Tarantino Trek - what could we expect?

[F. King Daniel]

Frankly I don’t understand Kelvin fans being so hung up about haters to the extent that any nod to the Prime films should be taken as an insult to Kelvin and an appeasement to haters. Whatever.

I think it's frustration that Kelvin Universe Trek never escaped the shadow of TOS. While on an individual basis those references were all justified (Spock rebooting the universe, coming up against Khan and then Spock/Nimoy's death and the wallet photo), it's frustrating that they never got a chance to do their own thing. And it's further annoying that all talk about future Treks revolve around Shatner cameos and whatnot. Orci couldn't make it happen in 2009 or 2015, and now rumours are Tarantino Trek mixes up Chris Pine, William Shatner and Patrick Stewart.

 

[Kirk Prime]

In my fan-fantasy, Tarantino could put NuKirk and the Federation into a desperate and dire situation, maybe even extinction level. NuKirk uses time travel (insert MacGuffin here) to change the past to prevent this situation and save his father (Chris Hemsworth) from death (circa 2233), thus "restoring" the prime timeline (with the exception that NuKirk is introduced). NuKirk lives on in prime timeline similar to Old Prime Spock who lived on during the Kelvin timeline. Move forward in restored prime timeline from the Kelvin event about 50 years. William Shatner can be cast as old NuKirk in current prime timeline along with Chris Pine as the restored prime Kirk circa 2282 (with a Wrath of Khan scene prior to Spock's death). Insert a touching reunion scene between old Kirk and Spock (Zachary Quinto). End movie.

Could be an interesting story with a little tweaking. Not a bad outline/start. It depends on what they want to do. Do you want the Kelvin universe to exist separately? OR do you want the Kelvin universe's existence to be a rewritten prime universe? They are two viable options. My thinking is this--

Abrams was vague on purpose. He didn't want this to be a different universe because then it's not the "real" Kirk and crew. It's another universe, just like the mirror universe. But he also didn't want to simply rewrite everything and get the fans' ire. So he tried to have both. Personally, I feel that in the absence of a clear and concise line stating it's another universe, the presumption has to be that Kelvin overwrote Prime. Spock, the time traveler, would be one of the only people who would know. The only safe place from a timeline change would be the nexus or the Guardian planet or something like that. Q of course would know.

What bothered me was that it would be very out of character for Spock Prime not to try to fix it.

Of course, that's just a presumption. A presumption can be overridden by having a prime universe and Kelvin universe crossover. I would love it if Tarantino did that.

I thought it was crystal clear...at least, when I watched it.

It isn't even close to crystal clear. You're just interpreting something as you want to see it, which is fine, but not what was on screen.

"Incapable?" Even though it is established that Vulcans have deep emotions, and can be in relationships, as established by Sarek and Amanda?

I appreciate your write up but all of this is predicated on a very strict interpretation of what Star Trek has presented, rather than a willingness to explore where the story went. The elements are there, from time travel, alternate realities, and the like. Abrams choose to take it a different direction, but that doesn't make him out of step with prior Trek.

It's going by what's onscreen, and flat out said. It was pretty clear. Sarek and Amanda have nothing to do with Spock, especially when Spock was at the same age/time period where he was in that "relationship" from This Side of Paradise. In fact, when Spock was hit by the spores, it caused him immense pain. Abrams didn't just go in a different direction, he wrote things out of character. If you aren't going to use the characters, why bring them in?

Really? That's the evidence? He's beaming across large distances but apparently has to get it perfect or he is incompetent?

Again, it's like Abrams never watched the original series. Yes, the beer factory was a buffoonish scene, as was the idea that Scotty would be banished on a space station for doing something to Archer's dog. The man was horribly written out of character, and I think he was poorly cast. Scotty was the finest engineer in the fleet, and a miracle worker. Pegg's interpretation of the character was one of the worst things in the Abrams movies for me.

Here's Kill Bill's famous Superman monologue.

