RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,214
Posts: 5,404,845
Members: 24,760
Currently online: 668
Newest member: R.Data

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 23 2013, 06:42 AM   #16
Borgminister
Moderator
 
Location: California
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

Let Edith live and Hitler be on the 100 dollar bill!
Borgminister is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 07:10 AM   #17
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

Borgminister wrote: View Post
Let Edith live and Hitler be on the 100 dollar bill!
Okay yes, yes DO IT!!!!
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 07:28 AM   #18
Norsehound
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

brian577 wrote: View Post
The parallel worlds is just a cop out so they can play it safe.
Abrams has rebooted Star Trek. He can go anywhere with this universe yet he continues to rehash old villians. Romulans, Klingons, Khan. I expected them them to do something new with Star Trek and instead of getting more original it's gotten less. If the best you can do is make Wrath of Khan 2.0 then maybe somebody else should take the helm for the next movie. Abrams has complete freedom with this universe, why not do something new with it. Show us these "strange new worlds and new civilizations" not the same old worlds we've seen for 40 years. The opening scene was great and the very kind of thing I want Star Trek to do. Why couldn't we have seen more of that?
Because if they didn't, the fans would be whining "How is this Star Trek? Where's XYZ? Why did you bother writing this crap and call it Star Trek when it's just a new bunch of people using the same names?"

I don't think the problem here is a lack of originality from Abrams and co. I think the problem is a fanbase who is very nitpicky and difficult to please.
Norsehound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 08:08 AM   #19
throwback
Captain
 
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

Well, the first film could have gone a different direction.

In the future, the Romulans and the Federation become allies. (Build on the idea brought up at the end of "Nemesis" where the two were firmly working together on building a permanent alliance.) During a crisis, the Federation takes steps that are viewed by some, including the captain of a ship, as a betrayal. On his way home, this captain finds himself propelled backwards to the past ("The Final Countdown"). He finds himself and his ship in the early 2260s.

Nero contacts his homeworld and convinces the Romulans that for them to survive they need to defeat the Federation. Using the technology of his time, and manipulating the political situation of the era, Nero leads the Romulans to war against the Federation.

During this time, Captain Kirk is the captain of a destroyer. The Federation has come out of a long period of war. He has proven himself to be a great warrior.

In the movie, we see how Captain Kirk defeats this new threat, and how he becomes the captain of the Enterprise. This war between the Federation and the Romulans alters the timeline.

I would start the movie with an attack on an Earth Outpost by a Romulan warbird, and I would show the failure of a Federation starship to meet this threat. During the course of the movie, I would show how this came to be different than what was seen in the "Balance of Terror".

If one is insisted on showing the destruction of Vulcan, make the planet the site of a major battle between the Romulans and the Federation. Show the Romulans destroying the Vulcan Defense Force and the Starfleet. Show the planet being bombarded from space. Show the capitulation of Vulcan. Show the survivors fleeing to Federation space.

In the end of the movie, the Federation wins the war, but at a great cost. Vulcan has fallen to the Romulans, and the Romulans are keeping the planet. Vulcans found a new world - a refuge camp -for the survivors. On Vulcan, the Romulans expel the Vulcans and bring in settlers to colonize Vulcan. (This is historically plausible. In the Peloponnesian War, Athens would conquer enemy city-states, expel or enslave the population, and colonize the city-state with settlers.)

For the second movie, show the aftermath of this war. Show the crew maturing on Kirk's new command into a family. (The first movie shows him getting this family. The second movie shows him becoming the pater familias of this ship.)

I think that I have demonstrated how it's possible to create a parallel world that is believable for the characters, respects the original, and works on what was already there. The first film makes no narrative logic - Nero wasn't saving his world; if he succeeded, his world would still be destroyed and there would be few worlds for the survivors to flee to. Many of the choice worlds were already inhabited, as homeworlds and as colonies. He had the time to convince a Romulan Empire hungry for war to declare hostilities against the Federation. In "Balance of Terror", the Romulans were testing the resolve and response of the Federation to a threat. With the success of the Federation, the Romulans would later forge a brief alliance with the Klingons in an attempt to stymie the expansion of the Federation. Now, if things went another way, then what we saw in the original timeline would be altered forever.

People have been copying and modifying what came before for thousands of years. I think what is important is how and why you do the copying and the modifying.

