I think the biggest flaw in this all being one universe, is that it robs these versions of the characters of all-new futures.
That's what I said earlier. If they made SNW a alternate universe they can have spock abd chapel get married later. Kirks son survive. Khan cause more havoc. Anything would be possible.
Very much how I feel.
If the story is good enough though, I can forget all that.
I watched episode 1 of SNW season 4 the other day and if anything I found I could really appreciate how the aesthetic was different to TOS, whilst still being utterly respectful of it. A turbolift scene stood out to me, with the motion of the lift being depicted via a bit of frosted glass with a moving light behind. Such a simple effect, so TOS-like, but with a slightly more elaborate design.
I'd say that points to a refit actually happening between the two shows, in-universe.
If I can accept that Saavik looks both like Kirstie Alley and Robin Curtis, I have no issue accepting that both TOS and SNW Enterprise are one and the same. Or are we gonna try to suggest that Saavik had plastic surgery in order to "explain" why the character looks different after one film?
This visual continuity absolutism of how there can only be one aesthetic is pedantic. Both TOS and SNW are valid. Star Trek is not some rigid documentary of the future, it's just a dramatization of one's imagination depending on when it was made.
TOS fans have always been weirdly overly defensive over how the show looked because they know it looks cheaper than productions made since TMP and are very insecure about it. It's not a set that would hold up in today's modern filmmaking, but a lot of them sure want to pretend it looks good enough so that's how it should always be. "Enterprise featured the sets and it looked great in that show!" If you think a one-off appearance in a spin off constitutes that it should be ok as a regular standing set for a 21st century TV production, I ain't buying it. Trekkies love it, that doesn't mean the larger viewers would appreciate the fact that the set looks cheap as shit by today's standards.
This visual continuity absolutism of how there can only be one aesthetic is pedantic. Both TOS and SNW are valid. Star Trek is not some rigid documentary of the future, it's just a dramatization of one's imagination depending on when it was made.
TOS fans have always been weirdly overly defensive over how the show looked because they know it looks cheaper than productions made since TMP and are very insecure about it. It's not a set that would hold up in today's modern filmmaking, but a lot of them sure want to pretend it looks good enough so that's how it should always be. "Enterprise featured the sets and it looked great in that show!" If you think a one-off appearance in a spin off constitutes that it should be ok as a regular standing set for a 21st century TV production, I ain't buying it. Trekkies love it, that doesn't mean the larger viewers would appreciate the fact that the set looks cheap as shit by today's standards.
Well they used red matter. The red matter could have actually created the separate universe.
As far as we know, red matter only created black holes, one of which made the Narada and the Jellyfish go back in time. It’s a deus ex machina, and as far as I can tell, not one with any universe creating abilities.
Ugh, goddamn Red Matter… One of the aspects of Trek09 that does not age at all well for me.
To be sure, there’s sillier stuff in the franchise, but I particularly don’t care for this one.
To be sure, there’s sillier stuff in the franchise, but I particularly don’t care for this one.
It’s just a name for a made up thing. I don’t see how it’s any different to dilithium?
I know people like this one as an example. But Saavik appeared a grand total of three times and was only a “character” in one of those. Compared to the Enterprise, which wore the same basic face across fifty-plus years.
I’ve never liked the design of it or how handwavium it is as a plot device. I think it calls too much attention to itself.
Of course, mileage will vary.
Suppose you had to keep the rest of the movie as is, only no red matter. What device or means would you have used?
We dont know. It was an artificially created black hole with a substance not used before. This wasnt time travel as we've normally seen it to the point. Another theory that the Narda and Spock were carried to a akready existing alternate universe and just changed its time. The Kelvin before any time change was much more advanced for a 2230s ship than a 2360s TOS ship.
Last edited:
I wouldn’t have touched anything dealing with black holes at all. That level of tech seems a shade too advanced for the post-Nemesis era. It would make a little more sense in late-Discovery.
Trek has a history of plenty of weapons that can cause stars to go nova, so Nero could’ve used any number of bombs/devices to destroy Vulcan and be just as visually impressive as the implosion effect. Hell, if the Narada has a powerful enough beam to be able to slice directly through a planet’s crust/mantle, I’d think they could finish off a planet just as quickly with that.
What about regarding its use in time travel?
Plenty of other ways this franchise has established accidental time travel.
While I personally think you're one of the nicer posters around here in that you're not forcing your viewpoints via mocking emojis, personal insults, and the like, you are extremely persistent in repeating your viewpoints again and again and again that most of new Trek is an alternate timeline. This is not meant as a personal attack or an insult against you, but more of an observation.
The stance of the corporate owner is that they're the same timeline, minus the Eugenics War changes. You've made your claims many times on how it should be an alternate timeline but haven't convinced a lot of people. It also seems that you aren't keen on other explanations, such as my own "refit between shows" fan explanation (which itself isn't popular and unforunately has gotten me personal attacks, mocking emojis and the like, and I appreciate you not ever taking part in any of that vileness). However, at this point, I'm not sure what new there is to say and your repeating the same points will probably get you the same personal attacks etc. that seem to be the norm around here unfortunately when a viewpoint doesn't fit the "majority".
Perhaps you should create your own Trek "timeline" on your own website or as a fanbook or something minus SNW etc. Star Wars fans have done so (Supernatural Encounters for example as well as a complete Legends timeline book that excludes Filoni's Clone Wars because the author insisted it wasn't part of Legends canon despite Lucasfilm's stance)
You could also reach out to Bernd Schneider of Ex Astris Scientia for collaborating, as he also is of the viewpoint that most of new Trek is an alternate timeline, at least his website seems to indicate this.
You may also want to move to reddit where the atmosphere is less generally hostile to non-majority ideas, as I've slowly been doing.
Last edited:
Possibly but as presented in the story it's closer to Parallels energy field than Mirror Universe.
You’re free to do what you want, but stuff like this isn’t going to win you any friends.
There's a bit of a difference, at least to me. One change was made because they couldn't get the same actor to reprise the role. The other change was made just for the sake of change.
Similar threads
