I don't think so, because that is not said in the film, and it is not the film's stance.
According to Orci:
Orci said:
Depressed about Vulcan
- Thread starter TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME
- Start date
I don't think so, because that is not said in the film, and it is not the film's stance.
According to Orci:
But in the case of this film the debate is fueled by the ambiguity of the nature of time travel in the movie. The arguments surround both sides using dialog from the movie to justify their views.
I think both sides make valid points for their arguments which is why I feel the movie is ambiguous (even though I do like it a lot).
Fans shouldn't have to go outside of the film and have the writers explain what their intent was. The writers could have been more clear within the film itself, in my opinion, that an alternate universe was created.
Since they went out of their way to have characters say exactly that, they were as clear as they could possibly be without stopping the action in the middle of the film and walking out on screen themselves to explain it again in person.
What dialogue in the film specifically supports or justifies single timeline theory?
They said alternate reality which is not synonymous with an alternate universe.
For one thing they keep referring to Nero as being from the future. Well, he's not from their future, he's from the future of another universe.
Nu-Kirk accuses Spock Prime of coming back and changing the past. But if this is an alternate universe then Spock hasn't changed the past of his universe. "You coming back in time and changing history? That's cheating." That line makes better sense in a linear timeline.
Young Spock states that whatever futures they might have had has changed...makes more sense if the timeline is linear. Because it does prove that the timeline has changed but it doesn't conclude or prove that an alternate universe has been created.
The death of Amanda the destruction of Vulcan have more of an emotional impact if they are the originals meeting their end. But if Vulcan still survives in another universe and Amanda didn't die that way then it lessens the sting.
99.999% of all other time travel depictions in the Trek franchise have been linear. We're now supposed to believe that all time travel creates a parallel universe?
If that is the case then how could they bring the whales back to the future if their actions created another universe? How could Kirk undo what bones had done in the past in City on the Edge of Forever? I could go on.
Yes it is.
Which was the same as the future of their universe before he came back. It wouldn't be their future any longer even if single timeline theory were in effect, because of the changes, so this dialogue doesn't actually favor either theory. In the situation intended by the writers, for reasons of efficient dialogue the characters would still tend to say "the future" instead of needlessly complicating it into "what was originally the future before his time travel changed it".
These lines make just as much sense under multiverse theory, a result which is unsurprising given that multiverse theory was the stated intent of the writers.
An emotional impact for whom? I don't think nuSpock is in any meaningful way comforted by the idea that Amanda may be alive in another universe. But the point is that subjective appeal to "emotional impact" does nothing to suggest the existence of a single timeline. I'm looking for evidence of single timeline theory in the film, not assurances that it would make things better if it were actually in effect.
I believe Orci addressed that situation by showing how it could fit into multiverse theory. But the question was about the evidence in STXI, not earlier episodes/films.
Memory Alpha goes with the idea of a lineal timeline that has been disrupted:
This is just all bullshit though. I'll go with the lineal time line incursion idea -- Spock and Nero jacked up their future and their past no longer exists. Yay for head!canon.
But then we get this:
This is just all bullshit though. I'll go with the lineal time line incursion idea -- Spock and Nero jacked up their future and their past no longer exists. Yay for head!canon.
That in no way indicates a single timeline. It merely points out that Spock was born before the timelines diverged. Thus, Memory Alpha is consistent on the timeline issue.
So... its like the theory that every action you make starts a new universe.
I type this post, but my counter part doesn't. A new universe. My counter part decides to take off from work, her counterpart doesn't. A new universe. Etc etc etc.
... Star Trek, need not be so complicated. Please. I really will just subjugate myself to the head!canon. I can enjoy the movies and this new Trek a lot more. As long as the movies don't make a big deal out of it on screen, all the ancillary information will only be fandom fodder.
I type this post, but my counter part doesn't. A new universe. My counter part decides to take off from work, her counterpart doesn't. A new universe. Etc etc etc.
... Star Trek, need not be so complicated. Please. I really will just subjugate myself to the head!canon. I can enjoy the movies and this new Trek a lot more. As long as the movies don't make a big deal out of it on screen, all the ancillary information will only be fandom fodder.
