An interesting line from Wired (spoilers)

[trekkerguy]

It just looks like a lame movie with none of what made TOS awesome. I could be utterly wrong. On the other hand, the Serenity trailers sucked and so did that movie. So I'm going with my gut. Enjoy the movie. I won't see you there.

All Perspective.

The trailer seems to bring back all of what made TOS awesome.
The Serenity trailers kicked ass and we got one of the best science fiction
movies to date with great human characters, lots of action, and a very
deep moral driven story.

In the end it's all the perspective of the person viewing. What you think
is far from the truth in my case, and probably close to or the same as
certain others.

... won't miss you.

I don't believe you.

I dunno what to say about this...

 

[Lapis Exilis]

If a timeline no longer exists, how can it be relevant?

Relevant to what?

Relevant to whether or not these things really happened (in a fictional context).

That is a complete nonsequitor. Things cannot "really happen" in a fictional context. A fictional context is, you know, fictional.

This is fiction. The stories can still be enjoyed and Trek "canon" has always been an inconsistent hodge-podge anyway.

I see. So how can you watch existing Trek, knowing that it will all be wiped out?

By pushing play on my DVD player?

I have never expected nor tried to make the episodic storytelling of Star Trek fit into a single storyline in the way a novel does. It's not a novel, so that would be silly. It would also be impossible since Trek regularly contradicts itself. Why should more contradiction on top of what already exists bother me in the slightest? I have no difficulty reading a Robin Hood story in which Robin is a peasant outlaw in Barnsdale Wood, a dispossesed nobleman stealing from the rich to give to the poor in Sherwood Forest, or an inner city kid fighting a corrupt law enforcement officer in the Sherwood Forest neighborhood of New York City. Each version can have entirely different events in their lives, each can have entirely different personalities. They're all still Robin Hood. I can read the legend of King Arthur in which he is a boy who is schooled by Merlin by being turned into different animals who grows up to fight the evil witch Morgana le Fey, or one in which he is a noble Christian knight fighting his evil sister Morgause, or one in which he rules a Britain caught between paganism and Christianity and his sister Morgaine is one of his closest advisors.

Why should Star Trek be any different from these enduring legends?

 

[ST-One]

The Mirror Universe is not an alternate timeline. It is a distinct, separate physical location from the mainstream Trek universe. We know this because (among other reasons) characters are able to travel back and forth between the two...

Of course the Mirror Universe (alternative universe) is just an alternative timeline.

As a theory goes (and I don't know if it has much scientific value) alternative universes/timelines are created all the time, at each and every moment. By that theory I have already created one just because I decided to respond to your post.

 

[Logical Leopard]

The Mirror Universe is not an alternate timeline. It is a distinct, separate physical location from the mainstream Trek universe. We know this because (among other reasons) characters are able to travel back and forth between the two...

Of course the Mirror Universe (alternative universe) is just an alternative timeline.

As a theory goes (and I don't know if it has much scientific value) alternative universes/timelines are created all the time, at each and every moment. By that theory I have already created one just because I decided to respond to your post.

That's what I was thinking. Because, the only thing that appears to make the Mirror "Universe" different is that different things happened in the time line. Yes, somehow people are able to travel back and forth between the two, but if you can travel "back" in time, it can't be much harder to travel "across" time sideways, can it?

Also, is the "vibrational" thing a real theory? I thought that was just DC comics...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Also, is the "vibrational" thing a real theory? I thought that was just DC comics...

No, Data also mentions it in "Parallels".

 

[ST-One]

The Mirror Universe is not an alternate timeline. It is a distinct, separate physical location from the mainstream Trek universe. We know this because (among other reasons) characters are able to travel back and forth between the two...

Of course the Mirror Universe (alternative universe) is just an alternative timeline.

As a theory goes (and I don't know if it has much scientific value) alternative universes/timelines are created all the time, at each and every moment. By that theory I have already created one just because I decided to respond to your post.

That's what I was thinking. Because, the only thing that appears to make the Mirror "Universe" different is that different things happened in the time line. Yes, somehow people are able to travel back and forth between the two, but if you can travel "back" in time, it can't be much harder to travel "across" time sideways, can it?

Also, is the "vibrational" thing a real theory? I thought that was just DC comics...

Also, is the "vibrational" thing a real theory? I thought that was just DC comics...

I don't read that many comics

No, Data also mentions it in "Parallels".

I had forgotten about that. Haven't seen any TNG in quite a while.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

Also, is the "vibrational" thing a real theory? I thought that was just DC comics...

I don't know what "vibrational" thing you're referencing, but the current attempts to explain the basic physical reality of our universe include quantum mechanics, which results in numerous paradoxes such as basic bits that are both particles and waves, thus spawning theories such as multiple universes in which there's are an infinite number of universes in which every possible thing that could happen does happen and were different things happen at the same point in time, universe diverge.

There is also string theory, which states that quantum particles are actually part of superstrings which vibrate and the universe either has 10 or 26 dimensions, though only four are perceptible to us. String theory also allows for multiple universes (or at least multiple ways to experience the one 'verse).

