Do fans want the prime timeline back?
- Thread starter Beyerstein
- Start date
Personally, I think the next Trek series will either be set in its own continuity or will have a continuity vague enough that it'll be hard to tell if its Prime, Abrams, or a mixture of both.
I think it's the thread's Question that's getting people riled up. 'Do fans want the prime timeline back?' The thing is there is several different types of fans. If this was targeted to a certain area; TOS generation, Voyager generation, or NuTrek generation; the thread would flow more evenly. Lucky for me, I've found enjoyment in all of their work so far. I hope they can keep outdoing themselves.
My point is that if (for example) I'm willing to do research to understand the current plotline and character interactions on a damn soap opera, a Star Trek fan - most of whom are generally smarter people than the average soap fan - should be willing to ask a friend why a character was alive in one episode and dead in another (possibly one episode was a Mirror-universe one where the mirror-character was killed but the regular character wasn't). And if there's nobody to ask in RL, there are always fan communities like this very forum where most of us could easily explain the situation.
You're the one who assumes people should agree with you. I know there are people in this thread who don't agree with me.
The Abrams movie, to me, was like watching a cartoon. I've already explained this. I'm not going to do it again - please read my previous posts.
Yes, it does answer your question. You just don't like the answer. Character assassination, aka character rape. To make the characters act completely out of established character traits, just for plot point, not because it's how the character would normally act in such a situation. Example: the ridiculous public displays of affection between Spock and Uhura. It may titillate the younger fans who don't remember or never saw how real Spock and real Uhura related to each other in TOS, but it's not how the characters were established or developed. Their relationship was always based on mutual respect, and never went beyond the mild flirtation in one or two early episodes.
Typo on my part. That should read "begin with them".
And no, comics did not create the idea of the reboot. As Greg and I pointed out its be going on forever. Probably as far back as the first storytellers.
Yes, I do. That was my point. Comic and other media were rebooting characters long before fans began calling the process a reboot.
No. If the original X-Men is still being publish, how can the Ultimate version have rebooted it? The Ultimate line is something different than a reboot, even though its a different take on the Marvel heroes. The closest thing I can think of is the Earth 1/Earth 2 situation in the Silver Age. Though the Silver version of Green Lantern, the Flash, Hawkman and the Atom were reboots.
But isn't that the point of a reboot, to have a different take on a character? Reboots never pretend that their characters are the same as ones they are adapting off, that's why they're reboots. Adaptations. They can pick and choose.
I understand being irritated if they were supposed to be the same characters but failed to be so. For example, if Leonard Nimoy's Spock in the reboot movies is drastically different from his portrayal before this. Or another example, if they made an actual prequel to TOS instead of a reboot and wanted to make sure that these are the same characters that will grow into William Shatner and company. In that case, there may be reason for being annoyed if characters feel utterly different from before.
Reboots allow a new take on a character while keeping certain recognizable elements. Maybe that's what you'd call a cartoon, where new Spock is just enough Spock that you'd know he's Spock, but different enough that he's not really Spock (Prime). I wouldn't have it any other way, since it is suppose to be a new take on the characters.
I understand being irritated if they were supposed to be the same characters but failed to be so. For example, if Leonard Nimoy's Spock in the reboot movies is drastically different from his portrayal before this. Or another example, if they made an actual prequel to TOS instead of a reboot and wanted to make sure that these are the same characters that will grow into William Shatner and company. In that case, there may be reason for being annoyed if characters feel utterly different from before.
Reboots allow a new take on a character while keeping certain recognizable elements. Maybe that's what you'd call a cartoon, where new Spock is just enough Spock that you'd know he's Spock, but different enough that he's not really Spock (Prime). I wouldn't have it any other way, since it is suppose to be a new take on the characters.
That's absolutely true--as far as the original series is concerned. But you seem to be missing the point that the new versions of the characters are not supposed to be identical to the previous versions. New timeline, new universe, new twists and character dynamics. That's kinda the idea.
I find it telling that you refers to the original versions as "real Spock" and "real Uhura"--as opposed to, say, the previous versions of Spock and Uhura, which is a less judgmental or dogmatic way to phrase it. If you keep expecting NuTrek to be completely faithful to the earlier version, you're bound to be disappointed.
To drag in poor Holmes again, Benedict Cumberbatch does not portray Sherlock exactly the way he was portrayed in the original books or in any earlier movie or TV versions. Ditto for Robert Downey Jr. and the guy on ELEMENTARY (whose name escapes me at the moment). Doesn't matter.
Different actors (and writers) are going to portray the same characters differently, especially when retelling the stories generations apart. That's not an "assassination" or even inaccurate. It's just a new and different approach to the characters.
