Into Darkness ties to Star Trek XIII?
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
But all those places are called Berlin, New Hampshire; Manchester, New Hampshire; Dublin, New Hampshire, etc.... The analogy of different planets having the same name falls apart if you consider the ENTIRE name of the planet. Generally, the nomenclature is "Star Name"+"Planet Number" (Ceti Alpha V, Sol III, etc...). Presumably "Delta Vega" should really have been "Vega Delta" (fourth planet of Vega), which pretty much restricts how many planets can have that name. Unless you want to argue that "Delta Vega" was a famous figure in Federation history, and it really doesn't refer to any particular star system.
Of course, whoever wrote WNMHGB probably had no forethought about what they were writing, anyway ("James R Kirk"), so that's excusable. And I agree the name was simply co-opted for reference-sake in ST09. But really, they should just have picked a better name -- perhaps one of the moons of Vulcan, considering it was in visible range of the planet (but Vulcan had no moon -- until TMP showed it to have several -- so...). Calling it Delta Vega really makes as much sense as calling it Mars.
Of course, whoever wrote WNMHGB probably had no forethought about what they were writing, anyway ("James R Kirk"), so that's excusable. And I agree the name was simply co-opted for reference-sake in ST09. But really, they should just have picked a better name -- perhaps one of the moons of Vulcan, considering it was in visible range of the planet (but Vulcan had no moon -- until TMP showed it to have several -- so...). Calling it Delta Vega really makes as much sense as calling it Mars.
What's the matter? Couldn't make it to Milan? Jeez.
"James R. Kirk" is not an example of bad forethought in WNMHGB, since that was the first episode written with that character. Nor is Delta Vega an example of bad forethought. By the way, the author was Samuel A. Peeples.
The "James R Kirk" issue is really irrelevant, and that can be excused as a "growing pain". I also didn't say it was "bad forethought," I said the writer didn't know what he was doing insofar as TOS "history" is concerned (irrespective of *who* the author is).
The "Delta Vega" point is different than Kirk's name, however. It establishes a location for the action -- which is near "where no man has gone before." To later suggest DV is right next door to Vulcan is bad planning. I could have believed it was some largely uninhabited planet near Vulcan (name withheld), or a moon of Vulcan, but the chosen route was just bad writing.
Lastly, why isn't Scotty the least bit concerned that Vulcan was destroyed, if "Delta Vega" is within earshot of the planet?
Because Earth is the center of the universe and the only thing that matters.
If you take a look at the front of the nacelles, they look like Transwarp nacelles.
I am going to go on a limb and say this is JJ's Excelsior.
Knowing JJ's version of Kirk being played recklessly by Pine, I can hear Pike saying:
You splashed down not one, but two new starships, Kirk?
Frankly, I think we see Khan in the next film, with a reveal at the end--something to hook the audience as was done with Empire strikes back or Nick Fury at the end of the Marvel movies leading up to Avengers.
That seems to be the direction things are heading in by the feel of things
I am going to go on a limb and say this is JJ's Excelsior.
Knowing JJ's version of Kirk being played recklessly by Pine, I can hear Pike saying:
You splashed down not one, but two new starships, Kirk?
Frankly, I think we see Khan in the next film, with a reveal at the end--something to hook the audience as was done with Empire strikes back or Nick Fury at the end of the Marvel movies leading up to Avengers.
That seems to be the direction things are heading in by the feel of things
what exactly is a transwarp nacelle?
No, there's nothing special about the nacelles on Excelsior except in fanon. Abrams's artists wouldn't bother to incorporate that kind of thing into a design.
Nonsense. The Excelsior was designed as an experimental transwarp vessel. So by inference, the nacelles -- unlike anything we'd seen before -- must have been for transwarp purposes.
What *is* fanon is the association of the failure of transwarp technology with Scotty's sabotage. There's no reason the technology shouldn't have succeeded, based on what was seen in STIII.
"So by inference" = fanon. Nothing more.
Bullpucky. The ship was introduced as having "transwarp drive." Anyone with two bits to rub together would figure the engines were transwarp.
Nope. Nothing suggests that they look the way they do for any reason other than that ILM designed the ship, and there's no reason in the world to think that the designers for Into Darkness would reference the Excelsior in that way.
So you're admitting that you got nothing. Fanon means nothing.
It ain't Excelsior.
It ain't Excelsior.
Knock it off, WarpFactorZ. If you have a point to make, you ought to be able to do it without getting personal.
Sorry, but Legion contributes little to most of these threads, other than passive-aggressive negativity against posters. If you're going to admonish me, you should do it to him too. Just because he doesn't outright say something, doesn't mean it isn't implied. Be fair.
Similar threads
