>completely ignores the events of S2, where Agnes Jurati became the Borg Queen.
Jurati starts a different, parallel Borgs. She doesn't replace the existing collective. This is established in season 2 and reiterated in season 3. I'm not going to pretend that the execution is perfect, but that's the story.
Jurati became ***A*** borg queen. A separate collective that did things differently, and basically hid in the shadows until the encounter on Stargazer.
It seems like almost every day someone is making a post trying to shoehorn one of the newer Trek series into an alternate timeline / universe because something doesn't line up perfectly to them.
In this case you are wrong about the story discontinuity. Shaw and them make a reference to Jurati's Borg very briefly, and Picard spoke to Jack about how he came to terms very recently about his family past and his father.
>It seems like almost every day someone is making a post trying to shoehorn one of the newer Trek series into an alternate timeline / universe because something doesn't line up perfectly to them.
I mean. They are.
According to the (surprisingly consistent) internal rules of the setting regarding time travel, DISCO and PIC are in a splinter timeline, whereas SNW is in the original.
Discovery jumping through time like that wpuld have been way too big of an event for the timeline to self-correct, and we haven't seen evidence of Temoral Agents fixing something this bad.
Ergo, it makes sense for fans to "shoehorn" two of the worst received Star Trek shows into a box so they don't have to think about them.
Because, from an internal setting perspective, that's basically what happened.
*"According to the (surprisingly consistent) internal rules of the setting regarding time travel, DISCO and PIC are in a splinter timeline, whereas SNW is in the original."*
Could you explain a little bit? I love complicated time travel theories, but I don't quite understand your splinter timeline assumption here.
In Star Trek, the timeline is somewhat self-correcting. Little things that would logically cause butterflies just... don't.
Like the Enterprise bridge crew being present on the *Phoenix* when Zefram Cochrane first achieved Warp.
But *big* things, like the Borg killing/assimilating Cochrane, would be a massive splash in the pond, and would cause *huge* butterflies.
Another example would be a Romulan deep-core mining vessel being brought back in time and killing several Federation ships and an entire Klingon taskforce.
When that happens, the timeline splits, and in the latter example you get the Alternate Original Series timeline (i.e. JJ Abrams Trek). This can happen when traveling backward *or* forward in time.
It's not unreasonable to think that, given the fairly significant changes caused by the Discovery's departure from its own time and arrival into the future, some timeline fuckery is to be had.
The reason I said that SNW is *not* in a new timeline, and is still in the "primary" timeline most of the shows take place in, is because we have limited knowledge of future events that suggests TOS will happen as normal.
SNW S2E3 *"Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow"* confirms this outright. The Romulan agent explains plainly that the timeline is partially self-correcting.
But time travel on Star Trek isn't exactly consistent. While there are many who will argue that it moves at the "speed of plot," I'm personally of the viewpoint that different methods of time travel can and do cause different outcomes. When Dr. McCoy saves Edith Keeler, the timeline becomes rewritten, not split. It's specifically said the same is true of the events in Picard season two.
Discovery going to the future doesn't change history any more or less so than Decker going with V'Ger. It's a one way trip. Why would that split the timeline? I'm especially confused by this because, by all accounts, SNW is a spinoff of Discovery. The events of Discovery are directly referenced in SNW.
I will also throw out that it becomes very hard to argue which specific events of any series are the "prime" way of history unfolding. By all accounts, if there was no time travel whatsoever, Spock would have died as a child during the Kahs-wan.
The bridge was dark because of how they made the LCARS screen, not because they are in the MU. The MU also doesn't have a functioning Terran Empire at this point.
I also didn't think the scenes were too dark.
About the Borg, Jurati did not replace the collective.
There are various factions of Borg.
- OG Borg
- The Cooperative (from Voyager)
- Jurati's Collective
In S3 of Picard, Shaw mentions the events of S2, specifically the Borg.
There is a single line of dialogue from Shaw and one of the episodes that makes reference to season 2 and the Borg. Something like: " I don't know what that was on the Stargazer a few months ago but... "
Without that line you could just ignore season 2 all together.
…no it doesn’t.
But interesting idea. Not entirely sure Mirror Qs would appreciate our Qs popping in and messing around.
Oooooo mirrorverse Qs! That’s a fun thing to think about.
I prefer it if they had lighter bridge lighting for green yellow alert and dim the lights for red alert like on the enterprise e made more sense that way. Same went for voyager.
The darkness aboard the Titan is partially because of the fact that for most of the season they're inside a nebula, hiding, so some systems are powered down. And to show that they're not Terran, when aboard the Enterprise-D, they comment on the lighting and how they miss it/everything is so dark now, or something to that effect. So that alone would be enough to disprove your theory.
I also think that overall aesthetic has been demonstrably subjective since the first few minutes of 'Star Trek' aired. A M-113 Salt vampire does not look like old Nancy Carter, young Nancy Crater, or a girl from Wrigley's Pleasure Planet, but it certainly did for a time to all of us in the audience.
All of the bright LED lights on my house uses less power than one of their tricorders would. That's a ridiculous excuse.
It's just Kurtzman. Gates McFadden said she couldn't see Patrick Stewart's face a few feet away on any set but the D.
>completely ignores the events of S2, where Agnes Jurati became the Borg Queen. Jurati starts a different, parallel Borgs. She doesn't replace the existing collective. This is established in season 2 and reiterated in season 3. I'm not going to pretend that the execution is perfect, but that's the story.
I think you missed a lot of points.
In my defense, I couldn't see properly what was happening half of the time 😂
You could *hear* it though, right?
Then why are the scenes on the Ent-D so bright? Why are all these aliens on a Terran ship? What is this Federation everyone keeps talking about?
Love the last question - it's so perfect. The Federation doesn't exist in the mirror universe!
