Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the same
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
The writers said the timeline was the same until Narada appeared in a Trekmovie Q+A when the 2009 movie hit cinemas. Spock Prime is indeed the same guy we first saw in "The Cage" and last saw in "Unification" and IIRC it's the same Q+A where they confirmed that the "Admiral Archer" mentioned in the 2009 movie is an aged version of Scott Bakula's character from Star Trek: Enterprise.
The writers said the timeline was the same until Narada appeared in a Trekmovie Q+A when the 2009 movie hit cinemas. Spock Prime is indeed the same guy we first saw in "The Cage" and last saw in "Unification" and IIRC it's the same Q+A where they confirmed that the "Admiral Archer" mentioned in the 2009 movie is an aged version of Scott Bakula's character from Star Trek: Enterprise.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Whichever one makes you sleep better at night.
Whichever one makes you sleep better at night.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
The idea that this is an alternate universe split off because of Nero is a fig leaf. Even if the writers were paying real careful attention to make sure that all events line up - and they clearly aren't - the visual artists, director and so on are willing to play fast and loose with so many things that nuTrek is pretty obviously a reboot.
The idea that this is an alternate universe split off because of Nero is a fig leaf. Even if the writers were paying real careful attention to make sure that all events line up - and they clearly aren't - the visual artists, director and so on are willing to play fast and loose with so many things that nuTrek is pretty obviously a reboot.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Agreed. The timeline may have been parallel to the Prime Universe, running more or less the same with some minor variations - up until Nero, that is - but the Abramsverse was, otherwise, a totally different universe from the one we knew from day one. Had Nero not intervened, we would have had a thirty-something Kirk take command of the Enterprise in the late 2260's, yes - but it would have been a slightly-older Pine, Quinto and the new cast, with the new patterned uniforms, on a not-quite-as-advanced Enterprise that (inside and out) would have looked like a cross between the Kelvin and the TMP refit (and not much like the TOS version at all).
This is a total reboot. The producers didn't want to call it such because they were afraid of alienating/scaring off the long-time franchise fans, but that's what it is. It is to the Prime Universe what the Ultimate Marvel Comics are to the regular Marvel line.
Agreed. The timeline may have been parallel to the Prime Universe, running more or less the same with some minor variations - up until Nero, that is - but the Abramsverse was, otherwise, a totally different universe from the one we knew from day one. Had Nero not intervened, we would have had a thirty-something Kirk take command of the Enterprise in the late 2260's, yes - but it would have been a slightly-older Pine, Quinto and the new cast, with the new patterned uniforms, on a not-quite-as-advanced Enterprise that (inside and out) would have looked like a cross between the Kelvin and the TMP refit (and not much like the TOS version at all).
This is a total reboot. The producers didn't want to call it such because they were afraid of alienating/scaring off the long-time franchise fans, but that's what it is. It is to the Prime Universe what the Ultimate Marvel Comics are to the regular Marvel line.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Yeah, if it being a reboot wasn't already completely obvious on first sight of the Kelvin from the outside, then it should have been blatantly so upon seeing it from the inside.
The fig leaf bore a strong resemblance to Leonard Nimoy.
Yeah, if it being a reboot wasn't already completely obvious on first sight of the Kelvin from the outside, then it should have been blatantly so upon seeing it from the inside.
The fig leaf bore a strong resemblance to Leonard Nimoy.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
With all the time travel that went on...nu trek charactersbare the ones who go back to Edith keeler/Capt Christopher/Gary seven/the whales...etc.. somewhere along the way they did something different than tos crew....leading to differentnship designs and somedifferent looks
With all the time travel that went on...nu trek charactersbare the ones who go back to Edith keeler/Capt Christopher/Gary seven/the whales...etc.. somewhere along the way they did something different than tos crew....leading to differentnship designs and somedifferent looks
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Not to be too self serving but I wrote about the Trek Time line in my blog last week. Check it out if you like (link in sig line)
My problem is that even if you take what the writers said at face value and these new movies branch off from the old time line...that creates problems.
If you think the events of Trek 09 take place in its own separate universe...that creates problems too.
The movie dose play like a reboot that erases the old time line and that too is something have a problem with.
Not to be too self serving but I wrote about the Trek Time line in my blog last week. Check it out if you like (link in sig line)
My problem is that even if you take what the writers said at face value and these new movies branch off from the old time line...that creates problems.
If you think the events of Trek 09 take place in its own separate universe...that creates problems too.
The movie dose play like a reboot that erases the old time line and that too is something have a problem with.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Kelvin sure looks differently from what a pre-Cage starship "should've" looked like based on reverse extrapolation from what filmed in 1964.
Then the '09 old Spock is a different or altered old Spock than the Spock we've been seeing since 1964, right?
Kelvin sure looks differently from what a pre-Cage starship "should've" looked like based on reverse extrapolation from what filmed in 1964.
Then the '09 old Spock is a different or altered old Spock than the Spock we've been seeing since 1964, right?
