^And that also means that Spock is gone as of 2387. McCoy is all alone again...if he survives that long
He's still got Scotty though
The fate of Romulus?
- Thread starter ironduke555
- Start date
He's still got Scotty though
^Poor Saavik. Spock is not coming home, or so it seems. I wonder what MWB's Saavik book will say about their relationship? Kids? Sherman & Shwartz had them get married in 2344, and Saavik was still in SF service as a Captain in 2377 during the whole Waatrai incident. They've been together for the better part of a century...
Sulu might still be around, his death has never been confirmed. Considering how old McCoy is, and that Sulu is younger than him, Sulu should still be alive.
I don't think Mr. Laser Beam is saying it contradicts the episode "Unification." I think he's saying that destroying Romulus and removing Spock from the timeline negates the plot thread of Spock seeking Vulcan-Romulan reunification, rendering it all meaningless.
I don't agree, however. The Romulan people live on many worlds, not just one. Regardless of Nero's overemotional rhetoric, the destruction of the planet does not equate to the destruction of the species. There will still be Romulans, many of whom were no doubt influenced by Spock's teachings, and so even without him, they may be motivated to continue striving for reunification. Indeed, given how the Romulans have been weakened by this loss, they might feel it's more important than ever.
In the Prime universe, Romulus and Remus do not exist.
What does "Unification" have to do with all this?
I wasn't even thinking about that episode. Although that is an excellent point, now that you brought it up. Since there is no longer a Romulus to reunify with, maybe it's for the best that Spock is gone...What I was actually referring to is this. Obviously the past portions of this film (everything post-Kelvin) take place in an alternate timeline. I suggest that it's an entirely separate *universe* as well, and that this alternate universe was reached via the black hole. (It would explain why the time travel that we see in this film does not overwrite the 'prime' timeline, since what happens in one universe does not normally directly affect the other.) Given this, if Nero and Spock Prime ended up in an alternate universe, perhaps they also came FROM one?
You're entitled to believe whatever you want about it in your own mind. The assumption of the filmmakers is that Nero and Spock Prime come from the original Star Trek timeline, and the tie-in fiction's mandate is to follow the lead of the canon.
Maybe the Vulcans will allow Romulan survivors to come and live on Vulcan, as an act of generosity. Since in some ways, Vulcan is their true home.
The destruction of Romulus could bring Romulans and Vulcans closer, in the same way the destruction of Praxis did for the Federation and Klingons.
The destruction of Romulus could bring Romulans and Vulcans closer, in the same way the destruction of Praxis did for the Federation and Klingons.
I'm not really sure what the problem is. I mean unless there is a reunifcation of the RIS and RSE then we know that half of the Romulans survived.
This could actually be an interesting turn of events for Treklit. Assuming that the Typhon Pact survives until 2387...it would be interesting to see what the sudden loss of Romulus would do to the alliance.
This could actually be an interesting turn of events for Treklit. Assuming that the Typhon Pact survives until 2387...it would be interesting to see what the sudden loss of Romulus would do to the alliance.
Umm, not really. The Romulans left Vulcan. They rejected cthia. They don't agree with it; Vulcan is not their home any more than England or France is somehow my home just because my ancestors came from there.
Maybe. On the other hand, maybe a lot of Romulans will blame the Federation like Nero did, noting that the Federation allied with the Imperial Romulan State, whom they might perceive as traitors to Romulus.
Or outside enemy interference, made to look natural.
I wasn't aware that "assumption of the filmmakers" = canon. Haven't we been told that only what appears on screen is canon? And there are things on screen in the movie itself that could be used as evidence to support Mr. Laser Beam's hypothesis, if one chose to interpret them that way.
TrekLit has creatively interpreted what has appeared on screen many times; I don't see why this situation is any different. Now, the question as to whether CBS Licensing would allow Pocket to interpret this differently than the filmmakers' intentions is a completely different issue. If I were a gambling man, I'd probably put my money on "they wouldn't", even if I wished that wasn't the case.
But as others have said, books set in 2387 are probably years away anyway.
We're not answerable to the filmmakers' assumptions because of some nitpicky legalistic interpretation of the word "canon" -- we're answerable to them because Bad Robot has approval on our novels.
And the idea that the new film is impossible to reconcile with the old continuity is naive. The old continuity is full of hundreds of continuity errors, some of them quite large, and yet fans accept the conceit that it's a single consistent reality. None of the discrepancies introduced in the film is any greater than the discrepancies that already exist. (Khan's multiethnic supermen becoming blond Aryans; the supermen being in their 20s after 15 years on the planet; Data using contractions routinely until he suddenly claimed he couldn't; Deanna repeatedly kissing a bearded Riker and later claiming she never had; Scotty believing Kirk was alive in "Relics" after witnessing his apparent death in GEN; Lt. Leslie and Mr. Valtane coming back from the dead; etc.) There never has been a truly consistent Star Trek reality; the idea that it's a consistent universe is a fictitious conceit we buy into by glossing over the many contradictions. So pretending that the discrepancies introduced by this movie are irreconcilable is a gross overreaction. There is no valid reason not to accept the film's assertion that the timeline was the same as the one we know prior to the Kelvin attack.
