Did Enterprise happen in this Star Trek's past?

[miraclefan]

Enterprise NEVER happened in canon, period.

No amount of retconning or fannon explanations will ever convince me that the events of that show occurred in the proper Trek timeline depicted on the 4 trek shows, given the huge and glaring contradictions contained within the show.

If this film references that show, then the only way they can credibly do it is to say that those events in Enterprise happened in an alternate timeline. Anything else and this films credibility will be as undermined as that show was, and equally as underserving of the Trek name as Enterprise was.

But, dosn't this movie take ''place'' in a ALTERNATE TIMELINE? already?

^Star Trek Enterprise happened in both timelines, it is canon, it is the fifth (or sixth if you count TAS) constituent part of the franchise. Its been *years* now, can we get over this shit?

Apparently not! it may say something about his ''character''that he can't just let it go! I mean, I am NOT a fan of VOYAGER, but I don't HATE it like he does ENTERPRISE. And as much as I don't like VOYAGER, I still accept it as CANON!

Thats the official position of Paramount who own the franchise, but as a mere consumer I don't consider it part of Trek nor deserving of the label of Star Trek.

You are right, I am not over it - but only because as a Star Trek fan I want to see something produced that truly deserves to be called Star Trek and for me that means fitting in with established canon regardless of how easy or hard it is to do for the writers and producers.

I understand the position of the studio, they want to make money, but like any consumer I demand a high quality product and to me that is not an unreasonable desire. Good businesses listen to (should do anyway) their customers, especially their loyal ones.

I thought 'EVERY' series has the TREK label?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Enterprise NEVER happened in canon, period.

No amount of retconning or fannon explanations will ever convince me that the events of that show occurred in the proper Trek timeline depicted on the 4 trek shows, given the huge and glaring contradictions contained within the show.

If this film references that show, then the only way they can credibly do it is to say that those events in Enterprise happened in an alternate timeline. Anything else and this films credibility will be as undermined as that show was, and equally as underserving of the Trek name as Enterprise was.

But, dosn't this movie take ''place'' in a ALTERNATE TIMELINE? already?

Ignore him. He's letting his personal hatred of Enterprise color his judgment.

That show takes place in both timelines - the original one, and this one. The only changes to the timeline happen after the events of ENT took place. Therefore it is common to both.

 

[miraclefan]

Ignore him. He's letting his personal hatred of Enterprise color his judgment.

That show takes place in both timelines - the original one, and this one. The only changes to the timeline happen after the events of ENT took place. Therefore it is common to both.

Thanks Babaganoosh I have met his ''type'' in person, and I do admit to them that ENTERPRISE ''could'' have been better, but when I try to defend it they get pretty ANGRY! and I've never understood why?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I like to call it the "Attila The Hun" mindset. You know, the "It's not enough that I succeed...everyone else must fail" thing. Whatever they hate, the rest of us cannot be allowed to like.

I see this a lot in the Battlestar Galactica forum when anyone tries to say anything nice about the original BSG series.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

* It´s too sad that TNG, DS9 and Voyager never happenned. Well, TNG and DS9.

 

[miraclefan]

^ I like to call it the "Attila The Hun" mindset. You know, the "It's not enough that I succeed...everyone else must fail" thing. Whatever they hate, the rest of us cannot be allowed to like.

I see this a lot in the Battlestar Galactica forum when anyone tries to say anything nice about the original BSG series.

It must be, I mean I am not a fan of ''Original Galactica'' But I do appreaciate what it did for giveing sci-fi a larger presence on the air-waves at the time. I am a fan of NU-GALACTICA, but I'm not going to tell you ''NOT'' to watch Org-Galactica.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It´s too sad that TNG, DS9 and Voyager never happened. Well, TNG and DS9.

Who knows. Maybe they still can.

In any case, the original timeline where they *definitely* happened, is still intact. It hasn't been wiped out. Probably it will be the only timeline written in Trek novels for the time being...

 

[Lior .B.]

It´s too sad that TNG, DS9 and Voyager never happened. Well, TNG and DS9.

Who knows. Maybe they still can.

In any case, the original timeline where they *definitely* happened, is still intact. It hasn't been wiped out. Probably it will be the only timeline written in Trek novels for the time being...

Exactly. There are no reasons why both of the timelines couldn't exist simultaneously and each of them could be "our" future. future stories could be writen for both timelines and I don't see why one should be consider the "true" timeline. Why can't people enjoy with both version of our characters? why should the prime timeline be any more truer than J.J's timeline?

 

[M'Sharak]

Stewy, weren't you perma-banned by T'bonz years ago?

He has been allowed to return. Member in good standing and all that.

...

Apparently not! it may say something about his ''character''that he can't just let it go! I mean, I am NOT a fan of VOYAGER, but I don't HATE it like he does ENTERPRISE. And as much as I don't like VOYAGER, I still accept it as CANON!

...

Ignore him. He's letting his personal hatred of Enterprise color his judgment.
...

...

Thanks Babaganoosh I have met his ''type'' in person, and I do admit to them that ENTERPRISE ''could'' have been better, but when I try to defend it they get pretty ANGRY! and I've never understood why?

^ I like to call it the "Attila The Hun" mindset. You know, the "It's not enough that I succeed...everyone else must fail" thing. Whatever they hate, the rest of us cannot be allowed to like.

Enough about "character" and "type"... and Babaganoosh, you know damned well that your "Attila the Hun" crack is out of line. Stick to the topic of discussion (which is not those things) and leave out the personal stuff.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Star Trek: Enterprise happened, since until certain events, they were the same Universe.

The moment *something* travels back in time, it spawned an alternate universe, where events happened differently in each one.

