2387

I won't argue that the characters that apparently have glaring age differences between their presumed prime counterpart[ie...Chekov] are supposedly the same individual. Heck, IMHO, these charactors might all be the same as their prime counterparts in name only, and have a passing resemblance to their prime counterparts due to nature/nurture.

And as to the "design aesthetics starting with Kelvin", well, I proclaim filmic artistic license combined with a hypothetical capability of advancement in current technology to represent futuristic tech. ie...if this was all real, perhaps what we could represent 10-50 years ago of this future was limited by the capabilities of our own technology of that time. so as we progress, then how we represent the future will equally change from decade to decade.

I believe Chris has created/explained how there can be this seperate form of time travel depiction within the ST continuum. JJ's seperate timeline did not replace the prime universe.

Btw, don't get me wrong. I am not a fan of JJ's ST whatsoever. However, there is, again IMHO, nothing wrong with how the newer fiction is presented, in universe.

 

Perhaps we're having a miscommunication over the meaning of the word respect.

If the speed limit is established to be 60, and you decide to go 85, you are choosing not to respect the speed limit.

If it is established that several characters went to school at different times, and you decide it would be more interesting to have them all graduate around the same time, you've chosen not to respect what was established.

If it is established that a character is 13 years old in the particular year in which you want to set your story, and you decide to arbitrarily make that character older, you have chosen not to respect what was established.

So I will say again, JJ Abrams does not respect numerous elements of Star Trek canon in the production of his films. They are egregiously discontinuous, even aside from Nero's genocidal rampage through time.

And it very well did and does hurt the Prime universe. At worst, our timeline ceases to exist. At best, we lose Spock (and if the majority will of this thread gets their way, Romulus).

And in the real-world, because of what they've done, the likelihood of more Star Trek set in the Prime Timeline is diminishing.

I could speculate why they don't think books set in the Abramsverse would be profitable, but I'd rather not risk crossing the line of civility.

 

I'm fairly sure that the 09 movie went out of its way to emphasize that this was an alternate timeline - they used references to episodes like Parallels, that said that these alternate timeline/universes existed and continued to exist separate of their involvement of the 'original' timeline. That episode never indicated that the universe with Captain Riker and Commander Worf of the USS Enterprise-D would cease to exist once the camera left them.

They never said that the timeline ceased to exist, just that the on-screen portrayal was now focused on the adventures of this alternate universe.

 

It's a lovely explanation, to be sure, but it's not part of the canon. Christopher himself explained that tie-in material holds no weight in the context of this particular discussion.

 

Those were speculations. Most of it was Uhura ruminating out loud. It was never confirmed on screen.

That was not a timeline altered by time travel. It was a different quantum reality. They are not the same thing, google "quantum resonance signature."

It is implied that the Prime timeline ceased to exist by the laws of time travel as depicted in literally every other instance of time travel ever shown in Star Trek.

 

I have no way of predicting that. All I can say is that licensing deals get renegotiated from time to time and there are always opportunities for things to change.

I'm still surprised at how quickly the books rushed forward over the preceding five or six years. We were only up to 2381 when the '09 movie came out. At that time, I would've expected a deliberate slowdown to give 2387 a wide berth, but instead the books jumped forward in practically real time.

Chekov is easily explained, since he was born after the timeline divergence. His parents must simply have decided to have a kid four years earlier. Either that or Chekov Prime was actually 26 in "Who Mourns for Adonais?" and was lying about being 22 for some reason. (Or maybe he was stuck on a sublight ship and time-dilated for several years.)

Sure, Bruce Greenwood's Pike is significantly older than Jeffrey Hunter's would've been, but you can say the same about James Cromwell as Zefram Cochrane. There is no continuity problem in the new movies that doesn't already have an equivalent in prior Trek canon. This is the same false claim that the purists always make when damning the newest incarnation, the fiction that no continuity errors have ever existed in Star Trek before. It's just that we've had more time to gloss over those older continuity errors in our minds.

This is as wrong as every other claim you've made. It's not exclusive. In "Yesteryear," when Spock was going back to restore his own timeline, he wished Thelin long life and prosperity in his. That means he fully expected Thelin's timeline to survive and coexist with his.

Besides, the idea of one timeline "erasing" another is gibberish. It's silly and self-contradictory. In order for one thing to replace another, it has to come after another. The idea of a single moment in time coming after itself is nonsense. If two versions of a single moment exist, then by definition they exist simultaneously. They must be parallel timelines, because it's both physically and logically impossible for them to be anything else. So stories that portray one timeline "erasing" another are WRONG. They are mistakes. And it is the prerogative of the creators of fiction to correct the mistakes in earlier works. The makers of the new movies have chosen to employ a more scientifically accurate and logical theory of time travel than previous stories, and it is ridiculous to call that an error. It's a correction.

