Reset Button at the end of Star Trek? *Potentially Major Spoilers*

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Having said that, what if they make the whole point of the film to be "we need to restore the real timeline" and introduce that plot point early on in the film. If that becomes the primary mission of this film's characters , then restoring the timeline becomes the purpose of this film (in-film purpose). That, and the introduction of these characters to a new group of fans (out-of-film purpose).

That's a very, very weak driving motive for the members of the audience who aren't hard-core fans, though.

"Back To The Future" isn't about whether 1985 will turn out to be a proper 1985. It's about what will happen to Marty and his family if it doesn't - and by-the-by, the audience actually lives in the present (circa 1985) and therefore has at least that much investment in the "BTTF Universe."

The deal with the new Trek is: this guy Nero killed Kirk's parents. Blows up a planet. Is about to blow up Earth.

And we're assuming that a reasonable percentage of the audience cares about as much about seeing Kirk and Spock get together and save the day as they do about seeing Clark Kent turn into Superman or Peter Parker swinging from skyscrapers, just because they're Kirk and Spock and Spider-Man.

Complicate what has to matter to the audience much more than that and it's a lost cause.

 

[ancient]

Due to the AWESOMENESS of quantum mechanics, there will be a reset and there will also be NO reset.

Everybody wins with quantum mechanics.

 

[Michael]

Due to the AWESOMENESS of quantum mechanics, there will be a reset and there will also be NO reset.

Everybody wins with quantum mechanics.

That.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...The deal with the new Trek is: this guy Nero killed Kirk's parents. Blows up a planet. Is about to blow up Earth.

And we're assuming that a reasonable percentage of the audience cares about as much about seeing Kirk and Spock get together and save the day as they do about seeing Clark Kent turn into Superman or Peter Parker swinging from skyscrapers, just because they're Kirk and Spock and Spider-Man.

Complicate what has to matter to the audience much more than that and it's a lost cause....

Which is why I say that I intend to enjoy this film, reset or not.

I understand where you are coming from and your argument makes sense. I'm just holding out a little hope that 'wunderkind' Abrams is genius enough to make non-fans (and fans) understand and enjoy a plot that includes a reset.

However, if the film doesn't reset, then that will be fine also.

 

[M'Sharak]

Kreeper doesn't sound like someone I'd want to know.

That's what's bothering me. It reminds me of someone we do know.

I was browsing the NeoGAF thread on the new Star Trek trailer when someone posted a link to the CHUD forums, in which one of their posters claimed to be prevy to information regarding the movies plot.

Here is what he had to say:

Spoiler: Spoiler

From what the people I know who worked on it told me, it does. Paramount and Roddenberry's estate would never approve of all these changes for an actual reboot; they're too radical.

Please forgive the upcoming rant, Chewers. Like Devin, I'm privy to info you aren't.

I can't believe all the people in this thread jerking themselves off into a frenzy over the trailer. Some of you are the same people who were complaining about how bad ENTERPRISE, VOYAGER, and other Rick Berman/Brannon Braga episodes were, due to over reliance on time travel.

Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman are doing the same thing B&B did: they're essentially pushing the Reset Button at the end of the movie. The difference is that B&B never charged us $10 to sit through it.

Kurtzman and Orci think they're being clever by essentially changing history as Trekkers know it and then saying, "But that didn't really happen."

This isn't a prequel, it's a sidequel. In other words (SPOILERS)

• Kirk's parents get killed/tortured - but it didn't really happen.
• Vulcan gets invaded/destroyed -- but it didn't really happen.
• Pike mentors Kirk, shows him his "destiny" -- but it didn't really happen.
• Chekov gets killed - but it didn't really happen.

How is that exciting? If it was lazy writing on ENTERPRISE and VOYAGER, then it's lazy writing here.

You guys ever see any of those fan fiction-based ST Webisodes that are all over the Internet? Well, based on what I know and have seen, this film looks like a $150 million dollar fan fic film (albeit with better acting).

My prediction is that this'll be ST:TMP all over again: it'll make money because everyone will go see it; it'll get good reviews, but looking back everyone will finally admit that, while they enjoyed it, it wasn't really good STAR TREK. Except instead of 2001, they'll be comparing this to DAWSON'S CREEK and (bad) STAR WARS.

The good news is that, like ST:TMP, if it's successful, Paramount will then finally hire someone to give us a real ST movie. It probably won't be Abrams and company. They had the opportunity to do any ST story they wanted and they ended up going into the past rather than dealing with the future.

