The Official STAR TREK Grading & Discussion Thread [SPOILERS]

[The Habs Fan]

The whole alternate timeline thing is the explanation preferred by modern scientists for time travel (well, to discuss it in full would go wildly off topic) but basically it's thought the universe avoids paradoxes by splitting off timelines. The idea is if you go and say, assassinate your grandfather in the past, it becomes its own separate reality where things can happen differently so no blowback affects the timeline you started from.

Hence Nero's shenanigans during the film make it an alternate reality, and thus the canon of the previous universe is preserved, no destruction occuring.

Exactly. And although I don't think this is going to happen for a very long time if at all, they could still set future movies and TV series in the original Roddenberry/Berman timeline.

 

[EJA]

Any indication of how far along Winona Kirk is in the pregnancy at the time of Nero's attack? If she was in the latter stages, and James was born in Iowa in the pre-Nero timeline, then would that imply that the Kelvin was due to return to Earth shortly at this time, to give Winona the opportunity to have her baby on Earth?

I got the impression that she was going to give birth to baby Jim any time now, even if the attack hadn't happened.

Hence my assumption that at the time of the attack, the Kelvin was due to return home. But if Winona had actually gone into labour prior to the attack....uh oh How can Kirk ever have said he was born in Iowa if he was always destined to be born on the Kelvin? BLOOPER ALERT!!

 

[section9]

You know, the original universe was not destroyed. It's out there somewhere, with our fond memories. Well, mostly fond. I am, however, very happy that we are not going back to that universe.

Oh, indeed, so am I. If it were up to some of the fans on this forum, we would go back to this....

Spare me unbounded nostalgia. I'll take change that adjusts with the moviegoing public, despite the apparent flaws in the writing. I'll be going to the movie tonight. Back with a grade when I see it.

 

[The Habs Fan]

I agree with you SalvorHardin. The original timeline is not destroyed. There are just 2 timelines now.

Along the lines of the BTTF trilogy for example, once you change the past it's altered. Simple as. You can go back and try and fix it, but in some shape or other its changed. The original timeline of BTTF 1 of Lorriane & George having crap lives and crummy jobs is erased after Marty changes things, it's not still there running along side it.

But I can see what you're saying, and even if you do go with that I don't get how that explains the MASSIVE changed we see in such a short space of time for everything to be so different.
But my main gripe with that aspect of the film is "why?" Just make it a remake/reboot from the start. Then you wouldn't have this nonsensical mess of a plot and you could just do a cool story about Kirk, Spock and co's maiden voyage.

Spoiler: Spoilero

Some people say Jumping the Shark. Some say Nuking the Fridge. I might start saying Destroying Vulcan.

This is the problem: BTTF. The writers of Star Trek chose the more scientific approach to time travel which involves quantum mechanics and alternate timelines, not slowly fading away from pictures.

 

[Wesser]

The only time an upcoming Star Trek project ever gave me a chill of anticipation up my spine was when TNG was announced, because it meant that, at long last, with Star Trek returning to television, we'd finally won.

Another movie coming out is just fighting the same old battle again for territory we already won twenty years ago. I don't care how spectacular it is, what's the point?

Well, I point I can offer is that TNG was never TOS. I was as jacked as any Trek fan when "we finally won" and TNG made it to the air. But it wasn't long, before I was bored with it.
This show was/is about the characters, as far as I'm concerned. The big 3 of TOS hasn't been "copied" or improved upon no matter how many Picards and Rikers you create. And don't even get me going on the Sisco's, Janeways and Archers of the world.

 

[EJA]

So is Winona already in child labour when the Narada attacks the Kelvin?

 

[FlyingLemons]

The whole alternate timeline thing is the explanation preferred by modern scientists for time travel (well, to discuss it in full would go wildly off topic) but basically it's thought the universe avoids paradoxes by splitting off timelines. The idea is if you go and say, assassinate your grandfather in the past, it becomes its own separate reality where things can happen differently so no blowback affects the timeline you started from.

Hence Nero's shenanigans during the film make it an alternate reality, and thus the canon of the previous universe is preserved, no destruction occuring.

Exactly. And although I don't think this is going to happen for a very long time if at all, they could still set future movies and TV series in the original Roddenberry/Berman timeline.

