I've been thinking besides the "reboot", there were number of things wrong with the movie. The plot was weak; in fact,the whole purpose of the plot seemed to be just to "reboot" the timeline, Nero didn't impress me as a villian. I will say the special effects were good and there was a lot of action. Finally the actors they chose did a fairly competent job. However, the three positive aspects I listed were the movie's ONLY positive aspects, JMHO!
Timelines, reality,star trek, canon, and the Truth!
- Thread starter hal9500
- Start date
- Status
Tis a tragicomedy of epic proportions.
The old timeline didn't get erased. Wanna know why? This is going to blow your mind, hal: they said so and put it in the script! Time travel isn't real so the "rules" are whatever the fuck the writer says they are.
If you don't like the movie that's cool, but you might want to have a real reason not to. Or failing that at least engage in honest debate on the subject.
If you don't like the movie that's cool, but you might want to have a real reason not to. Or failing that at least engage in honest debate on the subject.
This is a big misunderstanding, you clearly lack an understanding of modern Many Worlds Interpretation. According to prominent physicists themselves, if we invented a time machine tommorow and sent someone back in time we couldn't screw up our own timeline, the changes that happened would manifest themselves in an alternate universe which branched off from the original universe when they arrived in the past.
According to modern physics we can't change the timeline as such, we can only create new realities that branch off from the one that were experiencing. This is happening even as we speak, theres one where i do post this message, one where i dont, one where i drop dead, one where i reach for the mouse and my hand floats up to the roof etc...
So what JJ says ... goes....
Wow thats a very clever and scientific way of proving a [point about time travel...
So why did all the other trek series/films stick so ridgedly to canon, like ent for instance, never seeing the romulans faces... Why?\
Il tell you why,
A: Braga, Coto, & Brannon, for all they have done actually gave a toss!
It does matter.... But apparently not to you folks.
All Hail Abrams- Its in the new starfleet charter: the Doctrine on Abrams Infalibility...
All those years of woven together episodes films and series and he goes and pisses it all away....
And you "Trekkies" havent anything to say.
"It will appeal to a wider audience"
"Im not making this movie for trekkies but for future fans of star trek"
Go for it JJ. As you could never come up with anything original, go ahead. Piss all over it... One or two more films, ... then ... Kobayashi Mara...
Rodenberry must be turning in his grave....
Why does this keep coming back up?
I loved the "old" Star Trek. I own all the movies and everything.
That being said the "old" star trek was dying. Why ENT was canceled and such. Star Trek wasn't viable to survive as it was.
The "new" trek tries to fix that but we are contantly hearing from people like you who swear up and down that the old is now gone.
I ask you this.
Where were all the upcoming movie deals for "old" trek?
Where are all the series on tv for "old" trek?
Where is the stuff that would make this viable and interest more series and movies?
In order to survive they have had to try to bring more people into the group rather then a few diehards fans that CAN'T justify paramount and else to spend money on it. They WOULD NEVER EVER EVER make anything before this because they wouldn't make any money off it.
The bottomline "old" trek was not profitable and going downhill.
The "new" tries to renew the fanbase and bring more people in.
If you think they should just make good movies and not get a return on it your nuts.
I loved the "old" Star Trek. I own all the movies and everything.
That being said the "old" star trek was dying. Why ENT was canceled and such. Star Trek wasn't viable to survive as it was.
The "new" trek tries to fix that but we are contantly hearing from people like you who swear up and down that the old is now gone.
I ask you this.
Where were all the upcoming movie deals for "old" trek?
Where are all the series on tv for "old" trek?
Where is the stuff that would make this viable and interest more series and movies?
In order to survive they have had to try to bring more people into the group rather then a few diehards fans that CAN'T justify paramount and else to spend money on it. They WOULD NEVER EVER EVER make anything before this because they wouldn't make any money off it.
The bottomline "old" trek was not profitable and going downhill.
The "new" tries to renew the fanbase and bring more people in.
If you think they should just make good movies and not get a return on it your nuts.
They should have let it die then... Better to Die as it was, then exist as it now is...
and furthermore Memory Alpha lists this as a "alternate reality"
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Star_Trek_(film)
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Star_Trek_(film)
By George I think he's got it! He's the director. What he says literally goes. I'm glad you're grasping this.
It's not clever or scientific. It's just the way it is. Time travel works a certain way in certain Trek episodes because it serves those stories. It works a certain way in this movie because it serves the story. If that bothers you, you didn't really have a hope in hell of liking this film and I kind of feel sorry for you that you're so inflexible about this stuff to the point of ruining it for you.
Somehow I doubt most of the 70 odd million in box office agree with you on that.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=92023
How 'bout this - City on the Edge of Forever created the Abramverse - then you can have your pie and eat it too!