I loved this scene, but this interpretation of Superman was out of date. After 1985, Superman actually was the disguise, not Clark. Superman is what Clark did to make sure that Clark Kent had a life outside of Superman. I loved Tarantino's interpretation, but I didn't quite agree with it. Even pre-1985, Superman didn't make Clark bumbling as a critique of the human race, but to contrast between himself and Superman. He didn't want people to know to protect those he cared about, and also to have a life outside of Superman.

But what I like about this is that Tarantino does think and would likely have a strong interpretation based on the canon. He won't shoot from the hip.

I don't get why people hate the alternate reality thing so much.
The most sci-fi elements of trek (and not only trek) had always been influenced by what was contemporary at the time. There were certain trends, even, among different 'futuristic' products consistently drawing inspiration from each other.
Concepts like time travel have evolved well past the "back to the future" narrative because quantum mechanics is more contemporary now and is considered a tad more realistic.
We can't fault a creative team of our era for taking inspiration from what they know now, and ostensibly expect them to be..outdated.

This is a fair question. But here's the thing--in Star Trek, the BTTF style is far more prevalent. And since no one has actually traveled in time, a modern theory is no more valid than an older one. When Abrams makes a new franchise, he can interpret time travel in any way he chooses, but in the Star Trek sandbox, he should be limited by what has come before. The only thing real about time travel is that until it's done, we don't know what's real. So yes, we can fault this creative team in this situation.

Parallel realities aren't new to trek either, if anything this reboot is just using one of the possible explanations of how they might be created or you can access to them (through a black hole. There are actual theories about that).

I would have absolutely no problem with that, but Abrams did not do that. He specifically CHOSE not to put in some kind of line saying that Spock and Nero were from another universe. That's all he needed to do, and it would have merely involved changing a line or two.

As for spock/uhura...man, I don't get why romance and characters having sexual agency is so ostracised by some. Some fans aren't even that bothered by the destruction of vulcan but they can't get over two fictional characters being in love.

The Vulcan thing was terrible if you consider this the prime universe overwritten, but Spock/Uhura is out of character. Not just for Spock, but for Uhura. It was Chapel that had the crush on Spock. Spock is a Vulcan, and this is out of character. Why use Spock if you aren't going to write Spock?

Tl dr: it seems like some hate JJ&co because their trek isn't. .outdated.

First, TOS is not outdated. Great stories stand the test of time, and while it may be VISUALLY outdated, the stories and writing of TOS are MUCH better than anything Abrams did with his little explosions and lens flares.

The 'anti alternate timeline' arguments also seem to paint the most conservative fans into a corner: a reboot clearly cannot be a copy of the original thing, the writers need to change some things a bit to make the story more unique and unpredictable, and if you don't make it another reality then you need to retcon the old thing ..and fans don't like that either.

First, that's actually not true. It was a 5 year mission. We saw 79 episodes. There are literally hundreds of stories they could still tell, set in the original timeline. The only thing that they wouldn't be able to do is kill characters that didn't die. But killing characters is weak writing.

So was turning STID into an awful remake of TWOK.

Now if Abrams wanted the freedom from canon, that's fine too. It wouldn't take much to change ST09 to make that happen. All they had to do was establish that Spock Prime was from another universe. Maybe even send him home at the end.

 

[fireproof78]

It isn't even close to crystal clear. You're just interpreting something as you want to see it, which is fine, but not what was on screen.

Agree to disagree. I followed it. My wife (who isn't a Star Trek fan) followed it, as did my dad and brother who are Star Trek fans.

It's going by what's onscreen, and flat out said. It was pretty clear. Sarek and Amanda have nothing to do with Spock, especially when Spock was at the same age/time period where he was in that "relationship" from This Side of Paradise. In fact, when Spock was hit by the spores, it caused him immense pain. Abrams didn't just go in a different direction, he wrote things out of character. If you aren't going to use the characters, why bring them in?

Agree to disagree. When you say the parents have nothing to do with children then I cannot take this seriously.

