Such a flow chart has worked remarkably well for the Legend of Zelda franchise, with the divergence happening due to Ocarina of Time. Now if I could only find it...
Distinguishing the Continuities: 1966-2005 vs 2009-
- Thread starter FalTorPan
- Start date
Such a flow chart has worked remarkably well for the Legend of Zelda franchise, with the divergence happening due to Ocarina of Time. Now if I could only find it...
Nimoy and the time travel angle is there to say to fans 'Hey guys, this is canon! This is official Star Trek! You have to see this film!'
They are essentially hooks for the fanbase. I'm not saying that a reboot is either a good or a bad thing, but that is the real world reason they are there.
They are essentially hooks for the fanbase. I'm not saying that a reboot is either a good or a bad thing, but that is the real world reason they are there.
I agree. No offense The Super Brando, but I think for some reason you just do not want to accept facts that are given on-screen. It's like you are so set in the notion of this having nothing to do with any Trek that has come before that even if facts are put in front of you on screen contradicting said notion, you still would not accept them. And that's fine if you think wish to do so. It's your choice. But you are wrong.
Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
I'm a fan for 24 years and I was absolutely overjoyed to see Nimoy back as Spock, but the new movie was doing so well on its own in my opinion that I feel it can just go its own way and act like a real reboot.
Like James Bond...I never bother to worry about how James Bond can both be the guy that stops Goldfinger in the 60s and the new Bond in a post 9/11 world. I am perfectly content to let this new Trek do what it wants.
Like James Bond...I never bother to worry about how James Bond can both be the guy that stops Goldfinger in the 60s and the new Bond in a post 9/11 world. I am perfectly content to let this new Trek do what it wants.
Hear, hear.
Well. Nero going back in time to destroy the Kelvin altered time from that point forward, but the Borg going back in time to stop first contact changed (or at least altered slightly) time from that point forward, the temporal cold war muddied the waters still further in a veriety of ways, the "Bounty" going back in time resulting in Scotty giving the formula for transparent aluminum, changed things (at least slightly) from that time forward etc. etc. So almost every time travel event changes history regardless of whether things seemed to be set right again or not. My point is, there's more than two timelines we're dealing with here, and none can claim to be the "primary" or "real" one. It would be better to designate the sequence of alteration or "contamination" that's resulted, rather than focus on the different emergant universes/time lines?
Last edited:
That would be pretty cool to see. Something like that exists for all of the various Transformers continuities as well. It manages to be confusing and enlightening all at the same time!
Ladies and gentlemen. This^^^ is why Trek needed a reboot. I rest my case. Begin disparaging flames.
Ladies and gentlemen. This^^^ is why Trek needed a reboot. I rest my case. Begin disparaging flames.
Okay. First of all, if you're suggesting that I'm the type of fan that Trek needs to be "rescued" from then on what do you base that on? you don't know me well enough to shoehorn me into your preconcieved notions of what kind of fan I am! I'm simply trying to respond to the topic of the thread. Second, how does a "reboot", that introduces yet another altered timeline, help make your case? It was the writers/producers of this new movie that decided to use the time travel gimmick to sell their "reboot" to the fans, instead of making a clean break from what had gone before, has they could (or should?) have done. As such, Idle speculation by fans about said timelines is fair game, along with a hundred other things about the new movie, or Trek in general, that we might choose to discuss or debate, that is what these forums are here for, is it not?
Last edited:
Ladies and gentlemen. This^^^ is why Trek needed a reboot. I rest my case. Begin disparaging flames.
Okay. First of all, if you're suggesting that I'm the type of fan that Trek needs to be "rescued" from then on what do you base that on? you don't know me well enough to shoehorn me into your preconcieved notions of what kind of fan I am! I'm simply trying to respond to the topic of the thread. Second, how does a "reboot", that introduces yet another altered timeline, help make your case? It was the writers/producers of this new movie that decided to use the time travel gimmick to sell their "reboot" to the fans, instead of making a clean break from what had gone before, has they could (or should?) have done. As such, Idle speculation by fans about said timelines is fair game, along with a hundred other things about the new movie, or Trek in general, that we might choose to discuss or debate, that is what these forums are here for, is it not?
