Post-STXI novels

[ncc71877]

I'm of the opinion even if it's a soft reboot or a kick-you-in-the-teeth hard reboot, it doesn't matter. We will still have our book series as they are, and any stories set before or after the new movie will be clearly marked as 'continued from the blockbuster film' or some such. I'm not worried. The movie is what it is, I hope it's good cause it's success can only mean good things for the books.

FWIW, the NX-01 is in the Enterprise-E's model ship display case in Nemesis.

ncc71877

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Given the vast sums Paramount is investing in this film, I find it highly unlikely that they would allow licensees to wall the film off in its own ghetto.

Uhm, by that logic, every single piece of derivative Batman fiction should be based on Christopher Nolan's films rather than the comic books that have been published since 1939. Needless to say, that ain't remotely so.

On the other hand, Marvel reset the Spider-Man comics continuity so they're more in line with the Toby Maguire films. *shrug*

(EDIT) Which, I've just realized, isn't really an equivalent situation.

 

[Christopher]

On the other hand, Marvel reset the Spider-Man comics continuity so they're more in line with the Toby Maguire films. *shrug*

(EDIT) Which, I've just realized, isn't really an equivalent situation.

And they didn't do that anyway. They made a token attempt to introduce organic webbing into the comics, but they never did anything with it and erased it entirely from the continuity a couple of years later in the "Brand New Day" reboot. Other than that, the only real thing they did that was movie-based was to change Doc Ock's look to be closer to the movie version. Otherwise, the continuity was still radically unlike the movies.

And the post-BND continuity isn't particularly like the movie continuity either, except that it resets things back to the way the comics were 20 or 30 years ago. That has a few things in common with the movie continuity -- Peter still a photographer, May being in the dark about his secret (although I'm personally convinced movie May implicitly knows the truth), Peter still being single -- but has major differences as well, such as MJ not knowing his identity and the return of the mechanical webshooters.

 

[William Leisner]

I'm of the opinion even if it's a soft reboot or a kick-you-in-the-teeth hard reboot, it doesn't matter. We will still have our book series as they are, and any stories set before or after the new movie will be clearly marked as 'continued from the blockbuster film' or some such. I'm not worried. The movie is what it is, I hope it's good cause it's success can only mean good things for the books.

That's a very sober, reasoned approach to the situation.

Get off the internet, right now.

 

[ncc71877]

^I know. Four years ago, I would have been crazed-canonnite-guy! But, I read most of DC's comics and Infinite Crisis pretty much cured me of it.

The Enterprise has been Superboy-Prime'd! And I can live with that. Now I'm just enjoying the ride and am not concerned about it's place.

ncc71877

 

[SGCSG1]

New continuity books based on new movie?

It's obvious the new movie will create a new timeline for Trek. Will there be books based on that timeline?

In other words, when's the first Star Trek book coming out with a picture of Chris Pine as Kirk on the cover????

Short of movie 'novelizations' I'll be buying it.

 

[Procutus]

Re: New continuity books based on new movie?

Check out this thread:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=73724

 

[JD]

Re: New continuity books based on new movie?

I'm starting to think perhaps we should add a permanent thread with info about Trek XI based books.

 

[Procutus]

Re: New continuity books based on new movie?

I'm starting to think perhaps we should add a permanent thread with info about Trek XI based books.

That's not a bad idea, as I'm certain there's bound to be some that are specifically tied to this particular story. Especially if it does indeed create a new timeline/reality.

 

[Procutus]

The one thing I am wondering about is

Spoiler: Trek XI

that if the speculation from the spoilers is correct and April was in fact not the first captain of the Enterprise, what is to become of the upcoming Captain April book???

I must've missed reading about that one, can anyone provide more information on this?

 

[JD]

Spoiler: Trek XI

I don't know exactly where it comes from, but some of the stuff has talked about or show the Enterprise being launched with Pike in command.

 

[casey]

I believe the speculation came from the four clips that were previewed in Europe, but I honestly don't remember where I read it. But my understanding is that, as JD mentioned

Spoiler: Trek XI

Pike is shown as being the first captain of the Enterprise.

Of course it may not be true. But if it is, I could see it having an impact on the upcoming novel.

Then again I don't see why Paramount would approve a novel that contradicted the movie so dramatically. So, I take the speculation cum grano salis.

 

[Stevil2001]

Re: New continuity books based on new movie?

I'm starting to think perhaps we should add a permanent thread with info about Trek XI based books.

That's not a bad idea, as I'm certain there's bound to be some that are specifically tied to this particular story. Especially if it does indeed create a new timeline/reality.

This would indeed be a great idea... if we had the slightest bit of information.

 

[KRAD]

Re: New continuity books based on new movie?

It's obvious the new movie will create a new timeline for Trek.

Really? It's not obvious to me at all. On what are you basing this assumption?

 

[captcalhoun]

Spoiler: the movie

Pike commanding the ship first, the fugly ass ship, the fugly bridge, Romulans running around outside the NZ before BOT, deliquent Kirk, Chekov being on Pike's Enterprise...

 

[Christopher]

Spoiler: the movie

Pike commanding the ship first, the fugly ass ship, the fugly bridge, Romulans running around outside the NZ before BOT, deliquent Kirk, Chekov being on Pike's Enterprise...

Some of those are assumptions based on fragmentary information that may not be entirely correct in context. Others are no worse than the many, many contradictions that already exist within Trek canon, some of which I listed back in post #11 of this thread. The change in the appearance of the ship is no more "proof of an alternate timeline" than the change in the appearance of Saavik or Zefram Cochrane, or the change in the appearance of the Aurora or Flint's mansion in TOS Remastered; it's just a difference in interpretation. And "delinquent Kirk" doesn't contradict a single thing we know about Trek canon, and is in fact based on the Kirk backstory from Diane Carey's novel Best Destiny.

 

[StarFleetVeteran]

Personally, I wouldn't mind not seeing any post-Trek XI novels, at least not until the future of Trek after that has been decided.

-cc

 

[EmperorKalan]

I may well be grasping at straws here, but I'm still not convinced that this film is a reboot of any kind. So it looks different - BFD. The 'look' is simply like the staging of a play: a way to interpret the story.

Thank you for that allusion. I've tried to articulate the same concept a number of times, but always much more awkwardly. Hope you don't mind if I steal it for future use.

 

[captcalhoun]

delinquent Kirk contradicts Mitchell's walking stack of books at the Academy comment.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

delinquent Kirk contradicts Mitchell's walking stack of books at the Academy comment.

No, it doesn't.

Kirk can be a juvey delinquent as a teenager, and then he pulls his fecal matter together in college.

Which, by the way, is Kirk's character arc in Diane Carey's Best Destiny. He's a screw-up, and the events of the novel show him that he needs to pull it together. (Carey's YA novel Cadet Kirk follows up on this to some extent.)