Why doesn't Spock Prime go back in time to save Vulcan?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by EJA, Mar 3, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    The visual 'upgrades' were obvious.

    But what exactly did they fix in way of narrative? Everyone goes on about how they've 'updated' Trek. But what I see was something that essentially just tried to take the popular elements of Trek, put them in a mixer and pour. I honestly did not see an idea one that seemed original to Trek in the entire movie.

    This is just another Trek movie that desperately, desperately wanted to be The Wrath of Khan and yet seemed less intelligent than Nemesis.
     
  2. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    You are correct, it WAS a stylistic and visual upgrade.

    They realized that the core characters of TOS needed very little tweaking to appeal to a larger audience.

    Now, to streamline the story, and to provide an in-continuity reboot so that audiences don't need to know the 40+ years of Star Trek history, the did the Alternate Reality.

    I never claimed they completely reinvented Star Trek. I claimed an upgrade, which effectively did the following:

    - Provided a starting point so that newcomers would not be intimidated by the sheer weight of Canon.
    - Removed the tech-talk that gave incomprehensible technological solutions to challenges.
    - Increased the pace, and introduced a new cinematic style.
    - Within the needed upgrade, maintained a level of compatibility with the older components at the core (characters, established continuity).

    It is this last point that necessitated the Alternate Reality scenario. The other points were the reason so much was changed.

    Again, to claim more that an upgrade is to set up a straw man.
     
  3. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    On the plus side, one movie is hardly a pattern.

    If the next movie retains the flaws of the first, I'll freely concede that a lot of the current criticism was warranted. Until that time, I think people are really jumping the gun in the judgmental department.

    I mean really, has any new Trek ever done things entirely correctly the first time? Cut TPTB a little slack for trying something new.
     
  4. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    As for changes in the narrative, there are many things that were changed:

    - Kirk's Background.
    - The fate of Vulcan.
    - Some events surrounding the Federation's knowledge of the Romulans.
    - The relationship between Spock and Uhura.

    These are not merely cosmetic.
     
  5. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    I can agree with this. Though my hopes aren't high based on the script of Transformers 2.
     
  6. Devon

    Devon Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    There's someone who posts on StarTrek.com who has a reliable source at Paramount (and has posted here before.) Since Star Trek is now owned (or managed) by two separate entities (CBS and Paramount,) I believe the agreement went something a long the lines that Paramount would be allowed to produce new films if it was within its own "timeline." Paramount now have a copyright on their own timeline, CBS/Paramount Television have theirs. This person could possibly elaborate if he posts though. In that case, Paramount did what was reasonable and did it successfully.

    Not at all.
     
  7. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    The language doesn't sound like it would have precluded a straight re-boot of the franchise.

    Seeing Avatar last night really changed my feelings on the new Star Trek and definitely reinforces the fact that they went for the most general audience possible.
     
  8. lawman

    lawman Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Indeed. There were a couple of moments when Avatar descended to predictable "Hollywood" story beats, but on the whole Cameron created something original, imaginative, and thought-provoking. Oh, and internally consistent, too.

    Lowest common denominator, it was not... but that certainly didn't stop it from being popular.

    Worst thing about the movie was its marketing, IMHO... before seeing it, I expected it to be just another vapid hyperkinetic SFX extravaganza designed to sell Happy Meals. You know, like Star Trek.
     
  9. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    I have read most of this thread and I see the debate over time lines is still going strong. I have watched the new movie too many times to mention and have played close attention to the scene on the bridge where they explain things.

    My opinion is that there is one linear time line and that Nero's presence and actions have erased, written over, the previous Trek time line. Even Uhura's "alternate reality" phrase doesn't sound like it is synonymous with an "alternate universe."

    Plus on an emotional level Spock Prime's presence in the new time line loses its emotional impact if he and Nero are just from a different parallel universe. Why should Spock Prime be upset over the destruction of Vulcan if he knows that his Vulcan still exists in another universe? So many things I have seen on screen tell me that the old history is being erased for the new reality. Personally, I am fine with it.
     