How 'bout this - City on the Edge of Forever created the Abramverse - then you can have your pie and eat it too!
This article might be worth a read to demonstrate that J.J. isn't the only one re-purposing time travel to fit his story.
Star Trek New Voyages/Phase 2, continue on in the old timeline, Novels about the USS Titan, continue on. This new film doesn't stop that. If you were content to only have fan projects and novels, then go on enjoying them.
For those new to Star Trek, they have their own version to enjoy, and you have your version. Both Exist, Both Continue, Both can be enjoyed or despised.
People who hated Star Trek before this film, will continue hating it, but if they like the new film, then so what!
Also why do people assume Roddenberry would disaprove, when he is on record as saying he actually hoped someone to pick up the old Star Trek, and re do it better than he had done himself.
For those new to Star Trek, they have their own version to enjoy, and you have your version. Both Exist, Both Continue, Both can be enjoyed or despised.
People who hated Star Trek before this film, will continue hating it, but if they like the new film, then so what!
Also why do people assume Roddenberry would disaprove, when he is on record as saying he actually hoped someone to pick up the old Star Trek, and re do it better than he had done himself.
How about this? (taken from my post in another thread)
Who's to say that the Canon Trek we've had for the last 40 odd years came before the new canon of Abrams Trek? Perhaps the new canon is altered in the future causing the canon that we've known up to this point. Just because we've watched it first doesn't mean it came first and has been altered. Maybe the canon we've known is the (yet-to-be) altered canon? This would mean that the Spock Prime of the new movie is anything but and is in fact a Spock from a similar yet different timeline who comes back, alters his own timeline to the Abrams timeline which in time will be altered to create the 1966 onwards canon.
Yeah, I know. I'm confused as well.
LOVE the new movie though!!!
Who's to say that the Canon Trek we've had for the last 40 odd years came before the new canon of Abrams Trek? Perhaps the new canon is altered in the future causing the canon that we've known up to this point. Just because we've watched it first doesn't mean it came first and has been altered. Maybe the canon we've known is the (yet-to-be) altered canon? This would mean that the Spock Prime of the new movie is anything but and is in fact a Spock from a similar yet different timeline who comes back, alters his own timeline to the Abrams timeline which in time will be altered to create the 1966 onwards canon.
Yeah, I know. I'm confused as well.
LOVE the new movie though!!!
At the end of Star Trek: Countdown, after Nero and Spock disappear into the black hole, there is a bit at the end (almost an epilogue sort of thing) with Picard and Data onboard the 1701E. They do not wink out of existence or anything like that, Data does not change into a goldfish or anything, which would be a consequence if what the OP is saying is true. It's quite clearly not like that.
Furthermore, the writers have repeatedly stated that time-travel, in this instance, is consistent with the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics. That is, as others have no doubt pointed out, that there are an infinite number of alternate realities, that everytime a particle comes to a figurative "fork in the road" - everytime there is a choice or a random event - a whole new alternate reality branches off as a result. Where this interpretation is concerned, any act of time-travel at all is cause enough, on it's own, to cause a new and alternate reality to branch off from the one in which the traveller came from. This is explicit.
The fact that they are using this model this time may be throwing people off who are used to the way time-travel has worked in Trek up until now, but please, do some research and try to come to grips with it. Even if you don't like it, this is an alternate reality, not an altered one.
Furthermore, the writers have repeatedly stated that time-travel, in this instance, is consistent with the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics. That is, as others have no doubt pointed out, that there are an infinite number of alternate realities, that everytime a particle comes to a figurative "fork in the road" - everytime there is a choice or a random event - a whole new alternate reality branches off as a result. Where this interpretation is concerned, any act of time-travel at all is cause enough, on it's own, to cause a new and alternate reality to branch off from the one in which the traveller came from. This is explicit.
The fact that they are using this model this time may be throwing people off who are used to the way time-travel has worked in Trek up until now, but please, do some research and try to come to grips with it. Even if you don't like it, this is an alternate reality, not an altered one.
Take a deep breath. It's just fiction.
If someone wants to do a continuation of the Star Trek universe you're familiar with, there's absolutely nothing stopping them. The developers of the upcoming Star Trek MMO are doing exactly that. So is Pocket Books.
"Not official" you might say? Hate to be the one to break it to you, but regardless of what Abrams did or didn't do, there was never going to be an official continuation. Stick a fork in it. It's done, and it has been since before Abrams even heard of Star Trek.
Your Star Trek hasn't gone anywhere.
YES IT DID!!! I have seen every Star Trek made.
I was gonna type more, but I'm not gonna bother. Lost cause.
- Status
Similar threads
