Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel....
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
I'm sure that the film will be great, and I have a lot of confidence in J.J. and the team to deliver a good movie.
However, I do hope that the film does a little of "what it says on the tin" so to speak. Meaning I'd like to see the characters seeking out new worlds, new life forms and new civilizations.
Name me any of the proceeding movies that has actually done that.
TMP: Sort of, was a new life form by the end.
TWoK: No
TSfS: No
TVH: No
TFF: Yes, wasn't a particularly nice new life form, but there was one!
TUC: No
We've been shown new species that we havent seen before in the TNG films, like the Baku, So'na and the Remans, but no Trek film to date has shown the crew of the Enterprise making real first contact with a new species!
Go to a Transformers movie, and you know you're going to see giant transforming robots. Go to a Star Trek movie, how likely is it you'll see a story about a trek through the stars and discovering new worlds and new life? Not very likely at all judging by what has come up to now.
Trex XI was an opportunity to strip everything back. Show the origin of the characters and show a real voyage of discovery and adventure.
I hope that the opportunity has not been missed.
I'm sure that the film will be great, and I have a lot of confidence in J.J. and the team to deliver a good movie.
However, I do hope that the film does a little of "what it says on the tin" so to speak. Meaning I'd like to see the characters seeking out new worlds, new life forms and new civilizations.
Name me any of the proceeding movies that has actually done that.
TMP: Sort of, was a new life form by the end.
TWoK: No
TSfS: No
TVH: No
TFF: Yes, wasn't a particularly nice new life form, but there was one!
TUC: No
We've been shown new species that we havent seen before in the TNG films, like the Baku, So'na and the Remans, but no Trek film to date has shown the crew of the Enterprise making real first contact with a new species!
Go to a Transformers movie, and you know you're going to see giant transforming robots. Go to a Star Trek movie, how likely is it you'll see a story about a trek through the stars and discovering new worlds and new life? Not very likely at all judging by what has come up to now.
Trex XI was an opportunity to strip everything back. Show the origin of the characters and show a real voyage of discovery and adventure.
I hope that the opportunity has not been missed.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
First, in response to John_Picard, as I posted above, less than 7 percent of over 600 Trek episodes of TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY were time travel. ENT worked it into a story arc, so it has a higher percentage. Only four TOS episodes were time travel.
As StarMan said, there is nothing wrong with time travel. Unless accounting for a large percentage of fan favorite episodes -- including some considered among the best episodes -- and the most popular movies across the series is wrong.
If it seems "overused," maybe it's because we tend to watch a lot of those episodes at a rate disproportionate to their overall number. Kinda ironic, huh? Over-watched, maybe. Not overused.
StarMan said:
John_Picard said:
In other words, there is no other way for the writers to come up with a decent story other than to resort to Time Travel.Sorry, but I'm not buying it. This should be called Doctor Who Trek at the rate they keep using time travel storylines.
Not interested.
Resort?
One could frame every single potential plot device in the negative light you have.
There is nothing inherently wrong with time travel, nor is it a cop out.
First, in response to John_Picard, as I posted above, less than 7 percent of over 600 Trek episodes of TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY were time travel. ENT worked it into a story arc, so it has a higher percentage. Only four TOS episodes were time travel.
As StarMan said, there is nothing wrong with time travel. Unless accounting for a large percentage of fan favorite episodes -- including some considered among the best episodes -- and the most popular movies across the series is wrong.
If it seems "overused," maybe it's because we tend to watch a lot of those episodes at a rate disproportionate to their overall number. Kinda ironic, huh? Over-watched, maybe. Not overused.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
Time Travel, paradoxes, contaminated timelines, etc. Sorry, but to me time travel has been explored enough in the Trek verse. Once Voyager introduced the Federation Time Ships it had pretty much jumped the shark. The same holds true with DS9's "Orb of Time" and the "ohmygosh the Kemosite reacted with the warp field". Time travel is too easy/accidental considering the means the humans et all seem to slip and slide into specific time periods given the means used to achieve it. First Contact comes to mind for how Picard and company easily slipped back to the 24th Century.
Franklin said:
StarMan said:
John_Picard said:
In other words, there is no other way for the writers to come up with a decent story other than to resort to Time Travel.
Not interested.
Resort?
One could frame every single potential plot device in the negative light you have.
There is nothing inherently wrong with time travel, nor is it a cop out.
First, in response to John_Picard, as I posted above, less than 7 percent of over 600 Trek episodes of TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY were time travel. ENT worked it into a story arc, so it has a higher percentage. Only four TOS episodes were time travel.
As StarMan said, there is nothing wrong with time travel. Unless accounting for a large percentage of fan favorite episodes -- including some considered among the best episodes -- and the most popular movies across the series is wrong.
