Has nuTrek been INTERNALLY consistent, so far?

[USS Triumphant]

I was just reading a thread about the chronology of Commanders Starfleet (or C-in-Cs, if those are even the same thing) over in Trek Lit. As much as I love PrimeTrek, there are sooooo many things like this where things are confused by inconsistent accounts across all of the shows, movies, and books. And, admittedly, sometimes those are a source of entertainment in and of themselves, but it made me wonder: If you disregard PrimeTrek entirely, has nuTrek been internally consistent across all of it's movies, books, comics, etc, so far, or has it already screwed the pooch in that department, too?

 

[BillJ]

Count me as someone that doesn't care one way or the other.

 

[Kemaiku]

It really doesn't matter. 4-5 hours versus 700+ plus doesn't give anywhere enough material to even consider wasting the effort finding out, as it would take ten times longer than watching them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The movies themselves are pretty much fine (the shuttlebay changes a little bit for STID, and engineering sprouts a different warp core to what was ejected at the end of ST'09). But if you include the comics and videogame, it all goes awry.

Countdown's version of Romulus' destruction doesn't quite match the mind meld in ST'09: In the comic, Spock hadn't yet launched when the planet was destroyed. This is probably due to Abrams tinkering with the meld sequence up until 2 weeks prior to the movie's theatrical release.

The videogame ends with (a heavily damaged) Enterprise setting course for Nibiru. Countdown to Darkness also ends with the Enterprise heading to Nibiru.

In ID, Kirk says he's never lost a crewman. Crew die left and right in the (pre-ID) comics and videogame.

Due to the one-year gap at the end of ID being added in post production, the comics don't acknowledge it.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Count me as someone that doesn't care one way or the other.

Count me as someone who is wondering why you posted, then. I do care. Not a lot, but enough to be curious about it. PrimeTrek still had plenty of potential for stories, and if what they wanted was this ship and crew, they could easily have done it to the same effect (an Enterprise and a Kirk & company that is almost like our own, but also significantly different) by just pulling them from their timeline into the 25th century Prime, and giving a reason they can't go back.

So it seems to me that the main functional reason for doing things as they did would have been to break from the old so they could do it all RIGHT this time. But things like this...

The movies themselves are pretty much fine (the shuttlebay changes a little bit for STID, and engineering sprouts a different warp core to what was ejected at the end of ST'09). But if you include the comics and videogame, it all goes awry.

Countdown's version of Romulus' destruction doesn't quite match the mind meld in ST'09: In the comic, Spock hadn't yet launched when the planet was destroyed. This is probably due to Abrams tinkering with the meld sequence up until 2 weeks prior to the movie's theatrical release.

The videogame ends with (a heavily damaged) Enterprise setting course for Nibiru. Countdown to Darkness also ends with the Enterprise heading to Nibiru.

In ID, Kirk says he's never lost a crewman. Crew die left and right in the (pre-ID) comics and videogame.

Due to the one-year gap at the end of ID being added in post production, the comics don't acknowledge it.

...let me know that that ain't happenin'. (Thanks for the response, KDID.)

 

[Joel_Kirk]

^^

Just a thought, but what if all those inconsistencies are still due to Nero? Different versions of Abramsverse happening in, um, 'parallels.' (Again, just a fanon thought).

 

[fireproof78]

I was just reading a thread about the chronology of Commanders Starfleet (or C-in-Cs, if those are even the same thing) over in Trek Lit. As much as I love PrimeTrek, there are sooooo many things like this where things are confused by inconsistent accounts across all of the shows, movies, and books. And, admittedly, sometimes those are a source of entertainment in and of themselves, but it made me wonder: If you disregard PrimeTrek entirely, has nuTrek been internally consistent across all of it's movies, books, comics, etc, so far, or has it already screwed the pooch in that department, too?

For the moment, I am inclined to say yes, it has. This is partially due to the limited material, and partially due to limited writing staff.

Trek 09 did not really give us insight in to Commanders Starfleet, as we are only presented with the Academy Review Board, which is not the same as Commander Starfleet. The only concept we get is that Starfleet as a flag ship, and Pike was it's commander.