Again, it's like Abrams never watched the original series. Yes, the beer factory was a buffoonish scene, as was the idea that Scotty would be banished on a space station for doing something to Archer's dog. The man was horribly written out of character, and I think he was poorly cast. Scotty was the finest engineer in the fleet, and a miracle worker. Pegg's interpretation of the character was one of the worst things in the Abrams movies for me.

We agree on one point-Pegg was a terrible choice.

The rest we will completely disagree on so I'll just agree to disagree since it will turn in to

 

[Malaika]

No one has ever brought up spock/uhura when talking about Tarantino's trek although I think it is safe to say this is what you fear most about QT trek.
Spock/Uhura may break up for good this time since Tarantino may not like the idea of spock having a relationship. again, this is a big maybe. Has QT ever mentioned the romance? NO.So I don't see how your long analysis of the romance is actually relevant for now since QT has never spoken about it. sounds like is you getting paranoid.

If you weren't only obsessed about my comments you'd notice that it was in topic because it was one of Kirk Prime points that both @fireproof78 and I were addressing, but it figures if you (with whatever account you are using at the moment, btw), could waste a chance to bait me into another of your pretentious 'you silly spock/uhura fans' personal attacks. Let's pretend this isn't what you always do.
Of course, this is the only thing that will catch your attention into that long comment of mine that was touching on so many different aspects of this trilogy. Of course you will ignore everything else.

Yes, I love the dynamic as well as other things about kelvin trek, that which is clear in my comments. Maybe I have an alternate self in some universe who would care about you having an issue with that, but my current self couldn't care less just like I didn't care the other 975347895 times you tried to bait me and derail my points. But you still try.
Have this reply and my wasted 1 minute as a prize for your persistence, I guess.

 

[Dales]

If you weren't only obsessed about my comments you'd notice that it was in topic because it was one of Kirk Prime points that both @fireproof78 and I were addressing, but it figures if you (with whatever account you are using at the moment, btw), could waste a chance to bait me into another of your pretentious 'you silly spock/uhura fans' personal attacks. Let's pretend this isn't what you always do.
Of course, this is the only thing that will catch your attention into that long comment of mine that was touching on so many different aspects of this trilogy. Of course you will ignore everything else.

Yes, I love the dynamic as well as other things about kelvin trek, that which is clear in my comments. Maybe I have an alternate self in some universe who would care about you having an issue with that, but my current self couldn't care less just like I didn't care the other 975347895 times you tried to bait me and derail my points. But you still try.
Have this reply and my wasted 1 minute as a prize for your persistence, I guess.

woahhhhhhh I feel as if I am getting suffocated here. I addressed all your points, which I think were 3.

1. time travel parallel universe
2. spock/uhura
3. spock's emotions

well, whatever happens now everyone would have to deal. Tarantino has every credibility to direct star trek, one thing I would guarantee you is this , his star trek movie will get far better critical acclaim and make more money than that Orci chris hemsworth father Trek. QT track record proves its. A Tarantino Trek movie can make 500m world wide and more.


once upon a time in hollywood is turning out to be one of the best movies of the year, another great film for his amazing track record as a talented film maker. why wouldn't trek fans want him onboard.

Also you can be a Kelvin fan and a tos prime fan, when I read your post you make it sound as if you cant be both.

Just out of curiosity do you even objectively care about this man talents? objectively not subjectively?

if you dont like his trek, you really don't have to watch it.

oh and TOS is not outdated. it does stand the test of time more than Kelvin trek. if you want time travel paralleled universe, any new director on a new trek movie is more likely to love yesterday's enterprise over star trek 2009.

Calling TOS outdated is beyond ignorant to me.

 

[Malaika]

I think it's frustration that Kelvin Universe Trek never escaped the shadow of TOS. While on an individual basis those references were all justified (Spock rebooting the universe, coming up against Khan and then Spock/Nimoy's death and the wallet photo), it's frustrating that they never got a chance to do their own thing. And it's further annoying that all talk about future Treks revolve around Shatner cameos and whatnot. Orci couldn't make it happen in 2009 or 2015, and now rumours are Tarantino Trek mixes up Chris Pine, William Shatner and Patrick Stewart.