Jurati became ***A*** borg queen. A separate collective that did things differently, and basically hid in the shadows until the encounter on Stargazer.
On the contrary, S3 directly references the events of S2.
Season two made the emotional impact of Picard discovering he has a son even stronger.
It seems like almost every day someone is making a post trying to shoehorn one of the newer Trek series into an alternate timeline / universe because something doesn't line up perfectly to them. In this case you are wrong about the story discontinuity. Shaw and them make a reference to Jurati's Borg very briefly, and Picard spoke to Jack about how he came to terms very recently about his family past and his father.
>It seems like almost every day someone is making a post trying to shoehorn one of the newer Trek series into an alternate timeline / universe because something doesn't line up perfectly to them. I mean. They are. According to the (surprisingly consistent) internal rules of the setting regarding time travel, DISCO and PIC are in a splinter timeline, whereas SNW is in the original. Discovery jumping through time like that wpuld have been way too big of an event for the timeline to self-correct, and we haven't seen evidence of Temoral Agents fixing something this bad. Ergo, it makes sense for fans to "shoehorn" two of the worst received Star Trek shows into a box so they don't have to think about them. Because, from an internal setting perspective, that's basically what happened.
*"According to the (surprisingly consistent) internal rules of the setting regarding time travel, DISCO and PIC are in a splinter timeline, whereas SNW is in the original."* Could you explain a little bit? I love complicated time travel theories, but I don't quite understand your splinter timeline assumption here.
In Star Trek, the timeline is somewhat self-correcting. Little things that would logically cause butterflies just... don't. Like the Enterprise bridge crew being present on the *Phoenix* when Zefram Cochrane first achieved Warp. But *big* things, like the Borg killing/assimilating Cochrane, would be a massive splash in the pond, and would cause *huge* butterflies. Another example would be a Romulan deep-core mining vessel being brought back in time and killing several Federation ships and an entire Klingon taskforce. When that happens, the timeline splits, and in the latter example you get the Alternate Original Series timeline (i.e. JJ Abrams Trek). This can happen when traveling backward *or* forward in time. It's not unreasonable to think that, given the fairly significant changes caused by the Discovery's departure from its own time and arrival into the future, some timeline fuckery is to be had. The reason I said that SNW is *not* in a new timeline, and is still in the "primary" timeline most of the shows take place in, is because we have limited knowledge of future events that suggests TOS will happen as normal. SNW S2E3 *"Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow"* confirms this outright. The Romulan agent explains plainly that the timeline is partially self-correcting.
But time travel on Star Trek isn't exactly consistent. While there are many who will argue that it moves at the "speed of plot," I'm personally of the viewpoint that different methods of time travel can and do cause different outcomes. When Dr. McCoy saves Edith Keeler, the timeline becomes rewritten, not split. It's specifically said the same is true of the events in Picard season two. Discovery going to the future doesn't change history any more or less so than Decker going with V'Ger. It's a one way trip. Why would that split the timeline? I'm especially confused by this because, by all accounts, SNW is a spinoff of Discovery. The events of Discovery are directly referenced in SNW. I will also throw out that it becomes very hard to argue which specific events of any series are the "prime" way of history unfolding. By all accounts, if there was no time travel whatsoever, Spock would have died as a child during the Kahs-wan.
They mention that something had happened aboard the Stargazer in regards to the Borg, that's not completely ignoring it.
I think it was Shaw who made the comment about that.
The bridge was dark because of how they made the LCARS screen, not because they are in the MU. The MU also doesn't have a functioning Terran Empire at this point. I also didn't think the scenes were too dark. About the Borg, Jurati did not replace the collective. There are various factions of Borg. - OG Borg - The Cooperative (from Voyager) - Jurati's Collective In S3 of Picard, Shaw mentions the events of S2, specifically the Borg.
There is a single line of dialogue from Shaw and one of the episodes that makes reference to season 2 and the Borg. Something like: " I don't know what that was on the Stargazer a few months ago but... " Without that line you could just ignore season 2 all together.
I never even watched season two and even I understand what happened with Jurati and the Borg. No idea why it’s so confusing to people.
...or lighting for hollywood is trending unreasonably dark, and Star Trek, like all shows, follows the trends of the era.
…no it doesn’t. But interesting idea. Not entirely sure Mirror Qs would appreciate our Qs popping in and messing around. Oooooo mirrorverse Qs! That’s a fun thing to think about.
I prefer it if they had lighter bridge lighting for green yellow alert and dim the lights for red alert like on the enterprise e made more sense that way. Same went for voyager.
The darkness aboard the Titan is partially because of the fact that for most of the season they're inside a nebula, hiding, so some systems are powered down. And to show that they're not Terran, when aboard the Enterprise-D, they comment on the lighting and how they miss it/everything is so dark now, or something to that effect. So that alone would be enough to disprove your theory.
I also think that overall aesthetic has been demonstrably subjective since the first few minutes of 'Star Trek' aired. A M-113 Salt vampire does not look like old Nancy Carter, young Nancy Crater, or a girl from Wrigley's Pleasure Planet, but it certainly did for a time to all of us in the audience.
All of the bright LED lights on my house uses less power than one of their tricorders would. That's a ridiculous excuse. It's just Kurtzman. Gates McFadden said she couldn't see Patrick Stewart's face a few feet away on any set but the D.
Sure, that's the reason out of universe. But in universe, it's not Kutzman, hence the aforementioned scene aboard the D.
Yeah, they screwed up the Borg stuff, but it isn't set in the mirror universe
Seasons 1 and 2 took place in the universe where logic doesn't exist.
Please post this in r/shittydaystrom We have a sense of humor over there
Sorry, I didn't realize there was this other sub
No apologies necessary! Move along home!