UNTO THE QUADRANT SHALL COME A GREAT DISASTER: 2387

[RPJOB]

Star Trek consists of a infinite number of parallel universe and like parallel lines, they don't intersect.

If that's true, how do you explain the seeming overlap of realities observed in so many episodes throughout Star Trek?

Which one is real or Prime? Whichever one you feel most comfortable with.

That's funny. I thought you said earlier that was no such thing as a prime universe.

There's noting in ST09 that says that the universe OldSpock came from doesn't exist but there's nothing that says that it does.

That Spock exists at all is a good indication that the universe from which he came existed, too. He couldn't have come from nothing.

--Sran

Overlapping parallel universes were required by the story. COme up with some treknobabble reason how it happened and you're done.

Yes, there is not A PRIME universe. They're all prime. Each is just as valid and real as the others.

The universe he came from MAY still exist. The again, it MAY NOT. Nothing in the movie rules out one reality or the other.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

Overlapping parallel universes were required by the story. COme up with some treknobabble reason how it happened and you're done.

Seeing as how all of Star Trek is fiction, I don't know why you're taking issue with writers and producers devising fictional reasons to explain time travel in the context of a story.

Yes, there is not A PRIME universe. They're all prime. Each is just as valid and real as the others.

No one's suggesting the alternative universes depicted in Star Trek aren't valid. What people are arguing is that one of these universes has been the main focus of most of Star Trek as we've seen on screen or in novels.

--Sran

 

[Gotham Central]

If Nimoy weren't around I can almost guarantee you that the 2009 film would have been a straight-up reboot.

Well, not really. They tied it to the original continuity because they knew that Trek fandom was unaccustomed/hostile to the idea of alternative continuities (unlike something like, say, Batman or Transformers or Godzilla fandoms, which are used to having multiple incompatible versions coexisting) and thus would be more likely to accept the new reality if it were anchored in the original and presented as an outgrowth of it. Coaxing Nimoy out of retirement was the ideal way to get that point across (although clearly not everyone got the message), but it wasn't the exclusive reason they did it.

Personally I would have preferred that they started with a totally different reality and a clean reboot. As it is the the timeline as depicted BEFORE Spock and the Narada arrived appears to contradict the original universe. Indeed Spock's own use of the oddly earth centric stardate system (which blatantly contradicts the prime universe) does leave the door open for Old Spock to not have originated in the prime timeline. Scotty certainly never developed "transwarp beaming" at any point in the 23rd century. Plus it always sort of bugged me that the Jellyfish in NO WAY resembles a Federation vehicle of the 24th century. Where are the red and blue nacels? How about something as simple as using LCARs on the interior displays….

Now none of that prevents me from accepting that the INTENT of the writers was for Old Spock to be the one we've been watching since 1966. However some of their aesthetic and plot choices did open the door for alternate interpretations.

Just saying...

 

[Christopher]

As it is the the timeline as depicted BEFORE Spock and the Narada arrived appears to contradict the original universe.

Just as the original universe has been appearing to contradict itself for decades. Spock was a Vulcanian before he was a Vulcan. The Enterprise answered to UESPA before it became a Starfleet ship. Khan's followers were multiethnic until they became all-white; even Khan himself lost his "Indian" complexion in the movie. Data used contractions routinely right up through the first half of the episode that established he didn't use them. Virtually everything "The Host" established about the Trill was contradicted by DS9. Deanna kissed a bearded Riker numerous times before claiming she'd never kissed him with a beard. And so on. The idea that "the original universe" was ever a consistent, uniform whole is a fantasy. It's just that we've had more time to rationalize or gloss over the older contradictions, so the new ones seem bigger to us.

Indeed Spock's own use of the oddly earth centric stardate system (which blatantly contradicts the prime universe)

Stardates have never, ever been consistent. TNG's stardate system is completely incompatible with TOS's. TMP couldn't even keep its stardate intervals consistent within the movie itself. And the whole point of stardates (up until recently) was to be meaningless placeholders giving no real chronological information, so an inconsistency in them is hardly "blatant." It's not like anything remotely meaningful is being contradicted.

Scotty certainly never developed "transwarp beaming" at any point in the 23rd century.

You're forgetting that Scotty lived into the 24th century -- and TNG's "Bloodlines" explicitly established that a form of long-range subspace transporting already existed, but was rarely used due to its power demands and potential hazards. So prior canon clearly establishes that Scotty had an opportunity to become aware of a long-range transporter technology. (And although STID has ignored this, the intent of the phrase "transwarp beaming" in the '09 movie was to convey the act of beaming from a stationary platform to a ship at warp -- "trans-" in the sense of "across," as in beaming across the warp barrier, rather than the sense of "beyond" as in transwarp drive. Note that DS9 established that beaming at warp was only possible if the two ships matched warp velocity precisely. Maybe that was Scotty's breakthrough in the years between "Relics" and 2387: figuring out a way to use subspace transporters to get around that limitation.)

Plus it always sort of bugged me that the Jellyfish in NO WAY resembles a Federation vehicle of the 24th century. Where are the red and blue nacels? How about something as simple as using LCARs on the interior displays….

