RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,195
Posts: 5,436,576
Members: 24,949
Currently online: 458
Newest member: Lauran

TrekToday headlines

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 August 9 2012, 04:59 PM   #1
los2188
Commander
 
los2188's Avatar
 
Location: North Carolina
Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

Again, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but the thought has crossed my mind. Unlike some die hard fans I really do enjoy the new timeline with all the possibilities therein. I'm excited about the new adventures of the starship Enterprise, where her ongoing mission is to explore new worlds.. to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man, or no one has gone before...I came up with that phrase all by myself! Anyway...is an alternate timeline even necessary? I mean why not cover the original 5 year mission, but just expand on that 5 year mission. Tell stories of the things that we didn't see on the aforementioned original 5 year mission? Introduce new races and new stories. But then again I can understand the need of a new timeline to explain physical differences whether it be to the new crew like Kirk's eyes being blue now instead of the hazel green eyes that Shatner has, or the differing look of the Enterprise. What do you think...thanks for all the replies. I love it!! The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...or the one...(thought of that one myself too! )
__________________
Darling, you remain as aesthetically pleasing as the first day we met. I believe I am the most fortunate sentient in this sector of the galaxy.
los2188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 05:13 PM   #2
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

They wanted to tell an origin story, but one that avoided all the usual prequel issues of knowing who lives and who dies (and open the door to sequels where anything can happen). I don't see how they could have done as well making a straight prequel.

"Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed."

But then again I can understand the need of a new timeline to explain physical differences whether it be to the new crew like Kirk's eyes being blue now instead of the hazel green eyes that Shatner has, or the differing look of the Enterprise.
The new timeline DOESNT explain anything about how anyone or anything looks. Spock Prime recognized Kirk and Scotty on sight, so in-universe they look the same as Shatner and Doohan. They've simply been recast and the look of the universe given a much needed modernization.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 07:40 PM   #3
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

los2188 wrote: View Post
Anyway...is an alternate timeline even necessary?
Yes, because now they can tell any kind of stories they want without having to be slavishly devoted to what happened in a '60's TV show, while at the same time respecting that a LOT of people loved that '60's TV show and making it clear that that universe still exists. It's just not the one they're playing in anymore.

But then again I can understand the need of a new timeline to explain physical differences whether it be to the new crew like Kirk's eyes being blue now instead of the hazel green eyes that Shatner has...
That has more to do with casting than with the color of someone's eyes being different in a parallel universe. How many times were different actors cast in the same roles in the prime universe? Saavik? Alexander Rozhenko? Torah Ziyal? I doubt central casting cared that Robin Curtis's eye color was or wasn't the same as Kirstie Alley's.

...or the differing look of the Enterprise.
The Enterprise looks different in this new timeline because there was a 20 year difference in technology advancement between Nero's incursion and the construction of the ship.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 08:20 PM   #4
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

It was really only necessary in the sense of redoing TOS and taking it in new directions without tossing out everything that came after it. That was more of a creative choice than anything else, because we still would have two different continuities no matter what (our copies of movies and films from the original universe wouldn't just vanish into thin air).
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 09:13 PM   #5
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

Rebooting the continuity was necessary, and given the very nature of Trek it was inevitable that this would be labeled an alternate timeline.

What was not necessary was the way they handled the alternate timeline with it splitting from the original Prime and Nimoy Spock showing up to spell things out.

Whatever, it's a three year old argument, and a rather pointless one. It is rebooted. We have an alternate reality that split from the original one. And registry numbers now start with zero.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 10:10 PM   #6
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
And registry numbers now start with zero.
They started with zero in the prime timeline, as the Kelvin was in existence before Nero's incursion.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 11:01 PM   #7
Temis the Vorta
Fleet Admiral
 
Temis the Vorta's Avatar
 
Location: Tatoinne
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
They wanted to tell an origin story, but one that avoided all the usual prequel issues of knowing who lives and who dies (and open the door to sequels where anything can happen).
Yeah it was a mercenary decision (which is not to say it wasn't also a correct decision) to free up the story possibilities so that they could write a compelling story for the wider audience while pissing off the fans as little as possible.

Any other decision would have had large pitfalls. The alternative would be, who cares about the fans, just reboot the whole thing for real. And then you would have heard some real howling around here.

What they were never going to do is, cater to the fans even if it means being restricted creatively. The make or break for the movie is reaching a huge global audience who are largely non fans. Anything that inhibits that goal had to be swept away.
Temis the Vorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 11:08 PM   #8
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

Just like the last remnants of the old Republic.
__________________
Thank you very much for your concern, sir, but he does not need your religion, he has science and socialism and birthdays.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 11:39 PM   #9
1bulma1
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

Yes there was ....the success of the 09 film both critically and finically proves it.

star trek was starting over so the needed to make new stories with old characters and this to me was the best decision.

