Spoilers DTI: Forgotten History by C. L. Bennett Review Thread

[Christopher]

Okay, I thought you were using that point to justify the "timelines were always separate" argument. Apparently you haven't offered any particular justification for it, just asserted it as your preference and left it at that. So be it. You can believe that if you want, but it's not the creators' intent, so if there ever were a DTI or other tale commissioned to cross over the novelverse (or at least the Prime timeline) with the Abramsverse, it would have to be based on the prevailing assumptions of CBS/Paramount, so it would treat them as having a common history up until mid-March 2233.

Not that I expect to see any such thing published by Pocket in the foreseeable future.

 

[RPJOB]

There's nothing in the movie that says it has to be "our" Old Spock. It's an Old Spock. There's probably billions of them in the multiverse. With the timeline branching all over the place, both spontaneously and through deliberate action, there's probably more Spocks than you could count. One data point is hardly enough to draw a definite conclusion from. It's not like we saw the Enterprise-E and crew, looking pretty much like we last saw them. The movie is vague enough that pretty much any explanation could work. It's not like we're going to see the old universe again anytime soon.

 

[Sxottlan]

I enjoyed Forgotten History, but not as much as Watching the Clock.

Stringing the separate TOS time travel stories into a cohesive storyline was clever. Just about all of it made sense. My only issue is that Lucsly and Dulmur felt like guest stars in their own book. If it had been labeled a TOS book, I'm sure my perception would have completely changed. The power of marketing I guess. But then again, I want to see more of them and their lives.

And while Christopher apparently is not a fan of combat and ships, I find that he's the ironically the best at writing about ships and characters' relationships with them. Here it's about Scotty and his bairns (never have understood that term). Before it was his description of why Picard was assigned the Portia or describing the fire on the Stargazer. Sensible reasons or great love expressed for these vessels. And here his engines are given a proper send off.

As for all the TAS references, anytime something came up that I did not understand, I had to look it up. I just bought a new TV two weeks ago and it has streaming Netflix on it, so now I can actually watch TAS if I want to (another show to add to my to-watch pile).

 

[F. King Daniel]

I think you're confusing "more advanced" in-universe technology with updated production values.

No, I assume that the appearance of the Narada was the catalyst - meaning, Starfleet got whatever information it could out of the sensor readings of that ship, and thus upped their standards a bit.

I guess that could explain why the Enterprise in 2258 had the kind of pulse phasers we saw in Wrath of Khan (2283ish, with the refit in 2270something in the Prime U), or why Starfleet built a 725m Enterprise rather than a 289m one, but I hate the idea that it's why the sets and special effects look far snazzier than those in Nemesis in 2378 or even the USS Relativity in 28XX. IMO if you can recast characters, you can recast ships, sets and swap out effects just the same, leaving the underlying stories themselves unaffected.

There's nothing in the movie that says it has to be "our" Old Spock. It's an Old Spock. There's probably billions of them in the multiverse. With the timeline branching all over the place, both spontaneously and through deliberate action, there's probably more Spocks than you could count. One data point is hardly enough to draw a definite conclusion from. It's not like we saw the Enterprise-E and crew, looking pretty much like we last saw them. The movie is vague enough that pretty much any explanation could work. It's not like we're going to see the old universe again anytime soon.

Except of course, it renders Nimoy's cameo and the entire time travel aspect of the movie pointless.

 

[Angstromdweller]

If you're suggesting that the Abramsverse DTI could get involved, then yes, there's stories there.

If there is a DTI in the Abramsverse. We can't take it for granted that there are events in that universe that would lead to its establishment.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I would assume that, if anything, the knowledge that Nero and Spock were from the future would lead to the Federation and/or Starfleet establishing a DTI-like organization a little earlier than in the TOS timeline (where, as "Forgotten History" details, it's origins lie in and around the temporal escapades of Kirk and company in TOS/TAS)

 

[Angstromdweller]

Sure, that could happen. Although that wouldn't necessarily provide the immediate means to do actual time travel, so that alone might not provide the need to create a new organization.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out the possibilities.

 

[Relayer1]

There's nothing in the movie that says it has to be "our" Old Spock. It's an Old Spock. There's probably billions of them in the multiverse. With the timeline branching all over the place, both spontaneously and through deliberate action, there's probably more Spocks than you could count. One data point is hardly enough to draw a definite conclusion from. It's not like we saw the Enterprise-E and crew, looking pretty much like we last saw them. The movie is vague enough that pretty much any explanation could work. It's not like we're going to see the old universe again anytime soon.