Well, Glen Larson is in talks to create a BSG movie based on the original series rather than the superior reimagining, and they were going to do a Stargate sequel with Roland Emmerich which ignored the SG1 continuity, so they could theoretically do a series which carried on in the timeline that this movie branched off from. It might suit Paramount and CBS from a royalties sense to do this.

That said, I'm pretty much past caring...

So is Winona already in child labour when the Narada attacks the Kelvin?

With all the stuff going on around her it appears she's uninjured apart from giving birth, so I would say yes. There's not much indication she was forced into premature labour, so you could go with that interpretation.

 

[The Habs Fan]

The whole alternate timeline thing is the explanation preferred by modern scientists for time travel (well, to discuss it in full would go wildly off topic) but basically it's thought the universe avoids paradoxes by splitting off timelines. The idea is if you go and say, assassinate your grandfather in the past, it becomes its own separate reality where things can happen differently so no blowback affects the timeline you started from.

Hence Nero's shenanigans during the film make it an alternate reality, and thus the canon of the previous universe is preserved, no destruction occuring.

Exactly. And although I don't think this is going to happen for a very long time if at all, they could still set future movies and TV series in the original Roddenberry/Berman timeline.

Well, Glen Larson is in talks to create a BSG movie based on the original series rather than the superior reimagining, and they were going to do a Stargate sequel with Roland Emmerich which ignored the SG1 continuity, so they could theoretically do a series which carried on in the timeline that this movie branched off from. It might suit Paramount and CBS from a royalties sense to do this.

That said, I'm pretty much past caring...

And the funny thing is, both BSG and Stargate were rebooted or retconned, but the writers of Star Trek XI went out of their way to make this an alternative timeline where the original still exists.

 

[Wesser]

What I'd like to see is some veteran Trek writers taking advantage of all this hype and putting together a pitch for a new series that stays within the established continuity, maybe even a Captain April series (hey, I'm biased; sue me). After all, there's a five year period that's begging to be told, and if it's still going strong, and Ray Liotta is up for it, sign him up as Pike and keep rolling for a while (I don't know if it'd be workable to do a retelling of "The Cage" or just skip around it, from the fight on Rigel VII to their finally getting to the Vega colony, and maybe just deal with the fallout from Talos and Starfleet's enacting of General Order VII).

I 2nd this. Lets have some fun in the TOS era. They've skirted it for 15 years and 4 series.
Hell, pick one of the other 11 constitution class ships of that era and set it during THEIR 5 year mission. Matt Decker was presented as a great StarShip Capt. until the DD machine. Or Ron Tracy. Oh wait. The young hero who falls into revenge and darkness has bee done already too.

 

[EJA]

Doesn't The Deadly Years specifically state James Kirk to have been born in Iowa? What are we supposed to do now, mentally dub that line over with "USS Kelvin, sector wherever-the-heck-it's-supposed-to-be"?

And how the heck can there be two planets called Delta Vega?!

 

[Jono]

The whole alternate timeline thing is the explanation preferred by modern scientists for time travel (well, to discuss it in full would go wildly off topic) but basically it's thought the universe avoids paradoxes by splitting off timelines. The idea is if you go and say, assassinate your grandfather in the past, it becomes its own separate reality where things can happen differently so no blowback affects the timeline you started from.

Hence Nero's shenanigans during the film make it an alternate reality, and thus the canon of the previous universe is preserved, no destruction occuring.

Exactly. And although I don't think this is going to happen for a very long time if at all, they could still set future movies and TV series in the original Roddenberry/Berman timeline.

Given Trek's long history of time travel and dimension jumping even if you have a show set in the Abramsverse the crew can still have an adventure or two in the original timeline. Who knows saybe the MU will be replaced with the OT (Original Timeline) as the new hot spot for Starfleet crews to blunder into and have zany adventures with (slightly) different versions of themselves. Then after a few episodes we can then bitch about how lame the OT is and they should stop visiting it.

 

[Sky]

Doesn't The Deadly Years specifically state James Kirk to have been born in Iowa? What are we supposed to do now, mentally dub that line over with "USS Kelvin, sector wherever-the-heck-it's-supposed-to-be"?

Perhaps Narada's attack made Winona Kirk go into early labor and Jim was born before he would've been born in the original timeline.

And how the heck can there be two planets called Delta Vega?!

The same way there can be Paris, France and Paris, Texas?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Doesn't The Deadly Years specifically state James Kirk to have been born in Iowa? What are we supposed to do now, mentally dub that line over with "USS Kelvin, sector wherever-the-heck-it's-supposed-to-be"?

