If this Film Started Out Showing April in Command...

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Not that I personally need a scene like this to enjoy the film, but I was wondering...

...If the first scene -- or one of the first scenes -- in this film showed the launching of the Enterprise, and we saw Robert April in command (played by Paul McGillion??), would that scene go a long way to winning over the hardcore fanboy naysayers -- even if were a short scene, and we never saw April again after that.

I mean if an up-to-that-point unsatisfied hardcore fan saw that scene, would he say to himself "Wow, maybe Abrams does know his Star Trek", and look upon the rest of the film with a more open-minded attitude?

Like I said, I don't care either way if they mention April or not; I'm just wondering if it would behoove Abrams and Co. to pander to the hardcore fanboy just a little.

 

[Franklin]

Some nuggets for the fans will undoubtedly be strewn throughout the movie.

Probably not that literally, though. And, in this case, we don't know how important it is (or if it's even important at all) to the story that Pike was the first captain of the Enterprise. If it matters, then Captain April is probably better off living only in the animated universe.
If it doesn't matter, then maybe a reference to an Admiral April (as in, "Sir, we have orders from Admiral April to proceed to -- ."), or something like that. Get that name on screen, but that's it. Nice and cryptic. Let the fanboys debate if it was "the" April or not. The rest of us will enjoy the movie.

 

[msbae]

It doesn't matter. TAS isn't considered canon anyway...

 

[Captain Pike]

I think the very fact they have included Pike in it at all, let alone seemingly making him a major character is a huge step in the right direction anyway. We should count ourselves lucky if just for that.

If we see April, well and good, but it's no big deal as msbae points out - he's non-canonical.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

It doesn't matter. TAS isn't considered canon anyway...

That's not the point.

The point is this: If Abrams includes a scene such as this -- say only 5 minutes of screen time -- and make it fit in smoothly with the rest of the film, do you think it would help the undecided/doubtful fan look more favorably upon the rest of the film.

By the way -- obviously if April is shown in this film, then he becomes canon, whether he was ever shown or in the past or not. I have a feeling there WILL be some non-canon "fanon" (such as Robert April) that will be canonized by this film. Maybe not April per se, but some fanon items will be canonized.

 

[Jarrott2]

I have a funny feeling that Robert April is going to be in the movie.
Tom Cruise was on set and he is a huge trek fan. I predict he will have cameo as April.

 

[Dane_Whitman]

I have a funny feeling that Robert April is going to be in the movie.

Same here. It would be a nice nugget indeed.

 

[shapeshifter]

I wont cry in my popcorn if he isn't there but I will cheer if he is!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Who's Robert April, again? Did he command the Enterprise before Winter or after Raintree?

In any event, the OP is right - throwing the canonistas a bone like that couldn't hurt.

 

[Oso Blanco]

I have a funny feeling that Robert April is going to be in the movie.
Tom Cruise was on set and he is a huge trek fan. I predict he will have cameo as April.

I'd love to see a canon reference to Robert April, but I don't want Tom Cruise anywhere near Star Trek!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

"Star Trek" would be lucky to get an appearence by Tom Cruise. Man's a movie star most of whose "failures" open bigger than any Trek movie in history.

 

[scotthm]

The point is this: If Abrams includes a scene such as this -- say only 5 minutes of screen time -- and make it fit in smoothly with the rest of the film, do you think it would help the undecided/doubtful fan look more favorably upon the rest of the film.

No, because any 'fan' needing such a scene already has too many preconceptions of what this film has to be (in their own minds, of course.) You can't really please such people.

---------------

 

[gastrof]

Not that I personally need a scene like this to enjoy the film, but I was wondering...

...If the first scene -- or one of the first scenes -- in this film showed the launching of the Enterprise, and we saw Robert April in command (played by Paul McGillion??), would that scene go a long way to winning over the hardcore fanboy naysayers -- even if were a short scene, and we never saw April again after that.

