RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,803
Posts: 5,471,788
Members: 25,037
Currently online: 625
Newest member: Sabra

TrekToday headlines

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Trek Business Card Cases
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

February IDW Publishing Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

Retro Review: The Siege of AR-558
By: Michelle on Nov 15

Trevco Full Bleed Uniform T-Shirts
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14

Wheaton Buys Wesley Crusher Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14

People’s Choice Award Nominations
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14

Quinto: Not Internally Homophobic
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
Excellent 706 62.70%
Above Average 213 18.92%
Average 84 7.46%
Below Average 46 4.09%
Poor 77 6.84%
Voters: 1126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6 2009, 02:18 AM   #2491
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Oh trevanian and Anticitizen as to the it would be in character for Spock Prime to fix the timeline argument well the timeline wasn't exactly right at the end of Yesteryear and yet Spock wasn't trying to bend over backwards to save his poor sehlat, so there is a slight precedence here.
That was a PERSONAL loss, not a universe-changing one. HUGE difference. needs of the many, you know ...
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 02:24 AM   #2492
Anticitizen
Fleet Captain
 
Anticitizen's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa Research Facility
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
h
I WASN'T talking about time travel I was talking about alternate realities, like the alternate reality which is exactly like and is for all intents and purposes the Prime universe except that Spock and Nero weren't pulled into the black hole and as such DID NOT go back in time.
Then I'm afraid I don't see the point you're trying to make, because Spock and Nero obviously did go back in time...
Yes in the universe that Trek XI takes place in, but in another universe in the Trek multiverse they didn't.

It's like this you come up to a fork in the road, in one universe you go right in another universe the branches off of yours you go left and both the universe where you go right and the newly created one where you go left both continue of their merry little ways both continuing to existing.

Now knowing this and the fact that Trek has shown that this is the case in the existance of alternate realities in their multiverse we now apply this factor to NuTrek, for this pupose I will refer to one universe as Abrams 1 and Abrams 2 to avoid confusion.

Now

In the universe I am refering to as Abrams 1, in the year 2387 the Hobus star's supernova is threatening the universe. Spock Prime prevents this by detonating a drop of red matter in the star and thus causing a black hole that destroys said star, after this Spock and Nero the pissed off Romulan get pulled into the black hole and wind up in the past which is altered by Nero.

Now for the mind blowing part.

In the universe I'm calling Abrams 2 an alternate reality the branches off from Abrams 1, Spock Prime destroys Hobus, he and Nero are not pulled into the black hole and do NOT go back in time and Nero does NOT fuck up the time line.

In conclusion becuase a newly created universe branches off from the Prime universe inwhich Spock and Nero DON'T go back in time, the Prime Universe still exists and we can stop arguing about it.
That's all very interesting, but the movie suggests none of this.

This can also explain why Spock Prime doesn't try to restore the timeline becuase in the century since his last trip through time he picked he read up on quantum realities and how they are formed and figured his old timeline is still around in some form and figured trying to fix it probably wasn't worth the trouble since in some form IT STILL EXISTS.
Then why do anything?

Ah, well, I can put off washing the dishes then, because in an alternate reality, I already have. Or at least used paper plates.
__________________
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.
Anticitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 02:31 AM   #2493
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post


Then I'm afraid I don't see the point you're trying to make, because Spock and Nero obviously did go back in time...
Yes in the universe that Trek XI takes place in, but in another universe in the Trek multiverse they didn't.

It's like this you come up to a fork in the road, in one universe you go right in another universe the branches off of yours you go left and both the universe where you go right and the newly created one where you go left both continue of their merry little ways both continuing to existing.

Now knowing this and the fact that Trek has shown that this is the case in the existance of alternate realities in their multiverse we now apply this factor to NuTrek, for this pupose I will refer to one universe as Abrams 1 and Abrams 2 to avoid confusion.

Now

In the universe I am refering to as Abrams 1, in the year 2387 the Hobus star's supernova is threatening the universe. Spock Prime prevents this by detonating a drop of red matter in the star and thus causing a black hole that destroys said star, after this Spock and Nero the pissed off Romulan get pulled into the black hole and wind up in the past which is altered by Nero.

Now for the mind blowing part.

In the universe I'm calling Abrams 2 an alternate reality the branches off from Abrams 1, Spock Prime destroys Hobus, he and Nero are not pulled into the black hole and do NOT go back in time and Nero does NOT fuck up the time line.

