Well, as James Blish used to have Spock say:
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference."
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference."
Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
- Thread starter SalvorHardin
- Start date
- Status
I think the word you both are looking for is "non-committal".
Hollywood - and society in general in recent years - doesn't seem to be able to, or at least want to, commit to anything and see it through. Everyone is looking for an "escape clause", either in case things don't go exactly the way they want or to place blame elsewhere if they can't wrestle back control of the situation.
In Hollywood's case, this "parallel reality" explanation says that they're trying to have their cake and eat it too - if they went totally new or totally canon, it would limit the audience pool. They're trying to pull everyone in, but both sides are seeing through it for what it is - pandering to the lowest common denominator.
That's just plain rude and uncalled for...and makes you appear to be just as bad as the folks your insulting.
==========================================
As for this New Version of Trek...
Personally, I'm kinda disappointed now.
I was looking forward to perhaps being able to intertwine and fit this story into what has gone before, like WE do with all the different aspects of Trek that have come along.
But this is a whole new ball game, he essentially saying that there are Two OFFICIAL TREK Universes now and something about that just doesn't feel right.
Oh well.... My enthusiasm has certainly been dampened also.
Just because he's saying that doesn't mean you won't be able to make it fit.
If there's one thing I've learned in my time here, it's that Trek fans can be very creative.
Reading that line feels too much like a cop out. I would have preferred then to tie everything up - using Spock going back to put the timeline on the right track instead of just saying 'meh, alternate universe'.
Granted, it's fiction and the general audience won't care too much - but it shows more respect for the product.
Granted, it's fiction and the general audience won't care too much - but it shows more respect for the product.
Re: Bob Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
But I carry this picture of William Shatner as Kirk in my pocket, and he keeps fading in and out of view...
But I carry this picture of William Shatner as Kirk in my pocket, and he keeps fading in and out of view...
Re: Bob Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
I just wasted a few minutes reading that, the interviewer asked the same question over and over and over again and then, just to be sure, he asked it AGAIN.
I can't recall a point, since the details of this movie began to leak out, when the notion of the Trek Universe being reset to "normal" at the end of this film seemed credible.
I don't think one explanation of the changes in this film versus another explanation makes a dime's worth of difference. This version of Trek is simply different; that's been true from the beginning.
I think some ideas I've read (such as everything just suddenly becoming 60's style) were a bit much, but it wouldn't be too hard to bring everything together in a sense that the TOS stuff happened, but how they got there was a different story.
Or even an idea that would upset the fans somewhat, re-doing the old series in a couple of films to tie them into the old movies. One of them could be loosely based on Space Seed as a prequel to Khan.
It's not impossible to do, it might not match perfectly, but it would preserve a history thats been well recognised throughout it's various productions which I believe would be worth carrying on.
Though to be frank, all I want to see is a good Star Trek movie. Everything else is just 'stuff'.
IMAO, what matters about preserving the "original continuity," for the moment, is that at the end of "Star Trek" we find Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Bones and the rest of 'em crewing the U.S.S. Enterprise. Anything more specific than that can wait for Star Trek XII (II?).
Re: Bob Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
Just read this over at TrekMovie report. Good stuff and i'm satisfied that we do have an answer that I suspected might be the truth.
However. If a new alternate timeline is created when someone changes the past then what is the point of time travel to fix it? because whatever was done in the past wouldn't effect the current timeline, just create a new one. So why bother trying to stop it at all?
In the most recent time travel movie First Contact it was clearly shown that time travel does effect the current "prime" timeline. So before I start confusing the fu*k out of myself, let me ask how does this hold relevance to other Star Trek episodes and movies where the characters had to go back to "correct" their timeline which had been effected by someone else? Wasn't the timeline always "restored" to how it was before the villian changed it and not actually creating a new one.
Just read this over at TrekMovie report. Good stuff and i'm satisfied that we do have an answer that I suspected might be the truth.
However. If a new alternate timeline is created when someone changes the past then what is the point of time travel to fix it? because whatever was done in the past wouldn't effect the current timeline, just create a new one. So why bother trying to stop it at all?
In the most recent time travel movie First Contact it was clearly shown that time travel does effect the current "prime" timeline. So before I start confusing the fu*k out of myself, let me ask how does this hold relevance to other Star Trek episodes and movies where the characters had to go back to "correct" their timeline which had been effected by someone else? Wasn't the timeline always "restored" to how it was before the villian changed it and not actually creating a new one.
Re: Bob Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
Well, maybe Spock doesn't want a criminal from his universe destroying things and killing millions even if it is in another universe.
