EXCLUSIVE: Bob Orci Explains How The New Star Trek Movie Fits With Trek Canon (and Real Science) December 11, 2008
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Interview, Orci/Kurtzman, Science/Technology, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
One topic that seems to come up quite a bit with Trek fans regarding the new Star Trek movie, it is the subject of the Star Trek continuity (or canon). It has been the contention of the film makers that despite how some things may appear to be rewriting Trek’s history, the movie fits within Trek’s canon. In a very detailed conversation with TrekMovie’s Anthony Pascale, Star Trek co-writer Roberto Orci finally explains how it all fits together. [SPOILERS BELOW]
Bob and Anthony talk Time Travel, canon, paradoxes, physics and more
Background: As a follow-up to our earlier ‘post November’ interview with Star Trek co-writer Bob Orci is the following conversation between Bob and TrekMovie.com editor Anthony Pascale. It is presented as a ‘conversation’ because it is more of a chat between two Trekkies diving deep down a nerdy rabbit hole, than a traditional interview. Understanding the issues discussed is not required to watch the movie or enjoy it, but is presented to answer the follow-up questions about how the film ‘fits’ with Trek and with science.
The subject of the discussion was how to reconcile a number of issues. Since day one with regards to this project, it has been stated that the new movie is not a ‘reboot’ like the recent Batman, Bond and Battlestar Galactica, but will fit within Trek canon. However, just by looking at the new trailer and certainly based on JJ Abrams four scene preview tour (see TrekMovie report), some things appear not to fit within canon. Or do they? Many have noted that the report in Entertainment Weekly revealing how the film’s villain Nero travels through time to attack the ship carrying James T. Kirk’s parents might somehow come into play. But if so, then there are implications related to Trek history, as well as real and ‘Trek’ science. And that is where this discussion begins.
[NOTE: The discussion goes pretty deep into science and Trek lore, so for those who just want the quick version, skip to the summary at the bottom]
Nero attacks the USS Kelvin in "Star Trek (2009"
Anthony: OK, now let’s get really into it. From the trailer, and certainly from the four scene preview, there is no doubt that things are different. Pike and Kirk are hanging out in a bar. The ship looks different. Kirk is on the Enterprise and not headed to the Farragut. People are seeing Romulans…things are different. Now it has been revealed in the Entertainment Weekly article that Nero goes back in time and attacks the Kelvin, and JJ also talked about this during his previews. So the big question is: Is the destruction of the Kelvin, the canon reason why everything is different?
Bob: It is the reason why some things are different, but not everything is different. Not everything is inconsistent with what might have actually happened, in canon. Some of the things that seem that they are totally different, I will argue, once the film comes out, fall well within what could have been the non-time travel version of this move.
Anthony: So, for example, Kirk is different, because his back story has totally changed, in that his parents…and all that. But you are saying that maybe Scotty or Spock’s back story would not be affected by that change?
Bob: Right.
Anthony: Does the time travel explain why the Enterprise looks different and why it is being built in Riverside Iowa?
Bob: Yes, and yes.
Anthony: OK, well then some fans will say ‘fair enough, alternate timeline, we are used to that, but that is not my Kirk, that is some other Kirk.’ So is this still our movie, or are we seeing some other version of Star Trek?
Bob: Well that depends on whether or not you believe in nature or nurture and how much you believe in, for lack of a better word, their souls. I would argue that for the characters, their true nature does not change. Our motto for this movie was ’same ship, different day.’
Alternative timeline in "Yesterday’s Enterprise"
Anthony: So then is time travel, and the alternative timeline, just a way to do a BSG-style reboot, while still remaining canon?
Bob: In some one else’s hands, maybe, but, again, much of what you will see could conform to classic canon, and thus we were not relying it as an excuse to change everything.
Anthony: So even though some things, most notably Kirk himself, are on a different path (for example he doesn’t go to the Farragut after the Academy), he still ends up on the Enterprise with Scotty, Uhura, Chekov, Spock, etc. Are you saying there is some kind of ‘entropy’ perhaps? So even though some things are different, they gravitate towards some kind of center point?
