Is ST:ID Not Canon Anymore According to the New Continuity?

[Greg Cox]

No Star Trek movie or TV show has ever mentioned V'Ger again. Doesn't mean TMP has been been "officially" stricken from the "canon."

Sybok was never mentioned after that one movie. Hell, bloody Edith Keeler was never mentioned again after "City on the Edge of Forever."

I swear, some days I wish we could just ban the word "canon" . . . .

 

[BillJ]

I swear, some days I wish we could just ban the word "canon" . . . .

Amen.

 

[Tosk]

No Star Trek movie or TV show has ever mentioned V'Ger again. Doesn't mean TMP has been been "officially" stricken from the "canon."

Sybok was never mentioned after that one movie. Hell, bloody Edith Keeler was never mentioned again after "City on the Edge of Forever."

I swear, some days I wish we could just ban the word "canon" . . . .

That'd be sweet. Worse yet, the obsession with it has spread to other fandoms far and wide.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Really shows the sad state that Trek is in when the film makers talk openly about how they're ignoring the immediate entry preceding this.

1. Not what was said

2. What you describe is exactly what happened in 1982

 

[Jeyl]

2. What you describe is exactly what happened in 1982

I don't think so. What exactly was there to ignore in TMP that they didn't want in TWOK? Kirk was still an admiral, the Enterprise was still refitted and Spock was true to his word about not wanting to remain on Vulcan. The story of TMP was all but finished and what new crew members we could have gotten disappeared in the end leaving just the original crew. Nothing was really abandoned.

In the case of Star Trek Beyond, they're abandoning A LOT of things that Into Darkness introduced. The conflict with the Klingons, Carol Marcus, portable transwarp beaming devices and curing death itself. I only say they're important because, duh. THE FILM MADE THEM IMPORTANT. How can you ask us to take anything seriously if none of it is going to matter?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

In the case of Star Trek Beyond, they're abandoning A LOT of things that Into Darkness introduced. The conflict with the Klingons, Carol Marcus, portable transwarp beaming devices and curing death itself. I only say they're important because, duh. THE FILM MADE THEM IMPORTANT. How can you ask us to take anything seriously if none of it is going to matter?

They're not abandoning or eliminating those things. Just not mentioning them. There is a difference...

 

[fireproof78]

I don't think so. What exactly was there to ignore in TMP that they didn't want in TWOK? Kirk was still an admiral, the Enterprise was still refitted and Spock was true to his word about not wanting to remain on Vulcan. The story of TMP was all but finished and what new crew members we could have gotten disappeared in the end leaving just the original crew. Nothing was really abandoned.

In the case of Star Trek Beyond, they're abandoning A LOT of things that Into Darkness introduced. The conflict with the Klingons, Carol Marcus, portable transwarp beaming devices and curing death itself. I only say they're important because, duh. THE FILM MADE THEM IMPORTANT. How can you ask us to take anything seriously if none of it is going to matter?

But, Trek has done that for years. Some things simply don't matter, no matter how much importance the last film or story puts on it.

Also, until I see STB I'm not really going to worry about it. STID ended in a way that resolved most plot points and left things open with a 5 year mission.

I don't know. I don't see it as that big of a deal. I think Lin, Pegg and Jung are talented enough to utilize the elements they want and move past what they don't want. I don't really see this as something new.

 

[dahj]

The conflict with the Klingons, Carol Marcus, portable transwarp beaming devices and curing death itself.I only say they're important because, duh. THE FILM MADE THEM IMPORTANT.

All those things were relevant for that film.
Now they're making another one. If those things don't contribute anything to the story they're trying to tell in this one why should they be included?

 

[Pauln6]

Carol is not in the movie? Oh dear. I was assuming that we would power up to an unprecedented three women (oh wait...) and the new guest character would be inspiring without needing to be Kirk's potential love interest. Suddenly my expectations are dipping somewhat. I suppose I can can still keep my hopes up that Chapel and/or Rand will feature and at least Star Wars is now featuring more women than Trek. How things change.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Is Boutella's character a love interest?

 

[Michael]

Is Boutella's character a love interest?