Basically.

Abrams was vague on purpose. He didn't want this to be a different universe because then it's not the "real" Kirk and crew. It's another universe, just like the mirror universe. But he also didn't want to simply rewrite everything and get the fans' ire. So he tried to have both. Personally, I feel that in the absence of a clear and concise line stating it's another universe, the presumption has to be that Kelvin overwrote Prime.

Kelvin Spock and Uhura explained it's an alternate reality in the first movie. They did.
You also have the existence of prime timeline TV shows further confirming that tos is still there and so are the original characters. No one cancelled it.

Spock, the time traveler, would be one of the only people who would know. The only safe place from a timeline change would be the nexus or the Guardian planet or something like that. Q of course would know.

What bothered me was that it would be very out of character for Spock Prime not to try to fix it.

Personally, I think it would be out of character for a scientist like Spock to not understand quantum mechanics, and thus not understand it's another reality he got access to through the black hole. You would rather him believe in some entity with magic powers instead?
it makes perfect sense for me that he gets it's another reality and he respects that. He did the one thing that he could do: help the vulcans of this reality rebuild their home world into another planet.
It's no fairytale but it's realistic facing the consequences of things you have no power changing.

It's going by what's onscreen, and flat out said. It was pretty clear. Sarek and Amanda have nothing to do with Spock, especially when Spock was at the same age/time period where he was in that "relationship" from This Side of Paradise. In fact, when Spock was hit by the spores, it caused him immense pain. Abrams didn't just go in a different direction, he wrote things out of character. If you aren't going to use the characters, why bring them in?

Spock is an unreliable narrator of himself at times. If he didn't have feelings, he wouldn't have tried to purge them in the motion picture, only to realize it was silly to deny who he was.

I find it an inconsistent argument to assume that just because tos Spock didn't love Leila or Chapel back (didn't, not couldn't), then he couldn't love other people and the same is valid for an alternate reality version of him who is more in touch with his human side and had different life experiences.

If you use discovery to add layers to the discussion, it further explained the differences between the two Spock.
Maybe kelvin Spock never had a sister who hurt him and made him want to reject human and feelings, hence why without that trauma he grew up as a biracial man who is more honest about his dual heritage and he doesn't pretend he is just vulcan. It would be ooc for him to do that.

His parents are relevant because his own full blood vulcan dad fell for a human and he admits that eventually (so kelvin spock doesn't even really live the 'vulcans have no feelings' illusion) Spock is his unique person but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities that he shares some things in common with his parents.

This is a fair question. But here's the thing--in Star Trek, the BTTF style is far more prevalent. And since no one has actually traveled in time, a modern theory is no more valid than an older one. When Abrams makes a new franchise, he can interpret time travel in any way he chooses, but in the Star Trek sandbox, he should be limited by what has come before. The only thing real about time travel is that until it's done, we don't know what's real. So yes, we can fault this creative team in this situation.

But I thought trek wasn't like star wars; trek more than anything tries to create a realistic deciption of the future, even in the limits of something that is still fictional and not factual. Trek should keep things..up to date with new discoveries and theories about space. Even the ship warp effect was changed in beyond as they are still trying to figure out the most realistic way to represent it.

And again, jj didn't invalidate the other device. He used another that also takes inspiration from another trek device (different realities).

The Vulcan thing was terrible if you consider this the prime universe overwritten, but Spock/Uhura is out of character. Not just for Spock, but for Uhura. It was Chapel that had the crush on Spock. Spock is a Vulcan, and this is out of character. Why use Spock if you aren't going to write Spock?

Come on now, you are ignoring scenes but then you complain JJ is the one that didn't watch the series?

Bold of you to think they would be allowed to explore something like s/u in tos too, beyond the subtext (or text, as the attraction was).

And yet, Roddenberry himself had wanted to. And Nimoy didn't find it ooc at all, he actually said it was his favorite thing about the movie (don't tell Dales..^ ) abd he was jealous of Zachary Quinto.