In conclusion becuase a newly created universe branches off from the Prime universe inwhich Spock and Nero DON'T go back in time, the Prime Universe still exists and we can stop arguing about it.
That's all very interesting, but the movie suggests none of this.
Nothing except the rules handed down by previous incarnations of Trek that your argument in the case of time travel need to have occured to have an argument.

This can also explain why Spock Prime doesn't try to restore the timeline becuase in the century since his last trip through time he picked he read up on quantum realities and how they are formed and figured his old timeline is still around in some form and figured trying to fix it probably wasn't worth the trouble since in some form IT STILL EXISTS.
Then why do anything?

Ah, well, I can put off washing the dishes then, because in an alternate reality, I already have. Or at least used paper plates.
Becuase Spock is not a total bastard who only helps people if it's good for his universe hence my other theory about damage control in place of trying to do something he does not have the equipment to pull off.

Last edited by M'Sharak; July 6 2009 at 03:16 AM. Reason: removed extra close-quote tag
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 03:06 AM   #2494
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

How many episodes did Spock actually express a desire/ need to go back and fix messed up timelines? Just because Spock has been involved with crews that would fix the timeline when given the chance doesn't mean that he would actually do it when given an opportunity to do so on his own. I'm failing to see how this is Spock doing something out of character.

Also, there is just as much Star Trek evidence to support parallel timelines as there is to support one replacable timeline. Any episode where people come from the future to fix timeline screwups... if the timeline got replaced, then they should have been erased and never realise that there was a problem. Carpenter Street from Enterprise- humanity from anytime after the Xindi arrived in the past should have ceased to exist because as soon as the Xindi arrived, they should have changed the timeline, which would have prevented anyone from being alive enough to go back in time to stop them. At this point, there is no real way to argue which way or theory is right, because Star Trek has supported both of them, even at the exact same time!
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 03:40 AM   #2495
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

archeryguy1701 wrote: View Post
How many episodes did Spock actually express a desire/ need to go back and fix messed up timelines? Just because Spock has been involved with crews that would fix the timeline when given the chance doesn't mean that he would actually do it when given an opportunity to do so on his own. I'm failing to see how this is Spock doing something out of character.
If Spock hasn't learned the value of the decisions made in those past instances (whether he participated in the decision-making process or not), then he isn't even the sum of his parts, and he probably wouldn't have invested himself so in all the reunification crap, which on the surface is probably as illogical as 'fixing' a timestream, since vulcs and roms split apart by choice, and forcing or arranging a reconciliation would be inflicting his own vision on two cultures.

And the first time that time travel was brought up on TREK, it was Spock who expressed mild interest in exploring it, ("we CAN go back in time") while Kirk was the cautious one ("We may risk it someday" or words to that effect, at the end of NAKED TIME.)
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 04:08 AM   #2496
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

trevanian wrote: View Post
archeryguy1701 wrote: View Post
How many episodes did Spock actually express a desire/ need to go back and fix messed up timelines? Just because Spock has been involved with crews that would fix the timeline when given the chance doesn't mean that he would actually do it when given an opportunity to do so on his own. I'm failing to see how this is Spock doing something out of character.
If Spock hasn't learned the value of the decisions made in those past instances (whether he participated in the decision-making process or not), then he isn't even the sum of his parts, and he probably wouldn't have invested himself so in all the reunification crap, which on the surface is probably as illogical as 'fixing' a timestream, since vulcs and roms split apart by choice, and forcing or arranging a reconciliation would be inflicting his own vision on two cultures.
Was there any value in those past decisions? Why should Spock be the one to decide that his timeline is more right than the one that is currently existing? What if the "real" timeline is just the result of some other future person screwing up and creating it? Then Spock would be going back in time to restore a timeline that wasn't meant to be in the first place. If Spock follows the ideology of "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one", then he is forced to ask who is more important: the single life that remembers the way that things used to be or the trillions of lives that have now taken a new course. Who is he to say that they have no right to live their new lives?

And the first time that time travel was brought up on TREK, it was Spock who expressed mild interest in exploring it, ("we CAN go back in time") while Kirk was the cautious one ("We may risk it someday" or words to that effect, at the end of NAKED TIME.)
So what you're saying is that it was Spock who initially was OK with going back in time and jacking things up?
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 05:54 AM   #2497
number6
Vice Admiral
 
Location: number6 has left the village through some inexpicable hole in the ground to head the corporation.
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

It's not like Spock had a choice. His ship got pulled into a black hole he created in trying to contain the supernova. He was immediately captured by Nero, who by that time had already drastically altered the timeline they're both now in.

