Simon Pegg suggests that the Kelvin timeline is (essentially) a reboot

[F. King Daniel]

I stumbled across a spoiler about a character's back story that ties directly into Enterprise. Can't imagine Pegg writing that unless he was aware that it was part of the continuity. Also, the VFX guys have already confirmed that the design of the Franklin reflects the era of Star Trek: Enterprise.

They can always change their minds and say it's a similar backstory where some of the same named people did very similar things, but what's the point? There's no doubt in my mind that Spock Prime is referencing Wrath of Khan when he speaks to Spock in Into Darkness, or The Voyage Home when he tells Kirk that using time travel as a cheat is "a trick I learned from an old friend"

 

[Tyr]

Once Star Trek was a glimpse of what could be our future "where no one has gone before". Now it is just another "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" or more precise, "in the far future of a galaxy far, far away"...

 

[Mudd]

Once Star Trek was a glimpse of what could be our future "where no one has gone before".

No more or less so than it is today.

 

[Terok Nor]

Maybe it's not just that Enterprise is the the only series that the new films can reference, since the other ones actually take place in the future, but maybe there's some people out there who like that series and want to reference it.

I thought the new Star Trek was supposed to be moving away from fan service? Why would they want to appeal to the 10 people who actually liked Enterprise?

 

[Mudd]

Because more people remember that show than DS9.

 

[Terok Nor]

Because more people remember that show than DS9.

Delusional people?

 

[F. King Daniel]

Because CBS want people to see Beyond, google the thing mentioned as part of someone's back story, and go out and buy an Enterprise box set.

 

[fireproof78]

Because tying in to past works has also driven Marvel to be become the industrial, movie making juggernaut, that it is today.

Also, we already had an Enterprise reference, and sidestepped another one in STID. What's one more?

 

[M'Sharak]

Delusional people?

Don't do that.

If you don't like the show, that's one thing, but don't paint anyone as delusional simply because they like something you don't.

 

[Mudd]

In any event, I don't know what "delusional" would have to do with how vividly the show made an impression on the public, as it has nothing to do with people's opinions of the show or really even whether they watched it themselves.

Voyager and Enterprise were on a national network of sorts, running date-and-time, and during most of their runs they were the only Trek series on the air. The studio and UPN promoted them more heavily and they were higher profile in the media than DS9, which premiered during TNG's heyday and shared public attention with its better-known big brother. One might judge it unfair that Seven Of Nine and T'Pol are the most widely-recognized post-TNG characters, but they pretty much are.

 

[Terok Nor]

Don't do that.

If you don't like the show, that's one thing, but don't paint anyone as delusional simply because they like something you don't.

It's just as well I didn't do that then isn't it?

It's delusional to claim the lowest rated, least watched show is better remembered than Deep Space Nine which rated in the top 3 syndicated shows at the time. I see no flaw in my logic.

 

[Terok Nor]

One might judge it unfair that Seven Of Nine and T'Pol are the most widely-recognized post-TNG characters, but they pretty much are.

By whom?

Seven Of Nine I'll grant you but T'Pol? Who are these people who've forgotten all the characters from DS9 and Voyager yet remembered a character from the least watched spin off? It makes no sense.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's delusional to claim the lowest rated, least watched show is better remembered than Deep Space Nine which rated in the top 3 syndicated shows at the time. I see no flaw in my logic.

Enterprise ended this Century. DS9 ended last Century. That alone will make it fresher in peoples minds. Ratings are irrelevant.

 

[Terok Nor]

Enterprise ended this Century. DS9 ended last Century. That alone will make it fresher in peoples minds. Ratings are irrelevant.

No one watched it. It got cancelled. It doesn't matter when it ended.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I watched it.

 

[Terok Nor]

I watched it.

Then you and its other 9 fans will be happy with all the references it gets in Star Trek Beyond

 

[Nerys Myk]

No one watched it. It got cancelled. It doesn't matter when it ended.

