Yes
Same canon?
- Thread starter Captrek
- Start date
STXI is just as canon as TOS is. "Canon" is literally any live action Star Trek (with the possible excetions of STV and Voyager's "Threshold", apparently 
). It's just a different continuity post-2233.
Technically the multiverse should have a shared past - if the nuTrek crew went back to 1986 they should bump into ShatnerKirk and NimoySpock saving the Whales. If they go back to 2064 they'll meet Riker and Geordi. If they go back to 2002 they'll find Archer, T'Pol, Xindi and a bunch of hookers. If they go back to 1996 they'll meet Captain Janeway and crazy Braxton. If they go back to 2151-2155 they'll watch episodes of Enterprise (let's hope they skip the first two seasons!) and so on.
If they stick to this or not is another matter.
Should they bring back Khan it would be sensible to retcon the Eugenics Wars into our future and probably merge them with First Contact's World War III (recall that TOS itself couldn't decide if WWIII and the EW were the same or not). We'll see.
). It's just a different continuity post-2233.Technically the multiverse should have a shared past - if the nuTrek crew went back to 1986 they should bump into ShatnerKirk and NimoySpock saving the Whales. If they go back to 2064 they'll meet Riker and Geordi. If they go back to 2002 they'll find Archer, T'Pol, Xindi and a bunch of hookers. If they go back to 1996 they'll meet Captain Janeway and crazy Braxton. If they go back to 2151-2155 they'll watch episodes of Enterprise (let's hope they skip the first two seasons!) and so on.
If they stick to this or not is another matter.
Should they bring back Khan it would be sensible to retcon the Eugenics Wars into our future and probably merge them with First Contact's World War III (recall that TOS itself couldn't decide if WWIII and the EW were the same or not). We'll see.
I-Am-Zim
Captain
STXI is just as canon as TOS is. "Canon" is literally any live action Star Trek (with the possible excetions of STV and Voyager's "Threshold", apparently
Technically the multiverse should have a shared past - if the nuTrek crew went back to 1986 they should bump into ShatnerKirk and NimoySpock saving the Whales. If they go back to 2064 they'll meet Riker and Geordi. If they go back to 2002 they'll find Archer, T'Pol, Xindi and a bunch of hookers. If they go back to 1996 they'll meet Captain Janeway and crazy Braxton. If they go back to 2151-2155 they'll watch episodes of Enterprise (let's hope they skip the first two seasons!) and so on.
If they stick to this or not is another matter.
Should they bring back Khan it would be sensible to retcon the Eugenics Wars into our future and probably merge them with First Contact's World War III (recall that TOS itself couldn't decide if WWIII and the EW were the same or not). We'll see.
Wow. I actually agree with you.
Bingo.
Either way, over 40 years of Star Trek lore and development have now been left behind and will most likely never be revisited again. I'm gona miss the likable characters.
Basically, the people making the movies will tell the best story they can, and the fans can rationalize the inconsistencies. That's been the tradition as long as this series has existed. Just because the stories take place in an alternate timeline/universe does not mean that a separate canon is created. The 2009 movie and its follow-ups are basically like an extended look at one of the "Parallels" universes.
Bingo.
Either way, over 40 years of Star Trek lore and development have now been left behind and will most likely never be revisited again. I'm gona miss the likable characters.
That's my biggest problem. I would love to see some TNG/DS9/VOY movies produced straight to DVD. Now that there is a movie franchise making big bucks, financing good TV movies shouldn't be the problem.
Except DVD movies carry the stigma of cheap and nasty about them, and CBS don't want their revitalized, popular and profitable Star Trek associated with cheaper stuff like Babylon 5 and Stargate SG-1.
It would be cool, though.
It would be cool, though.
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Bingo.
Either way, over 40 years of Star Trek lore and development have now been left behind and will most likely never be revisited again. I'm gona miss the likable characters.
That's my biggest problem. I would love to see some TNG/DS9/VOY movies produced straight to DVD. Now that there is a movie franchise making big bucks, financing good TV movies shouldn't be the problem.
I'd like to see something along that vein myself. I'd really love to see the early adventures of the original Enterprise under Captain April, or even some of Pike's pre-Kirk era adventures when he commanded the Enterprise. Unfortunately, that will never happen. The Abramsverse is the Trek that we will all have to live with for the indefinite future.
This quote is from an article in USA Today from 2009 that sums it up pretty well:
"The Star Trek of the past — the original TV show, the 1980s movies and all The Next Generation TV shows, spinoffs and films — has been mostly set aside. And that makes some fans set their phasers on "kill."
Linky
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Personally, I feel that XI establishes its own separate canon in that it is an alternate universe and not part of the original TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY universe (which begs the question, "why should I give a targ's booty about any of these characters since they're not the ones I know?"). Even though it is supposed to represent the original TOS universe up until 2233 when the Narada appears, I still believe that the Narada and NuOldSpock emerged from the wormhole in a wholly separate alternate universe. Therefore not a part of TOS canon.
I agree.
Yep. That bugs the heck outta me as well. But the DV in XI is not supposed to be the same DV that we saw in WNMHGB. Or at least that's the writer's excuse for why its in the wrong place and has the wrong climate.
Actually, only 7 (8 counting the Abramsprise) ships went to NuVulcan. The rest of the fleet was engaged in the Laurentian system. As far as the Klingons, we really don't have a lot of information about the overall size of their fleet in the TOS universe. So that's hard to argue.