JJ Abrams has admitted that he found Star Trek to be too philosophical for him. Wheaton remarked,

Sigh. The whole point of Star Trek is that it’s philosophical. If you don’t want philosophical Science Fiction, there’s plenty of that for you to enjoy, but Star Trek is philosophical. Philosophy is part of Star Trek’s DNA, and if you’re given the captain’s chair, you’d better damn well respect that.
http://wilwheaton.tumblr.com/post/50...ar-trek-is-too
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 08:41 AM   #20
Vigilance
Commander
 
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

Ah yes. Too philosophical. Too much action. Hm, this all sounds familiar.

We have heard this story before — the story of a man who isn't sure he buys into the Star Trek universe as it's been done but builds something from it anyway. He directed The Wrath Of Khan.

Meyer had directed only one prior film, an adaptation of the light sci-fi novel Time After Time. He had no love of Star Trek, but he wanted a career as a filmmaker, and here was Paramount Pictures inviting him to direct a high-profile film — albeit for a mere 25 percent of Star Trek: The Motion Picture's budget. Meyer took the gig, on the condition that he be allowed to do Star Trek in a way that made sense to him, which meant departing substantially from the what we might call the founder's intent.

Meyer wrote in his memoir that Roddenberry envisioned Starfleet as not a military organization but a patrolling one — a notion he considered "manifestly absurd." For him, Kirk was heading up "a species of gunboat diplomacy wherein the Federation (read America, read the Anglo-Saxons) was right right and aliens were — in Kipling's queasy phrase — 'lesser breeds.'"
http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2...-great-debates
Vigilance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 08:49 AM   #21
I am not Spock
Commodore
 
Location: Australia
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

I kind of like the idea that no matter what universe you are in, some things are destined to happen, some things are predetermined to play out similarly. Obviously Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof find this parallel universe idea interesting too. A similar thing happened in Lost, and Fringe as well
__________________
It's a FAAAAKKKEEE!
Senator Vreenak- In the Pale Moonlight
I am not Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 12:38 PM   #22
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

Vigilance wrote: View Post
I am a huge fan of Fringe, which is similar in many ways to STID, and is a show created and created by the same creative minds (Abrams, Orci, and Kurzman).

My favorite Trek is DS9, but I am very much enjoying the latest film franchise.

Following are some thoughts that contain spoilers for both Fringe and STID.

Fringe is a show about (among other things) two alternate Earths coming into contact.

The Earths are subtly different, and the show LOVES to show scenes from subtly different angles.

For example, in one episode, a father on Earth One is shown teaching a coin trick to his son, who is terminally ill.

On Earth Two, we see the same boy, still terminally ill, who is being taught the same coin trick but by his mother.

We also see that in Earth One, the twin towers were destroyed on 9/11 while on Earth Two, the twin towers were saved, but the Pentagon and White House were destroyed.

Even seemingly insignificant details are shown to be different, such as Back to the Future starring Eric Stoltz, rather than Michael J. Fox.

So for those who think a lot of the subtle differences in, for example, the Engine Room scene of STID are just tugging on nostalgia (or- more unkindly, laziness or a lack of creativity), I would strongly disagree.

The subtle differences of a parallel reality are clearly an idea that interested the creative team in 2009. To my mind, it's a great idea and one of my favorite things about this new incarnation of our favorite franchise.
I agree with you, and think they were definitely going for a hybrid tribute/Fringe-style alternate reality variation of the scene (while at the same time being very moving in it's own right). It's also a continuation of the strange (when viewed with TOS in mind) coincidences of the last movie.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 02:17 PM   #23
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

brian577 wrote: View Post
I expected them them to do something new with Star Trek and instead of getting more original...
I never expected that; it was so clearly not the intent.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 05:33 PM   #24
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

I am not Spock wrote: View Post
I kind of like the idea that no matter what universe you are in, some things are destined to happen, some things are predetermined to play out similarly. Obviously Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof find this parallel universe idea interesting too. A similar thing happened in Lost, and Fringe as well
I think of it as waves. No matter if the waves are small or large, fast or slow- they all crash onto the same beach. In the first movie, when Kirk and Spock finally gave each other a chance, they realized how much they respected each other. Kirk was destined to be the Captain and Spock is first officer. It just works out better that way because Kirk is more flexible than Spock and can take advice that he thinks is better than his own. So I liked it, too.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 06:41 PM   #25
propita
Rear Admiral
 
Location: fresno, ca, us
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

The whole point of an alternate timeline as the basis for storytelling is to see the differences in the timelines. To ignore one of them defeats that purpose. The nuTimeline must be seen in comparison to the Prime one, so there must be some overlap. Here, we have overlap of characters and general story (Kirk et al, Star Fleet, etc)--but the changed details are parts of the point of the story having alternate timelines!

