Will Star Trek XI be "canon" ?
- Thread starter Danoz
- Start date
I always thought that who ever controls the property/license, release something, that is what is considered canon?.
This is actually the more correct use of the word. The use of the word "canon" to describe a fictional 'verse was originally used by fans of the Sherlock Holmes stories. As Holmes became popular, pastiches, parodies, "fan-fiction" started propagating also. In order to keep things straight, Holmes fans declared only the 56 short stories and 4 novels to be "canon". Of course, that doesn't preclude one from enjoying the other works, but if you were to have an "official" discussion, you could only count the canon works.
A better term is "continuity". Things like the soldiers wearing wristwatches in Ben-Hur (or some other swords-and-sandals flick) is a continuity break because wrist watches weren't around.
So the question is "will Trek XI fit into the continuity we know and love?"
Abrams, Orci and co have said their approach is "either you accept our version or you don't", and the story of the film is set up to allow this approach.
The fact that it's an alternate universe allows them to reboot the canon, but having a link to what came before through Spock Prime's presence in the Abramsverse. Hence you can either view this as a new universe started by the outcome of previous events and thus a continuation of the story into a new universe via cause and effect, or you can just ignore it and not consider it part of the rather inconsistent canon of the previous universe.
Personally, I'm going to regard it as canon as this is where new film and possibly series stories are going to take place from now on.
The fact that it's an alternate universe allows them to reboot the canon, but having a link to what came before through Spock Prime's presence in the Abramsverse. Hence you can either view this as a new universe started by the outcome of previous events and thus a continuation of the story into a new universe via cause and effect, or you can just ignore it and not consider it part of the rather inconsistent canon of the previous universe.
Personally, I'm going to regard it as canon as this is where new film and possibly series stories are going to take place from now on.
Its canon regardless of how WE regard it, just like Tripps death (even sucky things are canon not just the good stuff...). At the same time it a new universe open to ANYTHING. Both the old and the new can coexist hey they can even meet one another again, you never know.
Sharr
Nemesis pretty much was Die Another Day of Star Trek as a living breathing, evolving enity. The problem is, that there was no where THEY could go to get the mass audience into the theatres any longer.
Yes a Dominion War movie, more Romulan stuff, even the adventures of Riker and Troi on the Titan would have been interesting, but would it have been enough to sustain what was once a profitable franchise?
Sure NEW stuff could be done, but why not go back to familiar characters, and new takes on their backstories, ala EON's decision to reboot Bond with Casino Royale/Quantam of Solace. Those are characters that will "put the fannies in the seats."
I'm sure the books and comics will continue what you are saying with the continuation of the timeline after Nemsis and even in between (Dominion War).
From what I've gleaned, it does exactly that from the get go... anything can and likely will happen in future installments. Though I suspect the writers to take inspiration from the original universe and add in details from there.
Sharr
Star Trek Online continues in the original canon, although it does acknowledge the existence of the new film via incorporating Countdown into its backstory.
Whatever... I'm just going to enjoy a new Star Trek film. The supposedly "consistent" original continuity had plenty of holes if you looked and I can't see why the fact that it sidesteps the entire thing is meant to prevent me from liking this one.
Whatever... I'm just going to enjoy a new Star Trek film. The supposedly "consistent" original continuity had plenty of holes if you looked and I can't see why the fact that it sidesteps the entire thing is meant to prevent me from liking this one.
Good point, like I said with the Bond franchise, maybe the idea of the franchise was getting too old and just needed a fresh start.
Well, DS9 was pretty much concluded, and Voyager was all tied up too. I don't think anyone besides the core audience of fans would have gone to see an Enterprise film thus making it another Nemesis or worse, and a film going beyond the late 24th century would have alienated even some of the more hardcore fans.
It was on the cards for quite a while anyway, as J. Michael Straczynski and Bryce Zabel were thinking of doing a similar thing.
It was on the cards for quite a while anyway, as J. Michael Straczynski and Bryce Zabel were thinking of doing a similar thing.
It's "canon" in that it's a part of the official body of Star Trek product put out by Paramount.
As for its place in the official continuity, it's about three feet to the left of the z axis.
As for its place in the official continuity, it's about three feet to the left of the z axis.
I'm still seeing a lot of arguing over whether it's canon or not, but I don't ultimately see the value (or lack thereof) of it being canon.
It was on the screen. So what?
"Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" was onscreen, and it was great.
"Star Trek: Insurrection" was on screen, and it was crap.
"Canon" is a variable that is ill-defined, ill-applied, and useless as far as what it guarantees us, which is nothing.
We could come up with other, similarly useless variables to keep track of.
This is the Star Trek that has live actors in it.
This is the Star Trek that is scripted.
This is the Star Trek that is in color.
This is the Star Trek that was originally filmed in the English language.
This is the Star Trek that has sound.
This is the Star Trek that was shown onscreen.
Big whoop!
It was on the screen. So what?
"Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" was onscreen, and it was great.
"Star Trek: Insurrection" was on screen, and it was crap.
