Trek XI to be alternate timeline, according to AICN
- Thread starter Ghostface1701
- Start date
WHAT exactly did they ask for? I stopped reading about halfway through, because the thing reminded me of ROTS. Not because of the plot, but because the guy seems to think that CGI fights = good film. It was probably 80% CGI (or was planned to be -- it never saw film. I want strong characters and a story, not CGI and shaky over exposed shots.
But I'm not looking forward to time travel. time travel is a dead horse, please stop beating it.
If the whole time travel/alternate timeline thing is even remotely true, then I actually think it's going to be used as a means to bring Kirk back from the dead and sneak Shatner into the film at the very end.
Otherwise, I'll treat this as either a red herring or just another flat out internet rumor...
Otherwise, I'll treat this as either a red herring or just another flat out internet rumor...
I think the only thing "alternate" about the new film's timeline will be that it won't be afraid to violate canon to tell a good Star Trek story. At least, I hope that's the case. I say take the basic ingredients - Kirk, Spock, McCoy, the Enterprise, the bridge crew - and start from zero.
There's no reason to think that they're going to bring Shatner back. At this point he's not in the film, hasn't been offered a part, hasn't agreed to appear - etc, etc.
Very speculative rumors. I hope it isn't a time travel movie.
These why i had my doubts when they brought Nimoy on board for XI movie, how are they going to fit him in XI movie.
They scould have just make XI movie reboot/restart,,New Star Trek Voyages, but interesting news indeed
These why i had my doubts when they brought Nimoy on board for XI movie, how are they going to fit him in XI movie.
They scould have just make XI movie reboot/restart,,New Star Trek Voyages, but interesting news indeed
Well like I said the the laundry list thread for Trek XI - The only thing that I care about is if "Star Trek" is an entertaining and good movie. Simply having "Time travel" doesn't rule out being good at all. If well done it could even be mind blowing.
Its also hard to fully appreciate this without context. So the lets wait and see is the best way to go about it.
And I'm reminded of something a video Shatner (or whomever runs it) posted in a Myspace bullitan with Nimoy talking about how you just have to let these people loose to "Make their movie" inregard to all the internet chatter about how everyone has an opinion on what Trek should be.
And I also can't shake that this must be worth it since Nimoy is in it. There must be something in the script that touched him.
Sharr
I think this is probably bullshit. Moriarty was probably fed some little tidbit of info from one of his studio buddies and then went crazy extrapolating a whole movie out of it. As others have said, his article is a lot of sound and fury, etc.
I'd be real suprised if any of this turns out to be true.
I'd be real suprised if any of this turns out to be true.
Buncha crybabies.
I've been softly against the prequel/remake idea, skeptical, but hopeful.
This idea? I love it.
It's perfect. An alternate 'universe' is the perfect solution to reboot without scrapping the old one. I'm not a big fan of time travel, but the concept is sound.
I've been softly against the prequel/remake idea, skeptical, but hopeful.
This idea? I love it.
It's perfect. An alternate 'universe' is the perfect solution to reboot without scrapping the old one. I'm not a big fan of time travel, but the concept is sound.
They're going back to the well with time travel and I don't want to see the everything that has been established wiped out. Otherwise, I'm okay with the alternate timeline storyline.
Exactly.
Even if these rumors prove to be true... Well, in my book, it's the best of both worlds. The original Star Trek timeline is still there (as evidenced by old Spock's presence in the film), and the new Star Trek continuity can exist right along side it. It's a reboot, without all the unpleasant "What you had before doesn't matter anymore" vibe (which I don't personally care about, but I know it matters to a lot of people around these parts).
^
Sixties. Personally, I'm betting they'll probably just give Uhura a bigger supporting role than she had on the show. Neither Rand nor Chapel seem likely as she hasn't been mentioned on the casting sheets. I don't really see them shoehorning a new woman in when they can just beef up an existing female role...
It's true there's something anachronistic about a series where the leads are three white males (yeah, I know one of them is an alien, but bear with me), but they did decide to go back to this.
While I still don't see Shatner appearing, with a time-rewriting plot integral to the film it's a lot easier to insert him then they'd kind of implied earlier... but then, this could be false and all that, or they wouldn't want to screw around an already overcomplicated plot with another device just to bring Shatner back.
Sixties. Personally, I'm betting they'll probably just give Uhura a bigger supporting role than she had on the show. Neither Rand nor Chapel seem likely as she hasn't been mentioned on the casting sheets. I don't really see them shoehorning a new woman in when they can just beef up an existing female role...
It's true there's something anachronistic about a series where the leads are three white males (yeah, I know one of them is an alien, but bear with me), but they did decide to go back to this.
While I still don't see Shatner appearing, with a time-rewriting plot integral to the film it's a lot easier to insert him then they'd kind of implied earlier... but then, this could be false and all that, or they wouldn't want to screw around an already overcomplicated plot with another device just to bring Shatner back.
Trek fans think of "alternate timeline" as one thing - like another dimension or a variant universe of some kind.
Think in terms of "Back To The Future:" it's an altered timeline.
Think in terms of "Back To The Future:" it's an altered timeline.
Because Spock fixes the killing-Kirk's-father incident - this is stated in the AICN story.
Say, since OGAM involves someone causing Kirk not to be born this is rather problematic isn't it?
Say, since OGAM involves someone causing Kirk not to be born this is rather problematic isn't it?
That's about as far as I got before losing my lunch.
Abrams wouldn't be stupid enough to repeat the kind of crap that killed ENT.Similar threads