Bob: Yes. If you look at quantum mechanics and you learn about the fact that our most successful theory of science is quantum mechanics, and the fact that it deals with probabilities of events happening. And that the most probable events tend to happen more often and that one of the subsets of that theory is the many universe theory. Data said this [in "Parallels"], he summed up quantum mechanics as the theory that "all possibilities that can happen do happen" in a parallel universe. According to theory, there are going to be a much larger number of universes in which events are very closely related, because those are the most probable configurations of things. Inherent in quantum mechanics there is sort of reverse entropy, which is what you were trying to say, in which the universe does tend to want to order itself in a certain way. This is not something we are making up; this is something we researched, in terms of the physical theory. So yes, there is an element of the universe trying to hold itself together.
Data explains quantum physics in "Parallels"
Anthony: OK so let’s call the timeline Nero left, as ‘the prime timeline’, so that means that the USS Kelvin, as designed and seen in the trailer, that is also in the prime timeline?
Bob: Yes
Anthony: So what happens with the destruction of the Kelvin is the creation of an alternative timeline, but what happens to the prime timeline after Nero leaves it? Does it continue or does it wink out of existence once he goes back and creates this new timeline.
Bob: It continues. According to the most successful, most tested scientific theory ever, quantum mechanics, it continues.
Anthony: So everyone in the prime timeline, like Picard and Riker, are still off doing there thing, it is just that Nero is gone.
Bob: Yes, and you will notice that whenever the movie comes out, that whatever DVDs you have purchased, will continue to exist.
Anthony: OK we just dove pretty deep into Trek physics minutiae. Is any of that discussed in the film? In "Back To The Future II," there is that scene with the Doc and Marty, where the Doc explains time travel to Marty on a chalkboard. Does Spock ever do that with Kirk?
Bob: It would seem very logical. Quantum mechanics avoids the grandfather paradox that Back to the Future relies on, which is: you can go back in Back to the Future and screw with your own birth and potentially invalidate your own birth. In quantum mechanics that is not the case. In quantum mechanics, if you go back and kill your own father, then you just live on as the guy who came in from another universe who lives in a universe where you killed some guy, but you don’t erase your existence doing that.
Doc explains time travel to Marty in "Back To The Future II"
Anthony: And you believe that the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics is the Star Trek interpretation, based on "Parallels."
Bob: Yes. I would argue that at the very least, if we are going to do our Star Trek, it has to conform to the latest scientific theories and the most advanced and complete, and right now that is quantum mechanics.
Anthony: Star Trek has not always been consistent in this regard. For example both "Yesterday’s Enterprise" and "City on the Edge of Forever" seem to follow the Back to the Future rules of time travel, where new timelines overwrite previous timelines.
Bob: We have to deal with it, with the fact that Star Trek episodes that don’t conform to our theory of it, also do not conform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history. So I would default that it is the science that counts. And say in the case of "Star Trek IV," it could go either way. They cross over to a parallel universe and grab some whales and bring them back and save their own universe.
Kirk and crew in "Star Trek IV", one of Trek’s many forays into time travel
Anthony: Although the "Parallels" view of time travel resolves the paradoxes and is based on quantum physics, doesn’t it also affect the level of the drama? Are there still life and death stakes if anything you do in the past has no real effect on the timeline you started in?
Bob: There are, of course, life and death stakes, they simply don’t involve the cartoonyness of having a picture of yourself fading away because you bumped into your mother [as it was in "Back to the Future"]. We are not relying on the time travel element to tell a good story. That’s why this is not "Terminator" or any other movie you’ve seen before. And yet, oddly, as a practical matter, most people who see this movie will not have read this interview. Most of the audience will assume the classical time travel rules still apply.
Anthony: Well in the history of Star Trek there are dozens of recorded time travel events, and so does every single one of those create a new timeline. For example when Ben Sisko goes back in time ["Past Tense"] and becomes Gabriel Bell, does every Trek episode after that exist in an alternative timeline where Ben Sisko is Gabriel Bell?
Bob: I would argue that, yes, any time there is time travel that they created a parallel universe, if they want to conform to our most current and advanced thinking on the matter, which is quantum mechanics.
