What the heck is the point of having two timelines?
- Thread starter carcinoGeneticist
- Start date
No, just that I don't discuss Star Wars in a *checks notes* Kelvin films thread. We've already included real life anecdotal evidence.
He did fine.
I've been a Trek fan for almost 40 years and I enjoyed the hell out of Star Trek 2009.
My wife, who at best could be said to tolerate my love of the franchise, also loved the film. That first 15 minutes had her in tears.
Whenever I say to her that I'd like to watch a Trek film, she always request the Kelvin films.
"Save the old boring ones for after I go to bed."
Or, hear me out, she may not have known he was abusive. It sounds like she spends a lot of time off-world. She would simply be putting Jim's complaints down as a young man who is growing up and pushing back against the world he lives in.
I don't think you were supposed to.
Indeed? And how old did you say you were?
(Yeah, I keep seeing this insinuation--for years, now--that Abrams didn't appeal to "old fans" or that he didn't consider the feels of "old fans" or that he needed to cater more to the wishes of "old fans". And it's always bullshit. Plenty of fans who were watching the Original Series when it was still airing new episodes were able to enjoy these movies.
If you didn't like it, then OK -- that's your call to make. But just say that, and stop trying to lend imaginary weight to your statement by appealing to a larger group whose members may not even agree with you. That's dishonest and manipulative.)
It has for more than 20 years been the policy at this BBS to quote only the pertinent portion of the post being replied to. If the rest is not being addressed, then there's no reason and no need to quote it.
In other words, no one is under any obligation to quote your entire post simply because you'll complain about it otherwise.
If you have an issue with that policy, then you are welcome to properly raise that issue with board management in a thread in the QS&F forum. But don't get in the habit of trying to badger anyone here for adhering to longtime board policy. It's not your job to police the way other people construct their posts and replies.
And, if you want to discuss Star Wars, you're in luck: we have a whole forum for that.
Everything is prone to contradiction, including the movies. ( See: "Vader murdered your father." ) Books and such exist at that insecure level of canon that can be contradicted at any time. If you want to call that "non-canonical" then no one can stop you, but if these things were never canon in the first place then there would have been no point in decanonizing them. In the pre-Disney era a distinction was made between that level of canon -- where the material has no presumption of "job security", so to speak -- and "non-canon", which was a separate basket.
Actually what I like about Into Darkness is that it's not the same story as TWOK at all, aside from the contrived rehash/reversal of the death scene, which is the worst part of a film I otherwise mostly enjoyed. It's really a much better Khan story, because he's the nuanced, rational figure he was in "Space Seed" rather than the caricatured obsessive madman he was reduced to in TWOK, and because he actually gets to have significant interaction with the crew rather than just having a few exchanges over comms. And it's the only time we get to see Kirk and Khan working together as allies, which makes it interestingly different. I regret that the one small part of the film that does blatantly copy TWOK overshadows all the more original parts in the public's minds.
Someday I'll have to watch it again.
I’m not “plenty,” but I am a first-generation Trekkie who watched TOS as a 6-9 year old when it was on NBC. And I thought ‘09 was just fine. Didn’t care for Into Darkness, but thought Beyond was the best of the three. By a wide margin.
I'm curious, does it being non-canon ruin your enjoyment of those older materials? They did the same to the Treklit verse when Picard started, and I'm still enjoying those older books.
...even though everyone died horribly, and were then erased from history
Well, not exactly the same, since Trek tie-ins never attempted to have a single unifying continuity for everything. Even at the height of the novel continuity, the occasional other novel, nearly all of the comics, and all of the games were still depicting alternate continuities. So there was never any pretense that the novels were the single "true" version of events.
I was no fan of it before about 12 months ago. I had the same thought as you previously. ‘I don’t need another TWOK’.
I put it on last year though, for the first time since release and enjoyed it immensely. As @Christopher says, the plot bears very little relation to TWOK and contains some brilliant moments.
It’s still my least favourite of the three, but it’s a decent enough movie and absolutely worth another look. I watched it again earlier this year with my wife and she liked it, so that’s twice in 12 months.
Signed,
An Old Star Trek Fan Who Enjoyed JJ’s Take.
TOS Spock giving advice to alternate Spock was fun, and that they could share the same space and nothing goes kaboom
Similar threads