I don't mind Khan being in this film, and using many of the same alien species as before, because the timeline only changed 25 (well, now what? 27?) years ago. Most of human history is the same.

It seems foolish to throw out all that is known about the ST universe just for the last 27 years. We've already had big changes due to Nero's incursion: millions have died (the Kelvin, nearly everyone on Vulcan, and some on Earth); Star Fleet, and likely others in the Alpha Quadrant, and become more militaristic; technology advanced faster than before; etc.

For all we know, Vulcans could be having a cultural schism between those determined to maintain traditional Vulcan culture and those willing to accommodate changes due to being such a minority and seeing what how their lengthy debate contributed to Nero. And you have Spock Prime surely having some input, likely more "carefully steering conversations and general opinion" than outright comments. And nuSpock being a more shining example of somewhat-more-emotional-Vulcans than he was even as Spock Prime.


As for Edith Keeler, but for Kirk's presence, she WAS going to die. It was him saving her that changed history. We saw that she died crossing a street to get to him. While some may argue that it was his presence that caused her death, the fact that she died before they ever got to the Guardian shows that she was going to die but for Kirk's presence. The details might shift a bit, but she was gonna die.
propita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 08:59 PM   #26
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

throwback wrote: View Post
<snippity-snip>

JJ Abrams has admitted that he found Star Trek to be too philosophical for him. Wheaton remarked,

Sigh. The whole point of Star Trek is that it’s philosophical. If you don’t want philosophical Science Fiction, there’s plenty of that for you to enjoy, but Star Trek is philosophical. Philosophy is part of Star Trek’s DNA, and if you’re given the captain’s chair, you’d better damn well respect that.
http://wilwheaton.tumblr.com/post/50...ar-trek-is-too
And then, one day later, Wheaton went on to say:
A lot of people have pointed out to me that, if you watch the entire JJ Abrams interview with Jon Stewart, he goes on to talk about how much he came to love Star Trek as an adult, and that the viewer is left with the impression that he truly gets what Star Trek is about.

I didn’t watch the whole interview, but just saw the gifset that I reblogged. I stand by what I said: the whole point of Star Trek is that it’s about more than aliens and robots and cool space battles. Star Trek is unique in science fiction — certainly science fiction on television in the 1960s — in that it was always about something more than phasers and transporters and Captain Kirk using his fists and his wits to defeat hostile aliens before he nailed the green alien lady of the week.

When I worked on JJ’s first Trek movie, I got the impression that he genuinely loved Star Trek, and really got what it was all about. I should have watched the entire interview before I pulled out my Jump To Conclusions mat, and I regret that I didn’t. I hope anyone who was upset at me or drew the same erroneous conclusion I did understands that I care deeply about Star Trek, and sometimes my heart gets ahead of my brain where it’s concerned.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 09:22 PM   #27
brian577
Captain
 
brian577's Avatar
 
Location: United States of Equestria
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
<snippity-snip>

JJ Abrams has admitted that he found Star Trek to be too philosophical for him. Wheaton remarked,

Sigh. The whole point of Star Trek is that it’s philosophical. If you don’t want philosophical Science Fiction, there’s plenty of that for you to enjoy, but Star Trek is philosophical. Philosophy is part of Star Trek’s DNA, and if you’re given the captain’s chair, you’d better damn well respect that.
http://wilwheaton.tumblr.com/post/50...ar-trek-is-too
And then, one day later, Wheaton went on to say:
A lot of people have pointed out to me that, if you watch the entire JJ Abrams interview with Jon Stewart, he goes on to talk about how much he came to love Star Trek as an adult, and that the viewer is left with the impression that he truly gets what Star Trek is about.

I didn’t watch the whole interview, but just saw the gifset that I reblogged. I stand by what I said: the whole point of Star Trek is that it’s about more than aliens and robots and cool space battles. Star Trek is unique in science fiction — certainly science fiction on television in the 1960s — in that it was always about something more than phasers and transporters and Captain Kirk using his fists and his wits to defeat hostile aliens before he nailed the green alien lady of the week.