And how the heck can there be two planets called Delta Vega?!

How many "Springfields" are in the U.S? For that matter, how many "New Yorks" are in the U.K?

Whatever was said in "The Deadly Years" isn't a problem for me, because I just don't care. I can watch the episode and listen to them say that Kirk was born in Iowa (if they do, I don't remember) and then watch this movie and enjoy both and just not give a fuck that they contradict one another.

 

[Wesser]

Doesn't The Deadly Years specifically state James Kirk to have been born in Iowa? What are we supposed to do now, mentally dub that line over with "USS Kelvin, sector wherever-the-heck-it's-supposed-to-be"?

And how the heck can there be two planets called Delta Vega?!

How many "Springfields" are in the U.S? For that matter, how many "New Yorks" are in the U.K?

Whatever was said in "The Deadly Years" isn't a problem for me, because I just don't care. I can watch the episode and listen to them say that Kirk was born in Iowa (if they do, I don't remember) and then watch this movie and enjoy both and just not give a fuck that they contradict one another.

I think I just heard 32 fanboys gasp for air and crash to the floor. How dare you JUST ENJOY Star Trek!

 

[Ethros]

But why use the name Delta Vega? Just use another one. That sort of thing just strikes me as inherent laziness and ineptitude on the writers behalf (not that that sort of error is alone to this movie in the Trek universe at all, but the point stands)

And was it even meant to be in the Vulcan system? How the hell did Spock see it in the sky looking bigger than our own moon does if not?

 

[Sky]

But why use the name Delta Vega? Just use another one. That sort of thing just strikes me as inherent laziness and ineptitude on the writers behalf (not that that sort of error is alone to this movie in the Trek universe at all, but the point stands)

And was it even meant to be in the Vulcan system? How the hell did Spock see it in the sky looking bigger than our own moon does if not?

Have to agree. Now, why didn't they maroon him on T'Kuht...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

(not that that sort of error is alone to this movie in the Trek universe at all, but the point stands)

This is a very silly weasel clause - because yes, most of the fannish critiques of the film so far come down to the kinds of details that they choose to forgive when they like a Trek episode and condemn when they don't.

And that's fine, as long as everyone understands that this means the "naive aesthetic response" of liking or disliking the film comes first and the reasons are invented after the fact.

 

[SalvorHardin]

But why use the name Delta Vega? Just use another one. That sort of thing just strikes me as inherent laziness and ineptitude on the writers behalf (not that that sort of error is alone to this movie in the Trek universe at all, but the point stands)

http://trekmovie.com/2009/04/30/interview-roberto-orci-alex-kurtzman/

For the Trek fans, this film includes many little references. For example you have Kirk dropped off on the planet Delta Vega, which was seen in second Star Trek pilot. It is a cool reference, but didn’t you also fudge canon by ignoring that Delta Vega was way out next to the galactic barrier.


Orci: True. Yeah we did. We moved the planet to suit our purposes. The familiarity of the name seemed more important as an Easter egg, than a new name with no importance.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Doesn't The Deadly Years specifically state James Kirk to have been born in Iowa? What are we supposed to do now, mentally dub that line over with "USS Kelvin, sector wherever-the-heck-it's-supposed-to-be"?

And how the heck can there be two planets called Delta Vega?!

How many "Springfields" are in the U.S? For that matter, how many "New Yorks" are in the U.K?

Or Rigels in Star Trek?

 

[Ethros]

Orci: True. Yeah we did. We moved the planet to suit our purposes. The familiarity of the name seemed more important as an Easter egg, than a new name with no importance.

That just supports my own personal "not canon" view. Might as well slap in a Kazon at Starfleet Academy, or a planet called Bolarus full of Bajorans. That'd be a wink to the fans I suppose, and it would make as much sense.
Kinda like "Admiral" Archer still being alive at the time. Just an illogical reference, that yes you can say "oh well there's just more than one Delta Vega, Archer's just the oldest man ever, there's more than one planet called Bolarus, Kazon just look the same as another Alpha Quadrant species..." but you shoudln't have to. It's just a crummy lazy reference

I do have a lot of wiggles and niggles about the timeline and aspects of the film, etc
But what it came down to for me on a personal level was I just found it boring and not particular enjoyable to watch.

That's my two cents, think I'll leave it at that. Cheers