  10. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    As I said else-thread, no matter what approach the writers took to this conundrum, people were going to complain.

    If it's an alternate timeline, the writers didn't have the balls to mess with canon.

    If it's not an alternate timeline, the writers were jerks for messing with the canon.

    If they destroy Vulcan, they're jerks for destroying Vulcan.

    If they don't destroy Vulcan, they created a movie with a big reset button and don't have the balls to actually change anything in their brave new Trek.
     
  11. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    If Alternate Reality does not mean Ulternate Universe (as in Multiverse), then what does she actually mean?

    For something to be an Alternate, it must be alternate to something. And what "thing" is the Reality? Reality cannot become fantasy.

    The "overwritten" reality scenario violates cause and effect, and for that reason alone, should be rejected.
     
  12. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Damned if you do, damnded if you don't. So they went for it, but threw us a bone via the Alternate Reality.

    It shows, to me, that they have respect for what came before, and the insight to realized that more of the same would likely produce the same results, ala Nemesis/Enterprise.
     
  13. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    What they did was actually worse. They didn't do anything anyone would care about. In the grandest tradition laid down by Rick Berman, they nipped at the edges.

    I swear that if Rick Berman's name had been attached to this film everyone here would've been screaming about plot holes and the overuse of time travel.
     
  14. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Up until Stardate 2233.04, it is actually the same universe.
     
  15. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    I had wished the writers had said that this movie is a clear reboot of the franchise instead of trying to pander to some fans because now fandom is divided amongst itself wondering if it is a new time line or not.

    But to me, what is clearly seen in the movie is an erasing of the old time line in favor of this new time line. But the writers in trying to appease long time fans (and I am one of them, a fan since 1973) have done nothing but muddied the waters.
     
  16. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    But the movie itself doesn't ever state that after that stardate a new universe has been created. What we see and hear on screen, in my humble opinion, is that the old time line no longer exists. It's the same universe but now a different time line with the old time line now being recorded over.

    I am willing to be converted, but the writer's explanation to it being a new universe is not what we see in the movie.
     
  17. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    Perhaps it should be left to each viewer to draw the conclusion that brings them the most happiness.

    I feel it's an alternate timeline, not an overwrite. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll wait for TPTB to make that explicitly clear. And if you don't want to subscribe to my viewpoint, hey, good for you for having an alternate interpretation.

    ...see what I did there? :)
     
  18. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    I agree with your attitude and hope that the next film can settle the dispute.
     
  19. I-Am-Zim

    I-Am-Zim Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Unless it isn't.

    There are those (like me) who subscribe to the theory that the whole Abramsverse is an alternate universe in and of itself. When Spock and Nero went through the black hole/wormhole/temporal whatever, they actually emerged into an alternate universe and changed the events of that timeline, not the original (problem is, OldSpock and Nero treat the Abramsverse as if it is their universe with altered events). There are even those who think that "Spock Prime" may not even be the Spock from the original universe. There is evidence to support both theories. Personally, that's what I go with. It helps to reconcile some of the differences between the Abramsverse and the original that can't be resolved any other way.

    Either way, no matter what you think or believe, these are not the same people we have come to know over the last 40-odd years of Star Trek history. They are alternate universe/reality/timeline versions of those characters. The Kirk, Spock, etc. that we know are still trotting merrily along in the good ol' TOS universe that we loved. Unfortunately, we will never see them again. And that's too bad. Because I would really like to see how they all met and came to be aboard the Enterprise together. That would be a story worth seeing. I could care about that. I have no reason to care about NuTrek because, like the Mirror Universe, they are not the ones I know.
     
  20. OneBuckFilms

    OneBuckFilms Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    I personally like this new cast, but I agree that due to the Alternate Reality changes, they changed along different lines.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.