New Star Trek

Discussion in 'The Moving Picture' started by McPeppers, Sep 3, 2006.

  1. LordBest

    LordBest Practically Family

    I just got back from seeing it, have to say I loved it. I've been watching Star Trek since I was five, I was very worried about how the new movie would affect continuity and I think splitting the timelines so the original canon is seperate and inviable was a superb idea. The fact they were brave enough to do what they did and not hit the big red shiny reset button pleased me too (Learn from this, Doctor Who!)
    I was engrossed from start to finish, and I am eagerly awaiting the sequels.

    Never mind railings on a Romulan ship, the big question is; is Budweiser worth drinking in the twenty third century? My money is on 'no'.
  2. Oy vey, that was about the klunkiest product placement I had ever seen.
  3. flat-top

    flat-top My Mail is Forwarded Here

    Palookaville, NY
    I just got back from seeing it and thoroughly enjoyed myself. As with most origin stories, the villain was unremarkable, and his motives were explained in a just a few sentences. I DO,however, like the way Eric Bana played him ("Hello Christopher")!
    I'm looking forward to the next one!
  4. Matt Deckard

    Matt Deckard Man of Action

    They did erase the future in effect hitting the big red reset. Spock can't go back to where he came from because that place is now gone. There was no mention of another dimension, just mention that the timeline had been altered and many many things destroyed. So no Vulcan, no episode of Next Gen with Picard meeting Sarek on Vulcan... So projecting, Next Gen as we know it is historically erased.
  5. LordBest

    LordBest Practically Family

    Well, you could always argue that time bifurcated at the point where Spock went back from that point on creating an alternate course of history, neither erasing nor influencing the other. Its not perfect but its a way of placating the continuity obsessed (like myself).
  6. anon`

    anon` One Too Many

    Not necessarily. "Parallels" (TNG episode #163) gives some insight the 'Star Trekkian' answer to this problem, what happens when you travel through time but don't create a closed loop while doing so (such as Kirk's glasses from ST:TMP/ST4, or Cochrane's first warp flight from ST:FC).

    The "Parallels" explanation is, in fact, the only possible way (that I am aware of, at least) around an ontological paradox that this film would otherwise present. Consider: if Spock Prime is the same individual as Spock (as portrayed by Quinto), he (Spock Prime) would not be aware that the time line was altered by Nero's appearance in the past. It would be a simple ontological paradox, one which clearly cannot have occurred if "Star Trek II" had come to pass.

    Rather, because Spock Prime is aware that Nero has altered the time line, the events of the latest movie must, by extension, occur in a universe parallel to that which we saw in TOS. This is further supported by the fact that Spock Prime's explanation of his involvement on Romulus suggests some level of peace exists between Vulcan and Romulus (or possibly, the Federation and the Romulan Star Empire), which suggests that Spock Prime was ultimately successful in his attempt at diplomacy mentioned at the end of "Unification, Part II" (TNG episode #107).

    What happens in this new film, reality-wise, is not dissimilar to the changes that occur in "Yesterday's Enteprise" when the ship falls through the temporal distortion, some two decades into the future. Except that in "Yesterday's Enterprise", her crew elects to return through the distortion to Narenda III, thus restoring the timeline. In the new film, Spock Prime (for whatever reason, possibly because he had no way to undo the damage already done, even if he could get back to his own reality?) elects to remain in the new thread of time forked from the reality he knew 24 years prior when Nero emerged from the singularity. In effect, in the time line that we know from TOS, et alia, Spock Prime was killed when the star went supernova.
  7. MrBern

    MrBern I'll Lock Up

    Was no one else surprised to see this actor in th film?

  8. K.D. Lightner

    K.D. Lightner Call Me a Cab

    Des Moines, IA
    Mike -- I believe the "in deep space, no one can hear you scream, was from the advertising poster for the film, Alien.

  9. MrBern

    MrBern I'll Lock Up


    2001 induced snores, not screams. ;)
    kidding, kidding!
  10. Brad Bowers

    Brad Bowers I'll Lock Up

    I wasn't surprised, because I have no idea who he is.

  11. MrBern

    MrBern I'll Lock Up


    OK, I guess we're not hiding spoilers anymore...
    Spock(Nimoy)Prime is clear that he remains so that New Spock doesnt have to leave StarFleet to rebuild the Vulcan culture now that the planet is gone. Spock Prime will help guide a new Vulcan Colony. And btw, wasnt his cool little spaceship destroyed defeating Nero?
    As far as I can tell, the technobabble stated that Nero tunneled thru time&space 129years into the past, not across parallel dimensions or realities or mirrored universes. Then he changed the course of events thereby creating 'An Alternate Reality'.

