Hated it

[Joel_Kirk]

Good point. Now I personally believe the clear intent of the film was that the Prime Universe still existed, but even still the whole debate is akin to arguing about how many Organians can dance on the head of the pin.

It doesn't make any practical difference when it comes to watching the new movies.

Weeeelll, given that Organians can be non-corporeal beings, I would say that it is possible to have 'multiple' individuals on a head of a pin at any time. Unless, there is some sort of space in their non-corporeal state that would crowd them on said head of pin...

Okay, now we're getting somewhere . . ..

 

[UFO]

Your right. It's not a question of understanding the concept of "alternate universe" as intended in ST09. Its just a question of what actually was intend via the simple expedient of watching the movie alone. And yes, a holo projection in the classroom they are walking out of would do wonders. Good idea.

Well, my apologies but just watching film (back in 2009) I was left with the impression that it was alternate universe, akin to the Mirror Universe. A time line that flowed with the same timeline (Prime or what have you) but different due to different preceding events.

That was just my take-away. ... .

I'll take your word for that. Anyway, it appears I'm not completely alone and in my defense, it could be that I was distracted by other more important matters. Never-the-less, I think that if you ignore the phrase "alternate reality" (which itself can be taken both ways) the rest of the time travel dialogue fits in as well or better if viewed as a normal Star Trek same universe scenario. In fact I have long held the view that the latter was originally intended, but was probably changed when someone figured they could have the best of both er, universes and perhaps avoid some fan grief.

In TOS episodes, City on the Edge of Forever, Tomorrow is Yesterday, Yesteryear, Assignment Earth and maybe even TVH and FC had any changes made in the past affecting one reality - not creating new universes. Then you also had Alternative factor and Mirror Mirror with co-existing universes.
Even ENT had enemies going back in time to destroy 'the present'.

So given that in the Star Trek universe mostly/always going back in time affects the 'current universe' and doesn't create a new additional reality its natural to assume that may have happened in ST09.

Exactly. Where is the common place phrase "parallel universe" or even "Many Worlds Interpretation" or anything similar mentioned? When Spock Prime later talks about seeing Vulcan destroyed it sound to me as though he believes it is really "his" Vulcan. As far as I can remember, only the phrase "alternate reality" (and technically the probability Spock Prime would no longer be in a position to follow Nero once Nero changed his "present") gives any clue to the truth of what was actually supposed to be going on. And for that to sway you, you would have to have a good grasp of what "alternate reality" normally implies, it seems to me. I could be wrong of coures, but I would say that if the film markers had to come out soon after it's release to explain what was happening, it probably confused a lot of people.

...

I think this was a great way to do the reboot rather than just simply tossing everything aside, if nothing else it's provoking good debates with us fans.

It's a question of the viewer suspending disbelief and making peace with it. I have.

I agree with you about it being a good way to handle things, but wouldn't have a problem either way. My gripe is just one of clarity.

It doesn't make any practical difference when it comes to watching the new movies.

I'm picky, I like to know what's going on.

 

[Commishsleer]

I'm not quite clear on what the problem is. We were never going to see that continuity again anyway, so what does it matter if it was erased? A difference that makes no difference is no difference. If your enjoyment of a show depends on whether or not it actually happened, you picked the wrong genre.

Good point. Now I personally believe the clear intent of the film was that the Prime Universe still existed, but even still the whole debate is akin to arguing about how many Organians can dance on the head of the pin.

It doesn't make any practical difference when it comes to watching the new movies.

Unless they try to 'rescue' Shatner Kirk from the Prime Universe.
I suppose it might make a difference for the literature/comic readers but who's so hung up on canon that they wouldn't read a DS9 novel because that universe might no longer exist.
I read the TOS novels and are grateful they are still writing them no matter whats happening in nuTrek.

A potential problem with having the Prime Universe still existing is that Nero actually created the nuUniverse. Actually caused nuKirk and nuSpock to exist. Nero was initially a creator and then later a destroyer. PrimeSpock's grief is less understandable. His universe is still there. His Vulcan is still teeming with life. Maybe he just grieves for the loss of any life.

