Why is ST09's altered timeline a problem?

[I-Am-Zim]

I'm all in favor of civility myself, but, honestly, the lapses haven't been one-sided. I've lost track of how many posts I've seen that imply that anyone who likes the new movie is shallow, immature, juvenile, easily impressed, sycophantic, and lacking in taste. Not to mention the frequent implications that anyone who really understands and appreciates STAR TREK is obliged to dislike the new direction.

It's this kind of attitude that, unfortunately, tends to rub people the wrong way. Just as, I'm sure, being dismissed as a dogmatic fundamentalist riles you.

Ideally, we should be discussing the movie, not casting aspersions on each others' tastes, but there has been a lot of sniping from both sides.

Agreed. However, it has been my personal experience that the fans mudslinging toward the non fans far outweighs the other side. That may be due to the "majority rule". But it's still what I have seen. Personally, I'd love to get back on topic and start talking about the movie again. Eventually.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

I couldn't agree more. The suggestion to the contrary is outrageous.

-Withers-​

Of course. How silly of me.

there's no reason to be sarcastic, insulting, or rude.

That philosophy lasted all of what... a post?

-Withers-​

You started it

Sometimes a sense of humor helps.

 

[Withers]

I realize that there are non-fans who do resort to insults to a certain degree.

That's the biggest understatement I've heard in a while. While the number of people who spew bile at XI are few in numbers (due to the fact that the majority of people like this movie) the volume of their objection more than makes up for what they lack in numbers.

However, the fans are in the majority.

Well, okay, I guess... because the fans are in the majority. By virtue of there being so many more of them I guess it'd be stupid not to agree.

And I can cite multitudes of comments from "fans" insulting and demeaning "non-fans" because they don't share the same opinions.

I can cite just as many examples from fewer people.

-Withers-​

 

[I-Am-Zim]

I realize that there are non-fans who do resort to insults to a certain degree.

That's the biggest understatement I've heard in a while. While the number of people who spew bile at XI are few in numbers (due to the fact that the majority of people like this movie) the volume of their objection more than makes up for what they lack in numbers.

However, the fans are in the majority.

Well, okay, I guess... because the fans are in the majority. By virtue of there being so many more of them I guess it'd be stupid not to agree.

And I can cite multitudes of comments from "fans" insulting and demeaning "non-fans" because they don't share the same opinions.

I can cite just as many examples from fewer people.

-Withers-​

I really doubt that. Sorry, but that just doesn't sound possible. Could be, but I doubt it. Now if you're talking about negative comments toward the movie itself, then yes. There have been a lot. I can account for quite a few myself. However, negative, insulting comments toward fans from non fans doesn't happen as often from what I have seen. Maybe I'm not paying enough attention.

 

[ProwlAlpha]

I'm all in favor of civility myself, but, honestly, the lapses haven't been one-sided. I've lost track of how many posts I've seen that imply that anyone who likes the new movie is shallow, immature, juvenile, easily impressed, sycophantic, and lacking in taste. Not to mention the frequent implications that anyone who really understands and appreciates STAR TREK is obliged to dislike the new direction.

It's this kind of attitude that, unfortunately, tends to rub people the wrong way. Just as, I'm sure, being dismissed as a dogmatic fundamentalist riles you.

Ideally, we should be discussing the movie, not casting aspersions on each others' tastes, but there has been a lot of sniping from both sides.

Agreed. However, it has been my personal experience that the fans mudslinging toward the non fans far outweighs the other side. That may be due to the "majority rule". But it's still what I have seen. Personally, I'd love to get back on topic and start talking about the movie again. Eventually.

I'm sorry, but I know at least one poster who have actually derailed a whole topic because he/she started out with you movie fans are mean and oppressive.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Alright, that's all well and good, but that isn't what you said. You straight up said one side of this debate is responsible for the mudslinging whereas the other side of it doesn't resort to such measures and that is completely untrue. It never works that way on a forum on any subject where the members disagree. The evidence is all over the place.

As I stated, there's no reason to be sarcastic, insulting, or rude.

Indeed, there is not. That, however, doesn't keep people who dislike the movie from being just that way every bit as often as people who like it resort to such methods of getting their point across.

-Withers-​

Again, I beg to differ. I realize that there are non-fans who do resort to insults to a certain degree. However, the fans are in the majority. And I can cite multitudes of comments from "fans" insulting and demeaning "non-fans" because they don't share the same opinions. The contrary is rare. It does, happen, but not as often.

Sure it does and in more or less equal numbers. I think at times we gloss over all but the most egregious members of "our side" and focus on the similar comments by the opposition so it seems they are worse.