Anthony: So starting with "The Naked Time," which is the first episode of Star Trek with time travel, where they just went briefly back in time and that even though they didn’t change anything, merely by going back in time they created a new timeline?
Bob: Yes
Trek travels back in time for the first time in "The Naked Time"
Anthony: And even though they are all very similar, that we are up to something like the 57th* timeline when we get to Nemesis due to all the previous time traveling.
Bob: If we take Data’s description of the most current and awesome scientific theory to heart, then there is no prime timeline. If everything that can happen, does happen, who is to say what the right timeline is.
Anthony: But elder Spock and Nero come from the last known Star Trek timeline, which is the post-Nemesis, Next Generation era, right?
Bob: Right, that is where they are starting, yes.
Anthony: And that timeline lives on after they leave?
Bob: Yes.
Anthony: Traditionally in time travel plots from "Yesterdays Enterprise", "Star Trek: First Contact" and "City on the Edge of Forever" to the Back to the Future and Terminator series, the goal of the protagonists is to protect or restore the original timeline. Is that also the case in this movie? Is Spock’s mission to restore his original timeline?
Bob: No comment, I can’t give everything away [laughs]
Spock is back in time again in "Star Trek (2009)," but what is his mission?
To summarize…in FAQ form
All of the above can be a bit much to take in, and to paraphrase Captain Janeway ‘time travel gives you a headache.’ In reality you really won’t need to understand any of this to watch the movie. The above explains (in possibly too much detail) how the film resolves both the paradox of how the movie can appear different, but fit within canon, as well as how the film resolves the traditional paradoxes associated with time travel. So here it is in a simpler FAQ.
Q: Why do some things appear different in the new Star Trek movie?
A: There is an alternative timeline created by Nero traveling back in time.
Q: Is everything different in the alternative timeline?
A: No, some things remain the same.
Q: Does this alternative timeline wipe out the original timeline (from TOS -Nemesis)?
A: No, quantum theory says they both co-exist.
Q: Does the original timeline continue?
A: Yes, again as explained by quantum theory.
Q: Does this quantum theory approach conform to ‘Trek science?’
A: Depends on the episode, but it is explicitly cited by Data in the episode “Parallels.”
* 57 was just a number pulled out of the air. In actuality (according to Memory Alpha) there are 53 Star Trek episodes (including movies) involving time travel, many with multiple time travel events within them.
More Orci
See part 1 of TrekMovie’s exclusive December interview with Roberto Orci.
Comments»
Great stuff. The movie will be awesome.
Wow! I’m confused!
If Spock and Spock meet the universe will either explode, or they’ll just faint.
As soon as I read “Spoilers Below” I skimmed right down to the bottom and tried not to read anything else – although I did peak, damnit! Why must your articles be so interesting and why must I be so weak?!?!
;)
Wow…that was a heavy discussion. Quantum mechanics always makes my head spin.
I wonder why they dont explain that when Kirk & crew came to Omaha in the 1960’s they prevented the Eugenics War in the 1990’s and how when Kirk & crew came back in 1986, they caused WW3
Just saying…
I dont mind them fooling with the timeline.
I must say, studying Quantum Physics… this certainly boosted my interest in this film. My hat is off to the gentlemen, this will be a very interesting film…
:)
NOW I can sleep easy tonight knowing this bit of info!
The last part of the interview is what caught my attention….if the original timeline continues after Nero and Spock go back in time, then where is the motivation for Spock to want to go back in time unless he isn’t privy to the fact that no change will happen and only discovers that later in the movie before returning to his own original future!
Everybody got that?
Sheesh!
I think I speak for all of us, if I say… huh?
Reading this article gave me a technobabblegasm.
53 time incursions, no wonder BonesCLCW is confused.
To some, Trek is a great universe to tell stories in, to others, its a religion.
No wonder they banned it in Futurama!
just saying…
Same here, I’m confused.. but this article begs the question:
Has anyone tried diagraming the many different timelines that are how out there? Where would one start, and how would Archer’s trip to the future fit into that map?
That would certainly be interesting.. not to mention (dare I say) fascinating..
I’d rather have seen a Batman-style reboot than this, personally. Time travel is too easy to get wrong plus we have seen it way too many times. The canonistas won’t be happy in any case so why bother with the silly pretense?