If it seems "overused," maybe it's because we tend to watch a lot of those episodes at a rate disproportionate to their overall number. Kinda ironic, huh? Over-watched, maybe. Not overused.
Time Travel, paradoxes, contaminated timelines, etc. Sorry, but to me time travel has been explored enough in the Trek verse. Once Voyager introduced the Federation Time Ships it had pretty much jumped the shark. The same holds true with DS9's "Orb of Time" and the "ohmygosh the Kemosite reacted with the warp field". Time travel is too easy/accidental considering the means the humans et all seem to slip and slide into specific time periods given the means used to achieve it. First Contact comes to mind for how Picard and company easily slipped back to the 24th Century.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
You are correct. Sometimes it's not done well. Sometimes it's done too easily. But not doing it well is different than overdoing it. I guess that would be my point.
I'd also like to think that writers would not believe that just because they introduce time travel into a story, that it'll be automatically eaten up by the fans. At the same time, compared to the overall number of time travel episodes, a disproportionate number of them do find their way onto "best of" lists. So, there must be something especially compelling about it when it's done right.
The bottom line is I just don't roll my eyes and say, "Here we go again," merely at the prospect of XI involving time travel in some way.
You are correct. Sometimes it's not done well. Sometimes it's done too easily. But not doing it well is different than overdoing it. I guess that would be my point.
I'd also like to think that writers would not believe that just because they introduce time travel into a story, that it'll be automatically eaten up by the fans. At the same time, compared to the overall number of time travel episodes, a disproportionate number of them do find their way onto "best of" lists. So, there must be something especially compelling about it when it's done right.
The bottom line is I just don't roll my eyes and say, "Here we go again," merely at the prospect of XI involving time travel in some way.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
You are not of the body.
You are not of the body.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
So you want someone who doesn't even know Roberto Orci to be the source who says whether or not Orci is a big trek fan?
I think for someone to know whether or not Orci was a Star Trek fan growing up (maybe even a 'trekkie'), that person would probably need to know Orci pretty well.
...thus practically nobody who can attest to Orci being a fan could pass your "biased due to familiarity" test.
So you want someone who doesn't even know Roberto Orci to be the source who says whether or not Orci is a big trek fan?
I think for someone to know whether or not Orci was a Star Trek fan growing up (maybe even a 'trekkie'), that person would probably need to know Orci pretty well.
...thus practically nobody who can attest to Orci being a fan could pass your "biased due to familiarity" test.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
In other words, if someone isn't outright condemning them, they're "biased" but if they're out saying Orci... ect are lying "pretend Star Trek fans" you'll agree with them.
Sharr
In other words, if someone isn't outright condemning them, they're "biased" but if they're out saying Orci... ect are lying "pretend Star Trek fans" you'll agree with them.
Sharr
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
Orci is one of the two credited screenwriters of this movie, and the one person involved in production who knows the most about the Trek canon. By which I mean the main creative influences, himself, Kurtzmann, Abrams, Lindelof.
He is, as of this minute, the person with the best comprehension of where exactly this film does or does not fit in relation to Star Trek's past.
Perhaps we shouldn't take either him or his friends at their word, but he does know what he's talking about.
Orci is one of the two credited screenwriters of this movie, and the one person involved in production who knows the most about the Trek canon. By which I mean the main creative influences, himself, Kurtzmann, Abrams, Lindelof.
He is, as of this minute, the person with the best comprehension of where exactly this film does or does not fit in relation to Star Trek's past.
Perhaps we shouldn't take either him or his friends at their word, but he does know what he's talking about.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
I have two big problems with time travel plots. When the antagonist uses whatever time traveling mcguffin to go back and make sure Lincoln was never born or that the Nazis win WWII and the protagonit stops them and restores the time line, in true Wile E. Coyote fashion, the antagonist simply gives up and tries another evil scheme when, in fact, by of vurtue of time travel, they can simply do it again and learn from their mistakes. The first Back To The Future movie has shown that mistakes can attempted to be corrected. A time traveler, literally, has all the time in the world.
The second thing that bugs me is the alleged plot of the movie. By having the Romulans go back in time to kill or do something to Kirk to ensure their future survival shows two things: One. Once again, the Trek universe is shown to be smaller in that one person's demise will result in massive changes when in fact, one could deduce that several universal factors led to the Federation's dominance over the Romulans. And two, Kirk is elevated as this all important supergod long before he gets a command. I would like to see him grow and change and make mistakes on his own and not with the help of any time travelling guardian angels.
It necessarily doesn't piss me off that time travel is being used, but it concerns me that it will open a whole can of deus ex machinas by the virtue of its existence.
