• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What's with all the Union Jacks in the trailer?

Well of course flying the Union Flag upside down is a distress signal. As for why it is being flown. Perhaps because that sequence is set in the UK, and the Union Flag is just a visual indicator that we are in the UK. Just as if it was set in the US the American Flag would be flying.
 
My thoughts as well, it has something to do with the dissolution or dismantling of the Monarchy in the time between now and then.

Well if Oxford can survive into the 24th century and Data is a professor at the University surely the Monarchy can survive well into the 22nd century. ;)

Different Continuity. *URL* Awww yeah, bulletproof :cool: ...

We know the Monarchy survives until at least ENT's time, as Malcolm Reed's father (and grandfather) are said to be Royal Navy veterans.

:cardie: CRAP! Now I have "they should have done a clean reboot" butthurt. :lol:

Well of course flying the Union Flag upside down is a distress signal.

That is true. Or THIS still occurs.

EDIT: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/98-of-union-jacks-are-upside-down-2012112951186
 
Last edited:
The redcoats are coming the redcoats are coming !!!

Sorry lot of English stuff in this film so glad ??? Hopefully a chilling British villain !!!

JOHN HARRISON I'm good at everything !!!!
 
Well of course flying the Union Flag upside down is a distress signal. As for why it is being flown. Perhaps because that sequence is set in the UK, and the Union Flag is just a visual indicator that we are in the UK. Just as if it was set in the US the American Flag would be flying.

Exactly how is the Union Flag supposed to be upside down? An American flag, upside down, would have the field of stars at the bottom of the flag. The Canadian flag would have an upside down maple leaf. The Union flag is symmetrical, is it not? Putting it upside down gives you the same image, non? (or maybe I need a new pair of glasses)
 
Yes, and expect the Last Holdout Nation State in the 23rd Century to be reigned, but not ruled, by a sometimes dotty family of imported German Monarchs.

You've heard of the Space Hippies? You haven't lived until you've seen the 23rd Century Version of the Space Windsors...

Oh, of course, the only question left for England is this: have they made it past Andorra or a visiting Rigelian Friendly Team in World Cup Qualifying?

You know, from 2258 to 1966 is a really, really long time!

I see no reason why the Union Jack can't fly next to the Flag of the United Federation of Planets. I'm sure the United Kingdom still exists as a polity within the United Earth polity, which itself still exists within the Federation.

Though I, too, would have preferred to see the Flag of United Earth fly alongside the Union Jack and Federation Flag.

Also, I'm more bothered by the fact that the Union Jack seems to be upside down.

Typical American mistake by a bunch of Yanks from Los Angeles who think that just because they know some lines from the "Spanish Inquisition" sketch and the "Dead Parrot" sketch, they get to fly the Union Flag upside down.

Two words: "Jesus wept."
Instead of making three separate posts, two minutes apart, you can use the edit button ( ) to amend/add to an existing post. Posting more than twice in a row may be deemed spamming, so I'll just fix these for you.
 
^ Canonically speaking, the most number of states we've heard about in Trek's version of the USA is 52. I'm sure there could have been more added later, though.
 
The real question is has the British Monarchy survived into the 22nd Century and is the Windsor family line still on the throne?
I don't think that is the real question.

The Union flag is symmetrical, is it not?
Nope.

I'm trying to move it around in my mind, but the flag isn't just upside down, either, is it? The stripes are just off. I don't know.

This has already ruined the movie for me. How many more mistakes like this have been made, Mr. Abrams? Attention to detail my ass. :vulcan:

I think the British government should ask Paramount for a formal apology over this, as well as a promise that the mistake will be corrected whatever the cost. If they don't, then Parliament should ban the movie in the UK. I smell diplomatic incident!
 
The Union flag is symmetrical, is it not? Putting it upside down gives you the same image, non? (or maybe I need a new pair of glasses)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_jack#Flying

Thanks for the link. I stand corrected.

The real question is has the British Monarchy survived into the 22nd Century and is the Windsor family line still on the throne?
I don't think that is the real question.

The Union flag is symmetrical, is it not?
Nope.

Again, thanks.

The Union flag is symmetrical, is it not? Putting it upside down gives you the same image, non? (or maybe I need a new pair of glasses)

Bloody Colonials...

:)

Guilty as charged. :lol:

At the risk of further offending the UK contingent, in my defence, the asymmetry is considerably more subtle than the US and Canadian flags I am used to seeing. Rest assured, though, I won't make this mistake again.
 
True the difference is subtle, though I can see this appearing in tvtropes as did not to the research.
 
in my defence,

Anyone who missed the subtly if you spelling 'defence' the way the British do and not us yanks, missed the best part IMO.

BTW,

it's defense not defence

it's color not colour

and

it's check not cheque

Abrams better fucking get those right or it will ruin the movie for me. ;)
 
Is the flag upside-down, or is it backwards? ... if it's blowing the opposite direction we might be seeing the back. Or perhaps the entire scene is backwards, flipped over, which happens a lot in movie trailers when editing small clips together. Could be all of the above. They even run scenes in reverse for trailers sometimes.

EDIT: Looking at a screen shot, I'm probably wrong.
 
Last edited:
I think the British government should ask Paramount for a formal apology over this, as well as a promise that the mistake will be corrected whatever the cost. If they don't, then Parliament should ban the movie in the UK. I smell diplomatic incident!

By the 22nd century the Monarchy was dissolved and Parliment redesigned the flag in a different albiet similar pattern.

Since Star Trek is fiction ... lets rewrite British future history to fit Star Trek on screen.
 
Well, while it's far from an international incident, I would say it is a bit lazy... if you want to depict England on screen but you can't sort out certain details, that's lazy film making.
 
Last edited:
I think the British government should ask Paramount for a formal apology over this, as well as a promise that the mistake will be corrected whatever the cost. If they don't, then Parliament should ban the movie in the UK. I smell diplomatic incident!

By the 22nd century the Monarchy was dissolved and Parliment redesigned the flag in a different albiet similar pattern.

Since Star Trek is fiction ... lets rewrite British future history to fit Star Trek on screen.

We'll call it the "Abrams flag" or "Abrams jack."

Then let's have the British eat "french fries" in the 22nd century, too. And while we're at it, let's end all that biscuit confusion and have them say, "cookies." ;)
 
Well, while it's far from an international incident, I would say it is a bit lazy... if you want to depict England on screen but you can't sort out certain details, that's lazy film making. Would Spielberg screw that up?

Apparently Mr. Spielberg made a whole bunch of real historical mistakes it his latest masterpiece Lincoln

I ain't worried about an upside down flag in a movie about future fiction. :)

a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian of the period, claims in a letter to the New York Times that the movie “grossly exaggerates” its main points about the choices at stake in the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (November 26, 2012).[60] Kate Masur (Northwestern University) accuses the film of oversimplifying the role of blacks in abolition and dismisses the effort as “an opportunity squandered” in an op-ed for the New York Times (November 12, 2012).[61] Harold Holzer, co-chair of the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation and author of more than 40 books, served as a consultant to the film and praises it but also observes that there is “no shortage of small historical bloopers in the movie”
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top