Sure it does. Being a show with low ratings that was canceled doesn't change the fact it was the last show with the Trek named attached. Even people who didn't watch it will know of it. We get it. You love DS9 and hate Enterprise. That's not going to stop ENT reference popping up in future Trek installments. By you metric, there should be no TOS references, since it was a low rated show that was cancelled. TNG, which had the highest ratings should be the only thing Star Trek films, books and TV shows use as source material.

 

[Terok Nor]

Sure it does. Being a show with low ratings that was canceled doesn't change the fact it was the last show with the Trek named attached. Even people who didn't watch it will know of it. We get it. You love DS9 and hate Enterprise. That's not going to stop ENT reference popping up in future Trek installments. By you metric, there should be no TOS references, since it was a low rated show that was cancelled. TNG, which had the highest ratings should be the only thing Star Trek films, books and TV shows use as source material.

You're getting carried away. I wasn't the one who brought up DS9. Why was it mentioned anyway? Because of my username? TNG is my favourite Trek so if it was an attempt to antagonise me it has failed.

What has the fact it was the last spin off got to do with anything? It was the last spin off for a reason. It was low rated and axed. TOS suffered the same fate but grew in popularity through re-runs. If Enterprise has managed to scale those heights also it has certainly passed me by.

Not being highly rated is no reason to not reference something. Being a steaming pile of crap (In My Opinion) is. When JJ and Pegg finally agree on whether the new movies are a brand new universe from the big bang onwards or from NuKirk's birth onwards we can give Enteprise and it's place in the fictional history of Star Trek a more in depth discussion.

FYI, I'm glad you loved Enterprise. My original post was about Pegg's comment regarding the JJVerse timeline. If it's a new timeline from top to bottom why bother referencing any previous shows at all? Even if Enterprise took place in the JJ timeline it wasn't the show we know and featured alternate reality versions of the characters having different adventures just like NuKirk and crew. That's if we go with Pegg's latest statement about the JJVerse timelime.

And that brings the thread right back on topic and circles back to my post about Enterprise and its references in the JJVerse.

 

[eyeresist]

Then you and its other 9 fans will be happy with all the references it gets in Star Trek Beyond

Yep, very happy.

 

[fireproof78]

You're getting carried away. I wasn't the one who brought up DS9. Why was it mentioned anyway? Because of my username? TNG is my favourite Trek so if it was an attempt to antagonise me it has failed.

Um, yeah, actually, you did.

It's just as well I didn't do that then isn't it?

It's delusional to claim the lowest rated, least watched show is better remembered than Deep Space Nine which rated in the top 3 syndicated shows at the time. I see no flaw in my logic.

What has the fact it was the last spin off got to do with anything? It was the last spin off for a reason. It was low rated and axed. TOS suffered the same fate but grew in popularity through re-runs. If Enterprise has managed to scale those heights also it has certainly passed me by.

Not being highly rated is no reason to not reference something. Being a steaming pile of crap (In My Opinion) is. When JJ and Pegg finally agree on whether the new movies are a brand new universe from the big bang onwards or from NuKirk's birth onwards we can give Enteprise and it's place in the fictional history of Star Trek a more in depth discussion.

FYI, I'm glad you loved Enterprise. My original post was about Pegg's comment regarding the JJVerse timeline. If it's a new timeline from top to bottom why bother referencing any previous shows at all? Even if Enterprise took place in the JJ timeline it wasn't the show we know and featured alternate reality versions of the characters having different adventures just like NuKirk and crew. That's if we go with Pegg's latest statement about the JJVerse timeline.

Perhaps don't diminish someone's interest then?

What's wrong with a reference regardless of the mechanics of time travel? If it's originating from Kirk's birth, then ENT is still relevant. If it is a quantum copy generated by the red matter singularity then it might still be relevant as events could have unfolded similarly.

It's only a problem for the Department of Temporal Investigations department.