 

[Greg Cox]

To be fair, I think some people don't realize that they're coming off as rude. There was an amusing exchange a few days ago where a non-fan stated baldly that he had higher standards than fans who liked the movie, then seemed genuinely surprised that people took offense.

(Word to the wise: telling people that they have low standards, or implying the same, is generally considered an insult.)

 

[Withers]

I think there are a lot of very intelligent (more to the point- witty) people that post at this forum and are likely excellent conversationalists. That, however, can work against people sometimes when they don't realize what they think of as a harmless "barb" comes across like a personal lunge for the jugular. Someone takes something a little more personally than it was meant and then it escalates from there. I've read more of that than anything else or from any one side. The lack of chivalrousness is a byproduct of gathering the intelligentsia together and then having them discuss something about which they disagree.


Is that fair?

-Withers-​

 

[publiusr]

I have no problem with the altered timeline. First of all, Kelvin reminds me of some of Sternbach's flat saucer design from his Chronology. Secondly, there is nothing to say that the timeline wasn't altered several times.

The novel Federation takes place in the TOS ST universe, home of Spock Prime. Early Federation ships were quite primative. No NX-01, but Daedalus class ships that looked like Aridas Sofia's Archon. DY-500 from UR-500 class soviet vessels or something.

DY ships with warp-drives to either side of the rear engine block to fight sublight Romulan vessels (sorry Masao.) No ship-to-ship visuals due to atomic weapon effects.

Here is an idea for a comedy episode if we ever have a Star Trek anthology series that deals with different time periods.

I would have the crew of the Relativity focus on the original timeline, where people went to space and stayed. Saturns were never cancelled, and nucear pulse Orions went to Saturn.

Thus TOS-Prime's1996 was more advanced that we remember it as actually being. Khan becomes a real dictator. This timeline was altered with the Bill Gates type character getting 29th Century technology but in todays world. This is the timeline which results in the Novels version of Khan being a leader behind the scenes and results in the Archer Enterprise timeline, then the Enhanced TOS effects. No Kelvin, just Iowa, where Kirks dad lives.

Then Narada, Post TNG (other timeslines heal, merge to form ST:TNG) is hit with the decalithium (read Red Mercury), and implodes--this time the black hole focused on the Narada itself. Pieces of Narada get thrown through geon holes all during the timeline(s)--and pieces of Spocks Jellyfish--like the black box of it recovered with other Narada Debris (Teton fireball of 1972 as featured in A.C. Clarke's Mysterious World) are recovered by the USAF. The combination of this tech and that of the Voyager-Bill Gates deal allow the Archer timeline. Romulan spies get this tech and their Bird of Prey looks more advanced than we remember it being in the NX-01 timeline.

Then yet MORE pieces of the Narada pop up and are harvested, explaining Romulan Bird Of Prey ships to look more advanced, including the Narada-like disguise ships, and later designs from from DAC. The Romulan disguise ships are the real deal killers, with some of that tech being scanned by NX-01. This was also a secret of folks in the temporal cold war.

This second influx of technology causes TOS to cease to exist. (sorry guys.) Kelvin follows--a huge ship. This damages Narada, the Klingons recover a great deal of fresh debris, as do the Feds with Operation Grey Ghost. JJs Enterprise is thus much more advanced than the Constitution should ever have a right being--and is the largest Enterprise yet.

This sets the stage for JJs Star Trek movie timeline (with much more advanced tech) takes place--with ST Novels fitting into one of these three (or more) timelines, as Worf learns with the TNG episode where you have a sky full of Enterprise-Ds.

The crew of the Relativity discovers this, and travels both backwards and sideways through time. They save Romulus, but find out this causes them to cease to exist. So they consult Kurtwood Smiths character who also messed with Voyagers timeline. He helps

Or you can have various versions of bad luck Bonaventure getting lost in the Delta Triangle and getting the timeline in trouble in some way. A story showing timeline intrusian, Mudd, Cyrano Jones, etc--would be interesting--including a timeline where a universe cannot support warp drive, etc, but somehow, a sub-conscious messages is transmitted, showing this history to Roddenberry, et al.

