Probably the method of time travel. Star Trek 2009 was caused by a black hole. Even though the black hole was artificially generated by red matter, perhaps it's "natural" nature means that another timeline is created instead of the current timeline outright being changed in the more "artificial" methods used in other time travel Trek episodes.
Khan and the Eugenics War
- Thread starter SiddFinch1
- Start date
I really wish TPTB had been content to let Trek be its own fictional universe with its own largely fictional history. That way, it didn't matter if the Eugenics Wars took place in 1992 there and didn't in our world. Probably could even have had a story dealing with how Trek's history diverged from ours, but with both heading in the same direction towards a better tomorrow even if there are ultimately noticeable and maybe even glaring differences in the paths taken.
I mean, they are.
We don't have a Europa mission IRL, there's no Lake Ontario Bridge IRL, no Nomad Probe, OV-101 a lot of the fictional space stuff they showed in Pic Season 2.
And we never had a manned Earth -> Saturn probe led by Shaun Jeffrey Christopher.
That was never plan, even as far back as 1964. Of course they never thought Trek would be around this long either. But from the beginning our history and it's were same, with an occasional fictious thing tossed in for story reasons. Just like Mission Impossible or Friends.
Except, Goldsman’s justification for changing Khan’s origin is that Star Trek needs to align with our world in order to be “aspirational.”
AKIVA GOLDSMAN: This is a correction. Because otherwise, it’s silly, or Star Trek ceases to be in our universe…By the way, this happened in Season 1, so this is not a Season 2 [issue]. It’s a pilot issue. We want Star Trek to be an aspirational future. We want to be able to dream our way into the Federation as a Starfleet. I think that is the fun of it, in part. And so, in order to keep Star Trek in our timeline, we continue to push dates forward. At a certain point, we won’t be able to. But obviously, if you start saying that the Eugenics Wars were in the 90s, you're kind of fucked for aspirational in terms of the real world.
I mean, I don't. Because I don't think continuity fidelity strictness is a virtue.
Not seeing the conflict.
Good.
If you need the plot of a 56-year old story within a fictional TV show altered in order for you to find "aspiration" and for it to be "real," that says a lot more about other things than it does about the quality of the writing or having a cohesive narrative.
Not really. The plot remains the same. Superman from the past wakes up from suspended animation and tries to resume his evil ways.
Not really. Speaks to the purpose of the story.
Personally, I think Goldsman is full of shit regarding the "aspiration" thing, but I'm satisfied with this change because, in-universe, they explained exactly how and why it was done. It was an actual plot event. Not something that the showrunners just hand-waved away and said this is how it is now.
Nothing, as such. I just have issues with Goldsman insisting that it depends on having our history meshing with Trek's. I'll always have a problem with that. I mean, everybody knows that our history will never be exactly the same as theirs.
But since it was an in-universe plot event, I have no issues with moving the Eugenics Wars. If the producers had just said, behind the scenes, that it was moved, THEN I would have issues. But since they actually did an episode about it, I have no beef with what they've done. Because since it was in-universe, it doesn't decanonize TOS.
It goes back to Roddenberry really. Only some fans have been enamored with the alt history thing. Because data points or something.
It's not being "enamored" with Trek being an alternate history. It's simply recognizing that it's OBVIOUS that that's what it is.
Nah, it's the data points. Norman can't co-ordinate. Few if any Trek writers set out to create an alt history. They aren't looking to create a different world history from 1992 to whenever, just because a writer from 50 years ago dropped a date in a script that sounded good in 1967.
They didn't have to, That's simply how things evolved.
And again, I have no problem with Trek being an aspirational future. I just don't understand why this depends so closely on having its history mesh with ours. What's the point of that? Why is it important? I just don't get it.
Oh well. Whatever changes they make, as long as they do it in-universe, I'm fine with it.
Similar threads