To channel Seven of Nine, exactly how the characters of Spock and Uhura were established or developed back in the day is irrelevant. The old Spock and Uhura were indeed just friends and colleagues; the new Spock and Uhura have a closer relationship.
Neither version is wrong.
Last edited:
Or how about this exchange? 
I believe more would have developed if Spock prime had allowed it.
I believe more would have developed if Spock prime had allowed it.
Hey, Sci-Fi soap opera. There's a difference.
It's more like character 'temporal weapon ship'ed (if I haven't been dorky enough). I agree with most of what you say. IMO The NuTrek vision, though a hell of an action flick, pales in comparison to TOS. They traded off the overall character development and relationship for trust and rash decisions. I made the leap over to fan because they had Nemoy and Nero's back story and the fact that they didn't dissapear. I mean how can Spock built a blackhole ship on Vulcan, get pulled back with Nero, and watch the planet (that would later build the ship that sent him back) be destroyed, without ceasing to be? If Janeway's theories were true Future Spock, Nero, and their ships would have dissapeared, and NuTrek's Starfleet would be saying 'What happened to Vulcan?' (IMO, Star Trek's time flow is stubborn. Maybe Picard in FC didn't have to perform a causality loop and if he simply ported back along his temporal carrier wave, the Borg future and the Enterprise E normal timeline would have existed.) So Kirk's dad dies, he's born in space, and he has an asshole for a step-dad (that he didn't listen to); It's believable he would have been raised the same, Prime Trek Kirk's father was in Starfleet, and he grew up in a stay on Earth (Iowa) family (daddy wasn't there); So the group is younger; maybe after Nero's attack parents like Chekov's waited to have kids. NuTrek is an honest reboot IMO (and I too disliked the Spock/Uhura thing), and it's not like all Reboots defiantly supersed their predecessors.
Last edited:
Way ahead of you at 45, same thing.
I was talking about the term 'reboot', where the word originated.
When characters like the 'Uncanny X-Men' started reaching their 50's, the Ultimate timeline was created to make them in there 20's again. The 'Uncanny' X-Men had war time comics.
Reboots are 'different continuities'. The silver and bronze age were reboots. All that 'earth-645' means is reboot/remake/revamp #19, and each had there own continuity. I liked the 'Astonishing' X-Men reboot because it rebooted 'Uncanny' X-Men the way they should have, they did all that stuff 'Uncanny' did, just later. Don't get me started on 'Ultimate' Wolverine.
Last edited:
Whenever I want to revisit "Trek Prime" I'll just watch an episode of Star Trek, any time I want. They're available on DVD, and on Netflix and Amazon instant services.
As far as bringing "Trek Prime" back in a new form, I agree that this will be highly unlikely. Personally, I still wouldn't mind a new Trek series set in the JJverse, despite the fact that I wasn't crazy about the last movie. Star Trek always worked better as a TV series.
Sean
As far as bringing "Trek Prime" back in a new form, I agree that this will be highly unlikely. Personally, I still wouldn't mind a new Trek series set in the JJverse, despite the fact that I wasn't crazy about the last movie. Star Trek always worked better as a TV series.
Sean
Was that ever in dispute? I even mentioned its origin in this post.
Which X-Men, other than the obvious ones like Prof. X and Wolverine were ever said to be in their 50s o older? Not the original five or most of the All New All Different ones.
Uh, when was there a reboot in the Bronze Age? It flows pretty seamlessly from the Silver Age. DC's preCrisis continuity runs from around 1955 ( the Martian Manhunter's debut) through 1986 ( the end of Crisis On Infinite Earths), encompassing the Silver and Bronze Ages.
There was a reboot in Astonishing X-men? Explain that one. I thought it was just a new X-Men title. As far as I know its in the same continuity as every Marvel Comic since published since 1961 (FF#1).
You must be unfamiliar with things like the retconn and the sliding time scale as used in comics. The FF didn't blast off into space in 1961. The blasted off into space 10 or 15 years prior to what ever the current date is. Tony Stark didn't get shrapnel in his heart during the Vietnam War. Captain America didn't get de-iced in 1964. It all changes as time moves forward. The characters do not age in real time. These little tweaks are called retcons, not reboots.
Last edited:
Did I ask them to go back to the prime continuity because I think nuTrek is drivel? No. While I sincerely wish they would (and get better actors and writers), I only state my opinion that I think it's stupid, and I will go back to enjoying my TOS and Voyager stories. I'm sure they won't starve because they won't be getting any share of my money for a theatre seat, and I'm also sure they wouldn't care if they knew.
Intelligent characters are critical. NuKirk is not someone I can possibly imagine being capable of giving - and making the audience believe - the ethics lessons and moral philosophy of realKirk's speeches.