    This is a lot of Treknobabble to keep options open for Nimoy to return for more movies. The new franchise is here, its a young crew starting fresh so that the fans cant complain about details not matching previous episodes. This is exactly why previous Enterprise series was a prequel, to free up the writers from established continuity. Unfortunately that show sucked & is gone, now we have a new young Trek set on the Enterprise rebooted to its maiden voyage.
  12. anon`

    anon` One Too Many

    Yeah, the blacking out of text seems to have fallen out of favour...

    Anyway, you're correct in that Nero traveled back in time, and not across realities. But in creating "an alternate reality" he must have also created a new (second, to his experience) reality. Because he clearly had not succeeded in his mission in the reality he came from, a century and a half in the future, then he cannot have succeeded in his mission in that reality, period. From a continuity standpoint, it was likely the battle with the Kelvin that created the new reality (possibly, in the one that led to TOS, the outcome was reversed).

    Essentially, the theory follows thus: at any specific but arbitrarily chosen instant in time, an infinite number of realities are created based on the interaction of [whatever stuff reality is made of].
    In the "original" timeline, the star goes supernova, ostensibly in 2387 and immediately collapses into a black hole. Nero and Spock are both presumed dead when they're sucked into the black hole, and that's it. The crew of the Enterprise-E (hopefully, at any rate) continue running around just as before, Deep Space Nine continues to hold the line against incursions from the Gamma Quadrant and all that good stuff.
    But in the "new" timeline, this big and nasty-looking Romulan ship suddenly shows up, circa 2233 and forks off this second time line from the newest movie. The original time line is presumably unaltered and continues just as before.

    Anyway, I think we might be going around in circles here. The net result is that the "reality" from Star Trek 'XI' is not the same as the reality from anything previously (can we give Nemesis over this one, while we're at it?) and in effect gives future producers a blank slate to work with.

    Just, not the same slate the Roddenberry used. On more than one level, too.
  13. JennyLou

    JennyLou Practically Family

    La Puente, Ca
    it didn't erase anything or alter the timeline...just created a parallel universe
  14. jake431

    jake431 Practically Family

    Chicago, IL
    That was my understanding as well.
  15. Slim Portly

    Slim Portly One Too Many

    Las Vegas
    1. Because time travel is, for all practical purposes, impossible, all that can be speculated upon is the internal logic of the story line. This can be done through the events displayed in the movie, and/or the explanations given by the writers.

    2. Because even theoretical time travel is chock full of paradoxes, pointing out perceived mistakes or inconsistencies is fruitless.

    3. The "science" of Star Trek has never made rational sense, has never been grounded in reality, and has always been inconsistent.

    It's bright lights and shiny machinery and grand opera and a morality tale. Enjoy it, or not, for what it is.
  16. Miss Neecerie

    Miss Neecerie I'll Lock Up

    The land of Sinatra, Hoboken

    These fine folks:

    would disagree with this...and would like you to join them. Contribute today and you could -gone- tomorrow. ;)

  17. Stoney

    Stoney Practically Family

    Currently on the East Coast
    Gee Whiz!


    That may be the best $10.00 I've ever spent in my lifetime.

  18. MrBern

    MrBern I'll Lock Up

    rubber science bounce

    OK, 'rubber' science is used to placate the plausiblity of the situation depicted.
    BUT, the point of the matter is , does Old Spock have a home to return to, or is he stranded in this new existence 129 years in his past. Its actually says something about the character's choices once we are clear on his circumstances, regardless of how its justified by the rubber science.
  19. Matt Deckard

    Matt Deckard Man of Action

    Spock is stranded in the new timeline since the line has changed. If he goes back to the future he'll simply go to a future where Vulcan has been destroyed. You will never see another Next gen movie because that stuff never happened. It was all explained clearly in the new movie.

    Same universe. Timeline has been altered.
  20. MrBern

    MrBern I'll Lock Up

    BLACK HOLE Spaghettification Event Horizon

    OK, let me say one thing about the science in this movie.
    The explanation was that the vulcan ship & the Romulan ship fell into a Black Hole & emerged across time & space. Essentially depicting a Black hole as a portal or a Wormhole.
    I think its a little much.
    And in PREVIOUS trek, the ships were whiplashed by stars or the sun or a black hole. They did not plunge into one.

    The ships & crew would be spaghettified:

    Neil DeGrasse Tyson - Death By Black Hole


    but I still liked the movie. ;)

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.