That's because it's not there. Here's what the movie says:
SPOCK:
...Nero's very presence has altered history, beginning with the attack on the USS Kelvin, culminating in the events of today, thereby creating an entire new chain of incidents that cannot be anticipated by either party.
...Nero's very presence has altered history, beginning with the attack on the USS Kelvin, culminating in the events of today, thereby creating an entire new chain of incidents that cannot be anticipated by either party.
UHURA:
An alternate reality?
An alternate reality?
SPOCK:
Precisely. Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed.
Precisely. Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed.
Still doubt the writers' intentions? Here is the offical Star Trek timeline chart.
Last edited:
Here again is the 30-second clip from Stargate Atlantis "Before I Sleep", which explains the multiverse concept in the most concise manner possible. Dr. Weir went back in time, creating an alternate branch of the timeline - exactly what happened in STXI.
I don't have a problem with the writer's intentions, merely their ability to convey them in the movie. Spock's first statement above fits in with a standard (same universe) time travel scenario (he talks of "altering" history), so it’s hard to see where Uhura could have got the idea they are in a "newly" created universe! Moreover, the term "An alternate reality" can easily be interpreted as a describing a single altered timeline. So Spock's "Precisely" is rather ironic. Certainly what he says after that doesn't help make the issue any clearer.
They could have done a variation on the "I hear there is going to be a question on multiverse theory in the test tomorrow ..." theme, or something like that. It couldn't have been too hard to hang a shotgun on the wall. The multiverse idea seemed like a late change and maybe the writer's strike prevented the script from getting a proper overall to make it more consistent with that change.
Still doesn't answer my question about how multi-verse theory relates to time travel...
Take the scenario presented in Star Trek IV and Star Trek: First contact, where the intrepid crews go back and either fix or get something from the past to fix a current predicament. New universes should have been born with the abduction of George and Gracie and the Borg attack on the Montana complex.
When they go forward in time, they've done a good enough job of preserving what went on that A) they recognize the universe as being the one they left and B) the universe recognizes them as not being out of place.
What happened to the HMS Bounty and the U.S.S. Enterprise-E of these new universes? Did they also encounter the same exact scenario that sent the originals back in time and therefore also went back in time to fix the timeline?
If the above is the case, wouldn't there be an infinite number of universes where the same exact circumstances happen?
Um, OK, that's what I already thought. Spock Prime and Nero going back changed the past.
But apparently THIS TIME the original timeline was left intact somewhere else, because they wanted to change the way Trek did time travel to have their cake and eat it too.
The time travel logic may make more sense from a theoretical standpoint, but it's very different from how Trek had previously done time travel, which is all I was pointing out.
That's the official Star Trek Online timeline chart. Being non-filmed material... it's not canon.
That's the official Star Trek Online timeline chart. Being non-filmed material... it's not canon.
Agreed.
DOn';t know why Paramount/CBS just make some clear cut defined definition like Star Wars.
New universes are born of every possible outcome to every event that occurs, regardless of time travel.BillJ said:
Time travel's just one of the few situations where our heroes' paths through the multiverse can be traced.
They have. They decide what's canon.
Is this is still being debated? Its a Reboot attached to the original continuity via a time travel plot device.
Whether its an alternate universe or whatever really doesn't matter, its just words to describe a narrative framework, it will never make sense because it can't, its not real. Theres the original series, and the reboot. The reboot is current, and where the new adventures are. The original is of the eighties, the nineties and the sixties. Modern Trek is made for a modern audience and this way is so much better than knowing that Kirk will die on that bridge helping picard, or that Scotty will crash into a dyson sphere.
Whether its an alternate universe or whatever really doesn't matter, its just words to describe a narrative framework, it will never make sense because it can't, its not real. Theres the original series, and the reboot. The reboot is current, and where the new adventures are. The original is of the eighties, the nineties and the sixties. Modern Trek is made for a modern audience and this way is so much better than knowing that Kirk will die on that bridge helping picard, or that Scotty will crash into a dyson sphere.