JJ and co. have apparently confirmed that it IS the Spock we are all familiar with. Not quite 'on-screen' canon I suppose, but...

 

[Christopher]

There's nothing in the movie that says it has to be "our" Old Spock.

The fact that he says "I have been, and always shall be, your friend" is pretty telling. Would a Spock from an alternate reality have chosen his words the exact same way?

Besides, I'm speaking metatextually. The reason the filmmakers cast Leonard Nimoy -- coaxed him out of retirement, even -- and built the story around Spock's return from the 24th century was to make this story a legitimate continuation of the Star Trek that had come before rather than a completely disconnected version. If that hadn't been their intention, Nimoy's Ambassador Spock would not have been in the movie at all.

Stringing the separate TOS time travel stories into a cohesive storyline was clever. Just about all of it made sense. My only issue is that Lucsly and Dulmur felt like guest stars in their own book. If it had been labeled a TOS book, I'm sure my perception would have completely changed.

Well, I'd argue that the "main character" of DTI is the Department itself, not any single agent team. This was the origin story of the DTI and it featured a number of important DTI players from the 23rd century, notably Grey and T'Viss, as well as Aleek-Om and Andos.

And while Christopher apparently is not a fan of combat and ships, I find that he's the ironically the best at writing about ships and characters' relationships with them.

Oh, I like ships fine. I just like them better when they aren't killing people.

Here it's about Scotty and his bairns (never have understood that term).

Colloquial Scottish for "babies."

 

[MatthiasRussell]

So, Spock Prime and Data Prime are in the JJverse ! Does Spock know about Data's head ? If I recall correctly Picard would have known about this, and he melded with Spock...

Oooooo! Ooooooo! We should start a rumor that Brent Spiner is appearing in the next movie!

 

[RPJOB]

Except of course, it renders Nimoy's cameo and the entire time travel aspect of the movie pointless.

Except Nimoy has already played a Spock from an alternate reality, the Mirror Universe. If he can be a Spock from one universe, why not another? And the time travel is just a way to say "everything you know is wrong". It's pushing a reset button while not overwriting what's gone before. (or not. For all we know the old universe was overwritten. We didn't see anything of it after Spock and Nero went through the black hole.)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Except of course, it renders Nimoy's cameo and the entire time travel aspect of the movie pointless.

Except Nimoy has already played a Spock from an alternate reality, the Mirror Universe. If he can be a Spock from one universe, why not another?

That's a clown question, bro.

 

[RPJOB]

There's nothing in the movie that says it has to be "our" Old Spock.

The fact that he says "I have been, and always shall be, your friend" is pretty telling. Would a Spock from an alternate reality have chosen his words the exact same way?

Besides, I'm speaking metatextually. The reason the filmmakers cast Leonard Nimoy -- coaxed him out of retirement, even -- and built the story around Spock's return from the 24th century was to make this story a legitimate continuation of the Star Trek that had come before rather than a completely disconnected version. If that hadn't been their intention, Nimoy's Ambassador Spock would not have been in the movie at all.

In the Mirror Universe McCoy's work table had the exact same acid stain as the one in the prime universe. That seems much more unlikely than someone using a particular turn of phrase. and yet there it is.

An actor "un-retiring" is hardly unprecedented and Nimoy has done it before and since. Give him a big enough part and a big enough payment and you could convince any number of retired actors to put on the tights one more time.

The writers intent may have been that it was "our" Spock that we were seeing. In fact, I'm confident that you could say that with certainty. However, just like TATV being a holodeck program gave you an out for undoing Trip's death, the fact that the movie establishes itself as an alternate universe allows for the interpretation that this is a Spock from a universe very similar to but probably different in some ways, to the one we saw on TOS, TNG, etc. Nothing in the movie itself prevents that interpretation, writers intent being worth nothing more than their opinion. If it's not on the screen, it doesn't count.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Except of course, it renders Nimoy's cameo and the entire time travel aspect of the movie pointless.

Except Nimoy has already played a Spock from an alternate reality, the Mirror Universe. If he can be a Spock from one universe, why not another?