He captured Spock, took the ship with the Red Matter, marroned him on a planet and destroyed Vulcan. Since he's now stuck in this alternate timeline/reality and in the past, I am not sure how easy it would be for Spock to use 23rd century tech to get back to his own time and reality or fix what Nero did. Young Spock destroyed the Jellyfish and the remaining red matter in his attempt to destroy Nero's ship. I don't think it's as simple as people would think.
number6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 01:49 PM   #2498
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

archeryguy1701 wrote: View Post
Was there any value in those past decisions? Why should Spock be the one to decide that his timeline is more right than the one that is currently existing? What if the "real" timeline is just the result of some other future person screwing up and creating it? Then Spock would be going back in time to restore a timeline that wasn't meant to be in the first place.
Usually, he's the guy who just KNOWS.

Look at TVH (if you must, I prefer not to.) They actually rewrote the figure out about the whales thing so that Kirk makes the declaration about prepping for time travel, but Spock is the guy who figures everything out and basically leaves Kirk with only a declaration to make.

In the novels (which apparently affected the screenwriters signficantly, so it could constitute more of an argument than usual for those who keep waving the CANON around), Spock's part in time travel seems to be the guy who knows or figures it out too. I'm thinking ENTROPY EFFECT and KILLING TIME, though there are tons more I'm sure.

Your points are fine for philosophy, and for a non-franchise storytelling, I'd go so far as to think them commendable (think how much a little bit more of this would have helped THE FINAL COUNTDOWN.) But for TREK, it's a wrong call, because we've seen it different ... and not just as a plot point, but when things mattered, as evidenced upthread.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 03:02 PM   #2499
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post

What do you mean? I wasn't arguing whether they were properly fixed 100% or not, I was saying these episodes argue for one timeline, not multiples co-existing. If going back in time didn't effect the future, but instead simply branched off to another, 'parallel' timeline, then there's be no point in doing it.
Not all of your examples actually support "one timeline". Here is the best summation of what I mean that I've found (I didn't write it but I find it makes the most sense--it is not the most "natural" way of viewing the time travel stories in Trek but if one examines them closely enough, it is the most logical).
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 04:53 PM   #2500
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

trevanian wrote: View Post
archeryguy1701 wrote: View Post
Was there any value in those past decisions? Why should Spock be the one to decide that his timeline is more right than the one that is currently existing? What if the "real" timeline is just the result of some other future person screwing up and creating it? Then Spock would be going back in time to restore a timeline that wasn't meant to be in the first place.
Usually, he's the guy who just KNOWS.

Look at TVH (if you must, I prefer not to.) They actually rewrote the figure out about the whales thing so that Kirk makes the declaration about prepping for time travel, but Spock is the guy who figures everything out and basically leaves Kirk with only a declaration to make.

In the novels (which apparently affected the screenwriters signficantly, so it could constitute more of an argument than usual for those who keep waving the CANON around), Spock's part in time travel seems to be the guy who knows or figures it out too. I'm thinking ENTROPY EFFECT and KILLING TIME, though there are tons more I'm sure.

Your points are fine for philosophy, and for a non-franchise storytelling, I'd go so far as to think them commendable (think how much a little bit more of this would have helped THE FINAL COUNTDOWN.) But for TREK, it's a wrong call, because we've seen it different ... and not just as a plot point, but when things mattered, as evidenced upthread.
Except that by using novel examples you open the door for my counter agument using the Crucible trilogy.

You see in the Spock Crucible book Spock reviews some of his trips
through time and concludes that he has altered the timeline in the past.

An example he gives is Yesteryear (which for the purposes of this novel happened). Spock points out that after returning froma trip through the Guardian of Forever he finds himself in a timeline where he dies as a kid and an Andorian named Thelin takes his place in the grand scheme of things.

Spock figures out that the only reason he gets to live to adulthood his to go back in time and alter history to make it happen not correct history since the only way he can live is through the use of time travel.

Now he does this and he goes over the aftermath, which is that his sehlat died earlier then it should have and Thelin gets blown up at a future date all so that he could exist through time tampering.

