I read an article in the news that Star Trek: Into Darkness is not going to be considered canon in the rebooted universe, with the next film, Star Trek Beyond.
Is ST:ID Not Canon Anymore According to the New Continuity?
- Thread starter VulcanMindBlown
- Start date
You've totally misunderstood what was said. The sensationalist headlines say it's ignored, but Justin Lin ACTUALLY just says is that although the movie is canon, there's no direct follow-up to the events in ID since Beyond is set 2 and a half years later.
At the same time, do we address it? No, but we don’t discount it. We don’t sit there and say it doesn’t exist, it’s part of this universe now. - Justin Lin
Remember, that they're on the 5-year-mission at all is a direct reference to Into Darkness. And if you look closely at the trailer, you see the new larger impulse engine on the back of the Enterprise saucer from the end of that movie, you see Sulu wearing an unfolding seatbelt from the bit where the ship nearly crashes, Scotty jumps from one of the same photon torpedoes Khan hid his crew in etc.
At the same time, do we address it? No, but we don’t discount it. We don’t sit there and say it doesn’t exist, it’s part of this universe now. - Justin Lin
Remember, that they're on the 5-year-mission at all is a direct reference to Into Darkness. And if you look closely at the trailer, you see the new larger impulse engine on the back of the Enterprise saucer from the end of that movie, you see Sulu wearing an unfolding seatbelt from the bit where the ship nearly crashes, Scotty jumps from one of the same photon torpedoes Khan hid his crew in etc.
Yeah, that article felt a bit too much like click-bait, and taking Lin's words out of context, and spinning them to suit the narrative.
I mean, TWOK, for intents and purposes, ignored TMP but I don't hear that film's canonical status being questioned.
I mean, TWOK, for intents and purposes, ignored TMP but I don't hear that film's canonical status being questioned.
Did STID suddenly transmogrify into a book? No? Then it's still canon.
Not every story needs to be a direct follow-up to the events depicted in the previous story. ST:ID still counts. It's just that STB takes place a few years later, and people moved on. The crew shouldn't still be hung up on stuff that happened three years ago. A lot can happen and change in that time.
Kor
Kor
Into Darkness.... I've seen the movie a dozen times at least and I can't recall any particular plot threads worth bringing up in a third film, anyway. Kirk has Khan's blood? Does that matter? Khan is on ice somewhere. Pike's dead. Spock and Uhura still in love.
Personally I was hoping for something to come of the Klingon situation but I guess we'll have to settle for a motorcycle chase scene.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! (Kaboom!) They should have to retroactively rename the film:
Star Trek: Into Irrelevance
Personally I was hoping for something to come of the Klingon situation but I guess we'll have to settle for a motorcycle chase scene.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! (Kaboom!) They should have to retroactively rename the film:
Star Trek: Into Irrelevance
What actually happened is that Justin Lin did a group interview where he was asked some questions and the first guy to report what he said was, unfortunately, Devin Faraci who hates the reboot and thus reported what Lin said decorating it with his own narrative, wishful thinking and bias. For instance his sensational title that Lin said they ignored stid, and also him stating that the spock/uhura thing is ignored/they are no longer an item (Faraci believes that it's more 'traditional' for Spock to have Chapel as a lover..)
So other sites keep repeating what Faraci said, rather than what Lin said. This is the internet, it figures if sites can bother trying to report correct informations..
For instance, Lin never said they ignore stid or it's not canon*
And what he said about s/u could be interpreted either way. Surely, he explicitly stated they don't ignore things and their relationship is consistent to what was done previously..and last time I watched the movies they were an item since the first one so I don't get Faraci's speculation that 'consistent with what was done before' =they are over or ignored.
There are aspects of stid that they don't need to address such as Khan and Carol (though the latter is lame because the last movie established she was part of the crew in the end), but then stid did the same with elements of the first movie. They surely didn't focus on Nero or the Vulcan diaspora a whole lot..
*(he and the writers wouldn't be in power to decanonize other movies, anyway. Even Roddenberry couldn't do that, and he DID not like all the tos movies)
So other sites keep repeating what Faraci said, rather than what Lin said. This is the internet, it figures if sites can bother trying to report correct informations..
For instance, Lin never said they ignore stid or it's not canon*
And what he said about s/u could be interpreted either way. Surely, he explicitly stated they don't ignore things and their relationship is consistent to what was done previously..and last time I watched the movies they were an item since the first one so I don't get Faraci's speculation that 'consistent with what was done before' =they are over or ignored.
There are aspects of stid that they don't need to address such as Khan and Carol (though the latter is lame because the last movie established she was part of the crew in the end), but then stid did the same with elements of the first movie. They surely didn't focus on Nero or the Vulcan diaspora a whole lot..
*(he and the writers wouldn't be in power to decanonize other movies, anyway. Even Roddenberry couldn't do that, and he DID not like all the tos movies)
I read the original Faraci article, and I don't see the level of disingenuousness you're claiming.