Physicists are busily arguing these theories and none is accepted as an overall theoretical framework. That is - we don't know if either is in any way true. But the math works.

 

[Logical Leopard]

An alternate timeline is just that: a timeline. A version of history.

An alternate *universe*, on the other hand, is a physical location. What distinguishes one universe from the other, is the 'frequency' at which all of its matter 'vibrates'. Different universes have different frequencies, so to speak. So technically they all occupy the same space, but never actually touch each other.

...

That's the "vibrational" thing I was referencing. Babaganoosh cleared it up though and stated that the theory has been mentioned in Trek by Data in the episode Parallels.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

From Wired:

And, while connected to Gene Roddenberry's creation, this film is deliberately and unquestionably built in its own universe, constructing its story on the idea that the original Star Trek time line has been destroyed and must be reconstructed as closely as possible.

** emphasis mine **

So I'm thinking, Nimoy's Spock has discovered Nero's plot to change the timeline, kill Kirk and/or destroy Vulcan. In the process the timeline that we know has been completely obliterated. No more TOS. Nimoy's Spock, trapped in the past, must now work to reconstruct the mess made by Nero the best way he can, perhaps changing the course of many lives along the way to have "most" of history fall back in line.

By the end of this movie, it seems, are we going to be left with a Star Trek universe more like the end of "Back to the Future"? The main parts are the same, but the details have been changed?

And now consider this: The only reason this new alternate timeline/universe exists is because the original had to exist in the first place (just like BttF). The original is not disavowed. It happened. It had to in order for Nero from the original universe to go back in time, destroy it, and for Nimoy's Spock from the original universe to create the new timeline.

In other words, it's all good. The old stuff all happened. And the new Trek will move forward unfettered.

Well, then... look at it this way, then... "the original universe," by this argument... ends the moment that Spock and Nero travel back in time.

Essentially, everything we know in that universe is destroyed in this movie. In the minds of "Old Spock" and "Nero and the boys" there is memory of that universe, up to that point... but otherwise, it's gone and never existed. There is no continuation of the Trek universe we know from that point on... it's simply gone, forever.

You can say "well, it happened" but that means that timeline was "destroyed."

 

[gh4chiefs]

Well the reason people are already trashing this movie, has nothing to do whether its a good movie or not, since no one has seen it. Its from Trekkies who are bitching about the slightest variation from TEH CANON!11!!

I think that's an overgeneralization to the objections. To some of us at least think this:

And, while connected to Gene Roddenberry's creation, this film is deliberately and unquestionably built in its own universe, constructing its story on the idea that the original Star Trek time line has been destroyed and must be reconstructed as closely as possible.

just doesn't sound like a very good idea. I've shown this and the trailer to a few TOS fans that I work with that are not plugged into this bulletin board and aren't hanging on every bit of news about the movie, and their reaction is universal. They just don't like it.

I'm not saying it's going to be a bad movie, I'm not say some people aren't bitching about canon, because obviously they are. But there are some of us that are reacting to the story itself.

 

[Grup]

This is why I believe/hope Shatner will appear in STXI. Abrams has a great track record of keeping details secret. The most recent are any LOST clues and the monster from Cloverfield. I truly believe he could pull off a cameo of a now living KIrk because of the altered timeline. Whether Kirk would be a robust Starfleet member or an aged and failing health version of himself, who knows. The latter would force Spock to correct the timeline so that his friend doesn't die a painful, lonely death.

IMO

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And, while connected to Gene Roddenberry's creation, this film is deliberately and unquestionably built in its own universe, constructing its story on the idea that the original Star Trek time line has been destroyed and must be reconstructed as closely as possible.

just doesn't sound like a very good idea.

Well, assuming Nero isn't part of a predestination paradox (i.e. he was always supposed to travel back in time), then they really have no other choice. I suspect that the new, Spock-fixed timeline will be very much like the old. Different look, maybe. But we will then be able to watch TOS, TNG, etc. with the knowledge that those things happened in the new timeline as well.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Yes they mess with the canon, but this would actually be a good idea, although I'm not sure exactly how Spock would find out how Nero is messing up with the past, although it does put an explanation to the Kelvin being destroyed, perhaps Nero wanted to kill Kirk as a child, or his parents.

Perhaps it's a litle like First Contact, something protects Spock from the temporal shift, and he goes back to put things right.

 

[Woulfe]

Time lines.....

If we counted every time Trek did Time Travel where the time line was altered....

This new Film would be Time Line J....

Think about it.

- W -
* Do up a computer flow chart of all of Trek's time lines you'll see what I mean *

 

[Guartho]

The reason so many not-very-good movies get made is because audiences just don't care. It's a shame really.

---------------

In another thread you said you liked Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls. I'm afraid your right to comment on whether a movie is good or not has been revoked by the taste-police. You have the right to remain silence. If you give up that right your home will be invaded by CG gophers the likes of which even a lead-lined refrigerator cannot protect you from.