It has a name: Star Trek: Into Darkness.

[Overmind One]

Yes, yes it does.
Trek accepts all movies and live action shows as "canon". Just because an individual, or even groups of individuals do not like "whats on offer" does not remove it from canon.

SG-1/A/U form the "television canon" of Stargate, again, no matter if you like or hate it. The MOVIE however remains the only "canon" from the original creators and it is THIER call if something is canon or not.

Its AU canon within the Trek canon.

"Just because an individual, or even groups of individuals do not like "whats on offer" does not remove it from canon."

It can and frequently does. This goes in both directions. Uhura's first name, Sulu's first name and many names of shuttles and devices and even corridors (like the Jeffries Tube which is named after a Trek art designer from TOS) were made canon because novel authors made them such. Other things seen in Enterprise like the Xindi and the Suliban are removed from canon by virtue of them being non-existent in reference or presence in TOS which came after the timeline of Enterprise, as well as the other series and movies which have come after (in the timeline). If making a movie about Darth Vader, one does not write his story as a young Storm Trooper raised from birth by two Ewoks and then kidnapped by Sith Lords before becoming Darth Vader in a movie slotted before The Phantom Menace. If such a film was made, would that make it canon in Star Wars? When you say "Trek accepts....", what exactly do you mean? Trek purists are a small (and much older) group. We have been around long enough to have seen the original series whilst it was being broadcast on its first run.

In James Bond...the Casino Royale with David Niven and Woody Allen...is it Bond canon? NO. But the new one done by Daniel Craig IS being considered Bond canon. See how it works? The fans can edit the canon as much as the producers. To me SGU will never be canon for the TV series of Stargate. Beat me with a whip and threaten death and I will still believe the same.

 

[Gatefan1976]

"Just because an individual, or even groups of individuals do not like "whats on offer" does not remove it from canon."

It can and frequently does.

Nope, it does not.

This goes in both directions. Uhura's first name, Sulu's first name and many names of shuttles and devices and even corridors (like the Jeffries Tube which is named after a Trek art designer from TOS) were made canon because novel authors made them such.

No, elements of novels *can* become canon if the TV/ movie people accept or use them. Example in Trek is Kirks middle name (Tiberius). It was originally used in the animated series and not made canon until ST:6. Example in SW is Courusant which was only referred to as "imperial centre" until used in SW:1 even though EU writers had been using it for years.

Other things seen in Enterprise like the Xindi and the Suliban are removed from canon by virtue of them being non-existent in reference or presence in TOS which came after the timeline of Enterprise, as well as the other series and movies which have come after (in the timeline).

No, they are not. I would like to forget ENT as well dude, but not within ST canon.

If making a movie about Darth Vader, one does not write his story as a young Storm Trooper raised from birth by two Ewoks and then kidnapped by Sith Lords before becoming Darth Vader in a movie slotted before The Phantom Menace. If such a film was made, would that make it canon in Star Wars?

If Lucas made it, yep and hell, it may have been more entertaining that Ep 1

When you say "Trek accepts....", what exactly do you mean? Trek purists are a small (and much older) group. We have been around long enough to have seen the original series whilst it was being broadcast on its first run.

So? "Age entitlement does not exist in this case. Trek, as in TPTB that have stewardship of the trek TV/Movie franchise accept all Live action shows and Movies as Canon.

In James Bond...the Casino Royale with David Niven and Woody Allen...is it Bond canon? NO.

No, because it was not made by A Brocoli and Eon productions, the custodians of the Bond Movie franchise, not because it was crap.

But the new one done by Daniel Craig IS being considered Bond canon. See how it works?

Indeed, you don't, sorry dude.

The fans can edit the canon as much as the producers. To me SGU will never be canon for the TV series of Stargate. Beat me with a whip and threaten death and I will still believe the same.

You can believe what you wish, I like to do the same for SGU, not because it's "not canon" but because it is crap. I would like to forget Enemy at the gate, but as Omni pointed out, Atlantis is in SF bay, not in Pegusus because of that crap-fest. All fans can do is *add* to canon *if the creative "owners" accept it*. Ask Lit if any of her fans have the right to edit her books and call their version canon

 

[OMNI]

Yes, yes it does.
Trek accepts all movies and live action shows as "canon". Just because an individual, or even groups of individuals do not like "whats on offer" does not remove it from canon.