Boy, I hope she's not. I wouldn't be surprised, though. There hasn't been any official word yet about her role in the movie, as far as I know.

Would be kinda neat if this movie passed the Bechtel test, although I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Pauln6]

Don't know but I assumed that with Carol it would be less likely. They may decide that one romance is enough but Kirk is assumed to be the ladies' man. They have to reference that somehow I would have thought. Expectations demands it!

 

[Jeyl]

All those things were relevant for that film.
Now they're making another one. If those things don't contribute anything to the story they're trying to tell in this one why should they be included?

If we're all about what contributes to a movie's story and what doesn't, please explain how a scene where Carol Marcus strips to her underwear contributes to the story in Star Trek Into Darkness. Why is that scene more relevant than crewman having personal transwarp breaming devices that can fit inside duffle bag? I think that would contribute more for a film where the crew are stranded on a planet without a starship.

Also, have we confirmed whether or not the aliens are going to be attacking Earth or not? Because if they are, this movie isn't anything new at all.

 

[Michael]

Also, have we confirmed whether or not the aliens are going to be attacking Earth or not? Because if they are, this movie isn't anything new at all.

As far as I know they don't seem to be attacking Earth. What we see in the trailer (the scenes filmed in Dubai) is a new Federation outpost.

 

[dahj]

having personal transwarp breaming devices that can fit inside duffle bag? I think that would contribute more for a film where the crew are stranded on a planet without a starship.

It's not like this is the first time that a piece of technology that could solve a problem conveniently doesn't work...

 

[Jeyl]

It's not like this is the first time that a piece of technology that could solve a problem conveniently doesn't work...

But it did work. Perfectly in fact. Khan was able to beam himself from a falling speeder to a storm filled area on Kronos with no downside. Movement, storms and distance have always been used to downplay transporter usage and this piece of technology managed to overcome all three obstacles 'automatically'. Scotty KNOWS how this equation works, he's used it on the Enterprise's own transporters and now he knows it can be used effectively in a portable fashion.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It only matters if it has to matter. Just like every other piece of Trek tech.

 

[The Wormhole]

In the case of Star Trek Beyond, they're abandoning A LOT of things that Into Darkness introduced. The conflict with the Klingons,

Conflict with the Klingons was never going to be done in the movies. The comics got to resolve that story mere months after STID's release. Orci would never have signed off on that and allowed it if there was ever a chance of it being a storyline for the next movie.

 

[fireproof78]

But it did work. Perfectly in fact. Khan was able to beam himself from a falling speeder to a storm filled area on Kronos with no downside. Movement, storms and distance have always been used to downplay transporter usage and this piece of technology managed to overcome all three obstacles 'automatically'. Scotty KNOWS how this equation works, he's used it on the Enterprise's own transporters and now he knows it can be used effectively in a portable fashion.

So?

I know this has come again and again but how many technologies that would save lives, shorten travel, etc, etc have been forgotten over the years? I mean, I can think of any number of story reasons for not using the tech (unsafe for long term use, harmful radiation, etc). It wouldn't take much.

The war with the Klingons? That was a cold war that could turn hot. There was not evidence, other than Marcus' ramblings, that war was coming. So, the conflict could have resolved simply by virtue of the Federation and Klingons maintaining equal arms and keeping the cold war going.

Or the next Chief of Starfleet Operations decides to scrape all of Marcus' work to clean house and the tech is lost. Scotty was already under gag order by S31. It all gets stuck in the Star Trek junk drawer of tech.

 

[dahj]

But it did work. Perfectly in fact. Khan was able to beam himself from a falling speeder to a storm filled area on Kronos with no downside.

So?
In ST V Enterprise got to the center of the Galaxy in a couple of hours, so what, Voyager should have been stuck in the Delta Quadrant for a day, tops?

Just because one writer does something "cool" does not mean other writers have to mention it or explain it away, especially if it's a one-off plot device. Wasting screen time on explaining away inconsistencies from previous films/series is pointless, that's what fandom on the internet is for.

Transporter itself has been used in a million different ways, with upsides and downsides varying wildly. For instance it's been established that transporter can reverse old age, so why are people still dying of it?