The same was done with Nolan’s batman series and the recent Spiderman series.

I always fail to understand why people always whine and say some of the stuff in the 09 film is not TOS canon

09 film is an alternate universe (a different history) so some of the things we see on screen are not meant to be TOS canon.

Last edited by 1bulma1; August 10 2012 at 12:03 AM.
1bulma1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2012, 11:48 PM   #10
Silversmok3
Commander
 
Silversmok3's Avatar
 
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

YES!

Writing an original script thats compelling to all viewers is hard enough, without shoehorning decades of canon behind it. Trek fans would walk in thinking "we know Kirk, Spock, McCoy and gang ain't dying" and the average Joe would sit down wondering if why they need to take a class in Trek History 220 before watching a movie.

The old canon had to be set aside for the 2009 movie to work, and work well it did. Furthermore, the old timeline still technically exists;so future filmakers are not precluded from making a 24th Century follow on, should the franchise be popular enough for such a project.
__________________
There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under Heaven:A time to heal, A time to break down, and a time to build up.
-Ecclesiastes 3:3
Silversmok3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10 2012, 12:11 PM   #11
Desert Kris
Lieutenant
 
Desert Kris's Avatar
 
Location: Here and there.
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

For me, the best reasons for having a version of Star Trek that connects to the what's been seen in the past, yet can be different or similar to varying degrees is best imagined when I compare the old and new Battlestar Galactica shows side by side.

The first example that presents itself is a personal favorite storyline of mine in the old series, the visit to Kobol, where the characters visit a mysterious, ancient homeworld that their legends tell them they came from. They do some cook archeology things, there's fun action, and a hard-hitting change occurs for a couple of characters on a deeply personal level. It all goes down in about 1 or 1 and a half episodes, and was well remembered years after I had seen it as a little kid.

The core story was taken by the new series, and expanded and adapted to fit the sensibilities of the new show's style. Some of the consequences of the new show's creator's decisions in adapting the story expanded the scope of what was happening for the characters and story, and the original core story idea inspired material to last for something like 7 or perhaps 9 episodes, forming a huge epic built on that much smaller but still epic idea of the visit to Kobol. Breathtaking.

This big storyline in the new series started as a big time season ending cliffhanger for the new series, after utilizing the style of the new series to cultivating many episode built on entirely brand-new story ideas.

So, the new version of BSG early on maximized it's potential for new stories, and took a small but significantly memorable story idea from the old series and got an extraordinary piece of television drama out of it.

We now have a totally different perspective on how the TOS characters relate to each other. And we have the potential for totally brand new stories. And we have the potential for an old favorite to work in a totally unexpected way.

I know people argue about Khan. But it's a well known example. Strong in the minds of a casual viewer. We could see a version of Khan who has already been set loose on the galaxy. Not one guy with a handful of followers trying to hijack a ship, or a vengeful madman who captures a ship to battle one-on-one, ship versus ship. What about seeing Khan as a prince once again, with political power in the 23rd century? And dreams of continued imperial expansion and conquest. A formidable opponent at many different levels, politically, tactically, or physically.
Desert Kris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10 2012, 04:51 PM   #12
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

I like to think that if the next movie is about Khan, or one further down the road, it plays out how you suggest, where he was found earlier and that encounter was radically different so Khan doesnt try to take control and instead works a larger, grander scheme.

To parapharase the BSG analogy, just because it happened before doesnt mean it has to happen again.
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2012, 12:13 AM   #13
BruntFCA
Commander
 
BruntFCA's Avatar
 
Location: A Mile High
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

No they should have just called it what it was, a reboot/reimagining. I really liked the new movie but the story gymnastics they went through to try and connect it to the "prime" universe was just stupid and unnecessary.
__________________
"Well, I come from a long, long line of smartasses. Smartass is allergic to dumbass. It’s actually a physical allergy, as in you’re repulsed by dumbasses."
Josh Homme
BruntFCA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2012, 07:21 PM   #14
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

They would be bound by continuity if they just worked the new movies into the old universe. Now they're not. Better that than Berman/Braga's attitude of just not caring about it.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2012, 08:16 PM   #15
Wereghost
Part-time poltergeist.
 
Wereghost's Avatar
 
Location: BtVS 2x06.
Re: Was there a need for an alternate timeline?

The alternate timeline explanation keeps the movie on the straight and narrow by making it a soft reboot rather than an entirely new version, which would really bethe only viablealternative. A straight prequel was never feasible, as it would constrain the scope and timetable of any sequels and (probably) elicit apathy from the general moviegoing public; hence NuSpock's spelling out that the future was not written in stone.
__________________
Time is the boss of me.
Wereghost 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 08:16 AM.

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