 

There was no evidence in the movie to say that the original timeline was erased, and we've seen alternate timelines before so there is precedent Sure episodes like Yesterday's Enterprise showed the timeline being changed, but I don't remember there being anything that speicifically ruled out a timeline splitting off instead of erasing and old. Pretty sure there couldn't be since we got Watching the Clock, and the Myriad Universe novles many of which were based off specific split off points.
I really don't care about the age differences, that kind of stuff popped up all the time on the shows. Most of what you list off are incredibly minor things that only the most hardcore obsessive people who are determined to hate the movies just because they are different are going to care about.
It was pretty obvious there was going to be a big change in the aesthetics for the movies, there was no way movies made in 2009 and 2013 were going to share the same look as TV series and movies made in the 60's, '80s' and '90s.
If the creators of the movie were really that disrespectful of the Prime universe, they would have just ignored everything that came before and started from scratch.

 

So it's not the same character. Another troubling implication.

That's a bit of a stretch, but I suppose it's plausible.

Not really. Cochrane is said to have been rejuvenated by the Companion. The age as depicted in First Contact works fine.

I'm much more concerned about what damage he's done to the Prime timeline than in what he chooses for his own world. The inconsistencies are annoying, but the real problem is the implications of the time travel.

As I recall, Picard said something similar to the holographic police officer before ending the program in The Big Goodbye. It doesn't prove the Holodeck program "world" continued after Picard walked out.

Furthermore, Spock's statement to Therin could be interpreted as hopeful but uncertain, or even in reference to whatever Therin's life is in the corrected timeline where Spock is restored to the Enterprise. Take to mind what the Guardian said to the landing party in City... "Your vessel, your beginning, all that you knew is gone."

I'm not saying Prime universe didn't happen up to and including 2387... especially since the events of the Prime universe led up to Nero's incursion. They had to happen, for 2009 to take place. However, as in the aftermath of the Battle of Sector 001, that temporal incursion would have ended additional propagation of the Prime timeline (as in the phenomenon witnessed by the E-E following the Borg Sphere's departure through the temporal corridor into Earth's past).

We have seen it: The timeline changes and ceases to exist. You want it back, you need someone who was protected from those changes to go back in time after them and fix whatever was done. Spock Prime wasn't able to accomplish this with Nero, hence there is no more natural propagation of the Prime timeline after 2387 unless it's fixed.

Christopher, if all different timelines could co-exist evenly and without hurting each other as you're positing here, there would be zero motivation underpinning the Temporal Cold War. That makes no sense whatsoever. You're advocating a position that isn't supported by anything in Star Trek.

Christopher, I'm reeling from seeing something in Abram's films referred to as "scientifically accurate."

Even still, though, I don't buy your assertion that it is ridiculous to call that an error. If they decided to do Harry Potter 4 with no magic whatsoever, with the explanation they wanted to improve the scientific accuracy, I would indeed have called that an error, because the existence of magic and the particular manner in which it works is an integral part of the Harry Potter mythos.

To depict otherwise would have grossly contradicted what came before, and Harry Potter fans would be justifiably outraged.

 

Exactly. What's Kirk's middle initial? Which general order carries the death penalty? Is Spock a Vulcan or a Vulcanian? Is it lithium or dilithium? Trek fans have been arguing over continuity errors since the days when there were only 79 episodes. Trek Magazine had a whole ongoing column about it back in the '70s and '80s. To claim that minor continuity glitches render something illegitimate as part of the Trek franchise is disingenuous in the extreme.

Nor should they have. Roddenberry had the look of Starfleet technology and uniforms and the design of the Klingons completely overhauled in TMP because he could. TOS was not his absolute ideal of what the future looked like -- it was just the best approximation he could manage with middling-budget '60s resources, and he happily improved upon it as soon as he had the chance. Were he still alive today, he would've been perfectly happy to see the look of Starfleet technology completely changed to look more modern.

 

No, in fact even IDW's comics, which are directly supervised by Bad Robot have made it clear the Prime Universe continues after Spock and Nero's disappearance. The Prime Universe is even visited in the prologue and epilogue of the Q story in the Ongoing Comic.

 

That's derogatory and I don't appreciate it. I have a right to learn, know, and care about every detail of something, and not be judged for it by you.