If he can stop it or warn them, it would be pretty selfish and uncharacteristic for him to say "Meh,to hell with it. Not my timeline"
Well, maybe Spock doesn't want a criminal from his universe destroying things and killing millions even if it is in another universe.
If he can stop it or warn them, it would be pretty selfish and uncharacteristic for him to say "Meh,to hell with it. Not my timeline"
Last edited:
I think it's pretty accurate and plenty called for.
I remember when I didn't understand why some Trek fans think other Trek fans are weirdos. Now I get it.
I'm as devoted as you get, but some of yall are are like babies. I think they are doing something pretty clever and quite frankly, generous, with this new timeline thing and some of you guys sound as petulant as ever.
What JJ Abrams truly could to be saying is to kiss his ass cuz he really doesn't need any of us "devotees" but he's not. We're gonna watch it anyway and you know that. We're gonna complain regardless and you know that too.
Last edited:
Hear, hear. I'm not a fan of Orci, nor of how silly he sounded in this interview, but anyone still whining about "canon" gets no sympathy from me after this.
I'll be amused, however, if there are still people (mainly posting in Trek Lit) who adopt a "well, we'll have to wait and see!" attitude. Orci could have barely been more clear about this being a "canonical reboot," and it's time this finally die down as a point of discussion, when there are many more interesting things about this film to talk about.
Re: Bob Orci on Start Trek, timelines, canon and everything (SPOILERS)
Well, Orci is clearly enthralled with the idea of quantum mechanics. How many times in the interview does he tell us that it's the best scientific theory ever?
But the thing that really caught my attention is his belief that every time we've seen time travel in Star Trek, it's created a new alternate timeline in a new quantium reality and that our characters have traveled on from that point.
First off, I think that's the exact opposite of what Star Trek has always said. Our characters, from City on the Edge of Forever through Trials and Tribble-ations and beyond, have always been concerned about the possibility of altering the timeline, have always set out to restore the timeline if something is changed, have always made it clear that they are travelling back and forth within their own timeline.
Secondly, I think Orci's view would be very unsatisfying for me if it were true. So that means that after Kirk, Spock and McCoy went back in time in CoTEoF, they spent the rest of the series on an entirely different ship with an entirely different crew. That Sisko did not return to the same DS9 as he had been at previously once he had gone and played the part of Gabriel Bell. And on and on and on. Instead, we've seen dozens of different parallel universes, all different from one another, and haven't truly watched these characters and their worlds develop over the years. I don't like that at all.
Well, Orci is clearly enthralled with the idea of quantum mechanics. How many times in the interview does he tell us that it's the best scientific theory ever?
But the thing that really caught my attention is his belief that every time we've seen time travel in Star Trek, it's created a new alternate timeline in a new quantium reality and that our characters have traveled on from that point.
First off, I think that's the exact opposite of what Star Trek has always said. Our characters, from City on the Edge of Forever through Trials and Tribble-ations and beyond, have always been concerned about the possibility of altering the timeline, have always set out to restore the timeline if something is changed, have always made it clear that they are travelling back and forth within their own timeline.
Secondly, I think Orci's view would be very unsatisfying for me if it were true. So that means that after Kirk, Spock and McCoy went back in time in CoTEoF, they spent the rest of the series on an entirely different ship with an entirely different crew. That Sisko did not return to the same DS9 as he had been at previously once he had gone and played the part of Gabriel Bell. And on and on and on. Instead, we've seen dozens of different parallel universes, all different from one another, and haven't truly watched these characters and their worlds develop over the years. I don't like that at all.
This goes back to a thread I started a couple of weeks ago saying that these people may feel like different characters to me. And it has nothing to do with casting new actors.
No matter how well the actors act and the writers write (in fact the actors and writers can be 'spot on' with these characters), I will still have the nagging feeling that these are NOT the same familiar characters simply because these characters will be from an alternate timeline. The real Kirk, Spock et al. would be existing somewhere in another timeline.
I'm not saying that will necessarily make for a bad film. This could still be a great movie. But if they play the "alternate universe card" there will always be that little voice in my head that says these aren't exactly the same guys.
Especially considering if that's exactly what Orci, Kurtzman and Abrams are going to want me to believe from an "in-universe" standpoint -- that these are NOT the same people from TOS, but rather alternate timeline versions of the them.
So forgive me if this film does such a good job convincing me of this and I begin to believe that they are "alternate timeline" people, thus different people.
- Status
Similar threads
