And yet don't accidentally change something when they accidentally blab or show future events to historically famous people.
To Accept or Not to Accept
- Thread starter hal9500
- Start date
- Status
And yet don't accidentally change something when they accidentally blab or show future events to historically famous people.
This is entirely possible.
However, I believe that the historical parallels between the prime timeline (TOS) and the nuTrek timeline will drift apart more and more the further you move away from the point of divergence (Nero destroying the U.S.S. Kelvin, I suppose). Just look at the changes that have occured up until nuTrek (without warranty!)... Kirk never entered Starfleet the way he was supposed to enter (and lived a completely different life up until then), Chekov apparently graduated at the same time as Kirk did, not later, the nuEnterprise was built at a different location at a different time and was technologically more advanced and so on and so on.
Just as an example... to get a 'remake' of 'Space Seed', the nuEnterprise basically has to dodge the myriads of changes of this quantum reality to be exactly at the same time in the same location as the S.S. Botany Bay to get the story going. If it doesn't, Khan and his hibernating genetic supermen and -women could just as well drift through the void until the end of days. On the other hand, it wouldn't have made any difference for Edith Keeler. She would have died anyway had our time-travelling heroes not messed up and straightened out everything.
true!
think of how our actual real life timeline would have been changed without 9/11.
no iraq, no afghanistan, etc, etc. The last 8 years would have been totally different. Maybe the Kelvin has a similar affect.
But either way, I can't believe we have spent 14 pages discussing whether or not to accept this.
Just accept and try to enjoy, after all, it is entertainment.
think of how our actual real life timeline would have been changed without 9/11.
no iraq, no afghanistan, etc, etc. The last 8 years would have been totally different. Maybe the Kelvin has a similar affect.
But either way, I can't believe we have spent 14 pages discussing whether or not to accept this.
Just accept and try to enjoy, after all, it is entertainment.
A
Amaris
Guest
I'm not grasping your distinction between a canonically legit Mirror Universe and the Abrams Universe. In DS9, main Mirror characters were continuously killed off prematurely, relative to their counterparts; and others outlived their counterparts (Jennifer Sisko). In Enterprise, mirror Enterprise was destroyed without a corresponding destruction of the Prime Enterprise. If you'd just accept that an infinite number of parallel timelines can and do exist simultaneously in different dimensions, this would be a lot simpler
Is there really any distinction between "a separate timeline" and a "story that alters the current Trek timeline?" If, after the resolution of Yesterday's Enterprise, the altered Fed/Klingon war timeline ceased to EVER exist (anywhere, in any dimension), then how did a non-existent alternate Tasha Yar, who wasn't killed by an oil slick, manage to exist and procreate with a Romulan in the Prime Universe? The U.S.S. Defiant captured by Mirror Tholians and then commandeered by Mirror Archer exists either way; it was from that particular future Universe, the Prime Universe, (which if it existed once, must always exist) that the Tholians had accessed with their passageway. Actually, I'm kind of hoping that the aesthetics and the tech are explained as part of the altered timeline, right down to the new intricate patterns in the uniforms. Not that such details have to be spotlighted and specifically traced/explained; it's perfectly logical to see how one point of divergence from one alternate historical event could trickle-down and affect cultural things like uniforms and color schemes. Simply to accept the new look as a conceit, as a way of revamping the setting for a modern audience, would be to vacillate and meander between doing an alternate timeline RESPECTFUL to continuity and a RE-IMAGINING like Moore's BSG. It should be either one or the other. Now, I like the new BSG although it had increasing problems as it progressed, and it merely used the original material as a template for a far, far superior re-imagining of a hackneyed, uninspired, and ultimately pointless original that I'd have no problem erasing from OUR history with a Krenim time weapon. Star Trek, on the other hand, is due far, far more respect. That's why they're not doing a re-imagining , but a parallel universe that not only acknowledges, but the creation of which depends upon, events originating in the Prime Universe.
To quote Peter Griffin, 'Wait a minute! That's the smartest thing I've ever heard anyone say about anything!'
Seriously, that was my reasoning all along. However, I was simply too discouraged and annoyed by the regularly-emerging insipid bickering in this thread to sit down and write a treatise like that, only to have it shredded to pieces by Star Trek fandom's equivalent of the Taliban. So, I take my hat off in the face of your insight and your reasoning!
I've already mentioned it in earlier posts that I wholeheartedly embrace the concept of quantum physics and parallel universes (not only in the context of Star Trek, but also when it comes to real-world science and philosophy... however, I digress). Any decision anybody makes anywhere at any time is just another one of Schrödinger's cats, another reality branching off and off and off. So, if the mirror universe and the TNG 'Parallels' parallel universes and the alternate reality of ENT 'Twilight' are accepted as canon, why not also accept nuTrek, particularly since it seems that somebody really put some thought into it? 'It's Trek, Jim, but not as we know it'... yet. It's one more quantum reality within the Trek universe, but pulled through consequently this time.
Still, one thing bugs me somehow...