 

IDW's ongoing comic series, a tie-in, has no bearing on the context of this discussion, which is the implications of JJ Abram's abuse of the time travel mechanic on the canonical continuance of the Prime timeline after 2387, and the dual impacts of Spock's disappearance and Romulus's destruction on any potential Prime timeline stories taking place after 2387, if indeed the timeline can somehow be considered to still exist.

 

Yes. I'm amazed this isn't obvious. Again, chrinFinity, you are completely and staggeringly wrong. The last thing the filmmakers wanted to do was to delete the Prime universe from existence, because nobody wants that, obviously. The whole idea was to create a separate timeline to coexist with it in parallel. The filmmakers have made that extremely clear in countless interviews. And it's implicit in-story from Spock Prime's lack of concern for the survival of his timeline. He knows it still exists, which is why he isn't trying to "fix" history. So no, it absolutely would not contradict the film canon.

After all, this is fiction. It's ridiculous to claim that some kind of intractable law of in-story physics dictates what the creators of the fiction are able to do. They can make up whatever laws of time travel they want. And as I've already pointed out, they chose to go for the more scientifically accurate premise that alternate timelines coexist rather than "replacing" each other (which is impossible and nonsensical). Not only because they did their homework, but because, obviously, they wanted the old universe to remain in existence, since they're fans themselves.

 

Besides, continuity implications aren't canon. Only that which is explicitly stated is canon. Even if it were true that every past appearance of time travel resulted in an erased timeline, it wouldn't be canon that this one did unless it was explicitly stated. It might be logical that it was in that circumstance, but it wouldn't be binding on the authors.

If it isn't specifically shown or said with an intention for it to be taken in by the viewers as a part of the narrative, it doesn't qualify as canon. I mean, let's get to a ridiculous example here: it's not technically canon that Uruguay exists. If you wanted to write a Trek book where Uruguay didn't exist and never did, you wouldn't be in contradiction with any licensing agreements. The only thing that's canon is what they explicitly and intentionally show.

 

I'm not judging you for knowing and caring about every detail of something. I know a lot more about Trek, Star Wars, Once Upon a Time and the Buffyverse than is probably normal, but I'm not about to let possibly mistakes in the little details keep me from enjoying a later movie/show/book/game/ect.
Even if something takes a different approach than I might have preferred I'm still willing to give it a chance. The Clone Wars we got in the Star Wars prequels were not at all what I thought they were going to be when they talked about them in The Original Trilogy, and a few things might not line up quite right between the two trilogies, but I still enjoy the Prequels.

 

ChrinFinity, have you considered all the evidence? We know that Prime Starfleet still exists in the 29th century. Therefore, the only conclusion we can draw is that the 09 timeline is a larger Yesterday's Enterprise type of event, except that we won't get to see the conclusion on film, where AbramsSpock travels to Prime 2387 and saves the Hobus Star.

As for the huge pre-incursion timeline discrepancies, remember that the Abramsverse has no or different 29th Century Starfleet Admirals going back and screwing up ancient Terran, Vulcan and Deltan history. Especially Deltan. Abramsverse Deltans don't even need an oath to stay celibate.

 

But you're acting as though Trek was one perfect, harmonious whole prior to the recent movies when it very much wasn't. Trek's world holds together by suspension of disbelief alone - otherwise it crumbles when you ask why Kirk's old Enterprise could have made Voyager's lifelong journey or covered the distance of DS9's wormhole in no time at all, completely breaking the premise of both spin-offs.

Read some old Best of Trek books, and read some old Interstat letterzines. Every change Trek underwent was met with a similar outcry (based on what youve written so far, I'm curious how you coped with the complete re-imagining of the Klingons in 1979, for example), this one is no different.

 

There is occasionally dichotomy of intention and outcome, as in this case.

Creator interviews are not canon.

Spock's reaction can also be explained by a sense of hopelessness and defeat. That's what I see when I watch. He can't undo Nero's changes. It doesn't mean he couldn't have. He lives each day, with his failure, on the refugee colony, knowing it can never be undone. It's a terrible fate Spock suffers in these films.

Again you play the "it's not real" card. I'm willing to stipulate to that. I don't know why you continually feel the need to point this out to me.

JJ's not "the creator." He's the guy they trusted the keys with, and he drove the metaphorical car into a metaphorical tree.

I don't recall any of this being established on screen.

 

Uruguay appeared, labelled, on a political map of Earth shown in both the original and Remastered editions of The Cage.

I also vaguely recall that Uruguay might have been one of the teams competing in one of Archer's water polo recordings, but I'm not certain. It is just a TV show, after all.

 

That's because everyone in the Abramsverse seems to want to have gross and disgustingly inappropriate out-of-character sex with each other.