You're making the perennial mistake of confusing "Starfleet" with "Federation." You're describing the way Starfleet vessels look, but the Jellyfish was a civilian vessel constructed by the Vulcan Science Academy. There are certainly Prime-universe examples of civilian craft that don't conform to Starfleet design aesthetics, like the Merchantman freighter from ST III or the Maquis fighters or Kasidy Yates's Xhosa.

 

[Leto_II]

The inconsistency of Judi Dench's M being new to Brosnan while at the same time also being there when Craig's Bond first joined the serivce notwithstanding)?

However, there are definite in-movie cues within various films across Dench's tenure clearly delineating them as two completely separate universes, most notably different references made to the events of 9/11 in both Casino Royale and Die Another Day (in the latter, the Brosnan-Bond was being held in North Korean custody when 9/11 occurred, while the Craig-Bond doesn't gain his 00-status until July 2006).

Having Judi Dench serve as "M" in both universes was more of an aesthetic choice made by the filmmakers, Dench being as well-regarded in the role as she was -- it was simply to have one familiar, returning touchstone available for audiences to latch onto, while rebooting everything else (very similar, in many respects, to Leonard Nimoy).

 

[JarodRussell]

One should not waste a single thought on the continuity of Bond films, especially not when the Bond actor changed.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Personally I would have preferred that they started with a totally different reality and a clean reboot.

Wheras, I love that they linked them the way they did.

As it is the the timeline as depicted BEFORE Spock and the Narada arrived appears to contradict the original universe.

No more so than Trek contradicts itself - take a look at the videos in my signature.

Indeed Spock's own use of the oddly earth centric stardate system (which blatantly contradicts the prime universe)

Old Trek stardates = random meaningless numbers.

does leave the door open for Old Spock to not have originated in the prime timeline. Scotty certainly never developed "transwarp beaming" at any point in the 23rd century.

Nothing to say he didn't work on it without success - until his TNG-era resurrection. In fact, that's exactly what happens in Indistinguishable From Magic.

Plus it always sort of bugged me that the Jellyfish in NO WAY resembles a Federation vehicle of the 24th century. Where are the red and blue nacels? How about something as simple as using LCARs on the interior displays….

It's a Vulcan-built ship, not a Starfleet-built ship. "Unfication" establishes TNG-era Vulcan still operates their own ship designs in the Federation.

Add to that, ENT-era Vulcan ships zipping around in the background of the 2009 movie.

Now none of that prevents me from accepting that the INTENT of the writers was for Old Spock to be the one we've been watching since 1966. However some of their aesthetic and plot choices did open the door for alternate interpretations.

Ditto TMP and WoK vs. TOS - everything looks completely different, to an unrealistic degree for the 2.5 years stated.

 

[Christopher]

Having Judi Dench serve as "M" in both universes was more of an aesthetic choice made by the filmmakers, Dench being as well-regarded in the role as she was -- it was simply to have one familiar, returning touchstone available for audiences to latch onto, while rebooting everything else (very similar, in many respects, to Leonard Nimoy).

Right. The filmmakers don't expect anyone to think these movies represent a realistic, consistent universe, particularly not when they've been recasting Bond, Leiter, and Blofeld time and time again for decades and ignoring the passage of time. Having the same actress play the same role in two continuities is no worse than having different actors play the same role in a single continuity.

Not to mention that it's happened before in Bond films. Never Say Never Again is in a separate continuity from the mainstream Bond films, in that it features a Bond who still looks like Sean Connery operating in the late '70s, a time when the mainstream Bond looked like Roger Moore. So if Connery could cross continuities, why couldn't Dench?

And there are certainly other examples of different continuities using the same actor in the same role. Adam West has played Batman in at least three different realities, the '66 live-action series, the '77 Filmation cartoon, and the early-'80s Super Powers Team iteration of Hanna-Barbera's Super Friends. Similarly, Kevin Conroy has played Batman in the DC Animated Universe, four different DVD-movie universes (including the animated version of the Nolanverse), at least three different video-game universes, and a comedy short on DC Nation. Michael Clark Duncan played the Kingpin in both the Daredevil movie and the MTV CG-animated Spider-Man series (which was supposed to be in continuity with the first Raimi movie but was contradicted by its sequels). And J.K. Simmons has played J. Jonah Jameson in the Raimi Spidey universe, the Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes universe, the current Marvel/DisneyXD animated universe, and the LEGO Marvel universe. And Peter Cullen has played Optimus Prime in several different Transformers continuities; ditto Frank Welker as Megatron.

Admittedly, there are fewer examples of it happening in live action. But it can happen. Maybe the Highlander franchise qualifies; the various films and TV series seem to represent several distinct variant continuities, but Christopher Lambert has played the same character in most of them.

 

[Leto_II]

Maybe the Highlander franchise qualifies; the various films and TV series seem to represent several distinct variant continuities, but Christopher Lambert has played the same character in most of them.

A couple years back, there was even a Highlander video game in development for the PS3 and Xbox 360 systems, set in another, completely-new timeline/continuity, featuring a brand-new MacLeod-protagonist (Owain/Owen MacLeod), but with Peter Wingfield also returning in the role of Methos.

It looked great, and I was pissed off when Eidos eventually killed it.