 

[Timewalker]

I suppose it might make a difference for the literature/comic readers but who's so hung up on canon that they wouldn't read a DS9 novel because that universe might no longer exist.
I read the TOS novels and are grateful they are still writing them no matter whats happening in nuTrek.

The problem is if elements of nuTrek creep in to the TOS novels. Why have stuff from an alternate universe in the prime universe books if it doesn't exist in that prime universe?

 

[BillJ]

I suppose it might make a difference for the literature/comic readers but who's so hung up on canon that they wouldn't read a DS9 novel because that universe might no longer exist.
I read the TOS novels and are grateful they are still writing them no matter whats happening in nuTrek.

The problem is if elements of nuTrek creep in to the TOS novels. Why have stuff from an alternate universe in the prime universe books if it doesn't exist in that prime universe?

Like what? Things like the Kelvin, Captain Robau, the Laurentian System would've all existed prior to the timeline splitting.

 

[Timewalker]

I suppose it might make a difference for the literature/comic readers but who's so hung up on canon that they wouldn't read a DS9 novel because that universe might no longer exist.
I read the TOS novels and are grateful they are still writing them no matter whats happening in nuTrek.

The problem is if elements of nuTrek creep in to the TOS novels. Why have stuff from an alternate universe in the prime universe books if it doesn't exist in that prime universe?

Like what? Things like the Kelvin, Captain Robau, the Laurentian System would've all existed prior to the timeline splitting.

We've had this argument before, and I'm not interested in doing it again. Let TOS novels include pre-nuTrek stuff and let nuTrek novels include nuTrek stuff. Let people who like one or the other read what they prefer; if they like all of it, they can enjoy all of it.

 

[BillJ]

We've had this argument before, and I'm not interested in doing it again. Let TOS novels include pre-nuTrek stuff and let nuTrek novels include nuTrek stuff. Let people who like one or the other read what they prefer; if they like all of it, they can enjoy all of it.

It makes no sense to exclude newer material from the TOS novels because a few people just can't stand to move forward with the rest of us.

If you just can't stand it, read the pre-2009 novels and let the rest of us enjoy the expanded universe in peace.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Seems like a weird thing to get hung up on, considering Star Trek has been a mountain of retcons from the start.

A few more absolutely will not hurt.

 

[Timewalker]

We've had this argument before, and I'm not interested in doing it again. Let TOS novels include pre-nuTrek stuff and let nuTrek novels include nuTrek stuff. Let people who like one or the other read what they prefer; if they like all of it, they can enjoy all of it.

It makes no sense to exclude newer material from the TOS novels because a few people just can't stand to move forward with the rest of us.

If you just can't stand it, read the pre-2009 novels and let the rest of us enjoy the expanded universe in peace.

Did I not just say that you could go forth and enjoy all of it since you're one of the people who does like all of it (with the apparent exception of anything remotely touched upon by Berman)?

This is why I haven't bought many Star Trek novels in recent years. Too much bother to return them for refunds if I find nuTrek crap in them.

 

[Commishsleer]

We've had this argument before, and I'm not interested in doing it again. Let TOS novels include pre-nuTrek stuff and let nuTrek novels include nuTrek stuff. Let people who like one or the other read what they prefer; if they like all of it, they can enjoy all of it.

It makes no sense to exclude newer material from the TOS novels because a few people just can't stand to move forward with the rest of us.

If you just can't stand it, read the pre-2009 novels and let the rest of us enjoy the expanded universe in peace.

Are there licensing issues with say writing a Captain Robau novel set in the TOS era or a Captain Picard meets Nero set in the TNG era?

 

[M'Sharak]

...

We've had this argument before, and I'm not interested in doing it again.

Let's

...

If you just can't stand it, read the pre-2009 novels and let the rest of us enjoy the expanded universe in peace.

not

...

Did I not just say that you could go forth and enjoy all of it since you're one of the people who does like all of it (with the apparent exception of anything remotely touched upon by Berman)?

make things personal.

Discuss the movie, discuss the novels, discuss the difference between the Original Series and the Abramsverse novels, but leave out the little personal digs. If this thread turns one more time toward swipes at (or criticism of) other posters, it will be closed.