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
You guys are confusing "the same" with "the same production value." As far as I'm concerned, the Kelvin fits in perfects with what 2233 should look like. Of course it doesn't look like a cheesy cardboard "spaceship" set dreamed up in the 1960s. But *that* vision has license to change as technology evolves, so long as the storyline (or "established" history / canon) doesn't.
You guys are confusing "the same" with "the same production value." As far as I'm concerned, the Kelvin fits in perfects with what 2233 should look like. Of course it doesn't look like a cheesy cardboard "spaceship" set dreamed up in the 1960s. But *that* vision has license to change as technology evolves, so long as the storyline (or "established" history / canon) doesn't.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
'09 Old Spock is the same Spock we first met in 'The Cage.' What he mistook for mere time travel via Nero's red matter was in fact them crossing universes - from the Prime Universe over to the Abramsverse 150-something years in the past.
'09 Old Spock is the same Spock we first met in 'The Cage.' What he mistook for mere time travel via Nero's red matter was in fact them crossing universes - from the Prime Universe over to the Abramsverse 150-something years in the past.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
The Kelvin existed in 2233 in the original timeline, and it looked the way it looked all the time.
It's not a total reboot.
The Kelvin existed in 2233 in the original timeline, and it looked the way it looked all the time.
It's not a total reboot.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Then, let me elaborate.
Why is it necessary that the "storyline" [sic] remained the same, even while the art design so obviously changed? Additionally, where's the actual evidence that the backstory in fact remained the same? Furthermore, what about the evidence that the backstory in fact changed? Evidence such as a recalibrated warp scale, such as starships built in a manner contrary to the way the TOS writer's guide described, such as Chekov's age, and so forth?
From the opening moments of ST09, when the art design was so obviously different, it should have come as no surprise to anyone that a reboot was actually in progress.
Then, let me elaborate.
Why is it necessary that the "storyline" [sic] remained the same, even while the art design so obviously changed? Additionally, where's the actual evidence that the backstory in fact remained the same? Furthermore, what about the evidence that the backstory in fact changed? Evidence such as a recalibrated warp scale, such as starships built in a manner contrary to the way the TOS writer's guide described, such as Chekov's age, and so forth?
From the opening moments of ST09, when the art design was so obviously different, it should have come as no surprise to anyone that a reboot was actually in progress.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
So Enterprise was a reboot as well? Because that looks a HELL of a lot more advanced than TOS.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
I agree with you but the movie is as clear as mudd about that. Young Kirk and young Spock et al. sure do think that Old Spock and Nero are from their future. But they're not.
Also, old Spock watching Vulcan get destroyed looses a bit of its punch since we know that his planet Vulcan still lives in another timeline. But Nero and old Spock himself as shown in the movie sure do think it is the Vulcan from the other time line.
+
I agree with you but the movie is as clear as mudd about that. Young Kirk and young Spock et al. sure do think that Old Spock and Nero are from their future. But they're not.
Also, old Spock watching Vulcan get destroyed looses a bit of its punch since we know that his planet Vulcan still lives in another timeline. But Nero and old Spock himself as shown in the movie sure do think it is the Vulcan from the other time line.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Given what we saw in In a Mirror, Darkly, not so much. Retcon is more apt than reboot, when it comes to ENT. Besides, the main characters in ENT weren't the TOS characters, now were they?
Given what we saw in In a Mirror, Darkly, not so much. Retcon is more apt than reboot, when it comes to ENT. Besides, the main characters in ENT weren't the TOS characters, now were they?
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
True, but why not take what Spock said in XI at face value and accept the Kelvin design and aesthetic is a retcon as well?
True, but why not take what Spock said in XI at face value and accept the Kelvin design and aesthetic is a retcon as well?
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Let's not get carried away here. Spock and Nero time-traveled from their era to their past. The timelines diverged because of their incursion. Whether there are parallel timelines is irrelevant. They can no more travel to "their" proper past than you can travel to the universe in which you turned right when instead you turned left.
Let's not get carried away here. Spock and Nero time-traveled from their era to their past. The timelines diverged because of their incursion. Whether there are parallel timelines is irrelevant. They can no more travel to "their" proper past than you can travel to the universe in which you turned right when instead you turned left.
Re: Is everything before the destruction of the kelvin exactly the sam
Because, as I said, there are other elements in the film that don't perfectly fit, unless you interpret them as retconning TOS itself. Once that degree of retconning is occurring, it's better described as a reboot. Spock's exposition isn't encountered in the film until after the evidence of a reboot is already water under the bridge.
Because, as I said, there are other elements in the film that don't perfectly fit, unless you interpret them as retconning TOS itself. Once that degree of retconning is occurring, it's better described as a reboot. Spock's exposition isn't encountered in the film until after the evidence of a reboot is already water under the bridge.
Although I don't know for sure, because I haven't seen it, and maybe it won't, nevertheless I fully expect Into Darkness to rewrite parts of the timeline before Nero's incursion, piling more and more evidence on the side of the new continuity being a reboot.
Similar threads
