Was the Abramsverse already an alternate universe?

[Nerys Myk]

Yes, but your example, as well as Nerys' are small "continuity errors" made when the show (and therefore the Star Trek "world") was still being developed, and so are understandable.

The Abramsverse is a rather large one, with a built-in explanation of why it should be considered a paralell universe.

THAT's why I said it was being over-thought.

Relax, Cupcake. It's a joke.

Whats this large error?

First, we're both men. At least I am. So don't call me cupcake.

But, to answer your more serious question, The whole movie was a large error.

As for the built in explanation, see the TNG episode "Parrallels". Even Bob Orci copped to using this as his inspiration for writing the Abramsverse.

Relax Cupcake, its a line from the movie.

How is the movie an "error" in the manner of "James R. Kirk" or "Gold skirt Uhura"?

The Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, look it up.

 

[T'Girl]

It gets very fiddly when people use nitpicks or retcons as proof in instances like this. I hear that Enterprise is the result of time tampering in First Contact, but that undermines the entire point of the series as a prequel to the Star Trek mythos, and breaks the direct links it establishes with "The Tholian Web" (the USS Defiant in "In a Mirror, Darkly" and it's service records for Archer and Hoshi) and "The Pegasus" (as awful as "These are the Voyages" was). It's saying "these nitpicks mean it's an AU but those other ones don't"

But there is a deliberate disconnect between the episodes "The Tholian Web" and "In a Mirror, Darkly." In "Web" two of the corpses in the sickbay scene aboard the Defiant were posed face up and their insignia are clearly visible, and those insignia are the Starfleet Delta.

When "Darkly" was produced the decision was made to have the Defiant crew insignia be different than the Starfleet Delta clearly shown on screen in "Web."

It's a different Defiant. Where ever that Defiant is from, it's not from the prime universe.

And any personnel records in it's computer are also from some non-prime universe.

This isn't some minor nitpick, it's a result of a deliberate decision on the part of Star Trek: Enterprise production team.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The insignia change was a minor retcon (and attempt to fix a continuity issue), nothing to do with it being another universe. The idea that it would be ship other than the USS Defiant from "The Tholian Web" completely undermines the entire point of the crossover. If they didn't want it to be that ship, they'd have written an entirely different story.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The insignia change was a minor retcon (and attempt to fix a continuity issue), nothing to do with it being another universe. The idea that it would be ship other than the USS Defiant from "The Tholian Web" completely undermines the entire point of the crossover. If they didn't want it to be that ship, they'd have written an entirely different story.

Yep, at the time the episode was made, the thought was all ship in the 23rd Century had different insignia. So the art and costuming departments made up one for the Defiant. Its only recently that we've discovered that originally all starship personnel were supposed to wear the delta. The inclusion of different insignia for the Constellation and the Exeter were errors.

 

[BillJ]

I still don't get how a retcon/mistake somehow trumps the idea that "In a Mirror, Darkly" is a prequel/sequel to "The Tholian Web"?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I still don't get how a retcon/mistake somehow trumps the idea that "In a Mirror, Darkly" is a prequel/sequel to "The Tholian Web"?

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I still don't get how a retcon/mistake somehow trumps the idea that "In a Mirror, Darkly" is a prequel/sequel to "The Tholian Web"?

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

Said the guy with full-ridge Kang avatar.

 

[T'Girl]

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

But isn't that what some posters are doing with this "retcon" of the Defiant insignia from what it clearly was in Web, over to the brand new version of the insignia seen in Darkly?

 

[Caretaker]

Even in DS9, we do meet an 'original' Gabriel Bell, but there's no proof that he was ever the one that made history. For all we know, Sisko was always Bell. Remember, no one ever bothered looking up Bell's picture before all this happened...

The problem being that Sisko was quite familiar with Bell's history. If the real Bell was always replaced by Sisko, Sisko would probably say something about how Bell's picture looks just like him.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I still don't get how a retcon/mistake somehow trumps the idea that "In a Mirror, Darkly" is a prequel/sequel to "The Tholian Web"?

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

Said the guy with full-ridge Kang avatar.

I made that years ago. I liked how it turned out and made it into my avatar.

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

But isn't that what some posters are doing with this "retcon" of the Defiant insignia from what it clearly was in Web, over to the brand new version of the insignia seen in Darkly?

Yeah if you think either versions discredits either episode, you're in fanthink territory.

The Defiant that shows up in "In A Mirror Darkly" is the same as the one from "the Tholian Web". The insignia is irrelevant.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It's fanthink. Always looking for a way to "discredit" what they don't like.

Said the guy with full-ridge Kang avatar.

I made that years ago. I liked how it turned out and made it into my avatar.

As a guy who has spent the last couple of months trying to construct a NuTrek version of Kang for fanfiction, I cannot help but approve.

Besides the point, of course.