So kudos to you guys who are looking forward to this. It's just hard for me to get excited about this, from what I've been told/shown. To me it looks like lazy storytelling/filmmaking. I feel that ST deserves better.

I really hope the movie does not turn out to be like what his guy describes, as that would be an absolute disaster in terms of plot. I really cannot think of much to say other than the fact that I would be pretty angry if thats how it all goes down.

Inquisitive, it occurs to me to ask here: is this "Kreeper" someone who also posts or has in the past posted at TrekBBS? And also: was this reposted from the CHUD thread with his/her permission?

There is a German saying, which I think might apply here: Der Weg ist das Ziel. There's the English equivalent The journey is the reward, but I don't think that it really comprises quite the same message.

How about "Getting there is half the fun"?

 

[Sharr Khan]

I have a really hard time buying that Paramount... ect would greelit a project that HAD A RESET BUTTON since it seems to run counter to the stated goals of all involved.

They could have and maybe they did. I guess May 8 we'll find out.

Sharr

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I really doubt they're going to reset the movie at the end.

Out of curiousity... why do you think that?

It makes perfect sense, and dramatically (from what we know so far) it fits quite well. You know what the "reset button" would be, of course...

Spoiler: don't read if you don't want to know...

Kirk takes command of Enterprise, based upon his conversation with "Old Spock," and leads the Enterprise to save Romulus... which means Nero never goes "bad," and the movie can end in the TNG-era with a "heroic" Nero.

 

[Jakks]

It really all depends on the scale of any reset that might happen, a small reset that corrects a few things that happen in the movie without trashing the whole story is no big deal in my book...

However having the entire story end up to have not happened at all would be pretty shitty.

 

[Mordock]

This guy knows nothing.

If so, the force and specificity with which he displays his lack of knowledge is quite something, even for the Internet; a couple of pages later in that thread, he breathlessly spins a bizarre second-hand anecdote about the development of ENT in which T'Pau was changed to T'Pol because Majel had her lawyer slap Berman around...

 

[Sharr Khan]

This guy knows nothing.

If so, the force and specificity with which he displays his lack of knowledge is quite something, even for the Internet; a couple of pages later in that thread, he breathlessly spins a bizarre second-hand anecdote about the development of ENT in which T'Pau was changed to T'Pol because Majel had her lawyer slap Berman around...

That seems a strange thing for Majal to have done. I can't see how she would have a legal standing. Would it not have been the writer of Amok Time that would have a stake in it if they even cared? Fishy assertion, made more so since they did indeed later use T'Pau.

Sharr

 

[trevanian]

There is a German saying, which I think might apply here: Der Weg ist das Ziel. There's the English equivalent The journey is the reward, but I don't think that it really comprises quite the same message.

How about "Getting there is half the fun"?

Or, "It is better to travel hopefully, than to arrive."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

If so, the force and specificity with which he displays his lack of knowledge is quite something, even for the Internet; a couple of pages later in that thread, he breathlessly spins a bizarre second-hand anecdote about the development of ENT in which T'Pau was changed to T'Pol because Majel had her lawyer slap Berman around...

Which is breathtakingly ignorant on several fronts.

Of course, if he wants to push second-hand stories, rumors and fabrication with a sense of authority, specificity is pretty important (except in terms of his own credentials, in which case he becomes very general). He's clearly used to lying a lot. And yeah, he sounds familiar.

The guy's a boob.

This reset as described is an idea that would make no sense dramatically to anyone but a trekkie, someone who's been conditioned to accept it - it's very fanboi.

 

[SheliakBob]

While I'm tremendously skeptical about this whole "reset" thing, I have to admit that I would have fewer objections to the film if it were true. Heck, I MIGHT even watch it, despite my total aversion to recasting the original crew, just for the probably last appearance of Nimoy as Spock.

 

[ancient]

I really doubt they're going to reset the movie at the end.

Out of curiousity... why do you think that?

It makes perfect sense, and dramatically (from what we know so far) it fits quite well. You know what the "reset button" would be, of course...

Spoiler: don't read if you don't want to know...

Kirk takes command of Enterprise, based upon his conversation with "Old Spock," and leads the Enterprise to save Romulus... which means Nero never goes "bad," and the movie can end in the TNG-era with a "heroic" Nero.

Mainly because of how much time is going to be covered to begin with, birth to captain. In order to reset Nero out of the picture, the entire movie all the way back to before Kirk is born would have to be erased. Since Nero first attacks about when Mom Kirk is going into labor.

So essentially the movie shows Kirk being born, growing up as a kid, being a reckless teen, being at SFA, taking command of the Enterprise, meeting old Spock, and then...none of it happened? NONE OF IT? AAAAAH!!!!!