I’m definitely excited about this movie…however…
It’s time for a future producer of Star Trek to travel back in time to ensure that this is the very last and final time travel related Star Trek story ever made. Time travel in Star Trek is second only to the problems created by the invention of the holodeck in post-TOS Star Trek. Both are the ”kryptonite” of the Star Trek realm.
I’m confused. They are using an alternate timeline as an excuse to change cannon and do what they want? Thats BS.
This is a beautiful solution to canon concerns. It respects what has been, while allowing it to be seen in a new light.
“Fascinating”.
8 – Nero is still endangering lives, even if they are in an alternate timeline.
There fore, with or without Quantum Mechanics, the logical imperative remains the same.
His way of saving lives:
Help Kirk and himself to become who they are meant to be to stop Nero.
So how do these multiple timelines explain Vulcan’s BLUE sky in the trailer?
Hi Harry!
If everything that can happen, does and will, then nothing we do is in vain.
Ever read that Azimov story about the guy that puts the gun to his head and dies, puts it down, it jams, it’s unloaded, etc.?
There was also a parallel universe where Hemingway wrote slightly different stories and eventually, each time he tried to kill himself, an alternate version still lived, skipping into a new universe each time until the end of time. Not a Trek story, but one of those “Years Best” Sci-Fi compilations.
Then one of my favorites was a short story about what would have happened if the Lindbergh baby had lived, instead of having his head bashed in. I wish I still had that story.
Quantum Physics doesnt jibe with Einstein Physics anyway. If everything that could happen does, and already did, then what’s the point of doing anything at all?
#19
Reasonable, I guess, but from a dramatic storytelling point of view, it’s difficult to get “worked up” over the danger to individuals who live in alternate realities.
I mean, come on, if you’re concerned about THAT, where the hell do you draw the line?
20 – Vulcan’s atmospheric appearance might be weather based.
We have seen only a select couple of locations on Vulcan.
On a Class M planet, the atmosphere likely changes appearance depending on weather, similar to Earth, and that may change noticably depending on geographical location on the surface.
What about when the Borg ended up in the arctic in Enterprise? That changed everything we know right there.
What I dont understand is why CGI the Vasquez rocks forver to stand in for Vulcan?
I like the way Vulcan was presented in Search
#20 McCoy’s Gall Bladder “what’s the point of doing anything at all?”
EXACTLY!
As a matter of fact, after reading this interview, I’m so depressed over alternate realities, I’m sleeping in tomorrow!
What’s the point of getting out of bed?
#25 Um…. women?
Great stuff.
Now we need Closettrekker to spend his whole Friday explaining it to us.
Hi Closet!
AJ
#26 Couldn’t you simply extend the invitation to have them join you?
To me that’s just good time management!
#26 now that’s funny.. ;) doesn’t work for everyone though..
I think this interview was a $14.49 way of saying “yeah, we reboot everything that was canon, but everything that is canon is still valid, because this is just an alternate universe extrapolation of a different timeline.”
Somewhere, I think I just had a flashback to Bobby Ewing talking to Victoria Principal and explaining away an entire season of “Dallas” as a dream…..
I have to ask, if we branch into another universe inherently by traveling into the past, and the original timeline continues after we’ve left and or changed anything, then what good is going back in time and killing off kirk or spock?
just sayin…
#31
Hey, thanks, you just saved me $11.
I would have liked to have seen an attempt at real Star Trek, not a convoluted redo to make Ultimate Star Trek. Oh, well, it’s just a movie. >|>{
So…they are not calling it a reboot but are going to stage this new history in an alternate timeline so they can create a new history…what? How is that NOT a reboot in sheep’s clothing?
#14 – agreed.
What I got from this article is that quantum mechanics is the most advanced, best-tested scientific theory in the history of humanity. :-P
BTW, the “many worlds” theory does, indeed, require that the original timeline gets wiped out. “Many worlds” is something of a misnomer. It’s really more like “many configurations.” If you actually created a whole new universe by going back in time, it would take as much energy that is actually IN an entire universe to make the trip (otherwise where does this new universe come from?). But “many worlds” really means that the positions and whatnot of all the particles gets reconfigured once you arrive. You won’t wipe out your own past and fade like Marty, but you’ll “overwrite” the universe moving forward from your arrival point.