Intelligent stories are critical, and ones that make some effort to extrapolate science in a plausible way (as much as current RL knowledge and established in-universe knowledge allows)
Cast aside some of the utterly trivial details. ie. I do not give a damn what Gowron's cousin's hairdresser's husband's commanding officer thinks about the state of politics on the Klingon homeworld. I really don't. It's boring beyond belief, and is the kind of material that would go over better in a novel than in a TV episode or movie.
This is it exactly. I could take Kirk et. al in a different timeline if he still talked and acted and thought like Kirk. NuKirk is a spoiled little ass, and nuSpock isn't any better. Neither of them act like adults, and as I said - I can't fathom either of them having the maturity to pull off anything remotely as thoughtful as what happened in even the worst of the TOS episodes. I'd trust TOS Kirk and Spock with my life. I wouldn't trust nuKirk and nuSpock to clean my cats' litter box.
Which is your opinion, and you're entitled to it. And if you ever happen to write a nuTrek novel, I won't be buying it. You're an excellent author and I enjoy your work, but only to the point where you're writing in a universe I find enjoyable.
(and for the people who will promptly yell at me for "threatening" to not buy Greg Cox's books... don't bother. It's not a threat and not a tantrum - just a comment)
I was one of them. But after having read an excellent series of fanfic stories by various Orion Press authors, I have changed my mind. The reason is that these authors came up with a logical, sensible, plausible, in-universe scenario for the change. It makes sense to me and the stories were terrific.
Who's waiting? I'd be ecstatic if it did, but I'm not going to wait and pine like an abandoned wife on a widow's walk.
Please forgive the double post; my computer has been behaving erratically and I want to get this said.
And excuse me for using the terms "real(character name)" instead of some other term. To me they ARE the real characters. The Abrams versions are the phonies, the fakes, the counterfeits (to me). And THAT's not wrong.
Okay... first of all, it's not just the FACT that realSpock and realUhura never went beyond mild flirtation - it's a FACT that Vulcan society in general didn't go in for public displays of affection such as those done by nuSpock and nuUhura. I find it very hard to believe that the Abramsverse Vulcans would be into it, either. Spock grew up in a "don't show your emotions in public and preferably not in private, either" culture - so why is he acting not only un-Vulcan, but also unprofessionally as a Starfleet officer? Saying "it's a reboot" just doesn't excuse it. That's not Spock. It's an actor we're expected to think is Spock and react to as though he's Spock, but that character is NOT authentically Spock.
And excuse me for using the terms "real(character name)" instead of some other term. To me they ARE the real characters. The Abrams versions are the phonies, the fakes, the counterfeits (to me). And THAT's not wrong.
Uhura wasn't above teasing Spock.
Just saying.Charlie X said:
Like I said - mild flirtation. Uhura didn't drape herself all over him, and they never kissed. Neither of them behaved unprofessionally while on duty. The nuTrek characters did.Or how about this exchange?
You mean their ONE public kiss on the transporter pad that came AFTER Spock's breakdown and admission to his father that he has emotions and cannot control them?
Although he got there a very different way, Old Spock basically went though the same thing in TMP, realizing what folly an emotionless and purely logical life truly is. We then got a Spock who smiled a teeny bit in WoK, who wasn't afraid to tell Kirk what he meant to him. A Spock who laughed at the end of STIV and told Starfleet to "Go to hell" at the end of STVI.
What you see as "characterization rape," I see as personal growth.
So don't assume everybody will do that like you or me. Fans sho started watching Trek in 2009 might not even be interested in the old timeline. Imagine their confusion when Vulcan is back.
No, I'm not. Whatever gave you that silly idea ? Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I want you to agree with me. It's called debating.
No, it doesn't. How does your opinion about how they handled the characters in the new timeline have anything to do with my question of what opportunities they have with the original timeline that they don't have with the new one ?
That's right. I thought a key lesson for Spock in the 2009 movie was how emotions and their expression were not necessarily a bad thing, and it was his refusal to admit that that nearly doomed Earth. Before he learned that lesson (during the scene with his father), I was under the impression that his relationship with Uhura was very private. Remember, Spock is not necessarily an exemplar of Vulcan behaviour: in the very same film, he rejected the Vulcan Science Academy even though this was unprecedented in Vulcan history.
And as far as I know, there isn't a prohibition on romance between Starfleet officers, an instance that comes to mind is Balance of Terror, where officer Angela was engaged to her commanding officer Tomlinson. There are also numerous romantic relationships between other main characters like Jadzia and Worf, Torres and Paris, Riker and Troi, etc.
Last edited:
Similar threads