First, TOS is not outdated.

OK then.

Great stories stand the test of time, and while it may be VISUALLY outdated, the stories and writing of TOS are MUCH better than anything Abrams did with his little explosions and lens flares.

My argument wasn't about one being better or worse than the other, this is subjective. My argument is about context and thus being realistic enough to understand that the 60s influenced tos. Context matters when you are discussing a modern reboot and complaining things must be like the old thing no matter what.
Roddenberry&co didn't do some things because they couldn't, not, necessarily, because they didn't want to or never planned to.
We can't use nostalgia as an excuse to keep things the same even in a modern iteration, or nothing ever evolves.

First, that's actually not true. It was a 5 year mission. We saw 79 episodes. There are literally hundreds of stories they could still tell, set in the original timeline. The only thing that they wouldn't be able to do is kill characters that didn't die. But killing characters is weak writing.

JJ didn't kill any of the main characters (technically, since he killed Kirk for like, 2 seconds) , but still complain.
You are complaining he explored a relationship that didn't happen in tos, I don't see how you can suggest they are so free to ADD new stuff even if they were to fill in the holes of tos and tell all the stories they didn't tell in the original.


All of this, complains about whether jj got or respected trek canon, still feels like a moot point to me in context of you giving a pass to Tarantino, and basically saying that it doesn't matter if he makes pulp fiction in space, and ignores the canon of the very reboot he wants to work for. He either makes his own reboot, or he's at fault for doing the very thing you accuse jj&co of doing, just worse.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Kelvin Spock and Uhura explained it's an alternate reality in the first movie. They did.
You also have the existence of prime timeline TV shows further confirming that tos is still there and so are the original characters. No one cancelled it.

Ok--that line about the alternate reality means absolutely nothing, and here's why--if I travel back in time, and make a change in history, and wipe out the timeline I was in, I have created an alternate reality. When McCoy saved Edith Keeler and the Nazis won WWII, that was an alternate reality. But with the exception of the the area around the Guardian, the prime timeline was gone--until Kirk and Spock fixed. When the Borg assimilated Earth in the 21st century, everyone but the Enterprise was erased and turned to Borg. That was an alternate reality. So when it comes whether or not the prime universe actually exists within Star Trek's fictional universe, since obviously the DVDs exist in the real world and that's not even a topic, that alternate reality line doesn't do anything either way.

Personally, I think it would be out of character for a scientist like Spock to not understand quantum mechanics, and thus not understand it's another reality he got access to through the black hole. You would rather him believe in some entity with magic powers instead?
it makes perfect sense for me that he gets it's another reality and he respects that. He did the one thing that he could do: help the vulcans of this reality rebuild their home world into another planet.
It's no fairytale but it's realistic facing the consequences of things you have no power changing.

Spock has extensive history with time travel, and within the confines of Star Trek, he knows the importance of preserving the past. This would be exponentially more true with Vulcan being destroyed and all those people that contributed to his timeline. Spock has traveled in time, and knows that it's different from traveling to other universes as well. Again, why would anyone care about time travel at all if there were no stakes? It was never established that Spock traveled to another universe.

Again, this can be fixed very easily. One line. One story. If their intent is truly to have the prime universe exist, then let them go for it.

Spock is an unreliable narrator of himself at times. If he didn't have feelings, he wouldn't have tried to purge them in the motion picture, only to realize it was silly to deny who he was.

I find it an inconsistent argument to assume that just because tos Spock didn't love Leila or Chapel back (didn't, not couldn't), then he couldn't love other people and the same is valid for an alternate reality version of him who is more in touch with his human side and had different life experiences.

Yet at this point in his life, he was 100% committed to being a Vulcan, and traditional love is not something they do. Yes, Sarek loved Amanda, but he didn't express it like in this movie, and Spock being with Uhura of all people was absolutely forced.

Bold of you to think they would be allowed to explore something like s/u in tos too, beyond the subtext (or text, as the attraction was).

Except there was nothing romantic about Spock and Uhura in TOS. Hell, Uhura looked up to Kirk more than Spock.