I've questioned this myself. If "The Menagerie" took place in 2266 (Kirk's second year of his first 5-year mission), and the events of "The Cage" took place 13 years prior (according to Spock), then that would put "The Cage" at 2253, 5 years before the Abramsprise was even launched in XI. If Kirk was 33 in 2266 (his age was established as 34 in "The Deadly Years" - Season 2-2267), and Pike was roughly his age in "The Cage" (Jeffrey Hunter was actually 41, I think) then Pike would be 36 in 2258. He looks more like 50-ish in XI. So he would have had to be born 14 or 15 years earlier, an since he was already born prior to the Narada's appearance, it can't be blamed for this inconsistency. So yeah, that's a little hard to swallow.
Actually, the Kelvin used shuttles for evacuation. I don't think we've ever seen escape pods on a starship prior to TNG except for the NX-01 in "In A Mirror, Darkly". But the sheer number of shuttles on the Kelvin stretched the limits of suspension of disbelief. Especially considering the scene when Robau's shuttle exits the bay. The size of the shuttle compared to the size of the bay would seem to indicate that the entire secondaray hull was a giant shuttlebay if we believe that the ship could hold 30+ shuttles. And later, when the other shuttles are evacuating, they are leaving the ship in a single file line through a "corridor" similar to those used to launch Vipers on BSG. Interesting, yet wierd.
Yeah. That was in season 2. So if Kirk was 34 and Chekov was 22 in season 2, that means that Chekov was about 12 years younger than Kirk in the TOS universe. In the Abramsverse, Chekov is only about 8 years younger than Kirk. I find it a bit of a stretch that the Narada's incursion into the timeline somehow caused Chekov to be born 4 years earlier.
True. And the Enterprise crew in TOS had never heard of tribbles before. And if he had been aware of them earlier, it would seem logical that he would have warned Kirk not to let the bloody things on the ship.
Most can't be explained away simply by the appearance of the Narada. But, as far as I'm concerned, they really don't need to be since the Abramsverse is a separate alternate universe and in no way connected to the original TOS universe. There are too many differences prior to the Narada's appearance for it to be the same. That's the way I feel about it anyway. YMMV.
Last edited:
Interesting. I always thought a lot of those other time travel events were more of a predestination paradox, and I'm not sure how they could be reconciled with the multiverse concept. Like in "Time's Arrow" there was the whole thing with Data's head and things being inevitable. I think that issue even comes up from time to time in relation to "Yesterday's Enterprise" and how Picard even knew Guinan in that alternate timeline. Maybe that's how Guinan knew things were messed up? Maybe in the JJverse she's on the other side of the galaxy flipping out.
It's strange to think of an alternate universe's time loop coinciding with your own. What will they think when they find Data's head?
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Aaaaarrrrggghh! My brain hurts!
That is a fantastic question! I never, ever even thought about that. That would be something wouldn't it? How do we even know Dr. Soong will even build Data in this alternate universe?
What if Data never gets built in the Abramsverse and somebody on NuEarth finds Data's head? They'd be totally perplexed. Therein lies another problem with the whole branched off timeline thing. I liked the way they used to do it better. When time travel was understood to be linear, like "Time's Arrow", "Trials And Tribble-Ations", "Yesterday's Enterprise", etc. and so on.
In the Orciverse, Time's Arrow, Yesterday's Enterprise, First Contact and The Voyage Home simply can't happen. He retconned time travel not to work that way.
For that matter, how do we know that Soong will even be born? I don't really know his age, but if he was younger than 130 when we see him on TNG, it's possible he'd never even be born.
However, the producers here don't care about determinism. If they want Chekov on the ship, they'll make him be there. If they wanted Captain Picard to be born down the line, he would be. They aren't in the business to make things that make sense, they're just trying to sell movie tickets.
Like I said, if they want it to happen, they will make it happen. They think they aren't beholden to any prior continuity, but in that case they should have just done a straight up reboot and forgotten about all of the shoehorning previous Trek into it. There are all sorts of things that should happen, but they won't concern themselves with that. And Data's head is probably the least of those concerns.
Also, their level of perplexity would probably be the same as or more than when Picard found out about Sela.
Well, "Yesterday's Enterprise" wasn't exactly linear. It could be a branch off just like this movie. The only difference was that it was done in a deterministic way, and this movie has adopted the bizarre idea of fate guiding certain things. If "Yesterday's Enterprise" were done in the style of this movie, Worf and Troi would still be aboard and Tasha would still be dead.
Actually it's incorrect.
- If someone goes back in time, a new reality is created, but the old one still exists.
Lets take a look at what happened in Yesterdays Enterprise.
- The Enterprise C went forward in time. (it stayed in the same reality and skipped a few years forward).
- Since the Enterprise C was absent, hostory took a disasterous course.
- When the Enterprise C went back --> NEW REALITY.
- This new reality is what we've seen right from the beginning of TNG (barring other Time Travel incidents).
It's that simple, folks !!!
Re: i'm new...
Fate guiding certain things happened in Voyager too: A flashforward scene with Kes where she scanned a Krenim torpedo was later re-enacted by Seven of Nine in "Year of Hell".
Explain that.
Fate guiding certain things happened in Voyager too: A flashforward scene with Kes where she scanned a Krenim torpedo was later re-enacted by Seven of Nine in "Year of Hell".
Explain that.