When I worked on JJ’s first Trek movie, I got the impression that he genuinely loved Star Trek, and really got what it was all about. I should have watched the entire interview before I pulled out my Jump To Conclusions mat, and I regret that I didn’t. I hope anyone who was upset at me or drew the same erroneous conclusion I did understands that I care deeply about Star Trek, and sometimes my heart gets ahead of my brain where it’s concerned.
Yes, I'm sure he came to love it once he rewrote in his own vision...
brian577 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 09:26 PM   #28
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

brian577 wrote: View Post
M'Sharak wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
<snippity-snip>

JJ Abrams has admitted that he found Star Trek to be too philosophical for him. Wheaton remarked,

http://wilwheaton.tumblr.com/post/50...ar-trek-is-too
And then, one day later, Wheaton went on to say:
A lot of people have pointed out to me that, if you watch the entire JJ Abrams interview with Jon Stewart, he goes on to talk about how much he came to love Star Trek as an adult, and that the viewer is left with the impression that he truly gets what Star Trek is about.

I didn’t watch the whole interview, but just saw the gifset that I reblogged. I stand by what I said: the whole point of Star Trek is that it’s about more than aliens and robots and cool space battles. Star Trek is unique in science fiction — certainly science fiction on television in the 1960s — in that it was always about something more than phasers and transporters and Captain Kirk using his fists and his wits to defeat hostile aliens before he nailed the green alien lady of the week.

When I worked on JJ’s first Trek movie, I got the impression that he genuinely loved Star Trek, and really got what it was all about. I should have watched the entire interview before I pulled out my Jump To Conclusions mat, and I regret that I didn’t. I hope anyone who was upset at me or drew the same erroneous conclusion I did understands that I care deeply about Star Trek, and sometimes my heart gets ahead of my brain where it’s concerned.
Yes, I'm sure he came to love it once he rewrote in his own vision...
Who doesn't? Is there anyone out there who seriously hasn't thought "I wish there was this in it" or has come up with ideas for their own storylines (not necessarily fanfiction, just something you'd think would make a great story). And not just with Star Trek, but with everything? I love taking inspiration from movies, books and shows to create my own stories- they spark imagination. Why do kids go out and pretend to be heroes? Did they rigidly stick to the script? No, they make it what they want it to be- and the best writers out there do the same with their own stories. No one grows up wanting to be something without inspiration from another source.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 10:00 PM   #29
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

brian577 wrote: View Post
M'Sharak wrote: View Post
...
Yes, I'm sure he came to love it once he rewrote in his own vision...
Not sure why that feels like you're taking a swipe at me, but—regardless of any other issues which might be involved—any filmmaker who doesn't bring their own vision to a project doesn't belong in the director's chair.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 11:07 PM   #30
hiddenderek
Ensign
 
Re: It's about parallel worlds, not ripping off (spoilers)

sj4iy wrote: View Post
I am not Spock wrote: View Post
I kind of like the idea that no matter what universe you are in, some things are destined to happen, some things are predetermined to play out similarly. Obviously Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof find this parallel universe idea interesting too. A similar thing happened in Lost, and Fringe as well
I think of it as waves. No matter if the waves are small or large, fast or slow- they all crash onto the same beach. In the first movie, when Kirk and Spock finally gave each other a chance, they realized how much they respected each other. Kirk was destined to be the Captain and Spock is first officer. It just works out better that way because Kirk is more flexible than Spock and can take advice that he thinks is better than his own. So I liked it, too.

This. I don't get why people think the engine room scene was meaningless. It had a huge sense of purpose to me. It wasn't just a rehash for nostalgia, it had a huge role in character development. I also don't understand how people didn't realize the similarities between Kirk's standoff with the Vengeance and Kirk's dad's standoff with the Narada. Kirk was willing to sacrifice his life to save his crew and with that he finally lived up to pikes dare and finally earned the title of captain.That was the meaning of the sound byte from Pike as kirk woke up. Also, kirk and spock finally realized their friendship's potential and how much they had to learn from each other.

This all came from Kirk sacrificing his life. It was an essential part of the plot of the movie. Now, the whole reenactment scene with Spock yelling "KHANN!"? I think that role reversal was built in to show the differences between parallel realities even in huge events that cannot be avoided, as what sj4iy said.
hiddenderek is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 12:22 AM.

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