SG-1/A/U form the "television canon" of Stargate, again, no matter if you like or hate it. The MOVIE however remains the only "canon" from the original creators and it is THIER call if something is canon or not.

Its AU canon within the Trek canon.

NO only a braindead robot follower like you would take spunk in their mouth swallow it and call it a delicasy! fortunatly some people have the ability to accept or reject and make up their own damned minds and make personal choices as such SGU isnt Canon and in OM1's case Enterprise isnt canon.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Just because an individual, or even groups of individuals do not like "whats on offer" does not remove it from canon.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Highlander 2. The creator himself bent to fans' will and disavowed it from canon. Not only that but he recut a "renegade version" that removed all reference to Highlanders being aliens from another planet and still considered Highlander 2 no longer canon.

 

[Gatefan1976]

NO only a braindead robot follower like you would take spunk in their mouth swallow it and call it a delicasy! fortunatly some people have the ability to accept or reject and make up their own damned minds and make personal choices as such SGU isnt Canon and in OM1's case Enterprise isnt canon.

Canon is not personal choice, much as you may want it to be. In OM's mind ENT may not be canon, whoopee do!! I think ENT is a crapfest, but that does not remove it from canon. Now, take your ruby slippers and tap them togeather 3 times and tell your story walking pal.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 8:02 AM ---

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Highlander 2. The creator himself bent to fans' will and disavowed it from canon. Not only that but he recut a "renegade version" that removed all reference to Highlanders being aliens from another planet and still considered Highlander 2 no longer canon.

THE CREATOR did it, that is all that is important. He coulda got the idea from a box of cornflakes or a fortune cookie as well, it does not matter WHERE the notion came from.

 

[Bluce Ree]

THE CREATOR did it, that is all that is important. He coulda got the idea from a box of cornflakes or a fortune cookie as well, it does not matter WHERE the notion came from.

Yeah, but he didn't. He bent to the will of the fans and that's the heart of this discussion.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Yeah, but he didn't. He bent to the will of the fans and that's the heart of this discussion.

No, it's not.
The "heart of the discussion" is who gets to say what is canon, and it's not the fans. We can say "XYZ was total crap and here is why" and SOMETIMES the creators listen to us and adjust accordingly. Final say STILL goes to the creator of a body of work. Again, ask Illit if she thinks she should change her stories because "some fan(s)" did not like what she wrote.

 

[OMNI]

No, it's not.
The "heart of the discussion" is who gets to say what is canon, and it's not the fans. We can say "XYZ was total crap and here is why" and SOMETIMES the creators listen to us and adjust accordingly. Final say STILL goes to the creator of a body of work. Again, ask Illit if she thinks she should change her stories because "some fan(s)" did not like what she wrote.

thats not the Point here the Point is WE are free to make up our own fuking minds on what we accept and do not and your reluctance to accept this just makes you look dumb.

 

[Gatefan1976]

thats not the Point here the Point is WE are free to make up our own fuking minds on what we accept and do not and your reluctance to accept this just makes you look dumb.

You are free to make up your mind what you like or dislike, You are free to believe that your version of "canon" is real as well.
It's still just "your version".
What exactly have I stopped you from making your mind up about?

 

[Bluce Ree]

No, it's not.
The "heart of the discussion" is who gets to say what is canon, and it's not the fans. We can say "XYZ was total crap and here is why" and SOMETIMES the creators listen to us and adjust accordingly. Final say STILL goes to the creator of a body of work. Again, ask Illit if she thinks she should change her stories because "some fan(s)" did not like what she wrote.

Semantics. The fans yelled, Gregory Widen listened. Ergo, the fans called the shots.

 

[OMNI]

 

[Bluce Ree]

You are free to make up your mind what you like or dislike, You are free to believe that your version of "canon" is real as well.
It's still just "your version".
What exactly have I stopped you from making your mind up about?

Whether Enterprise was a joke or a pet project.