Common sense, writers' (and actor) intent, etc, etc.

Really, I could pick any episode or movie I wanted to discount from the main continuity and use the exact same argument to try and justify it.

And the time travel is just a way to say "everything you know is wrong". It's pushing a reset button while not overwriting what's gone before. (or not. For all we know the old universe was overwritten. We didn't see anything of it after Spock and Nero went through the black hole.)

Hence the movie being a reboot of Trek, albeit an in-universe one. Similarly to how the pilot episode of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles undid Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines.

"Countdown" and "The Needs of the Many" show the Prime universe (or at least some branch of it) continuing on after the events of 2387. The DTI novels detail the technicalities of how and why that can be.

 

[Christopher]

The writers intent may have been that it was "our" Spock that we were seeing. In fact, I'm confident that you could say that with certainty. However, just like TATV being a holodeck program gave you an out for undoing Trip's death, the fact that the movie establishes itself as an alternate universe allows for the interpretation that this is a Spock from a universe very similar to but probably different in some ways, to the one we saw on TOS, TNG, etc.

Yes, it allows for that interpretation, but I don't find it a desirable or useful interpretation, and I can't believe any licensed tie-in would be based on it. And it's just the same old reaction from fans who are intolerant of the new and different, just like they were with TNG and ENT in years past. Those attitudes always exist, but they never win out in the long run. Eventually the new interpretation gets accepted as part of the whole, except by a tiny minority of purists. That's always been the pattern in the past, and I see no reason to expect anything different this time. The original continuity remains enduringly popular and the Abrams continuity is hugely popular, so there's no reason to think that any future Trek creators would want to avoid drawing on one or the other.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The writers intent may have been that it
was "our" Spock that we were seeing. In
fact, I'm confident that you could say that
with certainty. However, just like TATV
being a holodeck program gave you an out
for undoing Trip's death, the fact that the
movie establishes itself as an alternate
universe allows for the interpretation that
this is a Spock from a universe very similar
to but probably different in some ways, to
the one we saw on TOS, TNG, etc. Nothing
in the movie itself prevents that
interpretation, writers intent being worth
nothing more than their opinion. If it's not
on the screen, it doesn't count.

The difference being that TATV was the end of TV Trek at the time it was produced. No more was forthcoming, nor were any movies scheduled after the flop of Nemesis. TPTB thus gave writers a lot more leeway to reinterpret things and do what they wanted, since there was no more risk of conflicting with future canon.

STXI was a successful movie, with a sequel on the way, and TPTB are VERY interested in how their property is handled (see: nuTrek novels being cancelled, only projects with direct Bad Robot oversight being allowed set in the new timeline) and so don't want tie-in writers ignoring the movie's intent.

 

[RPJOB]

I'd hardly consider myself a purist. I accept it all. Books, comics and others included. Star Trek is not a universe, it's a multiverse and we've known this since Mirror Mirror. The parts that contradict? They're from universe #185,290 and 59,227. No biggie. If someone wants to see Old Spock as the one from the DC comics instead of TOS, more power to them.

If someone came up with a compelling story that relied upon Old Spock being a different one that "our" Spock and if the editor and CBS agreed then we'd get that story. That's a big if but by no means one that's impossible.

Once Abrams is done with his movies we'll get another movie series or perhaps a TV series or two, based on someone else's vision of what Trek is. Contrary to some of the time travel stories, the future is not set in stone. Neither is the past. The universe exists in whatever form the current (or future) owners of the franchise say it does.

Desirable? Irrelevant as it's based on what's going to make the most money.

Useful? Who's to say what one person or the other finds useful. You may not find it useful but someone down the line could turn the idea that it's a different Old Spock into the best Star Trek we've ever seen. Who knows?

 

[Sxottlan]

Oh, I like ships fine. I just like them better when they aren't killing people.

Ships don't kill people. People kill people.

That and sentient ships.

 

[Relayer1]

So, Spock Prime and Data Prime are in the JJverse ! Does Spock know about Data's head ? If I recall correctly Picard would have known about this, and he melded with Spock...

Oooooo! Ooooooo! We should start a rumor that Brent Spiner is appearing in the next movie!

Who says it's just a rumour ?

 

[MatthiasRussell]

^Did you see those leaked pictures of brent Spiner wearing a green body suit and Data face paint with Chris Pine on the set of Star Trek?