"Canon" is a variable that is ill-defined, ill-applied, and useless as far as what it guarantees us, which is nothing.
We could come up with other, similarly useless variables to keep track of.
This is the Star Trek that has live actors in it.
This is the Star Trek that is scripted.
This is the Star Trek that is in color.
This is the Star Trek that was originally filmed in the English language.
This is the Star Trek that has sound.
This is the Star Trek that was shown onscreen.
Big whoop!
I'm happy to see a spirited discussion on this, since I've been curious myself on this matter.
I'm not as happy to see that there are still people who claim it will or not be "cannon". The word is in the thread subject; it's not that hard to look at the top of your screen and spell it correctly.
I'm not as happy to see that there are still people who claim it will or not be "cannon". The word is in the thread subject; it's not that hard to look at the top of your screen and spell it correctly.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
Oh really? Because just about as much of the average people out there also think Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Troi, Crusher (Beverley) & Crusher (Wesley) is Star Trek, too, and they would probably like to see more of the 24th Century version instead of this movie, as seen in this fan art painting at Deviant Art:
Ambush On Jatzon IV
Now try telling me that Next Gen's completely forgotton.
The current situation resembles 1982 Trekdom quite a lot - there's no current TV series on the air, the last movie from the established production crew was a disappointment, and Paramount have seen fit to take it away from the team that were responsible for the previous entry in the series and allow a new, fresh team to take a crack at it.
All which bodes quite well for the future - I mean, look at TWOK. I watched it again the other night, and it plays fast and loose with established canon, retconning the hell out of it where it suits the writers. Khan recognises Chekhov, and in order to believe that this happened it's assumed they had an offscreen encounter when he was doing something else on the Enterprise despite us not knowing about the character at the time of Space Seed. Carol Marcus, obviously a major romance in Kirk's life - never mentioned beforehand.
Two glaring differences from the established canon and yet it produces the elements of what is probably the best film in the series. And at the end, it makes a lasting change to the universe that will affect it for years to come - Spock dies. In doing so, it produces a brilliant, enjoyable film and also was one where the writers took liberties with the continuity to ensure that those watching didn't really need to know that much about what had previously happened in order to enjoy it. Even today I've shown it to people who didn't like Star Trek, and they've enjoyed it, without questioning me about references in it as it's already pretty much explained on screen.
Now enter what I call the "beige" era, for the colour of the ship's decor, and also for the colour of the whole universe. They played it safe for so long it sucked all of the life out of the universe. Voyager, for instance, was the epitome of this. Year of Hell Parts I and II, a story that could have set the series on a new direction as the crew face higher risks, trying to get back home while rebuilding their ship and perhaps having to make some difficult choices as a result. Plenty of room for character development and interesting stories.
But no - the toys must go back in the box, back to the cosy way they were before, so the Big Reset Button is employed. And here's our problem - any interesting possibilities for character development are just wiped out by time travel or memory loss or some other crap. Well, this time actual character development occurs and the universe isn't the same cosy place it was before - and it's all the better for it.
All which bodes quite well for the future - I mean, look at TWOK. I watched it again the other night, and it plays fast and loose with established canon, retconning the hell out of it where it suits the writers. Khan recognises Chekhov, and in order to believe that this happened it's assumed they had an offscreen encounter when he was doing something else on the Enterprise despite us not knowing about the character at the time of Space Seed. Carol Marcus, obviously a major romance in Kirk's life - never mentioned beforehand.
Two glaring differences from the established canon and yet it produces the elements of what is probably the best film in the series. And at the end, it makes a lasting change to the universe that will affect it for years to come - Spock dies. In doing so, it produces a brilliant, enjoyable film and also was one where the writers took liberties with the continuity to ensure that those watching didn't really need to know that much about what had previously happened in order to enjoy it. Even today I've shown it to people who didn't like Star Trek, and they've enjoyed it, without questioning me about references in it as it's already pretty much explained on screen.
Now enter what I call the "beige" era, for the colour of the ship's decor, and also for the colour of the whole universe. They played it safe for so long it sucked all of the life out of the universe. Voyager, for instance, was the epitome of this. Year of Hell Parts I and II, a story that could have set the series on a new direction as the crew face higher risks, trying to get back home while rebuilding their ship and perhaps having to make some difficult choices as a result. Plenty of room for character development and interesting stories.
But no - the toys must go back in the box, back to the cosy way they were before, so the Big Reset Button is employed. And here's our problem - any interesting possibilities for character development are just wiped out by time travel or memory loss or some other crap. Well, this time actual character development occurs and the universe isn't the same cosy place it was before - and it's all the better for it.
JMS made the pitch back in 2004, but was rejected as it being "too radical" as back then Paramount wanted to continue with Trek as it was. Given the changes in management since, it's clear that people less conservative about the issue of "canon" have come in and allowed the reinvention that it quite frankly needed.
Well since it never happens can Paramount/CBS pay me back all the Money I've given them over my lifetime?
Well I think he wanted to blow up the Federation sounded too Andromeda to me anyhow
Similar threads