I haven't seen the movie and I might be completely wrong, but, as I see it, the point of divergence between the prime timeline of TOS (et al.) and the new timeline is when Nero barges in from the future and blows the U.S.S. Kelvin to smithereens. This event should happen in a 'The Cage'-ish time period, if one takes the canon (and its particular styles) seriously. Yet, the U.S.S. Kelvin very much resembles the U.S.S. Enterprise refit in design and George Kirk's uniform looks nothing like Christopher Pike's jersey...
Last edited:
See, what I myself have a little problem with is the trend of this discussion towards discounting whatever will happen in ST09 as "Oh well, it's just an episode in an alternate timeline". As I said, from the angle that the film is, and I quote the writers, "a sequel", it is the next chapter in the story of Spock (for one thing). In so far as that he does back in time and does whatever he does there. This happens chronologically AFTER we last saw him in "Unification". So we have a connection to and a continuation of the previous stories and thus, these stories' universe. So if drastic changes were made (I'm aware of the rumor
) they would be fine because we're opening a brand new chapter which only happens to be set in the past.... if you know what I mean....
But that said, I don't even think we will see any changes in the established continuity. At least not of the sort that we could assume that Pine and Quinto could not go on to the same adventures we saw Shatner and Nimoy take on.
Let me elaborate:
The Academic said:
1. How exactly was Kirk supposed to enter the Academy? If I recall correctly (and Memory Alpha backs me up here), it was never said when or how Kirk joined Starfleet. At least not onscreen in any of the series or any film (which is where "canon" is produced). So when I watch TOS - do I know how long Kirk has served? He's in his mid-thirties, maybe he joined ten years earlier, rose through the ranks quickly? Remember, all the dates of the TOS era are conjecture.
2. What was Kirk's life like before? Aside from the massacre on Tarsus IV, I don't think we know anything about young Kirk's life. And I see no contradiction. His father - who I think was never mentioned on the show - still could've died on some starship he commanded for "12 minutes".
3. When did Chekov graduate? Sure, it feels like a contrivance that the entire Enterprise bridge crew knew each other back at the Academy, especially when Chekov is much younger than the others. But who knows what he did after graduating to remain an Ensign when Kirk was already Captain?
4. How do we know where the Enterprise was built? Why not on the ground? Where was it said or shown before that it happened differently?
5. How is the ship technologically more advanced? It looks sleek now, but so did the TOS Enterprise in the 60s, I bet. Why can't people ever accept that these are simply different design choices by filmmakers representing the very same thing? No one ever wondered why the Enterprise bridge looked completely different in every movie they made.
And so on and so on... By which I mean to say, we know nothing from TOS about the events of that time, so whatever we're shown in ST09 could be exactly how it was always supposed to happen. If not, they will make a plot point of this regarding the time travel angle. And then Old Spock will explain to us what was different the first time. But in any case, it is my belief that the main objective of that time travel story - making sure Kirk lives and becomes the Captain of the Enterprise - will be accomplished and therefore history "as we know it" will unfold.
that Vulcan gets destroyed
But that said, I don't even think we will see any changes in the established continuity. At least not of the sort that we could assume that Pine and Quinto could not go on to the same adventures we saw Shatner and Nimoy take on.
Let me elaborate:
The Academic said:
Which begs the following questions:
1. How exactly was Kirk supposed to enter the Academy? If I recall correctly (and Memory Alpha backs me up here), it was never said when or how Kirk joined Starfleet. At least not onscreen in any of the series or any film (which is where "canon" is produced). So when I watch TOS - do I know how long Kirk has served? He's in his mid-thirties, maybe he joined ten years earlier, rose through the ranks quickly? Remember, all the dates of the TOS era are conjecture.
2. What was Kirk's life like before? Aside from the massacre on Tarsus IV, I don't think we know anything about young Kirk's life. And I see no contradiction. His father - who I think was never mentioned on the show - still could've died on some starship he commanded for "12 minutes".
3. When did Chekov graduate? Sure, it feels like a contrivance that the entire Enterprise bridge crew knew each other back at the Academy, especially when Chekov is much younger than the others. But who knows what he did after graduating to remain an Ensign when Kirk was already Captain?
4. How do we know where the Enterprise was built? Why not on the ground? Where was it said or shown before that it happened differently?
5. How is the ship technologically more advanced? It looks sleek now, but so did the TOS Enterprise in the 60s, I bet. Why can't people ever accept that these are simply different design choices by filmmakers representing the very same thing? No one ever wondered why the Enterprise bridge looked completely different in every movie they made.
And so on and so on... By which I mean to say, we know nothing from TOS about the events of that time, so whatever we're shown in ST09 could be exactly how it was always supposed to happen. If not, they will make a plot point of this regarding the time travel angle. And then Old Spock will explain to us what was different the first time. But in any case, it is my belief that the main objective of that time travel story - making sure Kirk lives and becomes the Captain of the Enterprise - will be accomplished and therefore history "as we know it" will unfold.
