Rii
Rear Admiral
It's also even less cerebral than many fear this upcoming film will be. It's unadulterated fanwank.
I quite enjoyed it.
If Trek XI ends in the new timeline?
- Thread starter Lyon_Wonder
- Start date
It's also even less cerebral than many fear this upcoming film will be. It's unadulterated fanwank.
I quite enjoyed it.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Ouch.
Personally, I've mentally accepted the overwhelming likelihood that the old TOS timeline now exists in a separate continuum and the new movies and sixth TV series will happen in the new timeline set up by Old Spock and Nero. It's not what I wanted. But Paramount is determined to tweak the franchise to sex/jazz it up a bit so it's more popular with rank and file audiences, so the Abramsverse and Abramsprise seem to be what we're likely to get for the forseeable future.
Oddly, I don't see it like that. I think the new timeline set up will be a Movies Only Timeline. I think having a movie series and a TV series sharing the same space will crowd things up unnecessarily.
With the TV and Movie departments set up differently for Paramount now, I think Series VI will either take place in the old timeline or in a third timeline. Similar to the Terminator franchise where the TV series has diverged from the movies after T2.
I expect that if this movie is a success it will be the last you'll hear from the studio about "multiple timelines" as a springboard for future projects. Going forward this will be Star Trek as far as they're concerned.
The folks who are hoping for failure seem to sense this.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Since I'm not one of those people, I don't sense it.
Yeah, this will be the last we hear of anyone actively talking about "multiple timelines" but Star Trek won't take place in the same continuity as the one set up by ST XI for the rest of eternity. You're thinking too much in terms of the present if you believe that.
I didn't intend to suggest otherwise.
Only in the sense that, say, TNG doesn't take place in the same continuity as TOS. If this movie is a big success then it becomes foundational from now on, and when continuity evolves into something else again - as the modern Trek shows evolved into their own thing two decades after TOS - they'll be primarily "pushing against" JJ's Trek while picking and choosing among all the useful scraps of franchise history from the beginning onward. The likelihood of anyone at any point saying "well, let's do this tv series/movie based only on the continuity excluding that Star Trek 2009 movie that made so much money for us" is minimal. If the film succeeds.
Last edited:
Not to mention a legal tangle nobody wants, what with the division of the rights between the movie and tv sides of the house.
Probably the old timeline. After all, CBS has a vested interest in maintaining the viability of their billion dollar golden goose, and they do have the advantage of a proven track record to base things on, whereas JJ's little project has yet to actually prove itself.
Hmmmm. Having read all this, I have to say that I think the studio could still produce exciting Trek stories without discarding everything that happened in the original timeline. The fact is, great things happened in the old timeline, things that made Trek what it is. I simply don't think it's right to flush too much of that stuff down the toilet, otherwise it's in danger of drifting too far away from its original form.
And who says the alterations Nero makes in the TOS era have to change everything that happens during and afterwards? After all, the timeline was drastically altered before, as in First Contact and Enterprise, but despite the changes, things more or less remained as they had been.
And who says the alterations Nero makes in the TOS era have to change everything that happens during and afterwards? After all, the timeline was drastically altered before, as in First Contact and Enterprise, but despite the changes, things more or less remained as they had been.
"To the last, shall I Yub-yub with thee...."
Have you considered running your posts through a spell-checker prior to posting?
Agreed. Until we see the film, we don't know how it ends. It could be that, shortly after the events of the movie, Kirk is given full command, the Enterprise is assigned to a five year mission, Gary Mitchell comes on board, they are sent to investigate the galactic barrier etc. The only differences between 'new' continuity and the original version would be some cosmetic changes to the ship and equipment.
And of course it may change everything. Until we see the movie, we won't know for sure.
You know, for a great deal of the history of the English language, people spelled things however seemed right to them to make the proper phoenetics, and that worked mostly fine, for the relatively few people who could read, anyway. And then someone came along and decided to standardize and catalog the whole thing, and while there have been benefits, they also created a completely artificial reason for people like you to complain about other people's spelling, even when it is perfectly understandable.
And miraclefan's post was. And, it contributed to the ongoing conversation. So why is it so important that you let the spelling derail you?
Yeah! After all, if I can go without saying anything about all the damned quotation marks in places that don't make any sense, then you can cope with the spelling.Just let your mind see every third letter or so and you'll be fine.
Oops.
It'd be interesting if Paramount took a "Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles" approach to a sixth series. Don't set the series in either the original Shatner-thru-Bakula universe and timeline NOR the new one. But in an offshoot history that doesn't necessarily lead into either and one that can have a dramatically different outcome either good or bad.
Similar threads