The other example he gives is interestingly enough Star Trek IV where their trip to pick up some whales alters things in that they had to use time travel to get them so things didn't go as they would have gone with the proper flow of histoy and there no way of knowing how things would have otherwise turned out.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 06:53 PM   #2501
Anticitizen
Fleet Captain
 
Anticitizen's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa Research Facility
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Ovation wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post

What do you mean? I wasn't arguing whether they were properly fixed 100% or not, I was saying these episodes argue for one timeline, not multiples co-existing. If going back in time didn't effect the future, but instead simply branched off to another, 'parallel' timeline, then there's be no point in doing it.
Not all of your examples actually support "one timeline". Here is the best summation of what I mean that I've found (I didn't write it but I find it makes the most sense--it is not the most "natural" way of viewing the time travel stories in Trek but if one examines them closely enough, it is the most logical).
The only example in that list that features a 'divergent' timeline is Yesterday's Enterprise, and that's debatable. As soon as the time travel incident occurred, we saw the current-day events transform immediately (war with the Klingons, etc). It was only due to Guinan's actions that the timeline (which I believe to be the same one) was restored (another example of a character feeling it's important to 'fix' it).

As for Sela being created as a byproduct, well, I figure that's another one of those 'the time traveler has been protected from changes in the timeline due to the nature of time traveling itself' incidents, like FC or City on the Edge of Forever. And Trek '09.
__________________
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.
Anticitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 07:04 PM   #2502
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post

What do you mean? I wasn't arguing whether they were properly fixed 100% or not, I was saying these episodes argue for one timeline, not multiples co-existing. If going back in time didn't effect the future, but instead simply branched off to another, 'parallel' timeline, then there's be no point in doing it.
Not all of your examples actually support "one timeline". Here is the best summation of what I mean that I've found (I didn't write it but I find it makes the most sense--it is not the most "natural" way of viewing the time travel stories in Trek but if one examines them closely enough, it is the most logical).
The only example in that list that features a 'divergent' timeline is Yesterday's Enterprise, and that's debatable. As soon as the time travel incident occurred, we saw the current-day events transform immediately (war with the Klingons, etc). It was only due to Guinan's actions that the timeline (which I believe to be the same one) was restored (another example of a character feeling it's important to 'fix' it).

As for Sela being created as a byproduct, well, I figure that's another one of those 'the time traveler has been protected from changes in the timeline due to the nature of time traveling itself' incidents, like FC or City on the Edge of Forever. And Trek '09.
Yesterday's Enterprise shows us no less than three timelines. We have the timeline where Yar has been killed. We have the war timeline (created by the disappearance of the C at Narendra III). We have the timeline that leads to Sela. Our perspective from the camera suggests one timeline. Logic indicates otherwise. The timeline with a dead Yar CANNOT lead to the one that has Sela. The disappearance of the C creates a divergent timeline (into which it ends up--like what happens with Nero in the new movie). The C's return creates a third timeline--the one with Sela. That one is similar enough to the first one we see in the episode so as to appear the "restored one" but logically, it must be a third divergence. Time travel stories negate the linear mode of time that we think of in colloquial terms--we need to think of time travel stories in terms of results, not in terms of linear chronology from the perspective of the camera, if we want to examine the logical consequences of time travel. Or we can do what most people do--ignore the unsettling implications and simply enjoy the stories. The latter may be more pleasant, but in terms of logic, it is not necessarily (or even usually) correct.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 07:12 PM   #2503
Anticitizen
Fleet Captain
 
Anticitizen's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa Research Facility
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Ovation wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
Not all of your examples actually support "one timeline". Here is the best summation of what I mean that I've found (I didn't write it but I find it makes the most sense--it is not the most "natural" way of viewing the time travel stories in Trek but if one examines them closely enough, it is the most logical).
The only example in that list that features a 'divergent' timeline is Yesterday's Enterprise, and that's debatable. As soon as the time travel incident occurred, we saw the current-day events transform immediately (war with the Klingons, etc). It was only due to Guinan's actions that the timeline (which I believe to be the same one) was restored (another example of a character feeling it's important to 'fix' it).

