ENT Reference in Star Trek XI? - SPOILERS
- Thread starter Captain59
- Start date
The beauty of Archer living to see NCC1701 launch in 2245 and dying the same day is over now..
Since the ship launched in 2258 uncerimoniously.... Archer had to have been dead by then
Since the ship launched in 2258 uncerimoniously.... Archer had to have been dead by then
Robau said: "Polarize the viewscreen," which meant applying some kind of a polarization filter to viewscreen/window to reduce the glare from the star.
Yeah, that sucks. However, the original timeline will eventually be restored (Else the USS Relativity would be showing up), so it's still gonna happen. Just not in this timeline.
Ummm, no, Relativity wouldn't be showing up. The only time Relativity ever showed up was when it suited Braga's and his sidekicks' momentary whims.
Otherwise, Braxton's little Time Police would have kicked Janeway's butt for what she did in "Endgame."
The original timeline will never be restored because it still exists parallel to this new timeline. It just won't get revisited on screen any time soon. Vulcan is gone
, may it rest in peace.
The only two times they showed up was when the timeline wasn't restored without their meddling. If Janeway's actions in Endgame were part of their timeline, they wouldn't have kicked her butt.Ummm, no, Relativity wouldn't be showing up. The only time Relativity ever showed up was when it suited Braga's and his sidekicks' momentary whims.
Otherwise, Braxton's little Time Police would have kicked Janeway's butt for what she did in "Endgame."
The original timeline will never be restored because it still exists parallel to this new timeline. It just won't get revisited on screen any time soon. Vulcan is gone
It may take a while before the new timeline reaches it's reset button, though. Perhaps Picard or Sisko will get to "press the button" in this new timeline.
As long as Orci and Kurtzman run the show, there won't be any reset buttons. And by the time the creative team behind Trek changes, audiences will already be too accustomed to this new continuity that a radical change would only bring in confusion.
I think you need to face it - Berman/Braga era is gone for good. The sooner you accept it, the sooner you'll enjoy this new Trek 2.0 universe.
Eh, the destruction of Vulcan and such doesn't really demolish the TNG+ Universe since Vulcan didn't have much to do with it. Plenty of stuff in the TNG+ timeline would still likely happen anyways (Q and the Prophets invested too heavily into Picard and Sisko to just let them be erased) with a few differences.
The movie itself really doesn't, I guess, it only implies heavily that the timeline changed because of Nero stumbling into 2233, so everything before that would be the same as in the Prime Universe.
In reality if any such thing would be possible. But the movie shows us how similar the new timeline is to the old. The same people are born and end up in the same places at the end. Therefore, it stands to reason that by the time of Daniels (wasn't he from the 31st century?) it won't be too different from what is happening in the old timeline.
The truth is that Trek has screwed with time travel in such a way that over the course of what we've seen, a lot of new timelines were created. So, we probably saw different ones all the time, anyway.
Well, the effects of the events in First Contact were presented in ENT vaguely enough. Cochrane was on record saying that people from the future helped him while cyborgs tried to stop him. And the Borg sphere crashed on Earth. You wouldn't need the crew of the E to make that happen.
Or maybe we already saw the Abramsverse in ENT...
In the end, this quantum reality thing was just a device to do a soft reboot, I'm pretty sure they didn't waste too much time thinking about ENT. Nothing is keeping them from contradicting anything established by the series, if they so choose. It's very unlikely though because it's far enough in the past from their time frame. Unless they do, we can assume ENT happens the way we've seen it.
All in all, we're just having fun basking in the idea that of all the Trek series, ENT is the only one happening in both timelines, after all the hate it got. I'm not deadly serious about it all.
I know it will probably take a LOT of time, if they ever reset the new timeline. From my personal continuity-thing, however, I believe the timeline will eventually reset. And I already enjoy the Trek 2.0 universe (Just not as much as the original oine).
