Same canon?

[Captrek]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

If they’re the same canon, there are some contradictions that are difficult to resolve. For example:

The characters played by Zoe Saldana and Anton Yelchin bear little resemblance to the characters played by Nichelle Nichols and Walter Koenig. The differences are not something that can easily be explained by the Narada's impact on the timeline.

Delta Vega is near the galactic perimeter in TOS and near Vulcan in XI.

In TOS, starships are a rare commodity, so much so that an object could leave Klingon space headed for Earth with only one Federation starship in a position to intercept and that one starship isn’t even ready for launch. In XI, the Federation is able to gather a TNG-ish 40-vessel fleet at Vulcan in almost no time. At least five (Farragut, Walcott, Hood, Antares, and Enterprise) are on Earth and ready to go. Similarly, the Klingons are able to muster a 47-ship fleet to confront the Narada.

Pike appears to be much older in XI than in TOS, despite XI being set nine years before The Cage.

The Kelvin has escape pods with which the entire crew is able to evacuate the ship. Federation ships in TOS apparently have no such capacity.

In TOS, Chekov is 22 years old at the time of Who Mourns for Adonis. In XI, he is 17. But XI is set nine years before WMFA. (Maybe it’s possible that the Narada's intervention caused him to be born several years earlier than in the original timeline, but that seems like a stretch.)

In XI, Scotty has a tribble at his post on Delta Vega. In TOS, removing a tribble from its predator-filled natural environment is a disaster.

Can all these differences be treksplained by the Narada’s intervention, or are they not required to be?

 

[F. King Daniel]

The two Saaviks were different, yet we suspend our disbelief and say they're the same person. Same for the characters in STXI, and the billions of continuity goofs in Trek. All the Star Treks have a good illusion of continuity, but an illusion is all it is. Look too closely and it crumbles on James R. Kirk's tombstone.

Officially the Prime and Alternate timelines diverge in 2233.

The fleet to Vulcan was 8 ships. TOS never put a number to the Klingon fleet.

The Delta Vega in the Vulcan system is different to the one at the rim of the galaxy. Just think of how many towns and cities around the world there are that share the same same. Even a few stars do. Why not planets?

Tribbles were in Enterprise, and they're only dangerous when fed. Poor Scotty and Keenser were living on food cubes for months.

The Kelvin crew escaped in shuttles, not escape pods. The Kelvin was bigger than the TOS Enterprise, but think of it like the Voyager being smaller than the Enterprise-D, but just as capable.

Okay?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Canon is not the same as continuity and consistancy.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Canon is not the same as continuity and consistancy.

Indeed. Star Trek has a rich and interesting canon, but not much in the way of continuity OR consistency.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

The Movie presents an Alternate Reality, branching off of the existing continuity, started in 2233 by the Narada's arrival and confrontation with the USS Kelvin, and the subsequent sacrifice of George Kirk Sr., and James T. Kirk's premature birth during the escape.

If they’re the same canon, there are some contradictions that are difficult to resolve. For example:

The characters played by Zoe Saldana and Anton Yelchin bear little resemblance to the characters played by Nichelle Nichols and Walter Koenig. The differences are not something that can easily be explained by the Narada's impact on the timeline.

The differences are mainly due to the choice of acting talent, but they are intended as the same characters.

Their experiences at the Academy, and during the Enterprise's maiden voyage, are different as a consequence of 2233.04, but the precise explanations for all differences are never explained.

Delta Vega is near the galactic perimeter in TOS and near Vulcan in XI.

This is a Different planet in the Vulcan system with the same name.

In TOS, starships are a rare commodity, so much so that an object could leave Klingon space headed for Earth with only one Federation starship in a position to intercept and that one starship isn’t even ready for launch. In XI, the Federation is able to gather a TNG-ish 40-vessel fleet at Vulcan in almost no time. At least five (Farragut, Walcott, Hood, Antares, and Enterprise) are on Earth and ready to go. Similarly, the Klingons are able to muster a 47-ship fleet to confront the Narada.

There are not that many ships launched to come to Vulcan's aid, and most of Starfleet are engaged in an operation in the Laurentian System. No details of that operation is given.

Pike appears to be much older in XI than in TOS, despite XI being set nine years before The Cage.

The sequences with Captain Pike are set in 2255 and 2258, whereas TOS generally occurs in 2266.

The Cage occurs 17 years prior to the 2266 timeframe, placing it in 2249.

The Kelvin has escape pods with which the entire crew is able to evacuate the ship. Federation ships in TOS apparently have no such capacity.

TOS never established the number of escape pods on the TOS Enterprise, the Kelvin is from 2233 (a period never seen in Star Trek), and the crew were evacuated via shuttlecraft rather than escape pods.

In TOS, Chekov is 22 years old at the time of Who Mourns for Adonis. In XI, he is 17. But XI is set nine years before WMFA. (Maybe it’s possible that the Narada's intervention caused him to be born several years earlier than in the original timeline, but that seems like a stretch.)

Chekov's age was different in the movie, and is a Canon Breach. However, it is clear he was born AFTER 2233, so the alternate reality allows for him to be of a different age.

In XI, Scotty has a tribble at his post on Delta Vega. In TOS, removing a tribble from its predator-filled natural environment is a disaster.

It was the over-feeding of the Tribbles without natural predators to keep the numbers down that was the disaster.

It may be that Scotty inherited it as a pet, and that something may have been done to spay/neuter it. Or Scotty did not over feed it.

Can all these differences be treksplained by the Narada’s intervention, or are they not required to be?

90% of these differences can easily be Trexplained

 

[-Brett-]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

In theory; altered timeline.

