One Year Gap (spoilers, kinda)

[Hartzilla2007]

Honestly I think some of the characters were temporarily re-assigned to other ships in the fleet. Scotty was on Earth, leading the Enterprise repair/refit. As for Kirk, I have no idea. Part of that time was, no doubt, spent recovering from the experience of death, perhaps he also went to the Academy to teach. He may have also done a brief media circuit as a Starfleet hero.

Also, I'm sure that at some point the senior staff was briefed on the new Five Year Mission. Maybe other ships already on the mission have supplied Starfleet with initial impressions of what they're finding on the frontier and the Enterprise staff is taking the lessons to heart?

I thought this would be the first five year mission?

Yeah, Spock mentions that it was the first time a mission that long had be tried at the end of the film.

Plus at the beginning form how I interpreted kirk and Spock's discussion on the way to meeting Pike only one ship was going to get the mission. So I doubt if anyone else got it the Enterprise would be doing one.

 

[BillJ]

Kirk was obviously taking refresher courses on the Prime Directive and Report Writing.

 

[The Wormhole]

According to the IDW the events in the after darkness comics take place in 2259 one week after the very last scene of the movie and they're aboard the Enterprise refit not another ship.
I'm not sure anymore that there is an actual one year gap in the end.
here's a preview of the comic where you can see the ship:
http://www.comicbooktherapy.com/idws-star-trek-21-picks-up-right-where-the-movie-left-off-150149

I also have the novelization by Alan Dean Foster and the one year gap isn't mentioned either.

From Pine's delivery of the line, it's ambigous if "one year ago" means the movie's main events, or if he's referring to when he first officially took command of the Enterprise a year earlier (at the end of XI).

Personally, I prefer to assume the final scene is set a year after the main movie, it explains how the Enterprise was repaired, and Kirk and crew would likely need to stick around for a year anyway, for inquiries and tribunals which likely had to follow everything that went down. Really, a year is still not enough time for all that, but maybe beuracracy improves in the future?

Plus by placing the After Darkness comic in 2260, it's exactly seven years prior to Amok Time. That's kind of crucial to the plot of After Darkness.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Plus by placing the After Darkness comic in 2260, it's exactly seven years prior to Amok Time. That's kind of crucial to the plot of After Darkness.

No it really isn't seeing as Amok Time was the first time Spock dealt with that particular issue, hence why he would have thought it might not have been a problem he would have to deal with at the time.

 

[Malaika]

maybe Kirk was talking about the first time he got aboard the enterprise and the ceremony being one year after the battle of vulcan.

as for Spock's pon farr, unless they have some plot twist and someone had provoked it artificially it's possible that the traumatic events happened to him in the last year (mom's death, vulcan destroyed then Pike, Kirk, Khan) has made him have his first pon farr sooner.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't think there was anything ambiguous about Kirk's "one year ago" at all. He plainly said that the previous events of STID had occurred a year before the final scene.

 

[boobatuba]

I don't think there was anything ambiguous about Kirk's "one year ago" at all. He plainly said that the previous events of STID had occurred a year before the final scene.

^This. He describes how they are paying homage to those who lost their lives a year ago. Only the fan-wankiest of fans could re-interpret such a clear reference.

 

[BillJ]

I don't think there was anything ambiguous about Kirk's "one year ago" at all. He plainly said that the previous events of STID had occurred a year before the final scene.

^This. He describes how they are paying homage to those who lost their lives a year ago. Only the fan-wankiest of fans could re-interpret such a clear reference.

You know where you are?

 

[Commishsleer]

The comics aren't 'canon' so they can say what they like. But one week after the movie is one week after Kirk sets out on the 5 year mission which is a year after 'The Vengeance' crashed into San Fran.

I don't think its Fan Wank to want to sort out the dates though, just to be obsessed about them. I prefer the term fanon which I learnt here.

