It's certainly a premise that would give Leonard Nimoy more to then just, "hey kid, I have a story to tell..."
Trek XI to be alternate timeline, according to AICN
- Thread starter Ghostface1701
- Start date
Let's assume that the AICN and chud.com rumor is true, and the reason for the alternate timeline is to explain the inevitable(?) continuity errors...
So we see all of these young characters playing the familiar TOS roles (BTW, I'm okay with that), and there is some alternate timeline issue that, I assume, will be corrected by Old Spock by the end of the film... Fine.
But what about the sequels? (Quinto has already said he has options for a "multi-picture deal"). If Abrams is so concerned about masking continuity errors for this film, then what plot device will they use in the next film to explain continuity errors?
No -- I think these rumored story lines may very well be true, but I don't believe the part of the AICN report that claims Abrams is doing this to explain continuity issues. Abrams is smart enough to make a film that adheres to canon/continuity without basing his whole structure of his film on ways to avoid continuity errors.
So we see all of these young characters playing the familiar TOS roles (BTW, I'm okay with that), and there is some alternate timeline issue that, I assume, will be corrected by Old Spock by the end of the film... Fine.
But what about the sequels? (Quinto has already said he has options for a "multi-picture deal"). If Abrams is so concerned about masking continuity errors for this film, then what plot device will they use in the next film to explain continuity errors?
No -- I think these rumored story lines may very well be true, but I don't believe the part of the AICN report that claims Abrams is doing this to explain continuity issues. Abrams is smart enough to make a film that adheres to canon/continuity without basing his whole structure of his film on ways to avoid continuity errors.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
I'm so deflated by this apparent confirmation. I was really hoping we'd get something different, a real back to basics approach at storytelling, instead of the usual fanboy gimmicks. This sounds like an episode of Enterprise or something - temporal whatever garbage. Alternate timelines?? using plots to address continuity issues?!? I said it before but this is Marvel/DC bullshit.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
There's no confirmation. A first-hand source can back up a second, but a second-hand source can't back up another second-hand source or a third.
This is my fourth time wading through rumors online about Star Trek movies (starting with FC) and, at this point, the only information I'm going to listen to is from JJ Abrams and the screenwriters.
This is my fourth time wading through rumors online about Star Trek movies (starting with FC) and, at this point, the only information I'm going to listen to is from JJ Abrams and the screenwriters.
It's a corroboration rather than a confirmation, as others have noted. The guy at CHUD has heard the same basic stuff as Moriarity. That's pretty significant, given the backgrounds and contacts these guys have, but it's different and less certain than a direct confirmation.
No, that's not what the rumor is saying.
According to the rumor, Spock will correct the point of divergence - cause Kirk's father not to be killed - but history going forward will nonetheless be a different version than that which we've seen before. Spock will continue to attempt to guide events - presumably through contact with Young Spock - so that significant events he deems important occur, though not necessarily in the same fashion as before.
I'll wait for Entertainment Weekly to give me a synopsis and then I'll have an opinion.
I'm not for an alternate timeline. I know they exist we saw that on TNG "Parallels", however the only alternate timeline that I care about is the Mirror Universe. All other Trek stories should be in the canon we have. I'll worry about errors later, we can address and tweak those in the years ahead.
I just hope this new TOS stuff doesn't conflict with the new Year 4 comic seris by IDW, that would be an atrocity!!
I'm not for an alternate timeline. I know they exist we saw that on TNG "Parallels", however the only alternate timeline that I care about is the Mirror Universe. All other Trek stories should be in the canon we have. I'll worry about errors later, we can address and tweak those in the years ahead.
I just hope this new TOS stuff doesn't conflict with the new Year 4 comic seris by IDW, that would be an atrocity!!
So -- correct me if I'm wrong -- If there are more ST films after this one with this same new cast, those may also take place in this alternate timeline? Ewww
Yep, apparently so. :thumbsup:
I agree wholeheartedly. This is why I'm having such a near-impossible time accepting any part of this. It's just so utterly ... well, CHEESEY. No "general audience" of non-Trek fans would know enough to CARE about what's being discussed here. Nobody wants to see another "Trek cliche' time travel" story. This story is not about PEOPLE and CONFLICTS... it's all about "creating a new playground" which, MAYBE, could produce actual good stories later on.
I don't buy into it. I could be proven wrong... but if I am, it'll end up killing Trek for me... I have any interest in seeing any of the "nuTrek" stuff. Deleting the old... and we're not just talking about TOS, we're talking about EVERYTHING... TNG, DS9, VOY, all the movies... all of that "never happened" if this is true.
No, I can't believe anyone at PPC would be that dumb.
