Could you post a link to that, please?
Spoilers: Is This [Spoiler]'s Original Enterprise?
- Thread starter Shilliam Watner
- Start date
Just because it's reported, doesn't mean it's an accurate report.
And Khan knew where to hit them to cripple the ship.
Their shields were down, the ship was maned by a skeleton crew and still had bugs, and it looks like it only knocked out the transporter.
Except they weren't crippled and they were fighting an invisible ship.
The last trailer scared the fans showing a half-destroyed Enterprise in orbit of Earth. Any comments ?
Scott Chambliss said: "Are you sure it was the Enterprise? This is a J.J. Abrams movie after all!"
No one know anything about the movie. I do not believe it is productive to speculate on this at present.
Scott Chambliss said: "Are you sure it was the Enterprise? This is a J.J. Abrams movie after all!"
No one know anything about the movie. I do not believe it is productive to speculate on this at present.
I think its April's Enterprise...If you look at the pics of the Kirk Enterprise falling to Earth and its all battle damaged the name Enterprise is blown off perfectly.
I guessing the scene of the Kirk Enterprise falling to Earth is the aftermath of the big reveal that Marcus and Harrison are in cohoots. Marcus or Harrison annoucing something to the effect there is only one Enterprise and its not the new flagship one. Im guessing the attack on the Enterprise is specific beyond that of the other attacks that happen on Earth, that it might be a symbol of something more than just revenge to the antagonists.
But hey that's based on what I've seen preview-wise and what ive read here. Was there an Enterprise between the NX-01 and the one we have now? There is plenty of room in the story to say there was and maybe it just disappeared along with its crew and was listed as lost, thus the need for the new one being built in Star Trek 2009.
It could go along with the original timeline a little more in that originally (per memory alpha) the Enterprise was built in
2245 and I think Kirk took command in 2265 after April and Pike. Kirk was born in 2233. This would've made him around 32, in season 2 we have "the deadly years" where he stated he is 34 so its close. The Enterprise could've been built in the year 2245 in the alternate reality too with April in command. In the AR Kirk would've been 12 stealing his uncle's vette. But something happens (movie maguffin) and the Enterprise is lost, thus causing a new Enterprise to be built in 2255 when Kirk is 23 and then of course with him in command at around 25 or 26 in the year 2258. Wait I think my math is wrong....
Anyhow that would mean that 2009's Enterprise is technically an Enterprise A. Maybe they don't do the whole a,b,c thing in the alt reality. But it would be a great plot twist in that the orig Enterprise went missing with only a few survivors only to return and be a part of the revenge terrorism that Harrison is supposed to cause.
Speculation is fun...but that is all it should be!!
I guessing the scene of the Kirk Enterprise falling to Earth is the aftermath of the big reveal that Marcus and Harrison are in cohoots. Marcus or Harrison annoucing something to the effect there is only one Enterprise and its not the new flagship one. Im guessing the attack on the Enterprise is specific beyond that of the other attacks that happen on Earth, that it might be a symbol of something more than just revenge to the antagonists.
But hey that's based on what I've seen preview-wise and what ive read here. Was there an Enterprise between the NX-01 and the one we have now? There is plenty of room in the story to say there was and maybe it just disappeared along with its crew and was listed as lost, thus the need for the new one being built in Star Trek 2009.
It could go along with the original timeline a little more in that originally (per memory alpha) the Enterprise was built in
2245 and I think Kirk took command in 2265 after April and Pike. Kirk was born in 2233. This would've made him around 32, in season 2 we have "the deadly years" where he stated he is 34 so its close. The Enterprise could've been built in the year 2245 in the alternate reality too with April in command. In the AR Kirk would've been 12 stealing his uncle's vette. But something happens (movie maguffin) and the Enterprise is lost, thus causing a new Enterprise to be built in 2255 when Kirk is 23 and then of course with him in command at around 25 or 26 in the year 2258. Wait I think my math is wrong....
Anyhow that would mean that 2009's Enterprise is technically an Enterprise A. Maybe they don't do the whole a,b,c thing in the alt reality. But it would be a great plot twist in that the orig Enterprise went missing with only a few survivors only to return and be a part of the revenge terrorism that Harrison is supposed to cause.
Speculation is fun...but that is all it should be!!
Last edited:
The asnwers to every question you asked can be found in the Countdown to Darkness comic.
And this one
Beware spoilers abound
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/03/0...+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
Beware spoilers abound
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/03/0...+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
Eh? This is just two guys on the Internet reviewing a trailer. They don't have any inside information about the new movie. It's all just their opinions.
Lol do you even know what IGN is? It's about the biggest youth oriented genre site on the web. They were invited to view and participate in the super secret screening as well as an extended one with discussion. No Trek sites were invited, not even AInt it cool. But you right just two ordinary guys and their opinions lol
IGN is a former gaming news and review site now owned by News Corp., and the vid is really nothing more two guys speculating about what they see in a movie trailer.
While they may be drawing a paycheck from IGN for the having gone through the exercise, they're doing exactly the same thing everyone else is, and I've got my doubts concerning their call on the ship crashing into the Bay. Just because they "report" something on the internet doesn't make it true; IGN Chris and IGN Jim could be just as right or just as wrong on that detail as TrekBBS you or TrekBBS me.
Last edited:
I don't have to know what IGN is. I watched the Youtube video that you quoted as your source. My conclusion? These were two guys giving their opinions about a trailer. They did not act as if they had seen the film in its entirety before any of us have, nor did they offer any spoilers other than their own opinions about what they saw in said trailer. You, however, are choosing to accept their opinions as gospel. Which is your choice, I suppose, but since the ship crashing into the bay in that trailer is not the Enterprise, I'd personally doubt the veracity of their opinions.
Last edited:
Guys, it can't be the Enterprise...
Because it's the Endeavour! I can't believe I was able to clean the image up that much.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=206152
-Ricky
Because it's the Endeavour! I can't believe I was able to clean the image up that much.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=206152
-Ricky
That'd be hilarious. 
-Ricky
-Ricky
That is the ship that is crashing into the bay. You can tell by it nacelles. It port nacelle is damage, While Enterprise starboard nacelle was damage.Guys, it can't be the Enterprise...
Because it's the Endeavour! I can't believe I was able to clean the image up that much.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=206152
-Ricky
Er...no, it's not. That's an original creation by Madman1701A. Him posting it against the backdrop of the Moon is supposed to be a joke.
Yeah, a joke on me. Cause I'm the only one that mention that it wasn't the Enterprise that Captain April commanded, but was a newly built ship.
Perhaps you shouldn't have Quoted that particular post when posting your observation...
The pic in that post was meant to be a JOKE, thereby somewhat negating and muddling your factoid.
Similar threads