JJ didn't kill any of the main characters (technically, since he killed Kirk for like, 2 seconds) , but still complain.
You are complaining he explored a relationship that didn't happen in tos, I don't see how you can suggest they are so free to ADD new stuff even if they were to fill in the holes of tos and tell all the stories they didn't tell in the original.

What I'm complaining about is that it's out of character. What I was actually saying was that it wasn't necessary to do all of this since there was plenty of territory to explore in the prime universe.

As for the latter part--what would have happened if TOS had a season 4? They would have told new stories, and even if they made that today, with the movies and the sequel shows, it could still be done and done well because there is plenty of adventures to be had.

All of this, complains about whether jj got or respected trek canon still feels like a moot point to me in context of you giving a pass to Tarantino, and basically saying that it doesn't matter if he makes pulp fiction in space, and ignores the canon of the very reboot he wants to work for. He either makes his own reboot, or he's at fault for doing the very thing you accuse jj&co of doing, just worse.

I'm not giving Tarantino a pass. I'm giving him an open mind. Who says I said it doesn't matter if he ignores canon? If he ties in the prime universe and the Kelvin universe, he's going well beyond doing anything wrong--he's fixing a JJ issue, and ending a debate while telling a potentially interesting story.

 

[Malaika]

Ok--that line about the alternate reality means absolutely nothing, and here's why--if I travel back in time, and make a change in history, and wipe out the timeline I was in, I have created an alternate reality. When McCoy saved Edith Keeler and the Nazis won WWII, that was an alternate reality. But with the exception of the the area around the Guardian, the prime timeline was gone--until Kirk and Spock fixed. When the Borg assimilated Earth in the 21st century, everyone but the Enterprise was erased and turned to Borg. That was an alternate reality. So when it comes whether or not the prime universe actually exists within Star Trek's fictional universe, since obviously the DVDs exist in the real world and that's not even a topic, that alternate reality line doesn't do anything either way.

The definition of alternate reality was more appropriately used in kelvin trek because an alternate reality is, by definition, another reality and not one rewriting and cancelling another. So one supposes that if you call it like that, it means exactly what the word should suggest.

Spock has extensive history with time travel, and within the confines of Star Trek, he knows the importance of preserving the past. This would be exponentially more true with Vulcan being destroyed and all those people that contributed to his timeline. Spock has traveled in time, and knows that it's different from traveling to other universes as well. Again, why would anyone care about time travel at all if there were no stakes? It was never established that Spock traveled to another universe.

But they showed it. He got in the black hole and appeared on 'the other side' of it. Visually alone, the suggestion he traveled to another universe is strong for me, especially for nowadays audiences that had already watched black holes getting used that way.

I swear, I'm no genius and yet I got it from the first watch. Don't make me feel special.

Again, this can be fixed very easily. One line. One story. If their intent is truly to have the prime universe exist, then let them go for it.

They had that line, but it isn't enough. We have new tv shows set in prime, but it isn't enough.
The Picard show will basically be a sequel of the prime timeline side of the st09's story (the destruction of Romulus and the vanishing of Spock prime) but, it isn't enough.


But you aren't really asking they make it more clear that kelvin trek is another reality. You want them to ignore this other timeline and only make stories in the prime timeline.

I feel you are making Tarantino's mistake of painting yourself as someone who 'doesn't get it' when, rather, your issue is you don't WANT to because you want prime timeline stories.

Yet at this point in his life, he was 100% committed to being a Vulcan, and traditional love is not something they do. Yes, Sarek loved Amanda, but he didn't express it like in this movie, and Spock being with Uhura of all people was absolutely forced.

Define traditional love. Vulcans love, they have relationships. They experience those like humanoid species do for the most part. Listen to the way Tuvok talked about his wife, and try me again with 'they don't do traditional'.
But I suppose Spock cannot do traditional friendship either since the vulcans are supposed to suppress all emotion?