As for Sela being created as a byproduct, well, I figure that's another one of those 'the time traveler has been protected from changes in the timeline due to the nature of time traveling itself' incidents, like FC or City on the Edge of Forever. And Trek '09.
Yesterday's Enterprise shows us no less than three timelines. We have the timeline where Yar has been killed. We have the war timeline (created by the disappearance of the C at Narendra III). We have the timeline that leads to Sela. Our perspective from the camera suggests one timeline. Logic indicates otherwise. The timeline with a dead Yar CANNOT lead to the one that has Sela. The disappearance of the C creates a divergent timeline (into which it ends up--like what happens with Nero in the new movie). The C's return creates a third timeline--the one with Sela. That one is similar enough to the first one we see in the episode so as to appear the "restored one" but logically, it must be a third divergence. Time travel stories negate the linear mode of time that we think of in colloquial terms--we need to think of time travel stories in terms of results, not in terms of linear chronology from the perspective of the camera, if we want to examine the logical consequences of time travel. Or we can do what most people do--ignore the unsettling implications and simply enjoy the stories. The latter may be more pleasant, but in terms of logic, it is not necessarily (or even usually) correct.
No, we see three revisions of the same timeline. Otherwise, why would Guinan feel that the timeline she was in was 'wrong'?
__________________
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.
Anticitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 07:21 PM   #2504
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

Anticitizen wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
Anticitizen wrote: View Post

The only example in that list that features a 'divergent' timeline is Yesterday's Enterprise, and that's debatable. As soon as the time travel incident occurred, we saw the current-day events transform immediately (war with the Klingons, etc). It was only due to Guinan's actions that the timeline (which I believe to be the same one) was restored (another example of a character feeling it's important to 'fix' it).

As for Sela being created as a byproduct, well, I figure that's another one of those 'the time traveler has been protected from changes in the timeline due to the nature of time traveling itself' incidents, like FC or City on the Edge of Forever. And Trek '09.
Yesterday's Enterprise shows us no less than three timelines. We have the timeline where Yar has been killed. We have the war timeline (created by the disappearance of the C at Narendra III). We have the timeline that leads to Sela. Our perspective from the camera suggests one timeline. Logic indicates otherwise. The timeline with a dead Yar CANNOT lead to the one that has Sela. The disappearance of the C creates a divergent timeline (into which it ends up--like what happens with Nero in the new movie). The C's return creates a third timeline--the one with Sela. That one is similar enough to the first one we see in the episode so as to appear the "restored one" but logically, it must be a third divergence. Time travel stories negate the linear mode of time that we think of in colloquial terms--we need to think of time travel stories in terms of results, not in terms of linear chronology from the perspective of the camera, if we want to examine the logical consequences of time travel. Or we can do what most people do--ignore the unsettling implications and simply enjoy the stories. The latter may be more pleasant, but in terms of logic, it is not necessarily (or even usually) correct.
No, we see three revisions of the same timeline. Otherwise, why would Guinan feel that the timeline she was in was 'wrong'?
I'll let my fellow BBS member's post address this issue.

The relevant quotation from it is:

Guinan had previously met Picard from the alternate TNG timeline twice: Once in San Francisco in 1900 (in "Time's Arrow") and once in the timeless Nexus in 2300 (in "Star Trek Generations"). Both times, it was a Picard from a future where Yar was dead, and the Federation was not at war with the Klingons.

So, 70 years later, when the Enterprise-C appeared during the Klingon War, Guinan realized that she was in the "wrong" timeline, and had to "create" the alternate reality where the Picard she had already met twice would exist. She did this by convincing Yar that she would be better off in the alternate timeline.

That is usually the motivation for time travelers: "This timeline sucks. I'm going to another one where things are better."

However, half the time, the time travelers don't survive long enough to enjoy the new timeline they create (Kim and Chakotay in "Timeless," Lorian in "E2," Admiral Janeway in "Endgame," Lt. Yar in "Yesterday's Enterprise," Jake Sisko in "The Visitor," the Borg Queen in "First Contact," Nero in "Star Trek XI").

Other times, the time travelers succeed in creating a happy, new timeline, so they either stay in that new timeline's past or "return" to its future, which is better off than the one they left (Picard in "First Contact," Picard in "Generations," Captain Sisko in "Past Tense").

Either way, the characters never return to (or live long enough to see) the original, unaltered timeline again, and since the TV cameras follow only the characters who end up in the "good" timelines, we are left with the impression that the original future is "erased" or overwritten, but we have never actually seen any evidence of this.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 08:23 PM   #2505
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

You know Anticitizen an argument could be made that Yesterday's Enterprise's War timeline is the proper timeline because the Enterprise-C's trip through time occured because of a phenomenon caused by their battle with the Romulans and that by sending it back they in fact changed history.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
grading & discussion, parallel star trek, vulcan

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.