It seems like an overly fanboyish way to introduce a total reboot without pissing off hardcore Trekkies. It holds their hand and gives them a cup of warm milkso they can accept a reboot. It tells them "Don't worry...the old continuity is intact. We're not messing with anything. All subsequent Trek movies will just be set in this new altered universe. So don't get mad we didn't rewrite anything. It's not like Battlestar Galactica. IT's NOT! DON"T GET MAD AT US!!!!!!!!!! We're gonna handhold you to the reboot.". Just make a damn reboot instead of going all fanboy. Let's wank the continuity porn to get there. Just have the courage to reboot the thing instead of making some fanboy wetdream story to do a backdoor reboot. It's just lame. A straight reboot is easier to swallow than this. I've been in favor of doing a reboot for a few years now but doing it like this is just stupid. It's fanwank. It's jerking off. Just do a straight reboot. Why the need to backdoor it this way? It just seems way too complicated. It seems to me mainstream audiences might be turned off on this. Just do it like Batman Begins and Casino Royale.
Ooo! Ooo! Oooo! I just thought of something! It's pure speculation, but so as not to possibly irritate anyone, I'll continue in spoiler mode:
In general, I like what I've read so far of the rumored plot.
So far we've been told that Shatner won't be in the movie, there's no part for him since he was killed in Generations. But now, if old Spock goes back in time and helps young Spock to stop the future Romulans from killing young Kirk in the past and that changes the timeline, then old Kirk won't have to be killed in the future in Generations and Shatner could show up in the movie as old Kirk in the new timeline in the future with old Spock.
In general, I like what I've read so far of the rumored plot.
Well, I'm not sure about fanwankery -- I never memorized the cannon in the first place. But it's this kind of crap that makes me laugh at LOST. It's not identical, but it seems to go in the same direction. Two timelines, each carrying a plot of their own, each supposed to be "mysterious", yet neither one makes sense on its face.
Case and point was the guy in the wheelchair. He doesn't want to leave the island. It's a big mystery, except that part of the story is that the island mysteriously gives him the ability to walk -- which many many millions of actual people in wheelchairs want to do.
Why can't they make a movie without weird flashbacky things thrown in all over? Why this? I can't imagine a person who knows nothing of trek saying that they're excited about this movie.
Continuity isn't the issue. Hopefully this is wrong, because it reeks of psuedo-mystery and frankly suckage. At least if you made it all a dream it would make sense. Senile Spock has a nightmare -- the entire movie.
Case and point was the guy in the wheelchair. He doesn't want to leave the island. It's a big mystery, except that part of the story is that the island mysteriously gives him the ability to walk -- which many many millions of actual people in wheelchairs want to do.
Why can't they make a movie without weird flashbacky things thrown in all over? Why this? I can't imagine a person who knows nothing of trek saying that they're excited about this movie.
Continuity isn't the issue. Hopefully this is wrong, because it reeks of psuedo-mystery and frankly suckage. At least if you made it all a dream it would make sense. Senile Spock has a nightmare -- the entire movie.
This isn't too bad of an idea if it's executed well; it will create a new universe to dick around in without totally invalidating the old one. This is better than yet another prequel or just a straight up remake of TOS, but I'm still really skeptical that it will be any good. I'm as sick of time travel as everyone else, and frankly the reason why the Mirror Universe was so awesome was partly because it was *the* alternate reality... I still don't think the climate exists in Hollywood to make a good Trek movie anymore.
I hope I'm wrong, though.
I hope I'm wrong, though.
What exactly is the difference between creating an alternate universe to set future movies in and doing a remake. Both get you to the same place. It's a distinction without a difference since a remake is esentially an alternate universe in and ot itself. It's just the route taken there that's different. One holds the fanboy's hand so he doesn't go nuts and the other just dumps in all in his lap. Are the hardcore fans that infantile they need a time travel/alternate universe plot to end in the same place a remake does? If that's what they need then the fanboys need psychological help and possible hospitalization in the nuthouse.
I'm in favor of doing a total remake. This idea is just a backdoor way to get there without pissing off the fanbase or large portions of it. I'd rather they just piss off the fanbase from the get go rather than doing it in a weasle fashion like this. I don't need my handheld, I don't need some warm milk to make a reboot go down smoother in my widdle tummy. If Abrams and Paramount think we do then I'm pissed off at them. I'm a huge Abrams fan and if this is really what he's doing then I'm a bit upset with him. Give me a straight reboot not fanwakery to get there so the bitter fanboys get appeased and have their hands held. But in the end if it turns out to be well done and a kick ass movie I'll ket on my knees and beg forgiveness.
I don't think it's too complicated for joe six-pack, but it IS more overly complicated and contrived than it needs to be. Time travel doesn't bother me (although I'd rather they gave that a rest); and an alternate universe does not bother me, in principle, as long as the story is well executed and they eventually get back to showing the "right" universe. What bothers me (and many others) is that Abrams feels that he MUST have an alternate reality in which to tell this story in order to appease the fanboys.
Building a whole story-telling structure around not wanting to make a fan mad over a trivial continuity issue is a BACKWARDS way of making a film -- he's letting the canon/continuity issue tell his story for him rather than actively telling a story that fits in with canon and continuity. If this whole rumor is true, then Abrams and his writers are being cowards, or just plain lazy. This makes me feel that canon and continuity are in the driver's seat rather than the director...and that is wrong.
If true, then it doesn't matter what they do with this film, really - it's bound to tank and take the Franchise back into oblivion.
Similar threads