You are painting yourself into a corner here.
It isn't tos Spock the one who is with Uhura, it's kelvin Spock. A dude who is different, has different life experiences and might thus never get to that point in his life where he denies himself love. It's the point.

Uhura, of all the people, is the one that makes the most sense, watching tos and reading bts stuff too.

Except there was nothing romantic about Spock and Uhura in TOS. Hell, Uhura looked up to Kirk more than Spock.

Nichelle Nichols would disagree with your assertion because from her reading of the character through the scripts, she thought the person Uhura looked up to was Spock and he was the one she admired and was closer to. She said that Roddenberry had wanted to explore their dynamic, along other personal stories for the characters, but he didn't get the chance.

I wouldn't call flirting from her side, and him reading Byron and thinking about her beauty nothing.

What I'm complaining about is that it's out of character.

A point that tos invalidates already. It wasn't a matter of being ooc, it was a matter of circunstances both inside and outside the narrative that made it harder for that Spock and that Uhura to get this kind of storyline.
Now they can.

Besides, if you never watched a Spock who is in love and into a relationship before, how can you even know what's in character for him in that situation? You don't know how he acts in this kind of circumstances.
I'm sure part of the fun for the writers was imagining a private, unexplored, aspect of these characters.

I'm not giving Tarantino a pass. I'm giving him an open mind. Who says I said it doesn't matter if he ignores canon? If he ties in the prime universe and the Kelvin universe, he's going well beyond doing anything wrong--he's fixing a JJ issue, and ending a debate while telling a potentially interesting story.

An issue that doesn't need fixing because it isn't an issue, in the first place. It's the basic narrative foundation of the whole trilogy. Ignoring it is, well, just lame for Tarantino.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Kirk Prime]

The definition of alternate reality was more appropriately used in kelvin trek because an alternate reality is, by definition, another reality and not one rewriting and cancelling another. So one supposes that if you call it like that, it means exactly what the word should suggest.

Again, this does not state that the prime universe still exists. If you rewrite the prime universe, you are still creating an alternate reality. Any time travel creates an alternate reality. When Marty McFly went to Hell Valley, it was an alternate reality.

But they showed it. He got in the black hole and appeared on 'the other side' of it. Visually alone, the suggestion he traveled to another universe is strong for me, especially for nowadays audiences that had already watched black holes getting used that way.

I swear, I'm no genius and yet I got it from the first watch. Don't make me feel special.

You don't have to be a genius. But if you watched any Star Trek before ST09, you would know that time travel erases timelines. Alternate universes are a different animal. We only saw time travel.

Define traditional love. Vulcans love, they have relationships. They experience those like humanoid species do for the most part. Listen to the way Tuvok talked about his wife, and try me again with 'they don't do traditional'.
But I suppose Spock cannot do traditional friendship either since the vulcans are supposed to suppress all emotion?

Vulcans do not express emotion the way humans do. That's kind of Star Trek 101, and again, I refer you to This Side of Paradise, which covered this very topic pretty clearly. I'm no genius and yet I got it from the first watch. Don't make me feel special.

It isn't tos Spock the one who is with Uhura, it's kelvin Spock. A dude who is different, has different life experiences and might thus never get to that point in his life where he denies himself love. It's the point.

You're not getting this out of character thing. If Spock is the type of guy that would get involved with Uhura like that, he's not really Spock, but some guy who looked like him with the same name. What is the point of using the original characters, if you are going to change them so drastically that they are the character in name only?

An issue that doesn't need fixing because it isn't an issue, in the first place. It's the basic narrative foundation of the whole trilogy. Ignoring it is, well, just lame for Tarantino.

Again, 40 years of Star Trek that came before Abrams proves that yes, it is an issue, unless you want to blindly accept that the prime universe doesn't exist.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Ten years later, they're continuing the Prime Universe after the events of ST'09. They're telling Discovery stories with old-school time travel "rules".

It makes as much sense as the TOS crew beaming Captain Christopher into himself or Picard shooting his 6-hours-later self. But really, so what?

