Next Generation] going, he... well... he sort of decided that some of The Original Series wasn't canon either. I had a discussion with him once, where I cited a couple things that were very clearly canon in The Original Series, and he told me he didn't think that way anymore, and that he now thought of TNG as canon wherever there was conflict between the two. He admitted it was revisionist thinking, but so be it.[5]— Paula Block, 2005
 

Bryan^H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
7,250
TAS should qualify then.

But what I meant is that things are already kind of messed up continuity-wise inside the official "canon".

I mean, what's a Klingon? TOS, TNG, Abrams-verse, and Discovery are all very different conceptually. Yes, there are attempted explanations for that ("mutagenic virus") but they don't really make much sense.

At some point it's hard to reconcile what is "canon" and you just have to enjoy the shows individually on their own merits.

And from Wikipedia article on Trek canon, it seems Roddenberry was a little mercurial on what he considered canon.
Well the bottom line is he didn't like how TAS turned out and didn't consider it canon after some time stewing about it.

I respect his wish. I love the show, but don't consider it canon.
 

Doug Wallen

Supporter
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
9,672
Location
Macon, Ga.
Real Name
Doug
Just watched "Envoys" (1.2). I like Rutherford and Tendi and the Catian Doc. I'm sorry but I just find Boimler and Mariner all out annoying. I recognize an appreciate the show has an almost reverent love for TNG, but I can't get past the abrasiveness of our two leads. Insufferable and know-it-all is just my cup of tea. I'll blame my age (62). It is not the animation, that has bowled me over. I wish happy viewing for those who are fans.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
23,323
Location
Albany, NY
I'm sorry but I just find Boimler and Mariner all out annoying.
I agree. I didn't find Boimler so bad in the premiere, but he was just as annoying as Mariner this week, albeit in a completely different way.

One thing I did enjoy: How all of the leaders of the various departments were genuinely happy at Rutherford expanding his professional horizons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josh Steinberg

TJPC

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
3,897
Location
Hamilton Ontario
Real Name
Terry Carroll
I will continue watching, but my wife will not. I am a complete Star Trek fan, but she found the two episodes just "not funny enough", although she is a fan of "Rick and Mortie".
 

jayembee

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
485
Real Name
Jerry
Just watched "Envoys" (1.2). I like Rutherford and Tendi and the Catian Doc. I'm sorry but I just find Boimler and Mariner all out annoying. I recognize an appreciate the show has an almost reverent love for TNG, but I can't get past the abrasiveness of our two leads. Insufferable and know-it-all is just my cup of tea. I'll blame my age (62). It is not the animation, that has bowled me over. I wish happy viewing for those who are fans.
I'm sorry, but you can't blame your age. I'm two months away from 67, and I love it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Doug Wallen

Greg.K

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1998
Messages
2,090
Location
NY
Real Name
Greg K.
Re-upped CBS All Access while the free month offer was still available, and caught up on the first two episodes. I think it has some potential, but it seems a bit too frenetic. But I did chuckle quite a bit. I'll keep watching.
 

Sam Favate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
9,440
Real Name
Sam Favate
I liked the second episode even more than the first. It's funny, smart, witty and has a ton of reverence for Star Trek.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jayembee

Bryan^H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
7,250
It's funny, smart, witty and has a ton of reverence for Star Trek.
Well it should have a ton of reverence for Star Trek. It is Star Trek. It is canon, not an alternate reality. The characters are as real as Picard, or Kirk.
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
344,829
Messages
4,721,577
Members
141,344
Latest member
PhishHead00