 

[The Wormhole]

Plus by placing the After Darkness comic in 2260, it's exactly seven years prior to Amok Time. That's kind of crucial to the plot of After Darkness.

No it really isn't seeing as Amok Time was the first time Spock dealt with that particular issue, hence why he would have thought it might not have been a problem he would have to deal with at the time.

All I meant was by having After Darkness in 2260, Spock's next ponn farr will be in 2267 (same year as Amok Time) and from there he'll be on the same ponn farr cycle he was on in the Prime Universe.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't think there was anything ambiguous about Kirk's "one year ago" at all. He plainly said that the previous events of STID had occurred a year before the final scene.

^This. He describes how they are paying homage to those who lost their lives a year ago. Only the fan-wankiest of fans could re-interpret such a clear reference.

You know where you are?

North Fanwank, New Jersey?

 

[ManOnTheWave]

I've seen the movie three times and I'm still not certain if the "one year ago" was in reference to the events of STID or to Kirk's reciting the captain's oath before Pike.

 

[DredZed]

Kirk's speech was this:

"There will always be those who mean to do us harm. To stop them, we risk awakening the same evil within ourselves.

Our first instinct is to seek revenge when those we love are taken from us. But that's not who we are.

We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives nearly one year ago.

When Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath. Words I didn't appreciate at the time. Now, I see them as a call for us to remember who we once were, and who we must be again."

He's definitely referring to the events of Into Darkness as happening "nearly one year ago." The part about Pike and the captains oath is a distinctly separate sentence.

 

[JoeZhang]

Yep, saw it yesterday, that is indeed how it is said.

 

[The Wormhole]

Kirk's speech was this:

"There will always be those who mean to do us harm. To stop them, we risk awakening the same evil within ourselves.

Our first instinct is to seek revenge when those we love are taken from us. But that's not who we are.

We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives nearly one year ago.

When Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath. Words I didn't appreciate at the time. Now, I see them as a call for us to remember who we once were, and who we must be again."

He's definitely referring to the events of Into Darkness as happening "nearly one year ago." The part about Pike and the captains oath is a distinctly separate sentence.

Thing is, to me anyway, Chris Pine's delivery kind of makes it sound like:

"We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives. Nearly one year ago, when Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath..."

Indeed, since IDW seems to be unaware of a year's gap, perhaps they too were confused? Although, in their case, you'd think the script would be made available and the way the speech was written would make it clear what was meant to be said.

 

[beamMe]

Thing is, to me anyway, Chris Pine's delivery kind of makes it sound like:

"We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives. Nearly one year ago, when Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath..."

No.
The other version up-thread is correct.

 

[The Wormhole]

Thing is, to me anyway, Chris Pine's delivery kind of makes it sound like:

"We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives. Nearly one year ago, when Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath..."

No.
The other version up-thread is correct.

I'm not disputing which one is correct. I'm just saying the way it's delivered can cause confusion, and clearly has.

 

[beamMe]

Thing is, to me anyway, Chris Pine's delivery kind of makes it sound like:

"We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise, and to honor those who lost their lives. Nearly one year ago, when Christopher Pike first gave me his ship, he had me recite the captain's oath..."

No.
The other version up-thread is correct.

I'm not disputing which one is correct. I'm just saying the way it's delivered can cause confusion, and clearly has.

There is a lot going on in that movie. You can miss the most obvious things, like Khan being the one who cripples the Enterprise so that she loses all her power.

But the delivery of that line doesn't cause any confusion.

 

[BillJ]

There was simply no way they could've refitted the Enterprise in a week. Which is all the time they would've had if we go with the interpretation that the speech was one year after the first film.

 

[Caretaker]

When I saw the film the first time, I thought Kirk was talking about the events of the 2009 film. If you don't want to read into/believe that interpretation, that's your right to do so. But I do believe it is ambiguous, after having seen the film again. That being said, the IDW timeline on the website has a couple of issues that need fixing.

Maybe Orci can clarify it (or not).