The Defiant that shows up in "In A Mirror Darkly" is the same as the one from "the Tholian Web"

"It isn't, but we are meant to think it is." [/Kenobi]

Considering Defiant was brought into the Mirrorverse from a parallel world anyway, it's far from certain that the universe thy plucked this one from is the same one from Kirk's reality. Especially since there doesn't seem to be a lot of improvement over the Constitution design by the time of "Mirror, Mirror."

 

[Nerys Myk]

Said the guy with full-ridge Kang avatar.

I made that years ago. I liked how it turned out and made it into my avatar.

As a guy who has spent the last couple of months trying to construct a NuTrek version of Kang for fanfiction, I cannot help but approve.

Besides the point, of course.

The Defiant that shows up in "In A Mirror Darkly" is the same as the one from "the Tholian Web"

"It isn't, but we are meant to think it is." [/Kenobi]

Considering Defiant was brought into the Mirrorverse from a parallel world anyway, it's far from certain that the universe thy plucked this one from is the same one from Kirk's reality. Especially since there doesn't seem to be a lot of improvement over the Constitution design by the time of "Mirror, Mirror."

Of course it is. Why would the writers use it otherwise?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I made that years ago. I liked how it turned out and made it into my avatar.

As a guy who has spent the last couple of months trying to construct a NuTrek version of Kang for fanfiction, I cannot help but approve.

Besides the point, of course.

The Defiant that shows up in "In A Mirror Darkly" is the same as the one from "the Tholian Web"

"It isn't, but we are meant to think it is." [/Kenobi]

Considering Defiant was brought into the Mirrorverse from a parallel world anyway, it's far from certain that the universe thy plucked this one from is the same one from Kirk's reality. Especially since there doesn't seem to be a lot of improvement over the Constitution design by the time of "Mirror, Mirror."

Of course it is. Why would the writers use it otherwise?

As an excuse to stick a TOS Enterprise into an ST-Enterprise episode without blowing the entire continuity to smithereens (as JJ did in STXI).

 

[Set Harth]

(as JJ did in STXI).

No.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

(as JJ did in STXI).

No.

Yes.

Nero shot it to pieces when he came through the black hole. Parallel universe, right?

The Enterprise writers could have gone full potato and put the Defiant in the MAIN timeline to be discovered by Jonathan Archer and crew, but then they'd have written themselves into a corner as far as having to dispose of the Defiant at the end of the episode in such a way that it doesn't alter the future.

They COULD have just said "Fuck it, let's just have them keep it after all. 23rd century will be more interesting." Or they could have said "Parallel universe, baby!" They choose the second option, which Orci and Cruzman sort of did as well.

 

[Set Harth]

Parallel universe, right?

And a parallel universe "blows the entire continuity to smithereens" according to which group of people?

(A very, very small one.)

 

[Nerys Myk]

As a guy who has spent the last couple of months trying to construct a NuTrek version of Kang for fanfiction, I cannot help but approve.

Besides the point, of course.

"It isn't, but we are meant to think it is." [/Kenobi]

Considering Defiant was brought into the Mirrorverse from a parallel world anyway, it's far from certain that the universe thy plucked this one from is the same one from Kirk's reality. Especially since there doesn't seem to be a lot of improvement over the Constitution design by the time of "Mirror, Mirror."

Of course it is. Why would the writers use it otherwise?

As an excuse to stick a TOS Enterprise into an ST-Enterprise episode without blowing the entire continuity to smithereens (as JJ did in STXI).

Nah, I'm pretty sure they just wanted to used the Mirror Universe in a story and then thought of the Defiant as a way to get some TOS style in the episode.

I don't see how the Defiant would blow the entire continuity to smithereens.

Last time I checked the TOS-ENT continuity was still around.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

Last time a checked the TOS-ENT continuity was still around.

Just quoting to reinforce this.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Parallel universe, right?

And a parallel universe "blows the entire continuity to smithereens" according to which group of people?

Not the parallel universe.

The Narada did that. The RESULT was a parallel universe in which the normal continuity had been shot to pieces.

Which ST-Enterprise would have been if the Defiant had arrived in the main universe. The difference is, ENT wasn't previously established to BE in an alternate universe and Defiant's arrival there would just be a massive "Canon violation! WTF?!" moment for the fans.

I don't see how the Defiant would blow the entire continuity to smithereens.

Because Defiant arriving in the 22nd century would screw up the timeline for the entire rest of Trek lore. Unless, of course, you come up with some sort of tacky "reset button" plot device that causes Kirk not to know that the Defiant is being phased back to the 22nd century in "Tholian Web."

Hell, we still haven't figured out how to reconcile the Suliban and Romulan cloaking devices from Season 1 with the rest of TOS.

 

[Set Harth]

The Narada did that. The RESULT was a parallel universe in which the normal continuity had been shot to pieces.

Still false. ( Of course, now the phrase "entire continuity" has been replaced by the words "normal continuity" for some reason. )

A parallel universe, by definition, exists in parallel to the prime universe of the earlier releases. It doesn't blow anything to smithereens or other such nonsense. It simply fails to be a carbon copy of that universe, something it was never expected to be.