[QUOTE=Aesiron]
Going by the definition of Trek canon, it’s not official until it’s shown on-screen and that includes all the Paramount licensed books.
[/QUOTE]
IIRC, this is on “star trek” .com ? if so, it;s pointless, as the point I was making is what ‘fans’ consider canon vs alot of stuff - this is why movies that make attempt to re-do certain things are frought with peril.
[QUOTE=cmyk]
Spock’s mom is hot!
[/QUOTE]
A pointy-eared MILF. There’s gotta be a niche porn market for that.
[QUOTE=Aesiron]
Going by the definition of Trek canon, it’s not official until it’s shown on-screen and that includes all the Paramount licensed books.
[/QUOTE]
do you consider the memory alpha site to be canon?
[QUOTE=memory alpha]
In the early to mid-23rd century, at least twelve heavy cruiser-type starships, the Constitution-class, were commissioned by the Federation Starfleet. The vessel registered NCC-1701, which was constructed in San Francisco and launched in 2245, was christened the Enterprise. Larry Marvick was one of the designers of the Enterprise. (TOS: “Tomorrow is Yesterday”, “Is There in Truth No Beauty?”)
[/QUOTE]
and further from
[QUOTE=memory alpha]
Production materials reproduced in Whitfield’s “The Making of Star Trek”, suggested that “starship” was a unique type designation for space-going vessels. In that vein, the Enterprise and her sister ships were originally designated “Starship class” vessels.
The term denoted a large, multi-purpose vessel capable of taking on a variety of tasks during an extended mission, often at some distance from central authority. (The nearest 24th century equivilant designation would be that of Explorer.) This helps explain Merrik’s reference to a “very special type of vessel and crew”, as well as the numerous references to the extraordinary amount of authority granted the Captain of such a ship.
However, the term quickly fell into a more “generic” use, first as describing Federation vessels in general, and then large, faster-than-light-capable vessels from a range of cultures
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=simster]
IIRC, this is on “star trek” .com ? if so, it;s pointless, as the point I was making is what ‘fans’ consider canon vs alot of stuff - this is why movies that make attempt to re-do certain things are frought with peril.
[/QUOTE]
It’s official policy. Wikipedia has a good overview of it.
[QUOTE=simster]
do you consider the memory alpha site to be canon?
[/QUOTE]
For the most part but, then, my own personal canon (fanon) has a lot of my own conjecture, hand waving, and cherry picking in it. The plaque says it’s starship class but later episodes say Constitution and I subscribe to the latter notion since all large spacefaring vehicles are starships in my mind.
To use another example, novels are most emphatically not canon, for instance, but I consider the DS9 Relaunch to be a continuation of the television show but that doesn’t make it so. If there’s ever a movie, it will be canon and the books will not be.
You and I can believe whatever we want about the series but, in the end, what is aired is what is “real”.
[QUOTE=simster]
There were several books prior to 75 - ‘Making of Star Trek’ -the ‘Official Blueprints’ (1973), the Compendium, etc… not sure if they mention Enterprise history at that point - in 79, with the release of the first movie came several more items that are considered ‘canon’ - “Spaceflight Chronology” etc, - Robert April was the first captian, Pike had 2 successful 5 year missions on ‘our’ enterprise - Spock was Pike’s Science officer - Kirk was a Lt on the Farragut - Kirk succeeded Pike on the Enterprise - his arrival on the Enterprise is not covered TTBOMK - several of these are confirmed in the series.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for reminding me of the blueprints. My copy is in a box in the garage, and I’ll try to dig them out, but I’m pretty sure that is where I got the impression the Enterprise was built at Mars.
[QUOTE=Ogre]
A pointy-eared MILF. There’s gotta be a niche porn market for that.
[/QUOTE]
Please. Amanda is human.
[QUOTE=Flander]
This just makes that Futurama episode so much better! Thanks.
[/QUOTE]
I like the South Park episode even better, “Yes yes!”
[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir]
Just as VGR showed the Utopia Planitia yards to be in orbit of Mars, so too may we assume that the San Francisco Fleet Yards are in orbit over San Francisco (synchronous, presumably, or there’d be no reason to name them after a feature on the planet’s surface).
[/QUOTE]
Just to insert some physics into the argument (God help me) I just have to say that having something in synchronous orbit over San Francisco would be a royal pain in the ass. SF is at almost 38 degrees north and that would be hard to factor for. More likely would be either an equatorial orbit at 122.5 West which would put them in the eastern Pacific or a geosynchronous orbit which would go from 38N to 38S.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
I’m glad that someone remembers him. McIntyre’s novel Enterprise says that Pike was captain for 11 years, which leaves a bit of time after Kirk graduates, I think. I’ve read (and I can’t find it now) that April was the first captain. It might be on the timeline at the Las Vegas Hilton ST show.
I also think I’ve read that the Enterprise was built at Mars.
[/QUOTE]
Robert April first appeared in the animated Star trek episode “The Counter-Clock Incident ,” a rather bad episode in which the Enterprise passes through a super nova and into an alternate universe where time flows backwards. In a reversal of “The Deadly Years,” Kirk and his crew begin to reverse-age into infants. Retired captain April and his wife Sarah, whom the Enterprise had been transporting to a conference on Babel, remain adults longer than the rest of the crew due to being older than everyone else. With the aid of a scientist from the alternate dimension, who the Enterprise pursued through the supernova, April and his wife assume command of the Enterprise and guide it back into its normal universe. They then use the transporters, which contain the pattern of every crew member, to restore everyone back to their proper age.
At one point, Gene Roddenberry declared the animated episodes as non-canon. I don’t know if this particular episode has been restored to canon.
In the Star Trek Encyclopedia which I earlier mentioned, the authors Photoshopped Roddenberry’s head onto a “Where No Man Has Gone Before”-era uniform, and used it to illustrate the brief entry on Capt. Robert T. April.
HD trailer now found here.
This movie is written by the pair responsible for the Transformers movie script.
That may well be 'nuff said. 
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Frylock]
This movie is written by the pair responsible for the Transformers movie script.
That may well be 'nuff said. 
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
I can’t find a cite at the moment, but supposedly in an interview, Nimoy has said that the film has “three Spocks” in it.
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
I can’t find a cite at the moment, but supposedly in an interview, Nimoy has said that the film has “three Spocks” in it.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that in itself doesn’t bother me. (Should it?)
-FrL-
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock had three Spocks, after all - the little kid, the pon farr-suffering teen, and Nimoy as the old fart.
Another bit of teaser action, click on the red dot after the words “under construction” on the main movie site to be taken to www.ncc-1701.com/.
[QUOTE=Pushkin]
Another bit of teaser action, click on the red dot after the words “under construction” on the main movie site to be taken to www.ncc-1701.com/.
[/QUOTE]
EDIT: And a shot of the interior of the Enterprise too.
