Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Star Trek - The Animated Series Question?

Options
  • 29-08-2012 7:57pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,686 ✭✭✭


    Star Trek - The Animated Series Question?
    Gene Roddenberry once stated that Star Trek - The Animated Series was not cannon and as such did not exist to him. As a fan i take what ever i can now that star trek is off the air. Can any tell me if its possible to consider the Animated Series as the 4th year of the 5 yer mission?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    tonyheaney wrote: »
    Star Trek - The Animated Series Question?
    Gene Roddenberry once stated that Star Trek - The Animated Series was not cannon and as such did not exist to him. As a fan i take what ever i can now that star trek is off the air. Can any tell me if its possible to consider the Animated Series as the 4th year of the 5 yer mission?

    If its not canon then no, in my opinion anyway. They do have the original actors for voice acting, which puts them in a weird canon.non canon grey area.

    They also used some plots/stories that were submitted to be shown on the actual show, but declined due to costs/inability etc, which again puts them in a grey-area.

    Best bet is to watch them & judge for yourself. They're interesting, in a weird way


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,177 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    I think there was one episode that was definately recognised as canon, it was about Spock's childhood, not sure though. I was watching a sci fi debris review last week which discussed the issue of canonicity.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 894 ✭✭✭filmbuffboy


    are the episodes actually worth watching though?

    its the one thing in the franchise ive always avoided, well, because the animation looks damn right awful


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Well you have to remember, they are cartoons at the end of the day. I suppose it depends on the extent of your Trek fanaticism :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,575 ✭✭✭Indricotherium


    EnterNow wrote: »
    Well you have to remember, they are cartoons at the end of the day. I suppose it depends on the extent of your Trek fanaticism :p

    Drawing a distinction on realism between cartoons and live action startrek is probably on the far end of fanaticism.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    Drawing a distinction on realism between cartoons and live action startrek is probably on the far end of fanaticism.

    Well one show is based towards a much younger audience, whats your point?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    I also never said anything at all about drawing a distinction between realism in the two shows. A cartoon may simply not to be everyones taste. Despite being targeted at a younger audience, it's no less 'real' than the live action series. I think everyone might kinda know that already though :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,686 ✭✭✭tonyheaney


    mind you when you compare the stargate TV live action franchise to the god awful stargate tv cartoon show i still prefer to consider ST:TAS as season 4 myself


Advertisement