I like big JJprise spaceships. Growing up, TOS Enterprise was the biggest most futuristic ship on screen--nothing could touch it. Now, even primative Babylon 5 ships are larger. I don't like that. So let JJ' ships be bigger. The explanation above is a nice story which explains all we have seen.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

That's not bad at all. I like it. It's imaginative, creative, and makes perfect sense! That's the kind of creativity that was needed when this movie was being written. The only problem is that it would be terribly complicated to keep up with all that. But it would make for a great TV miniseries. I think it would end up being too long to be a movie. Too much would end up on the cutting room floor and it would probably end up not making much more sense than STXI did. The only thing I disagree with is your last paragraph about the big JJ-Verse ships. But that's a matter of taste.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

That's Spanish/Portuguese and the "a" ending has nothing to do with gender in this case.

Think "Sandinista". That label does not imply that the subject is female.

Believe it or not, that was an attempt at humor. However, I do prefer the term "canonist". I have been called that so many times before I kind of wear the label as a badge of honor.

No insult intended. People who don't speak some Spanish or Portuguese cannot know this.

 

[Aragorn]

I really doubt that. Sorry, but that just doesn't sound possible. Could be, but I doubt it. Now if you're talking about negative comments toward the movie itself, then yes. There have been a lot. I can account for quite a few myself. However, negative, insulting comments toward fans from non fans doesn't happen as often from what I have seen. Maybe I'm not paying enough attention.

It sounds like you're choosing what you "see" and "don't see" to suit your argument, in a Glenn Beck or Al Sharpton kind of way. Granted, a few of the biggest "you're an idiot for liking this movie" haters no longer post in this forum and you may have missed out on the biggest jerks of the bunch based on your board registration date.

This is a board where one poster hated Enterprise with a passion, yet watched every single episode with pen and paper in hand so he could bitch and moan every day about how much he hated it, and probably knew more and posted more about the show than its biggest fans. Where the equivalent Battlestar Galactica hater poster probably had the longest post I've ever seen on this board.

I could easily list the bashers who hated the idea of this movie before it was even made, complained endlessly about how bad it was going to be, watched it with the intent to hate every minute of it just to tell us how right their self-fulfilling prophecies were, then continue to move the goalposts back in order to complain about it some more, then call everyone who thinks differently than them about the movie idiots, but M'Sharak doesn't like it when I name names.

The previous board version had a list of all the posters who received infractions from the mods and why they received them. If we still had that, you'd be able to see the mudslingers who take personal offense to people who liked the movie.

 

[Greg Cox]

The thing is, there is a subtle, but significant, distinction between "the new movie is a piece of garbage because . . . .," which is a perfectly valid opinion, and "this new movie is a piece of garbage that appeals only to the brainless masses," which is bound to piss people off.

I'm sure there's a similar line that pro-movies fans cross as well. Probably the difference between "canon is no big deal" and "people who think canon is a big deal are silly stick-in-the-muds . . . ."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

"Silly stick-in-the-muds dislike the movie" isn't really an equivalent for "brain-dead masses like the movie."

"Silly stick-in-the-mud" is more equal to "undemanding viewers with little taste enjoy the movie."

Probably the pro-movie equivalent of "brain-dead masses like the movie" is something like "mentally unbalanced obsessive-compulsives dislike the movie."

 

[thumbtack]

Granted, a few of the biggest "you're an idiot for liking this movie" haters no longer post in this forum

Ah, those were the days. They ended too soon. And don't forget the "slobbering". I really miss being a "slobbering idiot".

 

[ilovestartrek17]

I miss "You are TOO young to remember TOS! That's why you like this moronic movie that is being made, and hasn't been completed, and isn't in the theaters!!"

 

[Withers]

^Give it time. XII is on the way. As soon as we have a trailer and screen caps the "festivities" will begin anew. That's the great thing about Star Trek; you can always look forward to the horrible characteristics new additions will bring out in the fans- Just the way Rodddenberry intended it.

-Withers-​

 

[DonIago]

I propose that the next movie begin with the Reliant being thrown back in time by the Genesis torpedo explosion and Khan destroying the Narada before it can attack the Kelvin.

 

[Greg Cox]

"Silly stick-in-the-muds dislike the movie" isn't really an equivalent for "brain-dead masses like the movie."

"Silly stick-in-the-mud" is more equal to "undemanding viewers with little taste enjoy the movie."

Probably the pro-movie equivalent of "brain-dead masses like the movie" is something like "mentally unbalanced obsessive-compulsives dislike the movie."

I stand corrected. Those are all good comparatives.

 

[ProwlAlpha]

Not only will the Reliant be thrown back, but it is specifically named Miranda class, not Avenger class, but in big slobbering idiot letters MIRANDA CLASS. Naturally, there will be three different registry numbers, Capt Terrell will not be black, but a Chinese, still with the Terrell name though, and Chekov will be retconned into being Chechnyan.