 

[Greg Cox]

This is why I haven't bought many Star Trek novels in recent years. Too much bother to return them for refunds if I find nuTrek crap in them.

I have to ask: is this even happening? I mean, I don't really get what the problem would be if it was, but I'm not aware of any nuTrek material making its way into the books yet. As far as I know, any such concerns are purely hypothetical at this point.

Lord knows I've never had occasion to work any references to the new movies into my TREK books and have no plans to do so anytime soon.

Not, as they say on Seinfeld, that there would anything wrong with that.

 

[bbailey861]

I haven't come across it. I was disappointed when the nuTrek books that were to be published were unceremoniously yanked from the schedule. I think it's just an excuse not to buy books since I would imagine it would be easy enough to find out if any book had nuTrek in it or not. Just start a thread on the Lit site and ask. Someone - the authors, even - would likely answer it quick enough.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I've read every TOS novel that's been released in the last five plus years. I can't think of a single New Trek reference appearing in any of them.

 

[fireproof78]

Your right. It's not a question of understanding the concept of "alternate universe" as intended in ST09. Its just a question of what actually was intend via the simple expedient of watching the movie alone. And yes, a holo projection in the classroom they are walking out of would do wonders. Good idea.

Well, my apologies but just watching film (back in 2009) I was left with the impression that it was alternate universe, akin to the Mirror Universe. A time line that flowed with the same timeline (Prime or what have you) but different due to different preceding events.

That was just my take-away. ... .

I'll take your word for that. Anyway, it appears I'm not completely alone and in my defense, it could be that I was distracted by other more important matters. Never-the-less, I think that if you ignore the phrase "alternate reality" (which itself can be taken both ways) the rest of the time travel dialogue fits in as well or better if viewed as a normal Star Trek same universe scenario. In fact I have long held the view that the latter was originally intended, but was probably changed when someone figured they could have the best of both er, universes and perhaps avoid some fan grief.

I can understand your position, but I am afraid I have to disagree, respectfully. First of all, BTS details provide for the idea of alternate reality being the writers intent from the beginning. In addition, another Trek writer commented that if they had done nuTrek they would have done a clean reboot, rather than dealing with different realities.

In addition, I was not aware that Trek had a clear description of how it dealt with time travel and alternate realities. Given the different takes that have been presented, there is room for interpretation, I think.

As I have pointed out, TOS journeyed in to alternate realities before, such as the Mirror Universe. It was described in "Parallels" as "quantum realities."

Now, we can split hairs over the methodology, but it seems that depending on the method of time travel will affect the arrival point in the time streams, either in the same time stream, such as Voyage Home, or Guardian of Forever, or an alternate reality, jumping the streams due to a spatial anomaly, such as an ion storm (Mirror Universe), red matter black hole (Abramsverse).

There is a variety of interpretations, they can fit in to the Trek verse with little problem

This is why I haven't bought many Star Trek novels in recent years. Too much bother to return them for refunds if I find nuTrek crap in them.

I have to ask: is this even happening? I mean, I don't really get what the problem would be if it was, but I'm not aware of any nuTrek material making its way into the books yet. As far as I know, any such concerns are purely hypothetical at this point.

Lord knows I've never had occasion to work any references to the new movies into my TREK books and have no plans to do so anytime soon.

Not, as they say on Seinfeld, that there would anything wrong with that.

I was also under the impression that book distribution was a fight that Abrams and Co had, and had lost or was still under dispute or something. Could not find anything about it news wise, so maybe someone else can enlighten me.

In any case, TNG appearances in TOS has not ruined those novels for me, so I am confused how nuTrek references (if any can occur at all) can ruin a book?

 

[BillJ]

Did I not just say that you could go forth and enjoy all of it since you're one of the people who does like all of it (with the apparent exception of anything remotely touched upon by Berman)?

Actually, I own all the Berman related material on DVD plus the first five seasons of TNG and the TNG movies on Blu-ray disc. The Berman work isn't my favorite Trek but even with that, I don't mind seeing references to it in the books/novels that I read. I like good stories regardless of what they reference. I trust if a writer is making a reference, that they believe it adds to the story.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

And really, how is referencing Captain Robau's glorious bald head or the annual Starfleet pot luck in the Laurentian system going to ruin a novel?

