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

[section9]

Say for the sake of argument there is a reset. A reset to what point? Does the movie end in with the birth of James T. Kirk and the proud father witnessing the birth and being handed his son for the first time? A joyous, happy moment? Basically a sign to the moviegoers that the timeline has been returned to how it was "supposed" to be?

I mean, for there to be a reset, Nero would have to be stopped at the point where he first polluted the timeline, right? Stopping him after he's committed all that mischief (47 destroyed Klingon ships, altering Kirk's life, maybe destroying Vulcan or some other planet) resets nothing. It's a new timeline. Those things stay. The future has been changed.

My point exactly: Nero has screwed the galactic pooch, and like Vader, is a consequential individual whose life and death affects the lives of untold billions of people across time and space. Kirk achieves heroic stature by stopping him (with the aid of Spock Prime acting as Obi Wan/Gandalf).

Setting everything back to zero as if Nero's actions never had happened would rob the entire $150 million dollar effort of any dramatic import. One might as well spend $150 million dollars on a Miley Cyrus vehicle. I don't believe that Orci and Kurtzman are THAT stupid.

Of course, we live in a universe where Shatner got to direct, so there you have it.

 

[RobertScorpio]

^^ hey hey..
continuity folks .. well thats me but i dont believe in being a slave to it. just like the original writers were not, if it came in the way of a story.
but they did try to play heed to it somewhat. because , it had richness to the background of the story.

I am not sure what you're talking about. The so-called continuity as to what happened or didn't happened caused more debates than it solved. Look what so called 'anti-Enterprise' TREK fans said about that show really mucking it all up. Or some of the events in the other series as well. If anything the continuity should be re-titled the diss-continuity of Trek. Would be a bit more accurate I dare say.

Rob

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

If this will be such a different timeline/universe than TOS, how do we reconcile that with what Abrams said at WonderCon:
"The story adheres to canon pretty much as well as the original series adhered to canon."

and what Orci said a few months ago:
"Some of the things that seem that they are totally different, I will argue, once the film comes out, fall well within what could have been the non-time travel version of this move."


I'm not necessarily saying there will be a "reset" button per se that cause the events of this film never to happen, but I don't think the timeline created by this film will be as different from TOS as many believe.

...Setting everything back to zero as if Nero's actions never had happened would rob the entire $150 million dollar effort of any dramatic import. One might as well spend $150 million dollars on a Miley Cyrus vehicle. I don't believe that Orci and Kurtzman are THAT stupid...

As I said above, I agree that there may not be a reset. However, not for the reason you gave.

The $150 million wouldn't be wasted, because the audience sitting in the theater would still have actually SEEN those events happen.

That's like saying that TNG: Yesterday's Enterprise and TNG: Cause and Effect were a complete waste of time and money since they both "reset" themselves as if none of the events in those episodes ever happened.

No -- the events that occurred in those episodes were seen and enjoyed by the TV audience, even if the fictional "in-show" characters never 'technically' experienced those events.

If there was a reset (and I'm not saying there will be), the TOS characters and Abrams Trekverse will still be introduced to the new audience, which is one of the points of this film, and those "new fans" who enjoyed the ride that STXI provided -- even with a reset -- would most likely come back for a sequel.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm not necessarily saying there will be a "reset" button perse that cause the events of this film never to happen, but I don't think the timeline created by this film will be that much different than TOS.

That's an entirely different matter, and entirely likely.

It's pretty sure that at the end of the movie Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock and Doctor McCoy will all be serving aboard the starship Enterprise.

 

[Aragorn]

Some people are wanting a reset button? Are you Voyager fans who didn't get enough of that on your show?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Some people are wanting a reset button? Are you Voyager fans who didn't get enough of that on your show?

TOS fans who somehow didn't get enough of it in original Trek.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

There must be consequence to killing Nero.