I mean if an up-to-that-point unsatisfied hardcore fan saw that scene, would he say to himself "Wow, maybe Abrams does know his Star Trek", and look upon the rest of the film with a more open-minded attitude?

Like I said, I don't care either way if they mention April or not; I'm just wondering if it would behoove Abrams and Co. to pander to the hardcore fanboy just a little.

The problem is that this is a story about Kirk, not about the Enterprise.

The Enterprise ends up significant because it's Kirk's ship. The "early glimpse" we get is apparently Kirk's mother pregnant with him, or possibly her during the period he was a young kid.

April might very well be out there on the Enterprise at that time, but I doubt we'll end up seeing him.

The movie will be too busy showing Spock on his mission to stop the bad guys who'll be...well...you know.

 

[Procutus]

I have a funny feeling that Robert April is going to be in the movie.
Tom Cruise was on set and he is a huge trek fan. I predict he will have cameo as April.

I'd love to see a canon reference to Robert April, but I don't want Tom Cruise anywhere near Star Trek!

Same here. Let's see McGillion do it, if such a scene were to exist.

 

[DrTaylor]

...If the first scene -- or one of the first scenes -- in this film showed the launching of the Enterprise, and we saw Robert April in command (played by Paul McGillion??), would that scene go a long way to winning over the hardcore fanboy naysayers -- even if were a short scene, and we never saw April again after that.

Well, yeah, maybe. But it might be nice too to see some other stuff as well, like Kirk and his good buddy Gary, or maybe Kirk's girlfriend Carol, or McCoy's girlfriend Nancy, or Spock's girlfriend Leila... wow. Lots of girlfriends, but you get the idea.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Some nuggets for the fans will undoubtedly be strewn throughout the movie.

Probably not that literally, though. And, in this case, we don't know how important it is (or if it's even important at all) to the story that Pike was the first captain of the Enterprise. If it matters, then Captain April is probably better off living only in the animated universe.
If it doesn't matter, then maybe a reference to an Admiral April (as in, "Sir, we have orders from Admiral April to proceed to -- ."), or something like that. Get that name on screen, but that's it. Nice and cryptic. Let the fanboys debate if it was "the" April or not. The rest of us will enjoy the movie.

Ideally, the movie shouldn't address this sort of thing at all.

If the STORY being told requires the Enteprise to be seen at a specific time when April would've been in command... sure, give it. If it doesn't... don't.

We know that we'll see Pike (only because we know who's been cast as Pike). There's no reason, in-film, to state that he's "the first captain" or "the second captain" or the "ten bazillionth captain" of the ship. Only that, at the time we see him, he's the captain.

No need to go all expository on canonical minutiae... just avoid overtly CONTRADICTING canonical minutiae!

Anything more... in EITHER direction... will be a "fannish distraction" from what the real audience of the film cares about... the STORY.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I completely agree.

However, it had been suggested (by R. Orci?) that perhaps scenes from the first teaser trailer may in fact be in the film. My idea is that IF such a scene is a part of the film, would it be prudent to show April as Captain. If the construction/launch of the Enterprise is part of the film, but only shown from the viewpoint of an "outside spectator", then so be it -- no Captain April needs to be shown.

I do agree with the notion that just because they may start the "Enterprise" parts of this film with Pike as Captain does not necessarily mean he was the first Captain -- although some 'fans' can't seem to grasp that concept.

 

[Franklin]

Some nuggets for the fans will undoubtedly be strewn throughout the movie.

Probably not that literally, though. And, in this case, we don't know how important it is (or if it's even important at all) to the story that Pike was the first captain of the Enterprise. If it matters, then Captain April is probably better off living only in the animated universe.
If it doesn't matter, then maybe a reference to an Admiral April (as in, "Sir, we have orders from Admiral April to proceed to -- ."), or something like that. Get that name on screen, but that's it. Nice and cryptic. Let the fanboys debate if it was "the" April or not. The rest of us will enjoy the movie.

