Countdown to Darkness - Review and Discussion

[Christopher]

^But my point is that artists in Trek comics can make assumptions that don't mesh with the universe or with authorial intent. The artist may just have been thinking "I need to make this look Abramsy" and not realized that the timelines didn't diverge until 2233, so that anything earlier would've been the same as in the Prime continuity. In short, I'd just chalk it up to an art error rather than concocting excuses for how those nacelles could've existed in the 2160s.

[BillJ]

Christopher wrote:

---

^But my point is that artists in Trek comics can make assumptions that don't mesh with the universe or with authorial intent. The artist may just have been thinking "I need to make this look Abramsy" and not realized that the timelines didn't diverge until 2233, so that anything earlier would've been the same as in the Prime continuity. In short, I'd just chalk it up to an art error rather than concocting excuses for how those nacelles could've existed in the 2160s.

But part of the fun is making these things fit together.

[ATimson]

King Daniel wrote:

---

And it was "1701-D" on the registry, written on a very unique saucer

Written on a recognizable saucer, off-center.

(I wouldn't call the movie-era saucer "very unique" - the Abramsverse one is very similar except for the bridge dome structure, I thought.)

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It does look a bit weird to see an NX with Abrams nacelles.

Guess this would add more fuel to the fire that the Abramsverse isn't just an alternate timeline, but an entire alternate universe to begin with... as would this:

the depiction of Landru being completely incompatible with the way the TOS episode showed him

[Christopher]

^I haven't read the "Archons" adaptation yet, but from what I gather, that could be more a case of what we thought we knew being wrong, rather than the facts actually being different.

And again, it's worth remembering that the comics are not canonical, according to Roberto Orci himself.

[BillJ]

Christopher wrote:

---

^I haven't read the "Archons" adaptation yet, but from what I gather, that could be more a case of what we thought we knew being wrong, rather than the facts actually being different.

It's incompatible. It doesn't make the comic a bad story in its own right but it should've been an original story.

[rfmcdpei]

BillJ wrote:

---

It's incompatible. It doesn't make the comic a bad story in its own right but it should've been an original story.

How exactly is it incompatible?

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

[MFB]

I think the two versions of the story can be compatible. The 6000 years are just an information that was given by the computer and the people on the planet had to believe.

The main difference in the comic is that the crew of the enterprise met a person who has never been under Landrus influence and was able to tell the true story.

It's absolutly possible that in the Prime Universe the team that stayed on the planet after Landrus destruction found out the truth too.



P.S.: Please excuse my bad English. English is not my native language.

[Oso Blanco]

But shouldn't they have encountered the saucer hull of the archor in the episode as well?

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

^The USS Archon's saucer must have been in the next room.

I'm used to Trek (especially Trek lit) subtly and sometimes not-so-subtly rewriting things. That the Next Gen crew somehow missed that Soong wasn't really dead in "Brothers" and had an underground lab with an advanced android body he was just waiting to transfer his conciousness into? Yeah, LOL, okay. *wink*

Then there's the whole concept of how literally we should take events from a TV show or movie. For example The Captain's Daughter implies that Evil!Kirk raped Janice in "The Enemy Within", although of course his attack was not shown going that far in the epsiode itself. But could it have happened given the situation? Unfortunately, yes. Would a real-life Gorn look like the guy in the rubber suit from "Arena" or even the dodgy CG from "In a Mirror, Darkly"? Of course not.

Open to a lot of interpretation, I say.

[BillJ]

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

How exactly is it incompatible?

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

Think you pretty much summed up why they're incompatible.

[ATimson]

BillJ wrote:

---

Think you pretty much summed up why they're incompatible.

Except, as MFB said, the Prime version's date isn't exactly from a reliable source...

[Mr. Laser Beam]

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

How exactly is it incompatible?

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

And in the original episode, Landru (the original) is native to Beta III. He's not a Starfleet officer named 'Cornelius Landru' as in the comic.

Then again, I agree that the only things we ever know about Beta III's past in the original episode came from the people talking about it. So I suppose it could have gone down as the comic showed. Besides, the people on Beta III look so completely human, as does their city...

[Christopher]

^That's right. As I said, it's incompatible with what the characters in the episode believed to be true, but beliefs can be wrong -- especially beliefs about history. Just because a character in a story says something is true, that doesn't absolutely prove it's true. Fictional characters can be mistaken in their beliefs and conclusions, they can be misinformed, they can be liars, or they can be deluded.

Of course, it's easier to reconcile the comic with the episode than with the sequel to it in SCE's "Foundations" storyline, which delves into Beta III society more deeply.

[BillJ]

Christopher wrote:

---

^That's right. As I said, it's incompatible with what the characters in the episode believed to be true, but beliefs can be wrong -- especially beliefs about history. Just because a character in a story says something is true, that doesn't absolutely prove it's true. Fictional characters can be mistaken in their beliefs and conclusions, they can be misinformed, they can be liars, or they can be deluded.

Just three points:

1. There seems to no disbelief by Reger and the other gentlemen with him when Kirk says they come from the valley. So this would be indicative of more than one settlement on Beta III.

2. Never once does Spock make a connection between the technology and Starfleet technology like in the comic.

3.

The Return of Archons wrote:

---

SPOCK: And apparently commanding powers far beyond our comprehension.