I have two big problems with time travel plots. When the antagonist uses whatever time traveling mcguffin to go back and make sure Lincoln was never born or that the Nazis win WWII and the protagonit stops them and restores the time line, in true Wile E. Coyote fashion, the antagonist simply gives up and tries another evil scheme when, in fact, by of vurtue of time travel, they can simply do it again and learn from their mistakes. The first Back To The Future movie has shown that mistakes can attempted to be corrected. A time traveler, literally, has all the time in the world.
The second thing that bugs me is the alleged plot of the movie. By having the Romulans go back in time to kill or do something to Kirk to ensure their future survival shows two things: One. Once again, the Trek universe is shown to be smaller in that one person's demise will result in massive changes when in fact, one could deduce that several universal factors led to the Federation's dominance over the Romulans. And two, Kirk is elevated as this all important supergod long before he gets a command. I would like to see him grow and change and make mistakes on his own and not with the help of any time travelling guardian angels.
It necessarily doesn't piss me off that time travel is being used, but it concerns me that it will open a whole can of deus ex machinas by the virtue of its existence.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
The phrase QFT has now officially jumped the shark. What's the point of saying 'Quoted For Truth' when you don't quote anything? It makes it a mere synonym of 'Indeed' or 'I agree'.
I think blockaderunner's criticism is pretty dead on, assuming that the plot is accurate. Of course, a film can rise above its time travel contrivances and their attendant plot holes to become interesting, and one hopes that this film does this.
The phrase QFT has now officially jumped the shark.
What's the point of saying 'Quoted For Truth' when you don't quote anything? It makes it a mere synonym of 'Indeed' or 'I agree'.I think blockaderunner's criticism is pretty dead on, assuming that the plot is accurate. Of course, a film can rise above its time travel contrivances and their attendant plot holes to become interesting, and one hopes that this film does this.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
^Wow, I always thought it meant "Quite F***ing True."
But yours sounds legit. And cleaner.
^Wow, I always thought it meant "Quite F***ing True."
But yours sounds legit. And cleaner.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
I'm completely unconvinced that there will be time-travel in this movie. I originally had reason to believe that there wasn't any... then some supposedly "official" statements came out to that effect... and now everything that actually says that in any form has been debunked.
Time travel may, or may not, be in this film. THERE IS NO INFORMATION TO ESTABLISH EITHER. All we know for sure is that we'll see multiple periods of time, and at least one character at multiple times in his life.
Given that... I find it silly that people are still clinging so firmly to this now-debunked rumor.
On another note...
We know, because he SAID SO, that JJ Abrams wanted to do Star Trek because he had a story he'd wanted to do since he was a teenager, set in this universe... which means he came up with that idea around the time that TWOK came out (we're the same age).
I'm curious... do you think Abrams will get a leading Story credit?
I'm completely unconvinced that there will be time-travel in this movie. I originally had reason to believe that there wasn't any... then some supposedly "official" statements came out to that effect... and now everything that actually says that in any form has been debunked.
Time travel may, or may not, be in this film. THERE IS NO INFORMATION TO ESTABLISH EITHER. All we know for sure is that we'll see multiple periods of time, and at least one character at multiple times in his life.
Given that... I find it silly that people are still clinging so firmly to this now-debunked rumor.
On another note...
We know, because he SAID SO, that JJ Abrams wanted to do Star Trek because he had a story he'd wanted to do since he was a teenager, set in this universe... which means he came up with that idea around the time that TWOK came out (we're the same age).
I'm curious... do you think Abrams will get a leading Story credit?
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
Isn't it part of the rumor that the Romulans ACCIDENTALLY end up back where they are, and preventing Kirk from being born turns out to be a convenient spur of the moment thing they can do?
Of course, that's rather weak in it's own right, if true. But at least it explains why they get only one chance.
Kegek said:
The phrase QFT has now officially jumped the shark.
I think blockaderunner's criticism is pretty dead on, assuming that the plot is accurate. Of course, a film can rise above its time travel contrivances and their attendant plot holes to become interesting, and one hopes that this film does this.
Isn't it part of the rumor that the Romulans ACCIDENTALLY end up back where they are, and preventing Kirk from being born turns out to be a convenient spur of the moment thing they can do?
Of course, that's rather weak in it's own right, if true. But at least it explains why they get only one chance.
Re: Does it piss anyone off that they had to use time travel
Which is why I added the caveat 'assuming that the plot is accurate'. If memory serves, they try to kill his father, and Spock stops them or something. As is, the rumours are all up in the air and I'd argue all we're really sure is that there are Romulans, they are the bad guys, and time travel is (probably) involved.
In other words, it's too early to do any meaningful criticism of this aspect of the film.
Which is why I added the caveat 'assuming that the plot is accurate'. If memory serves, they try to kill his father, and Spock stops them or something. As is, the rumours are all up in the air and I'd argue all we're really sure is that there are Romulans, they are the bad guys, and time travel is (probably) involved.
In other words, it's too early to do any meaningful criticism of this aspect of the film.