In ID, we are presented with Admiral Marcus, who is the more consistent, Starfleet Admiral, in his very direct mission statement. I like his straight forward approach. He assembles starship commanders, makes it clear what needs to be done and that's it.

I think, due to the limited exposure, we have seen a different side of Starfleet but a more consistent side.

 

[Amaris]

It seems fairly consistent to me.

 

[Lance]

The movies themselves are pretty much fine (the shuttlebay changes a little bit for STID, and engineering sprouts a different warp core to what was ejected at the end of ST'09). But if you include the comics and videogame, it all goes awry.

Countdown's version of Romulus' destruction doesn't quite match the mind meld in ST'09: In the comic, Spock hadn't yet launched when the planet was destroyed. This is probably due to Abrams tinkering with the meld sequence up until 2 weeks prior to the movie's theatrical release.

The videogame ends with (a heavily damaged) Enterprise setting course for Nibiru. Countdown to Darkness also ends with the Enterprise heading to Nibiru.

In ID, Kirk says he's never lost a crewman. Crew die left and right in the (pre-ID) comics and videogame.

Due to the one-year gap at the end of ID being added in post production, the comics don't acknowledge it.

Nice summary KDID. Yeah, within themselves the movies are pretty consistent, but the spin-off media are all over the place. So has it always been, though..... brings back fond memories of the DC comics in the 1980s having to do gymnastics every time a new movie came out, and they had to try and fix all these 'extended adventures' into some sort of consistent time-frame with the films.

 

[OpenMaw]

Yeah, the entire run between TWOK and TSFS is basically null and void by the events of TSFS.

It's a little tricker with certain statements that have been made regarding the comics for the new films as being "canon" which I think is pretty clearly not the case. They just blatantly don't fit with both movies. (I do wish we had gotten some of the "meat" given to NERO in the countdown comic within the film itself.)

 

[The Wormhole]

Yeah, the entire run between TWOK and TSFS is basically null and void by the events of TSFS.

It's a little tricker with certain statements that have been made regarding the comics for the new films as being "canon" which I think is pretty clearly not the case. They just blatantly don't fit with both movies. (I do wish we had gotten some of the "meat" given to NERO in the countdown comic within the film itself.)

What's so tricky about it? The comics aren't canon, that's stated and established many times over. The only exception was that one interview where Orci was goaded and manipulated into calling them canon, but Orci recanted that within a day.

Or are you referring to the fact that Orci has to sign off on the comics to make sure they aren't covering plot material he has planned for the movies, therefore meaning anything we see in the comics won't be in the movies, like the Klingon war everyone seems to think Trek XIII will be about? That's different from being canon.

 

[USS Triumphant]

What's so tricky about it? The comics aren't canon, that's stated and established many times over. The only exception was that one interview where Orci was goaded and manipulated into calling them canon, but Orci recanted that within a day.

Or are you referring to the fact that Orci has to sign off on the comics to make sure they aren't covering plot material he has planned for the movies, therefore meaning anything we see in the comics won't be in the movies, like the Klingon war everyone seems to think Trek XIII will be about? That's different from being canon.

I can't speak for OpenMaw, but to me, it seems like if there was going to be centralized creative control as you describe above, then the person or people doing that control (perhaps a brand management team at CBS) could have done the job right and allowed ALL of it to be canon. If that meant less output but greater care and a higher quality product, so be it. But of course, that runs counter to our corporate culture, and as KDID already pointed out, the pooch is already screwed on this score.

 

[drt]

I think the comics oversold Orci's actual level of involvement to make them seem more "official" (I'd bet that the '09 Countdown issues he's credited with were more "story by").

 

[Nebusj]

I can't speak for OpenMaw, but to me, it seems like if there was going to be centralized creative control as you describe above, then the person or people doing that control (perhaps a brand management team at CBS) could have done the job right and allowed ALL of it to be canon. If that meant less output but greater care and a higher quality product, so be it. But of course, that runs counter to our corporate culture, and as KDID already pointed out, the pooch is already screwed on this score.

What is the link between 'canonical' status and a 'higher quality product'? I do not see an obvious link between the care put into a story and whether it is unambiguous between the 2009 movie and the comic book whether Ambassador Spock's ship launched before or after Romulus was destroyed.