But... this is Star Trek. Do we really need another "Kill the mustache-twirling villain" moment? Wouldn't it be better (especially since we know, now, that Nero wouldn't have become "bad" if a great loss (and perceived great betrayal) had never befallen him?

Remember why Star Wars Episode IV worked (which, btw, I am convinced is JJ's template for this film-all that is missing is Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru...). The Death Star destroyed Alderaan. The Rebel Alliance had one chance to take it out or the D/S would take out the rebel moon orbiting the gas giant. There was dramatic urgency to Episode IV.

Honestly, I really don't see the parallel at all there. I think you're stretching too far to make it. Can you make the parallels you see more clear?

If you are constantly able to go back and fix things as if they never happened, there's no dramatic moment. It's like kissing your sister. That's why I think Vulcan's getting it in the neck. Permanently. Earth takes the role of the Rebel Moon Base which gets saved just in time by Enterprise and Jim Kirk.

HUH? That's... just... disturbing. (And not JUST the part about kissing your own sister.)

Your parallel is nonsensical, I think. Yes, we see planets being destroyed in both cases, but that's as far as the parallels go. The purpose behind each planetary catastrophy is different, for one thing. The Death Star was engaging in an act of terrorism (in the literal definition - effecting political change through the creation of a state of fear). Nero isn't... he doesn't want to use the destruction of (planet) to make himself absolute ruler of the galaxy. He's just out to destroy (and, presumably, to obtain the means to prevent his own loss in the process).

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Which is another good point because I'm pretty sure nero's space squid dosen't work like the giant time canon from VOY's Year of Hell so blowing it up dosen't reboot the timeline.

The only thing that would "reboot" things would be preventing Nero from coming back at all... by preventing the tragedy in his own past (Kirk's future) which drives him to do what he's doing.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Which is another good point because I'm pretty sure nero's space squid dosen't work like the giant time canon from VOY's Year of Hell so blowing it up dosen't reboot the timeline.

The only thing that would "reboot" things would be preventing Nero from coming back at all... by preventing the tragedy in his own past (Kirk's future) which drives him to do what he's doing.

Under your theory of time travel perhapes but they could be using the alternate timeline theory where by changing the past you now exist in an alternate timeline cut off from your own.

 

[section9]

There must be consequence to killing Nero.

But... this is Star Trek. Do we really need another "Kill the mustache-twirling villain" moment? Wouldn't it be better (especially since we know, now, that Nero wouldn't have become "bad" if a great loss (and perceived great betrayal) had never befallen him?

Remember why Star Wars Episode IV worked (which, btw, I am convinced is JJ's template for this film-all that is missing is Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru...). The Death Star destroyed Alderaan. The Rebel Alliance had one chance to take it out or the D/S would take out the rebel moon orbiting the gas giant. There was dramatic urgency to Episode IV.

Honestly, I really don't see the parallel at all there. I think you're stretching too far to make it. Can you make the parallels you see more clear?

If you are constantly able to go back and fix things as if they never happened, there's no dramatic moment. It's like kissing your sister. That's why I think Vulcan's getting it in the neck. Permanently. Earth takes the role of the Rebel Moon Base which gets saved just in time by Enterprise and Jim Kirk.

HUH? That's... just... disturbing. (And not JUST the part about kissing your own sister.)

Your parallel is nonsensical, I think. Yes, we see planets being destroyed in both cases, but that's as far as the parallels go. The purpose behind each planetary catastrophy is different, for one thing. The Death Star was engaging in an act of terrorism (in the literal definition - effecting political change through the creation of a state of fear). Nero isn't... he doesn't want to use the destruction of (planet) to make himself absolute ruler of the galaxy. He's just out to destroy (and, presumably, to obtain the means to prevent his own loss in the process).