TOS and everything that followed occurred in the "Prime" universe, while the movie occurs in the "JJ" Universe that was created as a result of time travel and Quantum Mechanics.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It´s too sad that TNG, DS9 and Voyager never happened. Well, TNG and DS9.

Who knows. Maybe they still can.

In any case, the original timeline where they *definitely* happened, is still intact. It hasn't been wiped out. Probably it will be the only timeline written in Trek novels for the time being...

Exactly. There are no reasons why both of the timelines couldn't exist simultaneously and each of them could be "our" future. future stories could be writen for both timelines and I don't see why one should be consider the "true" timeline. Why can't people enjoy with both version of our characters? why should the prime timeline be any more truer than J.J's timeline?

I am definitely looking forward to seeing what Trek novelists can do with this. There hasn't been anything announced on that point (i.e. when/if novels will start dealing with the change in the timeline, or if we'll ever see novels taking place in the JJ-verse), but I suspect they've got contingency plans. Plus, there's the Crucible novels, the Shatnerverse, Star Trek Online, the Star Fleet Universe, and (to a lesser extent) the Rihannsu novels, none of which jibe with the current novel continuity anyway, so it's not like this is the only contradiction.

As for Enterprise - we've got a reported Archer shout-out in the new film, and as we all know, the show takes place well before Nero shows up, so we're definitely safe.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Hard to believe I started life in the "Series V"/ENT forums as such a buzzkill and one-note hack.

At least you aren't a buzzkill anymore...

 

[-Brett-]

Probably won't be touched on in the movie, but my question is does JJ consider Enterprise as part of nuStar Trek's past?

If better, more popular, and more successful series (which is all of them) are being discarded, it's a safe bet that Enterprise will be discarded too.

 

[pookha]

but we dont know for sure what has and has not been discarded.
the writers have gone on record of being fans of all the series but especially star trek.

as for enterprise..
really it had far less canon errors then many fans claimed.
and tos itself as noted before had its own issues at time with canon.

 

[DaveyNY]

^Star Trek Enterprise happened in both timelines, it is canon, it is the fifth (or sixth if you count TAS) constituent part of the franchise. Its been *years* now, can we get over this shit?

Then you should Boycott Trek until they start listening to you....I'm sure they'll listen then......

...

Your decision...your freedom. But remember...even the vast majority of TREK fans disagree with your definition of ENT's canon, even if they didn't like the show.

How soon they forget, eh, Stewey? (Actually, of the three, I think only eddie has been here long enough to have been in the ENT forum then.)

I Remember...

Day One... Zero Hour...

It wasn't pretty...

Thank Goodness We All survived.



Well, some of Us anyway...

 

[Cyrus]

I must have fallen through a space-time vortex. I could swear I saw a post by Stewey a while ago.

He is going to love the old Porthos in the new movie.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Enterprise NEVER happened in canon, period.

No amount of retconning or fannon explanations will ever convince me that the events of that show occurred in the proper Trek timeline depicted on the 4 trek shows, given the huge and glaring contradictions contained within the show.

If this film references that show, then the only way they can credibly do it is to say that those events in Enterprise happened in an alternate timeline. Anything else and this films credibility will be as undermined as that show was, and equally as underserving of the Trek name as Enterprise was.

Enterprise did not BREAK what was established before. What it did was bend and elaborate on things.

Not Star Trek's greatest moment, but it IS CANON.

What are the "Huge, Glaring Contradictions" precisely?

What EXACTLY do they contradict? Note: Do NOT point to books, as they are NOT canon, though I've been told some of them are pretty good.

 

[shapeshifter]

ENT isn't a prequel to TOS, it is a sequel to ST 8: First Contact.

Yes this movie does give some credit to ENT but we must assume events within it are somewhat different from what we saw in our ENT.

Keeping multiple timelines straight can be difficult but we must at least try in order to keep our conversations making sense. It bugs me when I see the producers of Star Trek out-nerding the nerds.

 

[Stewey]

Star Trek: Enterprise happened, since until certain events, they were the same Universe.

I really have to disagree with you there.

When you compare the events of Enterprise to the references to Ents timeline from the other shows, the two cannot be reconciled. Enterprise could not possibly lead to the TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager as they were seen on screen.

Enterprise could have redeemed itself by using the TCW (a truly horrible idea in the first place in my view) as a way to explain why Enterprise contradicts the other shows so glaringly. I think it could have brought many fans back to that show, perhaps even me.

as for enterprise..
really it had far less canon errors then many fans claimed.
and tos itself as noted before had its own issues at time with canon.

Whether or not any particular show had errors or not, I would never consider that to be a justification for the carelessness of B&B when they came up with Enterprise.

The odd genuine mistake in an individual episode can be forgiven but for me it is unforgivable to be so careless when it comes to the entire premise for a prequel series set in the past of a universe with 40 years worth of content.

I appreciate and accept that people simply want to be entertained, but for me I simply can't be entertained by a show that metaphorically sticks two fingers up to TOS and the series that followed.

I must have fallen through a space-time vortex. I could swear I saw a post by Stewey a while ago.

He is going to love the old Porthos in the new movie.

Hi Cyrus, porthos was the only character I did like.

 

[cooleddie74]

It´s too sad that TNG, DS9 and Voyager never happened. Well, TNG and DS9.

Who knows. Maybe they still can.

In any case, the original timeline where they *definitely* happened, is still intact. It hasn't been wiped out. Probably it will be the only timeline written in Trek novels for the time being...

And for all we know, when Abrams is finished with HIS movies there might be one more timeline reset button where the TREK universe reverts to the Shatner/TOS one when the final movie ends. Lazy and predictable. But would preserve everything else that follows chronologically.