 

[BillJ]

I can't speak for OpenMaw, but to me, it seems like if there was going to be centralized creative control as you describe above, then the person or people doing that control (perhaps a brand management team at CBS) could have done the job right and allowed ALL of it to be canon.

I'm sorry, but there is no way I want a film script held hostage by comic book material that was created two years prior to the script being written.

I care about good stories not whether or not it the comics and movies mesh together.

What is the link between 'canonical' status and a 'higher quality product'? I do not see an obvious link between the care put into a story and whether it is unambiguous between the 2009 movie and the comic book whether Ambassador Spock's ship launched before or after Romulus was destroyed.

+1

 

[USS Triumphant]

I guess it varies depending on whether you want to view the stories as legends - which would not require absolute consistency - or an accurate retelling of events, which would. I'm not saying that your way is wrong, just that it is not mutually exclusive with my way being a right way, too. And... we've done it your way once, for the last 50 years.

 

[Franklin]

Being there are only four hours of nuTrek on film, and only one year separated the stories in universe, I'd say it's been consistent.

Going forward, as long as the behavior and personalities of the major characters remain consistent or change within logical parameters, short of a massive retcon (like all of a sudden, Amanda is alive) or a bunch of retcons all at once, I'd say let the movies follow the on-screen writing philosophy that Trek has used for fifty years: if the change improves the story or is necessary for a good story, then go with it. The older I get, the less I care about minor (and even some major) internal inconsistencies across episodes or movies. And, I've never cared about the consistency of off-screen things with on-screen things.

 

[BillJ]

The older I get, the less I care about minor (and even some major) internal inconsistencies across episodes or movies.

Pretty much my feelings. Life's too short to nitpick minutiae, I just want the broad strokes to be right.

 

[Enterprise1701]

Well I can think of some contradictions within each movie:
in Star Trek 2009, Spock maroons Kirk for mutiny via an escape pod. But in Into Darkness, the Enterprise has a brig.
in Into Darkness, Marcus has Carol beamed off the Enterprise right through the shields, but later Khan demands Spock drop the shields and hand over the cryo torpedoes in exchange for Kirk, Scotty, and Carol.
Notwithstanding that Kirk's team aboard the K'normian trading vessel made it all the way into Qo'noS's atmosphere without being stopped (which is completely ridicuous, especially for the Klingon Empire's capital planet), the Federation is alright 1 year later in the epilogue of Into Darkness, no war with the Klingons anywhere.
In both movies, Earth Spacedock is shown with many Starfleet vessels docked and yet later nobody is around to help the Enterprise against the Narada nor the Vengeance.

As for non-canon materials, we could solve their inconsistencies by simply throwing them out of our head-canons, but I'm not generally in favor of this idea. Inconsistencies I've spotted:

In Into Darkness, Scotty says that Starfleet confiscated his transwarp beaming equation. So was that before or after he used it during the Enterprise's journey like in "The Return of the Archons, Part 1" or "The Truth About Tribbles, Part 1"?

While this is not necessarily "internal", Abrams and his crew have repeatedly iterated that the Narada and the Jellyfish made one-way temporal transits which left the "prime" reality intact. Q himself states this to Picard in-universe in "The Q Gambit, Part 1". But in "The Return of the Archons" 2-part comic story, the population of Beta III is revealed to be descended from the crew of the U.S.S. Archon and not native to the planet. And Landru is a human-invented AI computer. This is completely impossible because it is totally different from the original "The Return of the Archons" episode.

The 2013 Star Trek video game. It's atrocious. The Gorn are from another galaxy???
No.
And a 23rd century Vulcan terraforming device opens up "rips" in space even more powerful than the canonically depicted Bajoran wormhole or Iconian gateways?
No.
It outrages me even more than the 24th issue of the IDW ongoing series follows up on the video game. Using the "Gorn" from another galaxy.

 

[DCR]

My own problem is that the technology isn't consistent with the setting.

Put bluntly, starships don't make sense in the Abramsverse. Interstellar travel appears to take an hour at most, and in most cases much less, so why are they using the nautical paradigm for transport rather than the aviation paradigm?

What's the point of a "Five Year Mission" when nowhere in the galaxy is far enough away that you can't get home for lunch?

It doesn't make internal sense.