Ideally, the movie shouldn't address this sort of thing at all.

If the STORY being told requires the Enteprise to be seen at a specific time when April would've been in command... sure, give it. If it doesn't... don't.

We know that we'll see Pike (only because we know who's been cast as Pike). There's no reason, in-film, to state that he's "the first captain" or "the second captain" or the "ten bazillionth captain" of the ship. Only that, at the time we see him, he's the captain.

No need to go all expository on canonical minutiae... just avoid overtly CONTRADICTING canonical minutiae!

Anything more... in EITHER direction... will be a "fannish distraction" from what the real audience of the film cares about... the STORY.

A good, clean, fast-moving story without a lot of exposition is always best.

At the same time, I think the writers have said that there are mentions in the movie that fans may recognize. That said, little nuggets could be tossed in when appropriate. Just a page over a PA system in an establishing scene; a mention of a name in a conversation; whatever. It doesn't have to be intrusive, and it doesn't even have to settle anything.

To that end, if there is a scene of the construction of the Enterprise, it must be important in some way. So, my guess is we'll see Captain Pike there, not Robert April. People will have to draw their conclusions from that. It's very true that it's not important for this movie to take the time to establish that Pike was the first captain of the Enterprise or not. But I think it will be apparent he was. April is Captain Dunsel here. Superfluous. Not needed for the story. His inclusion, just to set any record straight, would be confusing unless he had some other role in the movie. And, the name April is on no cast list.

It can go three ways. (1) it's established beyond reasonable doubt that Pike was first, or (2) there could be a throwaway line in the movie that mentions something about April without taking extra effort or being there for pure exposition -- one of those "nuggets," or (3) the question is left open.

 

[gastrof]

...No need to go all expository on canonical minutiae... just avoid overtly CONTRADICTING canonical minutiae!

Anything more... in EITHER direction... will be a "fannish distraction" from what the real audience of the film cares about... the STORY.

While I agree with you regarding the point you're making, I'd have preferred you worded that differently.

Let's not forget that "fan boys" are who kept Trek alive all this time and gave Paramount reason to even DO this film. JJ may say he's aiming at a larger audience than just the existing fans, the fact remains that if it weren't for the fans, there'd BE no interest in Star Trek today.

In my opinion, the fans are still the "real audience".

Others are welcome to join us.

 

[gastrof]

...To that end, if there is a scene of the construction of the Enterprise, it must be important in some way. So, my guess is we'll see Captain Pike there, not Robert April. People will have to draw their conclusions from that. It's very true that it's not important for this movie to take the time to establish that Pike was the first captain of the Enterprise or not...

It can go three ways. (1) it's established beyond reasonable doubt that Pike was first, or (2) there could be a throwaway line in the movie that mentions something about April without taking extra effort or being there for pure exposition -- one of those "nuggets," or (3) the question is left open.

Or they could just plain not say anything about who the first Captain was, and show Pike being put in command of the existing ship and crew, or just say NOTHING about that. There could still be a scene of the Enterprise being built, and then some other stuff happens, and later we see Pike in command of the Enterprise.

To be honest, tho', while the Encyclopedia and Compendium both (I believe) establish April as existing, it's also true that "onscreen is the only source for what's truly canon".

The only onscreen basis for April even existing is the animated episode "The Counter-Clock Incident". Since TAS isn't counted as entirely canon, that whole episode could easily be dismissed and so April vanishes from Trek history "like the popping of a soap bubble". Counter-Clock never did make any sense anyway, so no great loss.

Then there's also that line in ST3, that the Enterprise is 20 years old.

This would make it five years old at the time of Space Seed.

So how is it Spock was serving on her about 13 years earlier, under Pike?

That's something I've never been able to truly work out, so the continuity is either a bit fluid, or the "20 years" mentioned aren't Earth years.

Eh.

It'll be a Trek movie, and we shall go.