In reality; totally separate franchise.

They basically just didn't want to turn fans off by admitting that it was a reboot.

 

[F. King Daniel]

^Hey until they do something huge that really makes no sense with regards to TOS and can't be explained away at all, I'm happy to play along.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

In theory; altered timeline.

In reality; totally separate franchise.

They basically just didn't want to turn fans off by admitting that it was a reboot.

They had the following issues:

- Remaining within Canon (aka Continuity) was important to the existing fanbase.
- The Movie had to do a lot differently to work for non-Trek Audiances.

The Alternate Reality was, in a similar way to the refit of the Enterprise in Star Trek TMP, a way to make massive, sweeping creative changes they deemed necessary without breaking established continuity.

 

[Captrek]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

In theory; altered timeline.

In reality; totally separate franchise.

That strikes me as a sensible answer.

The first time I saw the movie, I didn’t like it. I think that’s because I came into it thinking of it as a sequel and I was put off by (as perceived by me) its lack of fidelity to existing canon.

When I rewatched it with a mindset of “It’s a re-imagining with a guest appearance by a character from the original series, like the 1978 Cylons who showed up in the 2004 BSG,” it fared much better.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

^Hey until they do something huge that really makes no sense with regards to TOS and can't be explained away at all, I'm happy to play along.

As am I, especially considering the results (IMHO, of course).

 

[Therin of Andor]

Poor Scotty and Keenser were living on food cubes for months.

And a bean.

The Alternate Reality was, in a similar way to the refit of the Enterprise in Star Trek TMP, a way to make massive, sweeping creative changes they deemed necessary without breaking established continuity.

In fact, I have several fanzines and newsletters from 1980 where the diehard fans were declaring TMP an "alternate" reality, due to the new ship design, the new Klingons, the Starfleet uniforms, and even Kirk, McCoy and Spock's choices made after TOS. Many just couldn't accept that Kirk would accept the Admiralty, that McCoy would go off on his own, or that Spock would ever attempt to purge his human emotions.

 

[Captrek]

In fact, I have several fanzines and newsletters from 1980 where the diehard fans were declaring TMP an "alternate" reality

Not just the diehards. I think Harve Bennett, Nicholas Meyer, and all the other creative talent behind TWOK pretty much disregarded TMP as if it had never happened.

 

[F. King Daniel]

In one of my old Best of Trek books (I recently aquired most of them), I read a TWoK-hater's argument that Wrath of Khan was set in an alternate universe to TOS and TMP. He cited everything from characterizations, to militaristic uniforms, the weapons, the low-tech Enterprise and dark lighting and declared that the darker TWoK universe must be recovering from some untold disaster within the prior five years, and that the movie totally ran against TOS's message of a bright future.

Articles in prior books mention many fans pretending TMP didn't happen, and that many fans were upset with "needless" changes to the uniforms, Enterprise, Klingons ("who are these munchkins?" one furious Klingon fan wrote) and even complaints about the new transporter effects!

Yet 30 years later we fans consider all the TOS films part of the same universe and canon.

Now fans get upset that they modernized the TOS look for the Kelvin, or that transporters now swirl instead of twinkle

Give it time.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

^ Most of us don't really need time. I'm a proud member of an exceptionally large family of trekkies, people who have twice rescheduled family reunions to accommodate (or to facilitate attendance of) Star Trek conventions, people for whom Spock is bigger than Jesus. From them and our assorted friends I have heard not a single complaint about the actual movie. The only complaint I am familiar with was one my grandmother lodged a few months ago saying that the destruction of Vulcan now eliminates the REAL timeline, but after we pointed out that it was an ALTERNATE timeline and the other timeline should still exist, she resorted to "Oh... whew!"

I think the film's critical and box office reception speaks for itself: MOST fans ate it up. There's always going to be a few bitter malcontents who hate anything new simply because it's new, but they're the overwhelming minority (which is why Star Trek's popularity wanes as new productions try harder to stick to old formulas).

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

In theory; altered timeline.

In reality; totally separate franchise.

They basically just didn't want to turn fans off by admitting that it was a reboot.

In theory: alternate reality (not altered timelime.) It's like the Mirror Universe, not like COTEOF.

But you're right that it's effectively a new franchise. Now if only they would remember that TV is a key part of the franchise...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Is XI considered to be an alternate timeline within the original canon, or is it a separate canon?

In theory; altered timeline.

In reality; totally separate franchise.

They basically just didn't want to turn fans off by admitting that it was a reboot.

In theory: alternate reality (not altered timelime.) It's like the Mirror Universe, not like COTEOF.

But you're right that it's effectively a new franchise. Now if only they would remember that TV is a key part of the franchise...

It may not be anymore. Feature films do not appear to be part of the Stargate franchise at this point.

 

[Ensign_Redshirt]

If they’re the same canon, there are some contradictions that are difficult to resolve.

Basically what others said before: There's no rule that forbids Canon to contradict itself. And in fact, it often does. ST09 is Canon because TPTB say so.

 

[Captrek]

If they’re the same canon, there are some contradictions that are difficult to resolve.

Basically what others said before: There's no rule that forbids Canon to contradict itself. And in fact, it often does. ST09 is Canon because TPTB say so.

It’s a retcon?

 

[JarodRussell]

If they have Khan in the next movie and move the Eugenic Wars from 1996 to 2096, it will effectively remove Montalban Khan and TOS: Space Seed from the official Star Trek continuity, won't it? Or even remove it from canon?

 

[DonIago]

One could argue that that would only establish that the point of this alternate reality's divergence from the "prime" reality is actually prior to the Narada's incursion.