Politely ignore. As in, they won't be saying in the film, "That never happened", they just won't refer to it at all. Which isn't really news, Trek has been doing that for decades.
He doesn't state that. He reports what Lin said and then goes on to guess what that answer may mean, giving example possibilities. He could easily be wrong of course, but he doesn't state anything as hard fact. His hopes for the material are clear though, no question.
He reported and added his opinions to the mix. ...in my opinion.
He sort of can, in that he can write his movie to explicitly ignore Into Darkness, by, say, taking place immediately after Star Trek 2009 or adapting Khan in a different way. This is similar to what the Highlander and Terminator Franchises have done.
But the studio heads at Paramount probably would object if it's too explicit.
Since it takes place two and a half years into the five-year mission and they were leaving for said mission at the end of the last film: I'd say they aren't ignoring it. Just one plot has nothing to do with the other.
Exactly. Nobody has said nor will ever say that ID is not canon. However they can simply ignore that entire story going forward.
its a tricky thing but it has happened. when superman returns in 06 was released, bryan singer who directed the film decanonize superman 3 and 4. he said superman returns was a direct sequel to superman 2.
justin will not decanonize STID he will just make a film that does not need to call back on stid so much. its like iron man 3 which had no call backs to iron man 2.
I can't say I'm that upset at this. I liked STID very much but I'm very much in favor of keeping Khan on ice.
Really shows the sad state that Trek is in when the film makers talk openly about how they're ignoring the immediate entry preceding this. It's one thing to ignore the events of one episode from ever happening (Voyager's 'Threshold'), but that's only one episode out of 172. This NuTrek series only has two movies under it's belt. That's half the content that you're ignoring in order to move on.
Also, just because things were bad in STID doesn't mean that they weren't worth fixing. Take Carol Marcus for example. Her depiction in Star Trek Into Darkness got a lot of attention because of how gratuitous her underwear scene was. But during the ending scene where Kirk welcomes her 'to the family' I thought that hey, maybe next time she'll actually amount to something. Well, she's not in the movie so not only will she not have the opportunity to improve, STID is all that she'll have. The film that everyone is choosing to ignore.
Also, just because things were bad in STID doesn't mean that they weren't worth fixing. Take Carol Marcus for example. Her depiction in Star Trek Into Darkness got a lot of attention because of how gratuitous her underwear scene was. But during the ending scene where Kirk welcomes her 'to the family' I thought that hey, maybe next time she'll actually amount to something. Well, she's not in the movie so not only will she not have the opportunity to improve, STID is all that she'll have. The film that everyone is choosing to ignore.
It's nowhere near that dire. Only that STB will feature a new storyline, that's all. They're not deliberately insulting STID or anything like that, just choosing to do something new. It's harmless.
I think it's disingenuous to pretend there is not an ounce of bias in his article, or that he simply honestly wanted to just report what the director said, rather than reinvent it to suit his narrative as a hater of the reboot, the previous creative team and stid in particular.
He clearly wanted people to assume that Lin had said we can skip stid and they ignore it. And it worked because a lot of sites now repeat HIS words and interpretation rather than what Lin really said. As for 'politely', semantics is not my thing but really, 'critics' being passive aggressive is nothing new.
He doesn't state that. He reports what Lin said and then goes on to guess what that answer may mean, giving example possibilities. He could easily be wrong of course, but he doesn't state anything as hard fact. His hopes for the material are clear though, no question.
He reported and added his opinions to the mix. ...in my opinion.
He actually stated that and, again, sites now repeat his interpretation rather than what Lin really said. Even trekcore did that.
Furthermore, before making the article he made some 'preview' comments over twitter where he DID state the director told him that s/u were maybe not an item and that people could skip stid and just watch st09 and stb.
What a coincidence, also, that his 'possibilities' didn't include the pretty rational one that they are an item because Lin said they are consistent with the other movies.
Would that guy jump ONLY to the most negative suppositions if he didn't have his bias against the reboot (and thus s/u too)? I doubt it.
Take the same exact quote and replace the characters with Han/Leia or other fictional relationships from other franchises: I find it hard to believe the first thing one would read in it is the kind of assumptions Faraci made.
I'm not a fan of Pegg&co and I don't trust them. One of my first concerns is exactly the fact they might ignore some aspects I liked. So I'm not hating on that dude because I'm an apologist of the new team, but even I thought that the sites reporting Lin's comment are being way off base and taking his quotes out of context to make sensational titles and click bait links. And people are falling for that (hence this thread and the many, many, allarmistic comments I read in other sites)
But then, it has happened before. Take the urban legend that JJ 'hates trek' because he is a star wars fan, when he actually just said he wasn't a fan of trek as a little kid because at the time it was too deep for him but then he appreciated it as an adult.
Similar threads