Technically I think Robau said "polarize the viewscreen." Apparently that close to a huge star/sun the Kelvin's main viewscreen functioned that way...I suppose to help filter out the brightest light coming from the star.
Since this movie took place in the Alt Universe, something Nero did could have pushed the launch date back 13 years...but that doesn't affect the Prime Universe at all. There's still no reason to believe the Enterprise didn't launch in 2245 in the Prime Universe.
That's the real beauty of this film...it doesn't affect anything in the Prime Universe, except Nero, his crew and ship, Spock, and the Jellyfish ship are no longer there in the 24th Century. But, that is just part of the normal timeline of the Prime Universe...that they left.
Also, I don't find the reference to Archer and his prized beagle as a cut on ENT at all. I still think it's majorly cool Archer is the only character from another Star Trek series mentioned. Although it would have been cool when the Jellyfish ship was destroyed if Prime Spock said something like, "Mr. Laforge will not be happy"...a reference to the Countdown comic prequel to the movie.
I liked that about the movie too.
Seeing the reference in context, it was fun. Even Scotty didn't conclude that the dog was a goner. (Gotta love Simon Pegg.) And knowing that the book ends with Porthos safe and sound doesn't hurt. I wish we could have seen the scene where Scotty quietly delivers the dog back to the Admiral.
In season 5 Porthos was going to be, tragically, lost in some space time temporal fart. It would have been very touching.
Obviously when Archer was an old man Porthos, the original one!! was returned to him. Perhaps he just appeared one day in Daniel's quarters and the security guarding it heard him barking.
Poor Archer, his joy was short lived because that larrikin Scotty went and beamed poor Porthos away
Obviously when Archer was an old man Porthos, the original one!! was returned to him. Perhaps he just appeared one day in Daniel's quarters and the security guarding it heard him barking.
Poor Archer, his joy was short lived because that larrikin Scotty went and beamed poor Porthos away
That would be great to see in the next movie...another nod to ENT and some continuity with the first movie.I wish we could have seen the scene where Scotty quietly delivers the dog back to the Admiral.
That would be great to see in the next movie...another nod to ENT and some continuity with the first movie.I wish we could have seen the scene where Scotty quietly delivers the dog back to the Admiral.
An Admiral McCoy-looking, decrepit Scott Bakula in thick old-age makeup. That'd be worth the price of admission alone!
That would be great to see in the next movie...another nod to ENT and some continuity with the first movie.I wish we could have seen the scene where Scotty quietly delivers the dog back to the Admiral.
An Admiral McCoy-looking, decrepit Scott Bakula in thick old-age makeup. That'd be worth the price of admission alone!
Especially if he calls Scotty, a "Whipper snapper."
Yeah, but suppose it's not Jonathan after all, but in fact his son. Would you like to see Bakula play him, or someone else?That would be great to see in the next movie...another nod to ENT and some continuity with the first movie.
An Admiral McCoy-looking, decrepit Scott Bakula in thick old-age makeup. That'd be worth the price of admission alone!
Especially if he calls Scotty, a "Whipper snapper."
Yeah, but suppose it's not Jonathan after all, but in fact his son. Would you like to see Bakula play him, or someone else?An Admiral McCoy-looking, decrepit Scott Bakula in thick old-age makeup. That'd be worth the price of admission alone!
Especially if he calls Scotty, a "Whipper snapper."
I suppose Jonathan could have married after leaving Enterprise and had a kid and grandkids. But the "IaMD" bio never hinted at that so I guess we're sort of left assuming it's him...The Old Man.
Bakula...just like he played his father in Quantum Leap.Yeah, but suppose it's not Jonathan after all, but in fact his son. Would you like to see Bakula play him, or someone else?An Admiral McCoy-looking, decrepit Scott Bakula in thick old-age makeup. That'd be worth the price of admission alone!
Especially if he calls Scotty, a "Whipper snapper."
Similar threads