Well, for one thing, J.J. Abrams and Robert Orci don't talk about quantum physics for nothing...
Why can't it be both? Star Trek XI starts as a sequel. Spock goes off on his next adventure in the post-Nemesis TNG era. He travels back in time to put things Nero messed up right again and ends up in a parallel universe that has already been changed. He tries to do whatever he can, but seems to be not entirely successful... However, what he does is to hand over the baton to Kirk and his not-quite-so-former self. At the end of the movie, the crew of the nuEnterprise will probably sail off into a wonderful sunrise/sunset, into a not-quite-exactly-the-same universe, into a different quantum reality. It has nothing to do with "Oh well, it's just an episode in an alternate timeline". It will become a new continuity, running parallel to the already-existing continuity.
Well, at least on not-quite-exactly-the-same adventures...
I admit, you've got me there. I can offer no canonical proof whatsoever except circumstantial evidence, stuff like 'Where's Gary Mitchell?'
What we DO know is that the U.S.S. Enterprise was in service for quite a while, under two different captains, before TOS started. This means that her construction started when James Kirk was still a toddler... and I doubt that it takes as long to build the U.S.S. Enterprise as it took to construct the Death Star between Episodes III and IV!
For once, let us have the benefit of the doubt. We are talking about J.J. Abrams here and it seems that he never ever does anything unintentionally! 'Lost' anyone? 'Cloverfield'?
Ships get an update/a refit whenever deemed necessay. It doesn't always have to be a pre-TMP-size refit.
I very much doubt that Star Trek XI will exactly show how Kirk got the command of the Enterprise in the first place. And why should history "as we know it" - in a movie-making, story-telling sense - unfold AGAIN? Been there, seen that, meh...
Wrong. Pike is the only canon Captain of the Enterprise before Kirk. April is not canon, TAS and TrekLit.
Also in ST III Adm. Morrow said "Enterprise is twenty years old". That number is off for both scenarios, but is closer to NuTrek.
I don't know if the movie will be good of not. I hope so, but I will go to see. I hope others will at least go see it once to see. This movie is our last shot at Trek for a long time.
Also in ST III Adm. Morrow said "Enterprise is twenty years old". That number is off for both scenarios, but is closer to NuTrek.
I don't know if the movie will be good of not. I hope so, but I will go to see. I hope others will at least go see it once to see. This movie is our last shot at Trek for a long time.
That's right.
I disagree. Look at the Hulk first film didn't do so good, so they made another just a few years latter. Star Trek is too big not to be remade over and over again in the future. The real question is do most fans like this particular direction or don't they. I don't think I as a fan have to be force-fed JJs version of Star Trek and be threated with, well if you don't go see it, they won't make another. Yes of course they will, and hopefully next time they'll get someone who is a fan and doesn't just simply change everthing because he is making the film for 'future fans.'
While it's nice that nuTrek probably fits quite well into the existing framework, I would hope they keep the "remake" option open, meaning
- The refurbishing doesn't end with prequels, but also future installments that reach into the TOS and post-TOS eras. Stories and backstories (like the Organian Treaty, first visual contact with Romulans) are open for reworking
- liberties with established continuity. For example they could remake The Menagerie in the second movie (complete with Pike in chair of course), but add twists to the story and only keep the basic story with a few nods to the original. Kinda like Casino Royale. Khan could be a recurring character and such.
Like "updating" TOS, but this time it's not (just) the effects like in TOSR, but everything else.
- that new canon should then be binding for subsequent movies/series
- The refurbishing doesn't end with prequels, but also future installments that reach into the TOS and post-TOS eras. Stories and backstories (like the Organian Treaty, first visual contact with Romulans) are open for reworking
- liberties with established continuity. For example they could remake The Menagerie in the second movie (complete with Pike in chair of course), but add twists to the story and only keep the basic story with a few nods to the original. Kinda like Casino Royale. Khan could be a recurring character and such.
Like "updating" TOS, but this time it's not (just) the effects like in TOSR, but everything else.
- that new canon should then be binding for subsequent movies/series
Yes. You're absolutely right. There's no way that could go wrong. Especially if they had a Starfleet Jeep type vehicle... you know, like in the Rat Pack.
Frankly, I'm not so sure it's "our Spock" who goes back in time. Rather, I suspect it's the old Spock of the alternate timeline that Nero screws with when he goes back in time in the first place and misses, winding up in the alternate timeline instead of the primary one.
Of course, with that approach, who's to say that Nero is from the primary timeline in the first place?
This gets better all the time.
The "bums" in question who shifted Supes from leaping to flying were named Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.
Way to magnificently, spectacularly, miss the point.
Rii
Rear Admiral
On a conceptual level this is certainly what I would've preferred, however for the moment I'm open to the possibility that Orci and Kurtzman have an awesome story to tell here that requires this convoluted approach, of which the in-universe explanation for canon violations is merely a convenient and incidental benefit.
I still think they should've made Chekov a woman. Russian chicks are hot.
- Status
