Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Tiberius, Apr 13, 2010.
I like to think that the timeline does get changed, only because I want to fit in somewhere the great novel "Federation."
Also because the Kelvin kind of has an ENT feel more than a pre-TOS feel (which to me, would resemble more "Forbidden Planet" )
In my personal timeline, FC did change the timeline, producing ENT. I have a nebulous idea that in the original timeline (in my personal continuity), Captain Archer may have commanded the U.S.S. Daedelus, or some other pioneer ship, but it's nearly important enough to me to flesh out.
Anyway, FC led to ENT, which led to the Kelvin scene (in my personal continuity). I think there was too much that was different technologically and aesthetically in the movie (including that first scene) to be explained just by a 20 year divergence caused by one attack on one ship. But that's just me; I agree it doesn't matter. BillJ said that having it all be one timeline is dramatically a more satisfying structure, and I find that to be a completely valid viewpoint. It shouldn't need to be something that holds up to anyone else's scrutiny; it just be for you whatever makes more sense and is more satisfying aesthetically or dramatically. And for me, that's the divergent timeline model.
I don't know, I'm kinda anal about continuity myself, but to me, that book is so good it just kinda transcends continuity. It's like, everything else just kinda fades away...
If we're going to talk about ships missing from the wall displays in TMP and TNG then you have to mention the most famous real Enterprise. The World War 2 era USS Enterprise CV-6; the most decorated US warship of the war. Which was cut up and sold for scrap.
As for the ship design of the twin nacelles and saucer. I always thought that the design was a result of the warp field geometry of a flattened elipse.
Of the three legacy walls, one featured UFP starships exclusively (the one on the E-E). Of the other two, one omitted the nuclear carrier (the TMP one) while the other one omitted the war-hero conventional one (the E-D one - the TMP wall did actually have that one). Both omitted half a dozen assorted sailing ships, and no doubt also half a dozen spacecraft of all sorts. Archer's "poor man's version" only had four vessels in all, again omitting CV-6 but also all other spacecraft besides the shuttle test article.
It's quite difficult to see a pattern of completeness there... A starship or three could well slip through. Indeed, the TMP wall had the famous if mysterious ringship which clearly was an advanced spacecraft, but the E-D wall did not...
The prediction itself made no sense, though. How could T'Pol figure out when the message would reach its destination? She only knew the direction and the speed. She couldn't know the distance (and thus the time) unless she knew the destination beforehand, and how could she know that?
In all the encounters with the Borg, the cyborgs or supposedly neutral observers have never suggested that any of those would be a first encounter between the Borg and the Earthlings. As for the Earthlings themselves, they thought they had a first in "Q Who?", but they were doubly mistaken - they quickly realized the connection to "TNZ" but never realized that the Hansens had already been there and done that. So it's possible there were no further contacts in addition to those shown, but it's rather probable that there were, quite possibly long before the Hansen case. (Certainly the Borg seem to have clashed with the Federation many times since, without the camera being anywhere around - dialogue in "Scorpion" and ST:FC makes this rather clear.)
Bear in mind that the hansens' trip would have been classified by Stafleet. It wouldn't be in the computers just waiting for someone to find, nor would Starfleet say to Picard, "Oh, by the way, here's all this classified information that you don't actually need to know."
While I never analyzed FC enough to even think that it could've changed the timeline, I like your idea. ...Because the only way I could watch, much less enjoy ENT, was to pretend it was a parallel universe.
Unfortunately, there's evidence on screen that indicatres that all of Star trek flowed on from the events in FC with the Borg being involved.
In Year of Hell, Seven statesd that the Borg were present at First Contact. How could this be if it was a different timeline?
There's certainly no evidence of that in TOS. I don't find ENT as an overall body of work to flow very well into TOS, therefore it makes more aesthetic sense in my mind to consider it an alternate timeline. From that starting point, it's logical to assume that it's the timeline that was started in FC.
Frankly, a personal continuity doesn't have to make perfect and complete sense. I accept that the official version is that FC didn't change the timeline, and that ENT and the Kelvin scene was part of the Prime timeline, etc. But in my personal continuity, I choose to ignore that in favor of something that works better for me, personally.
Now, I'm pretty anal about continuity sometimes, but I try not to get so involved in it that I let it ruin my enjoyment of something. I say watch ENT if it entertains you, notwithstanding what timeline it's in. Sure, there are some things that don't exactly sync up with TOS, and that can be annoying, but it shouldn't affect whether you enjoy the interactions of the characters and the adventures they experience. And if you didn't like those parts in the first place, then putting it in a different timeline won't help that.
I like continuity, it's fun when things sync up. When one book makes a reference to another book, and I think "I know that story," it pleases me. But it's not the most important thing; the story itself and the characters are what really matter. My favorite Star Trek novel is Federation, and that's out of continuity. That's a shame, but it doesn't affect my enjoyment of it.
Actually that one WAS in the TMP scene, but apparently not in TNG or FC.
Enterprise CV-6 was on the wall in TMP? I'll have to watch it again. Oh well. I don't think a hundred or two hundred years from now that Branson's Enterprise will have been significant. There's a huge difference between riding a rocket plane to the legally defined edge of space and back, and reaching a true Earth orbit and staying and working there for a reasonable length of time. Someone please tell Obama that before he kills off NASA manned spaceflight.
Just watched Discovery make her next to last landing. What a shame.
Separate names with a comma.