Okey dokey. Nero's just a guy with a deprived childhood and a great sense of loss. Sure comes as a great cost to all those Vulcans. I mean, if we want to get into intentionalism here-I'm sure that Nero, if tried, would be brought up on, at the very least, some sort of mass murder charges. You're probably right on the terrorism, but I didn't imply that Nero is trying to achieve a political aim. He's either trying to restore Romulus or trying to restore his wife. Nero's intent is actually irrelevant to his importance as a villain. It's what he does to others and to history with the Narada that is important.

Hitler can write Mein Kampf till the cows come home. It's when Hitler invades Poland, the Low Countries, France, Russia, et al, and orders up the Holocaust that he needs to be destroyed.

I'm saying that Nero is consequential and must be dealt with: otherwise, Kirk might as well kill the Sta-Puft Marshmallow Man or the Bum of the Month.

Defeating Vader and destroying the Death Star was a rite of passage for young Skywalker. Methinks this is what is being attempted here-on a similar scale. Just because Nero is out for vengeance or to restore Romulus does not mean that Kirk doesn't meet the heroic standard by defeating him.

Besides, if he didn't meet the standard, all the Trek fans would say that Pine is a candy-ass and want the Shat back in the chair. And we can't have that, can we?

 

[Michael]

Wow, Godwin was right!

 

[ancient]

How about this...

First he attacks the TNG klingons. Obtains time travel thing. Goes backward...

Then he attacks (and destroys?) Vulcan. But his drill is damaged by Kirk. Nero wants revenge so...

Then he goes back in time a few days and attacks Earth, and is defeated by Kirk. Again. So...

Then he goes back in time 20 years and fights the Kelvin. And Dad Kirk kills him.

So we would see his first attack last and his last attack first.

How's that for a confusing plot?

 

[Aragorn]

Do we really need another "Kill the mustache-twirling villain" moment?

The opposite would be how Spidey (didn't) deal with Sandman in Spider-Man 3.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

How about this...

First he attacks the TNG klingons. Obtains time travel thing. Goes backward...

Then he attacks (and destroys?) Vulcan. But his drill is damaged by Kirk. Nero wants revenge so...

Then he goes back in time a few days and attacks Earth, and is defeated by Kirk. Again. So...

Then he goes back in time 20 years and fights the Kelvin. And Dad Kirk kills him.

So we would see his first attack last and his last attack first.

How's that for a confusing plot?

Interestingly enough that fits Abrams style from what I've heard.

 

[section9]

Wow, Godwin was right!

Well, come on. What's repartee without a visit from the Adolf?

At last count, I have only been able to find TWO Downfall Parody Videos about the JJ Abrams Trek movie.

Hitler's been banned from World of Warcraft, but by God, nobody's banned Hitler from seeing the rushes for the new movie yet!

 

[section9]

How about this...

First he attacks the TNG klingons. Obtains time travel thing. Goes backward...

Then he attacks (and destroys?) Vulcan. But his drill is damaged by Kirk. Nero wants revenge so...

Then he goes back in time a few days and attacks Earth, and is defeated by Kirk. Again. So...

Then he goes back in time 20 years and fights the Kelvin. And Dad Kirk kills him.

So we would see his first attack last and his last attack first.

How's that for a confusing plot?

Wait! How's about they both go back and kill Hitler and Edith Keeler?

Two birds, one stone, and only one check to Harlan Ellison!

 

[Kryton]

...as a full captain - telling his crew (and the audience) to "buckle up."

Seat belts on a STARSHIP? Preposterous! I declare childhood rapage!

Procter! PROCTER!

 

[seigezunt]

Not buying the OP. Has a smell about it...

 

[Cary L. Brown]

...as a full captain - telling his crew (and the audience) to "buckle up."

Seat belts on a STARSHIP? Preposterous! I declare childhood rapage!

Procter! PROCTER!

Well, it's OK as long as the belts are made from invisible, and very weak, material.

 

[JoeZhang]

If this will be such a different timeline/universe than TOS, how do we reconcile that with what Abrams said at WonderCon:
"The story adheres to canon pretty much as well as the original series adhered to canon."

So not at all.