Wow.
How many smilies do I have to put on my post before people get that I'm being facetious?
I meant no offense at you personally. I was simply pointing out that the convoluted nature of your explanation (one shared by many a Trekkie, including me) illustrates why the Trek-verse needs a clean start. That the producers chose to mollify die-hard Trekkies like you and me with a superficial time-travel twist really does nothing to take away from the fact that this is "Classic" Trek for the 21st Century and that, if this movie is as big a success as Paramount is hoping (and the sold-out crowds outside the theatre I saw it at tonight seem to indicate), then this will be the Trek-verse that we will be seeing for quite some time.
On a side note, having seen it tonight, I welcome it.
For the life of me I can't understand all the despair about everything seen before being changed/washed away.
This is Star Trek. It deals in alternate realities constantly and in fact, as the Mirrorverse shows, quite a few of them stick despite insane 'oh no! I have to go back in time and fix that!' efforts.
This is an offshoot. Everything that was is still there, just off to the left (or right, if you prefer).
The only reason I could possibly see myself being angry about the onscreen rewrites would be if they affected what I hoped to see on the big screen some day...and since what I want to see on the big screen (more TNG, DS9, or VOY crew time) isn't likely to ever happen anyhow, I don't care. My canon is doing just fine.
This is Star Trek. It deals in alternate realities constantly and in fact, as the Mirrorverse shows, quite a few of them stick despite insane 'oh no! I have to go back in time and fix that!' efforts.
This is an offshoot. Everything that was is still there, just off to the left (or right, if you prefer).
The only reason I could possibly see myself being angry about the onscreen rewrites would be if they affected what I hoped to see on the big screen some day...and since what I want to see on the big screen (more TNG, DS9, or VOY crew time) isn't likely to ever happen anyhow, I don't care. My canon is doing just fine.
I agree with biggshow. It is (or was) a tremendous chore to write anything in the "prime" (or "old") trek universe because you had to adhere to all these rules and estalished continuities or trek fans would eat you alive (and rightfully so). Just like in the DC or Marvel comic universe(s), there were SO many characters and SO many convoluted storylines it's like an epileptic soap opera.
Personally, I feel this new trek is great because it frees us from having to include stupid things in the canon, like those guys with the half back and half white faces (relevant in the 60s, but cheesy and dumb these days). It frees us from the Klingons who look like tan humans. It frees us from... and I can't believe I'm going to say this.. the Ferengi. You know they were a mistake. And about a hundred other cheesy things that never should have been included in a serious sci-fi show.
(spoiler alert below, be warned)
As kiradax said, this IS an offshoot reality. Everything changed when Nero came back and altered the timeline, starting with the USS Kelvin. This explains why the Enterprise was built on the ground and looks the way it does, why Uhura and Spock are doing whatever, why Chekov is there, why Pike isn't a vegetable at the end, and so on.
In fact, we never have to go back to the old reality, because for all intensive purposes, it doesn't exist, probably. Sure, you could go back and explore it through books or video games or godawful fanfic, but it was never going to be in the movies again. The next gen crew was never going to reunite. And now we have a chance to do the original voyages over again, and do it right this time. And hey, maybe we'll get to see the voyages of the enterprise B and C and D (hopefully without John Harriman helming the B and the morons in dresses and too-tight jumpsuits on the D).
btw, the ugly couch show has posted episode 39, and it's an all trek episode. http://uglycouchshow.com
Personally, I feel this new trek is great because it frees us from having to include stupid things in the canon, like those guys with the half back and half white faces (relevant in the 60s, but cheesy and dumb these days). It frees us from the Klingons who look like tan humans. It frees us from... and I can't believe I'm going to say this.. the Ferengi. You know they were a mistake. And about a hundred other cheesy things that never should have been included in a serious sci-fi show.