 

[T'Bonz]

Random speculation:

-If there is a "reset," it would be the restoration of Vulcan.

-I'm guessing that the story will end with our heroes in an alternate, but very close timeline. Meaning they are now free to do whatever with no pesky canon. So Shatner Kirk et al went off in one direction, Pine Kirk et al will head off in a new (but similar) direction.

-They kill off Spock (older one) for good this time.

Now if the alternate timeline occurs, I hope it doesn't mean that the events of the first timeline hold for those people and places.

I can't say as I'm a fan of changing timelines or shifting onto another track. It seems to me that unless done well (and Star Trek recently has NOT done time-travel well) that it is a disaster waiting to happen. I don't see why a time travel story to shoehorn in the n00bs was even necessary, one could have suspended disbelief when accepting new actors, given that it was a practical necessity if one were to revisit Kirk et al.

But I would guess that tptb wanted a clean slate so as to write future stories without being hamstrung by the vast Star Trek past.

So I guess I don't know what to think. I just hope that what comes out is acceptable to me as a fan. I have no issues with the new people as I feel they'll do a good job and some of the casting was just brilliant, but I must confess, I'm rather concerned about the story and what it will mean to me as a fan.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Random speculation:

-If there is a "reset," it would be the restoration of Vulcan.

-I'm guessing that the story will end with our heroes in an alternate, but very close timeline. Meaning they are now free to do whatever with no pesky canon. So Shatner Kirk et al went off in one direction, Pine Kirk et al will head off in a new (but similar) direction.

I'm thinking you're probably dead-on, here.

-They kill off Spock (older one) for good this time.

I'm not so sure about that one - it's a bit too much of a downer. Something where there's an ambiguous possibility that he's either died or moved suddenly back to his own time seems more likely to me.

 

[Kryton]

Or perhaps he glowingly dissolves and joins with the younger version of himself.

I'm sure they have some appropriately cornball Old-Spock-Disposal plan that doesn't leave fans cold.

 

[Cmndr J Crichton]

Hey, mabey he means they'll reset the movie over again so we can see it over and over!

 

[pookha]

just a guess but i suspect the only reset will be saving vulcan.
but a lot of the other stuff will have still happened.

as i said before i suspect kirk due to certain things like pike is becoming the man he was supposed to be anyway.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I really doubt they're going to reset the movie at the end.

Out of curiousity... why do you think that?

It makes perfect sense, and dramatically (from what we know so far) it fits quite well. You know what the "reset button" would be, of course...

Spoiler: don't read if you don't want to know...

Kirk takes command of Enterprise, based upon his conversation with "Old Spock," and leads the Enterprise to save Romulus... which means Nero never goes "bad," and the movie can end in the TNG-era with a "heroic" Nero.

Mainly because of how much time is going to be covered to begin with, birth to captain. In order to reset Nero out of the picture, the entire movie all the way back to before Kirk is born would have to be erased. Since Nero first attacks about when Mom Kirk is going into labor.

So essentially the movie shows Kirk being born, growing up as a kid, being a reckless teen, being at SFA, taking command of the Enterprise, meeting old Spock, and then...none of it happened? NONE OF IT? AAAAAH!!!!!

Yeah, well... except that "this Kirk" is still, at his core, the same guy. That's partly the point, I think. Even given that "everything is different," and he's not where he ought to be when the flick starts out ("our" Kirk entered the Academy young, this guy does it much later in life... so at the time "Shat-Kirk" is in command of a small ship, "Pine-Kirk" is riding around on a harley starting bar-fights), he's still the same guy, deep down. (Nero's comment in the trailer makes it pretty clear that this is a central theme to the movie, doesn't it?).

The "core Kirk" (common between both timelines' versions) comes out, and he saves the day.

At the end, once "the spoiler" is done... we see him, not in a black shirt but in a gold shirt, walking through the bridge (granted, still the "Revlon Bridge"), as a full captain - telling his crew (and the audience) to "buckle up." Not because Starfleet promoted him suddenly, but rather because "all is as it ought to be" (except for the set design) again.

Same actors. Probably the same "new" sets. Possibly even the same "new" ship. But the old "history" again.

This isn't really all THAT uncommon, and it's not terribly unsatisfying for a movie. Or didn't any of you see THIS movie?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453467/

It seemed to do pretty well... was probably as successful at the box-office as this flick is going to be... and the movie ends with a big "reset." Which, really, is part of the point, I thought. I didn't feel cheated by that. I'd have felt cheated if they HADN'T done that.