I, for one, have made up my mind that it was Braga's "Quantum Leap meets Boobarella" on the USS Caligula, where crew members get to oil each other up in a private booth under a black light after every away mission. Notice how it was almost always either one male & one female or one male and two female crew members.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Semantics. The fans yelled, Gregory Widen listened. Ergo, the fans called the shots.

Ok dude.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 10:19 AM ---

Whether Enterprise was a joke or a pet project.

Ok................

I, for one, have made up my mind that it was Braga's "Quantum Leap meets Boobarella" on the USS Caligula, where crew members get to oil each other up in a private booth under a black light after every away mission. Notice how it was almost always either one male & one female or one male and two female crew members.

Did I ever say ENT was not shit?

 

[Bluce Ree]

Ok dude.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 10:19 AM ---

Ok................


Did I ever say ENT was not shit?

Hell, no. You were quite clear you thought it sucked.

 

[Overmind One]

Nope, it does not.

No, elements of novels *can* become canon if the TV/ movie people accept or use them. Example in Trek is Kirks middle name (Tiberius). It was originally used in the animated series and not made canon until ST:6. Example in SW is Courusant which was only referred to as "imperial centre" until used in SW:1 even though EU writers had been using it for years.

No, they are not. I would like to forget ENT as well dude, but not within ST canon.

If Lucas made it, yep and hell, it may have been more entertaining that Ep 1


So? "Age entitlement does not exist in this case. Trek, as in TPTB that have stewardship of the trek TV/Movie franchise accept all Live action shows and Movies as Canon.

No, because it was not made by A Brocoli and Eon productions, the custodians of the Bond Movie franchise, not because it was crap.

Indeed, you don't, sorry dude.


You can believe what you wish, I like to do the same for SGU, not because it's "not canon" but because it is crap. I would like to forget Enemy at the gate, but as Omni pointed out, Atlantis is in SF bay, not in Pegusus because of that crap-fest. All fans can do is *add* to canon *if the creative "owners" accept it*. Ask Lit if any of her fans have the right to edit her books and call their version canon

All of this is just your opinion, GF! Canon is/isnt what the fans/individuals make it. For me, (and millions of others), Enterprise is not canon in Trek. Same with SGU in the Stargate franchise.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 11:53 AM ---

Canon is not personal choice, much as you may want it to be. In OM's mind ENT may not be canon, whoopee do!! I think ENT is a crapfest, but that does not remove it from canon. Now, take your ruby slippers and tap them togeather 3 times and tell your story walking pal.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 8:02 AM ---


THE CREATOR did it, that is all that is important. He coulda got the idea from a box of cornflakes or a fortune cookie as well, it does not matter WHERE the notion came from.

Bolded...YES, it is. Perhaps this will help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon

The Star Trek canon is the set of all canonical material in the Star Trek universe. It is usually defined as comprising the television series Star Trek: The Original Series, Star Trek: The Animated Series, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, Star Trek: Enterprise, and the motion pictures in the franchise.[1] However, the official Star Trek website acknowledges that this definition is not set in stone, but that the notion of what constitutes canon in Star Trek is fluid, open to interpretation and debate.[2]

"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 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.[4]— Paula Block, 2005
Additionally, David Gerrold, in an interview about Star Trek: The Animated Series, commented on Roddenberry's parsimony and how it originally affected "canon":

​

Arguments about "canon" are silly. I always felt that Star Trek Animated was part of Star Trek because Gene Roddenberry accepted the paycheck for it and put his name on the credits. And DC Fontana -- and all the other writers involved -- busted their butts to make it the best Star Trek they could. But this whole business of "canon" really originated with Gene's errand boy. Gene liked giving people titles instead of raises, so the errand boy got named "archivist" and apparently it went to his head. Gene handed him the responsibility of answering all fan questions, silly or otherwise, and he apparently let that go to his head.[5]​

The creator of Enterprise was NOT Roddenberry. So using your own flawed understanding of what canon is in Trek, Enterprise would not qualify. "Based on Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry" does not qualify anything as canon, sorry! You can take the ruby slippers back...they are not my size.
--- merged: Mar 31, 2013 at 12:09 PM ---

No, it's not.
The "heart of the discussion" is who gets to say what is canon, and it's not the fans. We can say "XYZ was total crap and here is why" and SOMETIMES the creators listen to us and adjust accordingly. Final say STILL goes to the creator of a body of work. Again, ask Illit if she thinks she should change her stories because "some fan(s)" did not like what she wrote.

