No really? This is a perfect example of what could have been great for my other favourite shows that were cancelled. Farscape being one of them. My point is, most of the voice tallent returned, including some guest stars for three episodes. Gene gave his thumbs up for this endevor, why is it not considered "cannon"?
shareI believe it was aimmed toward kids and does not feel like star trek.
The canonicity has been somewhat disputed, but much of what appeared in the series carried on into other things. Also, with the new movie coming out Canon has pretty much been thrown out the window any way. ST TAS is canon to me.
shareI share the same feelings as you do about ST-TAS Heta. With episodes that continue on with certain story lines from episodes of TOS, it's hard not to see this little lost gem as the final two years of the "Five year misssion".
shareI would say that Gene Roddenberry decided that this series would not be canon when the first movie came out. It's possible that, because the series was aimed generally towards children, some of the concepts would not have translated well into the adult world even though a lot of the social ideas promoted were more closely aligned to the original Roddenberry idea of what the future would be like.
shareAgreed. I think that dispite many good episodes and of course most of the original cast back to voice the program, there were a number of liberties taken, especially including some pretty strange-looking 'cartoon' alien charcters. The show had a style that attempted to suit the 'Saturday Morning' viewer (though it came across as too 'mature' for kiddies in my opinion). Personally, with a few exceptions, this series is just perfect viewing following the the first 3 years of TOS. The uniforms were the same, characters patterned after TOS (even in age, hair style and mannerisms), the Enterprise was patterned after the one seen in TOS, and even the 'cinematography' of the space sequence was right out of classic Trek. I think this show deserves more than its 'obscure footnote' status. It sad that some look at it in the same light as a 'fan film' which it isn't.
shareI agree.
Usually cannon is what appears on screen.
A tv series and movies will be made noncannon if that tv series is rebooted.
I believe Batman movie franchise was rebooted with Batman Begins.
Gene would later say that had he thought that there would be a live-action Star Trek, he would never have permitted the animated series. So, years after the animated show aired, Gene Roddenberry instructed Paramount not to consider the series as part of the official Star Trek Universe.
Star Trek The Animated Series was made noncannon in 1987 when I believe
Star Trek The Next Generation started.
This was due to Mr. Roddenberry having had some regrets over some elements of the Animated show.
However before Star Trek The animated series when asked about the maturity level of the animated series during an interview for Show magazine in the early 1970's, Gene Roddenberry responded: "That was one of the reasons I wanted creative control. There are enough limitations just being on Saturday morning. We have to limit some of the violence we might have had on the evening shows. There will probably be no sex element to talk of either. But it will be Star Trek and not a stereotype kids cartoon show."
Gene Roddenberry himself said this would be star trek.
http://www.danhausertrek.com/AnimatedSeries/Bgd.html
I guess the term 'alternate universe' comes into play when story canon is tweaked. The new film made no qualms when it changed major character stories and went against the established history of the saga. Comic books have been doing this for years, so why not Star Trek? That's wht they call it 'science fiction'.
shareI've heard that the real reason is that Filmation (the animation studio/production company that produced The Animated Series) was dissolving amidst financial crisis and the rights to anything (character or story) that they produced was in legal limbo. So with The Next Generation (the cash cow) in production Paramount decided that it was easier to just write off TAS than risk a law suit should TNG use a character or concept from the show.
I've also heard some rather nasty things about Trek's archivist Richard Arnold. Apparently he was some kind who impressed Roddenberry with his photographic memory of all things Trek, in the age before home video and bittorrent. He became Gene Roddenberry's assistant, which basically amounted to driving him around and doing b**ch work as Gene's health declined. According the David Gerrold:
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.
That's not entirely the whole story though because Arnold was put in charge of overseeing all licensing for Trek related spinoffs but he was still beholden to the studio's legal woes with Flimation. That said according to Peter David he was a real jerk to lots of writers, making very arbitrary rules about what could and couldn't be done, in the same way that lots of fans would be if they were in charge.
[deleted]
Arbitration Judge would have to decide what star trek canon means.
For now Star Trek canon is only live action tv series and movies.
No, ST:TAS is not "cannon," because it is not a large metal barrel in which gunpowder is ignited to propel a heavy projectile over large distances at a designated target. But I'd say it IS "canon."
shareI believe that Gene Roddenberry only did it for the money.
I say Star Trek The Animated Series is canon also.
Live action TV series and Movies are considered canon.
Star Trek Cannon is not set in stone.
An arbritration judge would have to decide what Star Trek canon is?
Paula Block says, "Canon is Star Trek continuity as presented on TV and Movie" screens.
CBS Senior Director of Product Development Paula Block who is in charge of all Trek licensed products says Star Trek canon is Star Trek continuity as presented on TV and Movie screens.
http://trekmovie.com/2007/07/22/dc-fontana-on-tas-canon-and-sybok/