(spoiler alert below, be warned)
As kiradax said, this IS an offshoot reality. Everything changed when Nero came back and altered the timeline, starting with the USS Kelvin. This explains why the Enterprise was built on the ground and looks the way it does, why Uhura and Spock are doing whatever, why Chekov is there, why Pike isn't a vegetable at the end, and so on.
In fact, we never have to go back to the old reality, because for all intensive purposes, it doesn't exist, probably. Sure, you could go back and explore it through books or video games or godawful fanfic, but it was never going to be in the movies again. The next gen crew was never going to reunite. And now we have a chance to do the original voyages over again, and do it right this time. And hey, maybe we'll get to see the voyages of the enterprise B and C and D (hopefully without John Harriman helming the B and the morons in dresses and too-tight jumpsuits on the D).
btw, the ugly couch show has posted episode 39, and it's an all trek episode. http://uglycouchshow.com
Sorry for taking you the wrong way, but the brevity of your post made this almost inevitable, lone smiley notwithstanding?
Anywho, I agree this is THE Trek-verse for the foreseeable future, and I'm fine with that. I am not trying to uphold any particular version of Trek over any other, Just trying to give some helpful suggestions for those who like to derive some enjoyment out of trying to make sense of the multiple time-lines we've been saddled with. I also understand and respect those fans that don't care for such explanations, but that doesn't erase the fact that, like it or not, multiple time-lines are part of the Trek mythos, and there's no evidence to suggest that all time-lines should collapse into one? If that were the case, the "mirror" universe(s) wouldn't exist and we'd lose a lot of interesting story possibillitis there, so I for one, am content to let the TOS time line and this new one, exist side by side, how about you?
Last edited:
True that Trek has featured a lot of time-travel stories and speculations about alternate timelines. But they never had the characters on screen look into the camera and say "The timeline has now changed, everything is completely different."
Instead it was always fanchat, like "don't worry about this because of episode #273. <pats trekkie on the head>"
Trek fans can be a very demanding lot, but they should recognize that the producers met them at least halfway on this one. Not only did they make the reboot timeline a primary plot element, they made more than purely superficial changes to the Trek universe.
whoops!
Instead it was always fanchat, like "don't worry about this because of episode #273. <pats trekkie on the head>"
Trek fans can be a very demanding lot, but they should recognize that the producers met them at least halfway on this one. Not only did they make the reboot timeline a primary plot element, they made more than purely superficial changes to the Trek universe.
Destroying Vulcan fundamentally changes both the Federation and Spock's character. Nobody will confuse Trek 2.0 with Trek Prime, which means that TOS and classic trek will never be slighted by the new version.
Last edited:
Thanks for the spoiler alert, not everyone has seen the new movie yet, and I'm one of them! This thread seems to be devolving into an excuse to pick on a certain segment of fans anyway, and I'm not into that, so bye for now.
P.S. Thanks (sincerely) for fixing the spoiler.
Last edited:
There is no old Trek anymore. I was trying to watch Voyager yesterday and I realized all my DVDs had been erased. Damn you JJ!!! 
If you listen to their interviews, you'll see that it was their intent. If you consider the fact that Leonard Nimoy is in it playing Spock, it strongly suggests that, if it weren't for time travel, it would be the same continuity, and, if you listen to Quinto's Spock you'll hear that the timelines diverged when Nero went back in time, thus making everything before that part of the same timeline.
BTW, I like going with original universe and altered universe. The idea is that they could still have stories in both continuities if they wanted to (although I'm sad that Romulus would be destroyed in the original continuity).
I read about this on the official movie forums. I liked the idea of sticking to two or three letter acronymns. The best ideas I read were AOS (Alternate Original Series) and ST (Star Trek). It seems that Abrams does not want to do what has already been done, so I don't think we have to worry about movie duplicates.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Prime Trek
New Trek
or
Star Trek Prime
Star Trek Eponymous *
* For which I must credit Brutal Strudel.
New Trek
or
Star Trek Prime
Star Trek Eponymous *
* For which I must credit Brutal Strudel.