Pshaw. Like Bryan Fuller is in any way a trustworthy source.
Star Trek 2017 will not be set in the JJ-Verse
- Thread starter fyre
- Start date
Pshaw. Like Bryan Fuller is in any way a trustworthy source.
Sure, he's only Executive Producer on the new series!
Well, I suppose there is the "Benedict Cumberbatch is NOT playing Khan" situation to consider...
Given the registry of the ship, it makes sense. Set after ENT and before TOS. Avoid the Abrams-verse altogether.
Well, all that would mean is that the new series is a shared past for both the Prime universe and the Abramsverse.
While I don't know what Fuller's stance is on that, according to writer of Star Trek Beyond Simon Pegg, not necessarily:
With the Kelvin timeline, we are not entirely beholden to existing canon, this is an alternate reality and, as such is full of new and alternate possibilities. “BUT WAIT!” I hear you brilliant and beautiful super Trekkies cry, “Canon tells us, Hikaru Sulu was born before the Kelvin incident, so how could his fundamental humanity be altered? Well, the explanation comes down to something very Star Treky; theoretical, quantum physics and the less than simple fact that time is not linear. Sure, we experience time as a contiguous series of cascading events but perception and reality aren’t always the same thing. Spock’s incursion from the Prime Universe created a multidimensional reality shift. The rift in space/time created an entirely new reality in all directions, top to bottom, from the Big Bang to the end of everything. As such this reality was, is and always will be subtly different from the Prime Universe. I don’t believe for one second that Gene Roddenberry wouldn’t have loved the idea of an alternate reality (Mirror, Mirror anyone?). This means, and this is absolutely key, the Kelvin universe can evolve and change in ways that don’t necessarily have to follow the Prime Universe at any point in history, before or after the events of Star Trek ‘09, it can mutate and subvert, it is a playground for the new and the progressive and I know in my heart, that Gene Roddenberry would be proud of us for keeping his ideals alive. Infinite diversity in infinite combinations, this was his dream, that is our dream, it should be everybody’s.
So, in the context of Star Trek: Discovery, what all this seems to say to me is that the new show DOES take place in the Abramsverse, if the fundamental reality of space/time was altered in both directions when the Narada went back in time.
But yes, Fuller's stance may be different. Honestly, I don't really give a shit. I was just annoyed at the entitled OP.
Altered in both directions in that parallel universe.
But then we're right back to the question: What universe does Star Trek: Discovery take place in? Because based on Pegg's comments, we can't just assume it takes place in the prime universe just because the ship's registry is 1031.
But in this case I'll take Fuller's statement at face value.
Plus, the show would have been in development before Pegg's statement.
The contrast between Pegg's comments, and the explanation given in 09 (that Nimoy changed their future), pretty adequately displays that the 'rules' exist at the whims of the writers. Nothing new there, but it also shows there's not much use going 'but Pegg said...' when trying to predict what Fuller will do.
*rubs hands gleefully* Which means for the next few months, all the more arguments for us.
I'll have to track down quotes, but I think it was made pretty clear from the beginning by Abrams and/or Orci and/or Kurtzman that the Prime Timeline always continued to coexist in a separate reality parallel to the Kelvin Timeline. All Pegg is adding in is that the Kelvin Timeline's differences ripple backward as well as forward along it, creating not only a parallel future but a parallel past as well.
So instead of this:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _P
We have this:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _P
_ _ _ _ _ / \_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ K
That's what I'm getting from it all, anyway.
So instead of this:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _P
\ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ K
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _P
_ _ _ _ _ / \_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ K
That's what I'm getting from it all, anyway.
Pretty much.
So where Orci's version of the rules (theoretically) meant that Data's head could still be dug up from under San Fran in the Nuverse, Pegg's approach means that sort of situation is no longer a 'necessity' (as it were.)
Star Trek writers - refining the art of glossing over continuity errors since 1963.
Why is the ST 2017 panel not on youtube? Why is the only source this gizmodo article?
And why does the trailer look so shit? Okay, they get out of that one by saying it's "test footage". But that ship design is awful. If they use it, I hope it's heavily tweaked before launch.
Based on the primitive-looking ship, and the bifurcated Starfleet emblem, my guess is that those who wanted a series about the Federation after a decline will get their wish. The split in the emblem suggests the Federation is split for some reason (could be secession, could be a natural disaster), and the brown colour and primitive look of the ship suggests a "used future" akin to Firefly.
And why does the trailer look so shit? Okay, they get out of that one by saying it's "test footage". But that ship design is awful. If they use it, I hope it's heavily tweaked before launch.
Based on the primitive-looking ship, and the bifurcated Starfleet emblem, my guess is that those who wanted a series about the Federation after a decline will get their wish. The split in the emblem suggests the Federation is split for some reason (could be secession, could be a natural disaster), and the brown colour and primitive look of the ship suggests a "used future" akin to Firefly.
The "Excelsior" from ST09 was brown.
A
Amaris
Guest
Right here:
Bottom left hand corner, the brown/red ship is considered an Excelsior class in this timeline, according to "Star Trek: The Art of the Film," art book.
Similar threads