 

[MakeshiftPython]

The filmmakers have made it clear that the Kelvin timeline is supposed to co-exist with the Prime timeline. This was done so that while Abrams could do whatever he wanted with his timeline, the Prime timeline would remain unchanged for other filmmakers to play in that sandbox.

Besides, the time travel mechanics have NEVER been consistent. The rules always change to the whims of the story being told. Sometimes it's fixed timeloop where you can't change the past, sometimes you CAN change it and change it back. There's no "correct" way to depict time mechanics in Trek. You could do a "Yesterday's Enterprise" story set in the Kelvin timeline, despite the fact that the first film introduced that branch off timeline because story matters more.

 

[M'Sharak]

The definition of alternate reality was more appropriately used in kelvin trek because an alternate reality is, by definition, another reality and not one rewriting and cancelling another.

Alternate, in the sense of being an alternate version to some other, pre-existing version of that thing, as opposed to altered, in which the original thing is itself changed / overwritten / replaced.

If I'm reading you correctly?

 

[fireproof78]

You don't have to be a genius. But if you watched any Star Trek before ST09, you would know that time travel erases timelines. Alternate universes are a different animal. We only saw time travel.

We saw both actually.

I got it on first watch. Let's try not to require an in depth dissertation to explain it to the audience.

Star Trek TOS has had alternate universes, time travel, and the like. The possibility is always there, and Kelvin Trek took the opportunity to explore new ideas. You know, that thing that Star Trek is supposedly known for?

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Haters need to get over it, and Kelvin fans need to stop feeling so defensive. I get, Kelvin hasn't been having a good time for awhile now.

All Trek is canon. Let's talk about the prospect of Tarantino playing in the Star Trek sandbox.

 

[fireproof78]

All Trek is canon. Let's talk about the prospect of Tarantino playing in the Star Trek sandbox.

I tried. I got shot down for my trouble of daring to express concern that Tarantino might not be a good fit.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I tried. I got shot down for my trouble of daring to express concern that Tarantino might not be a good fit.

I agree with you on him being unfit, but still wanna see him do it.

 

[Malaika]

Alternate, in the sense of being an alternate version to some other, pre-existing version of that thing, as opposed to altered, in which the original thing is itself changed / overwritten / replaced.

If I'm reading you correctly?

Yes? It's another version of the thing and not an altered version that overwrites the thing. An alternative, another way, but not the ONLY way. A possibility.

JJ and the Orci&Kurtzman duo are familiar with these things and having watched both fringe and lost, I guess I wasn't that surprised they were inspired to use some (some) of that for trek too.

Lost had both the 'conventional' time travel device and an alternate reality (though in the end Lindelof retconned the latter into....I won't even say that), but the time travel and altering the past/future thing was handled in a 'whatever happened, had (always) happened' paradox where the characters realize that some things from their present had always been, from the start, the result of them going back into the past at one point and changing or influencing some things (eg. some characters will realize that they were the ones who will save/have saved one of the villains when he was a kid, and the 'cure' is what made him bad..so basically they create their own enemy) .
The movie 'Interstellar' is like that too. There is no fixing or restoring the timeline. The paradox and/or alternate realities seem to be, nowadays, the most realistic way to represent time travel for a number of reasons.

 

[pst]

I tried. I got shot down for my trouble of daring to express concern that Tarantino might not be a good fit.

did you? after tarantino's history of disturbing behavior toward his actresses came out last year, several of us protested his involvement in the franchise and speculated that this news would be the end of this project.

unfortunately it's still going forward, so all that's left has been to speculate about what it'll be like and grin and bear it if it actually happens.

 

[fireproof78]

did you? after tarantino's history of disturbing behavior toward his actresses came out last year, several of us protested his involvement in the franchise and speculated that this news would be the end of this project.

unfortunately it's still going forward, so all that's left has been to speculate about what it'll be like and grin and bear it if it actually happens.

Yeah. I hadn't even touched in his personal conduct. I had just noted that his style and approach to film may not suit Trek. I get accused of hand wringing and entitlement.

Pointless. Apparently QT can do no wrong.