Bullshit! The fans DO get to say what is canon. The fans frequently determine canon and correct it for the creators (especially when the creators listen. like Roddenberry did). Roddenberry was dead when Enterprise was made. He had nothing to do with the making of Enterprise and thus things within it were not Roddenberry creations or canon. Many Trek fans do not consider Enterprise canon. By definition, your statements apply and make Enterprise canon, but Roddenberry would consider it "apocryphal". The fans arguably have even more power than the creators of towering franchises like Trek. With Roddenberry gone, that does not mean that JJ Abrams has been given the "canon wand". The fans need to give him that power. Also Paramount may own the Trek franchise, but they do not decide what is Trek canon since they did not create Trek.

This same thing is now happening in the Aliens universe with Ridley Scott. Is Prometheus to be considered canon in the Aliens franchise? Fans say yes. Ridley says no, but the movie has too much obvious connection to the original Alien movie like the crashed "Engineer" ship, the alien creature in the movie, etc. The final say of the creator is only part of the process, and in the case of Enterprise, the creators are Brannon Braga and Rick Berman and Roddenberry had nothing to do with it.

 

[shavedape]

I'm not too upset about this one because I expect it to be over the top. I didn't expect to like Cumberbach in the lead bad guy role but he actually does a good job in the clip.

 

[Overmind One]

I'm not too upset about this one because I expect it to be over the top. I didn't expect to like Cumberbach in the lead bad guy role but he actually does a good job in the clip.

And the statement in bold is sorta sad. I have the same low expectations too. Also, I had a terrible thought about the ship...I dont get to see the damned thing explode or the nacelles to be torn off so they could just "repair" it. . Also, the action and explosions are going to be over the top because they are doing it in 3D too. . Given how CGI allows the impossible to be possible now in live action films, perhaps they could take one of the stories from Star Trek: The Animated Series and do it as a movie? It would be more intelligent than the dreck Im starting to see coming from the mouth/ass of JJ Abrams. And he is going to do Star Wars too?

 

[shavedape]

And the statement in bold is sorta sad. I have the same low expectations too. Also, I had a terrible thought about the ship...I dont get to see the damned thing explode or the nacelles to be torn off so they could just "repair" it. . Also, the action and explosions are going to be over the top because they are doing it in 3D too. . Given how CGI allows the impossible to be possible now in live action films, perhaps they could take one of the stories from Star Trek: The Animated Series and do it as a movie? It would be more intelligent than the dreck Im starting to see coming from the mouth/ass of JJ Abrams. And he is going to do Star Wars too?

They're doing it in 3D? Why???????????? I'm so sick of the 3D trend.

I'm trying not to think about how bad this one could get. Someone mentioned Scotty's little alien/troll sidekick, which I had forgotten about and now I'm all depressed that they are bringing that thing back. It's just so stupid!

 

[Overmind One]

They're doing it in 3D? Why???????????? I'm so sick of the 3D trend.

I'm trying not to think about how bad this one could get. Someone mentioned Scotty's little alien/troll sidekick, which I had forgotten about and now I'm all depressed that they are bringing that thing back. It's just so stupid!

Yep, all of that is coming together in this massive flush which will be Star Trek: Into Darkness. I think the title is quite apropos, even thouygh nobody has seen the movie...I dont like the fact that the sentient turn/horned toad thing is returning. Wow. We get to see it climb on things so Scotty can tell it to "get down from there". . And the 3D is not just any 3D...its IMAX 3D.

http://screenrant.com/star-trek-sequel-imax-3d-kofi-179541/

 

[shavedape]

Yep, all of that is coming together in this massive flush which will be Star Trek: Into Darkness. I think the title is quite apropos, even thouygh nobody has seen the movie...I dont like the fact that the sentient turn/horned toad thing is returning. Wow. We get to see it climb on things so Scotty can tell it to "get down from there". . And the 3D is not just any 3D...its IMAX 3D.

So true!!!