 

[UFO]

I'll take your word for that. Anyway, it appears I'm not completely alone and in my defense, it could be that I was distracted by other more important matters. Never-the-less, I think that if you ignore the phrase "alternate reality" (which itself can be taken both ways) the rest of the time travel dialogue fits in as well or better if viewed as a normal Star Trek same universe scenario. In fact I have long held the view that the latter was originally intended, but was probably changed when someone figured they could have the best of both er, universes and perhaps avoid some fan grief.

I can understand your position, but I am afraid I have to disagree, respectfully. First of all, BTS details provide for the idea of alternate reality being the writers intent from the beginning.

Not necessarily. I didn't spot anything that indicated they always intended that outcome. Did you? Never-the-less, thank you for that link. Very interesting.

As I have pointed out, TOS journeyed in to alternate realities before, such as the Mirror Universe. It was described in "Parallels" as "quantum realities."

Yes, but as Mutoid pointed out, that's not the traditional "default" method (so people can be forgiven for jumping to a traditional conclusion). Even so, I don't think past Trek excursions involved the branching scenario. Without that you have to explain how time travel also gets you into a pre-existing alternate universe, not to mention why that universe is so similar to the one you just left. Even Bob said:

… And yet, oddly, as a practical matter, most people who see this movie will not have read this interview. Most of the audience will assume the classical time travel rules still apply.

Now, we can split hairs over the methodology, but it seems that depending on the method of time travel will affect the arrival point in the time streams, either in the same time stream, such as Voyage Home, or Guardian of Forever, or an alternate reality, jumping the streams due to a spatial anomaly, such as an ion storm (Mirror Universe), red matter black hole (Abramsverse).

There is a variety of interpretations, they can fit in to the Trek verse with little problem

Sorry but that's not my impression. Once you invoke Quantum Mechanics, branching will occur every time you time-travel as its a part the fabric of the universe(s) not part of the method of time travel. Indeed if I understand things correctly, its happening all the time irrespective of whether time travel is happening or not. Its just that time travel is likely to product significant and interesting branches so we follow them. Eg. in the Mirror Universe example, arriving would have created a branch (in the mirror universe) as would trying to return to their original universe. Interestingly the bad versions of Kirk and Co wouldn't have shown up in the "Prime" universe either but would have created their own branch off it. This means the universe they got back to (not their original one of course but a copy of it) wouldn't know anything about their evil twins.

Disclaimer: I understand there is a book called "Department of Temporal Investigations: Watching the Clock" by Christopher L Bennet that goes into these issues. Now it may explain why the above is wrong in whole or in part. Unfortunately I haven't read it (yet) so I don't know.

 

[eyeresist]

(Checks discs of TOS movies and episodes.) Nothing I have has been erased.

All mine have disappeared. Where they were, there is just a note which says "Try an alternate universe."


My nephews have been overdosing on Star Wars and I'm hoping to introduce them to Trek this Christmas - using the comic adaptation of ST09 (not the nu "continuing voyages" comics, which look pretty awful). I can't imagine them tolerating ancient-looking 4:3 TV shows or mid-budget 80s movies, not at their age anyway. Glossy new Trek is essential if the franchise is to have a future.

The only thing I really disliked about ST09 was the glee with which they offed Nero - a cheap and nasty payoff. And it is a shame we won't be visiting Vulcan for the forseeable future (unless our heroes go back in time!). Haven't seen STID.

Anyway, even if what they make does not exactly suit my needs, I hope they keep making more Trek. I imagine opinions will mellow with time, until ST09 is about as controversial as TMP. People will look back 20 years from now and say 'Remember all that fuss about that first Abrams movie? That was weird."

 

[M'Sharak]

The only thing I really disliked about ST09 was the glee with which they offed Nero

I keep hearing about this supposed glee—it is a thing people seem to like to talk about—but I have yet to witness it for myself. Please indicate the location of the glee. Give exact time index, if possible.