You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Baskin-Robbins... OH, okay, I get it.
It's funny you mention that....
One of the cardinal rules imposed on Pocket Books by both Richard Arnold's reign of error and subsequent administrations within Paramount was "Thou Shalt Not Contradict What Was Shown On Screen." But such was the audience reaction to "These Are the Voyages", that Pocket had no qualms commissioning The Good That Men Do, in which we learn that a key character death on that infamous episode was in fact an in-universe cover story to hide his wartime-and-early-Federation adventures with the Baskin-Robbins Gang (as I sometimes call a certain numbered department).
Yeah. "These Are the Voyages" presented a unique opportunity. The novels were able to utterly reinterpret those events without actually contradicting anything, since the whole thing was a holodeck recreation, told from the perspective of the 24th century, rather than from the perspective of Archer's crew in the 22nd. As a result, the "cardinal rule" (as Tuxedo Prime called it) was actually upheld.Makes sense, since what we see on screen in that case could only have matched the official record, and anything that wasn't public knowledge in the 24th century couldn't have happened there. No other Star Trek episode explicitly frames itself as a historical reconstruction like that (which is itself unfortunate, of course, because if we could move to accepting that all canon is inspired by the events of the world of Trek instead of insisting that every word is God-breathed, entire YouTube channels would go out of business.)
I fully adopt "the Baskin-Robbins Gang" into my lexicon and personality.
Indeed, that's the only reason they could write "The Good That Men Do."As a result, the "cardinal rule" (as Tuxedo Prime called it) was actually upheld.
To be fair, I can point to any number of prose works for other franchises that singularly FAIL to maintain their parent series' continuity. The first Murder, She Wrote novel infamously depicted Jessica Fletcher as driving a car (this was later fixed in a revised edition, but other errors remain).Indeed, that's the only reason they could write "The Good That Men Do."
Part of why I love tie-in novels (not just Star Trek, but generally) is that there's a level of artistry necessary in taking the exact words of canon and finding spaces to tell new stories without contradicting anything.
It's a rule that non-prose works (like video games, comics, and TV spin-offs) never bother to uphold (look how Star Trek Online is still chugging along post-Picard, long after Pocket Books was forced to throw out their continuity), but I never see anybody shitting over them for being "glorified fanfic."
It is deeply a movie that has seen 2001: A Space Odyssey. I blame that influence for why there's that bizarre and out of place transporter accident scene as well. But at least it wasn't Star Wars!But first, the first motion picture was slooooow. So much panning scenery shots of space stuff. Maybe the sfx blew people's minds before but it was boring. People did get killed by the entity though. They never explained why it selectively chose the lady to murder, poor girl. But I figured out what was going to happen after they name dropped the entity and said it was after it's Creator on Earth. The whole thing felt like it could have been a Twilight Zone ep, just really stretched out.
And, logistically speaking: given how long and how much trek has been created by so many people: it's literally impossible to make new content which does not step on something past. It's part of why some companies (like DC.) are constantly rebooting the franchises, and doing stand alone stuff: it just makes it easier to tell stories.
The fandom dubbed it "The Slow-Motion Picture" for a reason.But first, the first motion picture was slooooow.
Yes. It's kind of fun to think about how it's basically just a thing they made up so the movie could have an action-y opening. and then the fandom fell in love with it to the point that you'd think it was a much bigger part of the setting than it was. "How did this character approach the Kobayashi Maru?" is one of the Standard Star Trek Tie-In Media Stories.Also, is this the first time the Kobayashi Maru thing was mentioned?
Slow Motion Picture!!! Hahaha!!!The fandom dubbed it "The Slow-Motion Picture" for a reason.
It's less bad if you keep in mind that the story was originally intended to be the pilot for a new Trek TV series until the studio decided at the last minute that it wanted a movie instead.
Ok, I saw the first two original Star Trek movies with a friend (after I told him I was watching some Star Trek shows). Since I just finished the musical SNW ep, have to stuff to reconcile.
But first, the first motion picture was slooooow. So much panning scenery shots of space stuff. Maybe the sfx blew people's minds before but it was boring. People did get killed by the entity though. They never explained why it selectively chose the lady to murder, poor girl. But I figured out what was going to happen after they name dropped the entity and said it was after it's Creator on Earth. The whole thing felt like it could have been a Twilight Zone ep, just really stretched out.
Oh, I have no idea. I watched a DVD set (Blu ray?) at a friend's place. Director's cut would be loooooonger, I'd assume? If I saw the theatrical, then it was already too looong for me, haha