And the idea that the new film is impossible to reconcile with the old continuity is naive. The old continuity is full of hundreds of continuity errors, some of them quite large, and yet fans accept the conceit that it's a single consistent reality. None of the discrepancies introduced in the film is any greater than the discrepancies that already exist. (Khan's multiethnic supermen becoming blond Aryans; the supermen being in their 20s after 15 years on the planet; Data using contractions routinely until he suddenly claimed he couldn't; Deanna repeatedly kissing a bearded Riker and later claiming she never had; Scotty believing Kirk was alive in "Relics" after witnessing his apparent death in GEN; Lt. Leslie and Mr. Valtane coming back from the dead; etc.) There never has been a truly consistent Star Trek reality; the idea that it's a consistent universe is a fictitious conceit we buy into by glossing over the many contradictions. So pretending that the discrepancies introduced by this movie are irreconcilable is a gross overreaction. There is no valid reason not to accept the film's assertion that the timeline was the same as the one we know prior to the Kelvin attack.
Was the year 2387 stated onscreen? I don't remember that, but I only saw the movie once so I could easily be misremembering. If not, then even though that's probably what will stick since it's appeared a few different places, it could end up changing.
That would be an example of that misremembering I was talking about.^Spock Prime said he came from 129 years in the future, and the movie was taking place in 2258. 2258+129=2387.
Surely if the writers *must* take into account everything that happens on screen, then the books *must* end by 2287, because you can't continue a universe when it's been changed.
However, re: the destruction/survival of Romulus, how often has Earth been destroyed? It's not hard to come up with a story where Spock manages to return the timeline to normal, return to the right time and save Romulus. (He seemed ridiculously casual about "not being in time" to save Romulus. Did that part seem rubbish to everyone else? Spock wouldn't just not-be-on-time. Spock doesn't make those kinds of mistakes!)
Alternatively, someone else (*anyone else*) travels slightly back in time and prevents the destruction of Romulus.
Or, Romulus wasn't destroyed - what we saw was part of a mind meld, which can be faked, or minds can be tricked.
There are any number of ways to save Romulus, or leave it dead.
I'm not saying anything of these things should happen, all I'm saying is that anything COULD happen, so shall we just wait and see what they come up with?
However, re: the destruction/survival of Romulus, how often has Earth been destroyed? It's not hard to come up with a story where Spock manages to return the timeline to normal, return to the right time and save Romulus. (He seemed ridiculously casual about "not being in time" to save Romulus. Did that part seem rubbish to everyone else? Spock wouldn't just not-be-on-time. Spock doesn't make those kinds of mistakes!)
Alternatively, someone else (*anyone else*) travels slightly back in time and prevents the destruction of Romulus.
Or, Romulus wasn't destroyed - what we saw was part of a mind meld, which can be faked, or minds can be tricked.
There are any number of ways to save Romulus, or leave it dead.
I'm not saying anything of these things should happen, all I'm saying is that anything COULD happen, so shall we just wait and see what they come up with?
That's a common misconception. Some people misinterpret "nothing offscreen is canonical" as "everything onscreen is canonical." Which is a basic logical fallacy, like assuming that since nothing off Earth is Belgian territory, therefore everything on Earth is Belgian territory. In fact, canon itself disregards a number of things that have happened onscreen, like the descriptions of antimatter in "The Alternative Factor," the death of Lt. Leslie in "Obsession," Data's early uses of contractions, the short travel time to the galactic center in ST V, etc.
,
A, you mean 2387, I presume. B, the filmmakers' point of view (based on real quantum physics) is that time travel doesn't erase a timeline, it simply creates a new, coexisting one.
C, the books are only required to avoid contradicting onscreen canon (at least the parts that haven't been contradicted by later canon). It was never stated in the film that the old timeline had ceased to exist, so there is no contradiction in assuming that it continues to exist. For proof, look at Star Trek Online. As a licensee of CBS, they are no doubt required to stay consistent with canon just as much as the novels are, but nobody's told them they have to stop developing their game set in 2409.
Just once, I believe. It was blown up by the Xindi in ENT: "Twilight." FC had a timeline where it was assimilated by the Borg, and "All Good Things..." had one where life never evolved on Earth at all, but in neither case was the Earth itself, i.e. the planet rather than the thin biological film coating its surface, actually destroyed.
But that's never going to happen, because the new movie is a huge, huge success, so nobody in their right mind would erase that successful new timeline.
Even Spock can't anticipate the unpredictable. The interpretation in the Countdown comic is that the supernova's expansion unexpectedly accelerated. It was a highly anomalous event, so it might not have been possible to predict its behavior.
Similar threads