Not that it matters. “Many worlds” also maintains that travel between the quantum realities is impossible, so…
Oh, haha, that sounded like a cheat. XDDD
He’s thinking- I like that. Half of the enjoyment of any fiction for me is the production not treating the audience like we’re idiots. With Star Trek, the other half for me is the production understanding my complete adoration for the source material.
> Pine and Kirk are hanging out in a bar.
Now *that’s* going to be hard to explain. ;-)
#15 – with what we have seen so far, that is the way it appears to me too.
Latest Greatest “most tested scientific theory ever” what nonsense!
Half of the theory is supposition and a great majority of what is left is pure math and utterly untestable as of yet.
Anyone else get the “beating that into my brain because you can’t actually prove it” feeling? Considering how many times “Bob” repeated it?
He said it in grand and eloquent, yet pointless, flourishes at least 5 times.
So they are making it so that everything that has happened previously timeline wise has always subtly changed the timeline in every Trek episode in movie regarding time travel. Sounds like a good explanation. I also like the fact that he mentioned how the universe likes to Gravitate in a certain way. And it doesn’t mean that this subtlely alternate timeline won’t flow into the normal timeline to some degree. You just have to leave somethings up to the imagination.
I worked on this stuff for 15 years and even *I’m* confused. :) But as Steven Wright observed, “I was walking down the street the other day and– wait, that wasn’t me…”
BTW, I like the gobbledy-gook of the quantum explanation, and it fits with what I was saying a few threads ago that this movie, for all intents and purposes, is completely disconnected from the TOS reality.
This doesn’t diminish my interest in the characters at all. It’s not like the TOS reality was “real” reality.
Folks,
Know what? I’m ENTIRELY down with this.
Orsi’s comments engender much trust. Especially after watching the recent episode of UNIVERSE which deals with parallel universes.
Why didn’t they just say this from the beginning?
I LOVE this idea. I really do.
Unfortunately, this Trek universe wound up with absurd production design.
Other than that…Trek on!
So, if the Universe tends to gravitate towards what was intended to happen, does that mean in any alternate reality I’d still be stuck with taking Debbie Simms to the Senior Prom?
Aw, crap!
41. Atlantians – December 11, 2008
http://www.astro.umd.edu/~miller/teaching/astr320/lecture21.pdf
I have a lot of faith in the writers and the production team, but I sort of hope I don’t need to take a wall chart of alternative timelines with me to understand and enjoy the movie. Give us layers of storytelling, but don’t bog us down in techspeak, please!
I’ll go see it. But I’d rather have had a story set in the classic canon TOS universe without time travel for the 53rd time!
You think that is confusing, wait until you add in the negative mirror universe into all this. Matter- antimatter. The two meet and BOOM!
When dealing with Matter and Anti-matter, it comes down to mind over matter………if you don’t mind, it doesn’t matter!
So much for the pre-scripted claims that things were being “dumbed down.” Almost above my head!
Makes sense.
…and the adventure continues….
guys, I know the above is pretty thick, but I thought you might want to read the back and forth, and see how much thought actually has gone into this.
However, for those who are less interested or are a bit confused, I added a quick summary at the bottom.
This is exactly the explanation I’ve been giving friends who ask about the new movie…man I am too awesome.
So… it’s a movie for people who love movies, and who also happen to have Ph.D.s in quantum physics from M.I.T. Now I get it. Huh?
…they have to resort to quantum mechanics to make the canon work? I love sci-fi!
Well the canon issues were never that important to me, and still are not….but that explanation seems a little weak.
But in the end my enjoyment of this film will have nothing to do with its canonicity, and it still looks like a damn good movie!
Can’t wait to see it!
This is in my regard one of the most mature usages of TT in the whole Trekverse (all of them). It is funny that Tomorrow is Yesterday was the first TT story I ever watched, and it kept me wondering about paradoxons and their physical implications. Which later on lead me to discover the works of Schrödinger and Heisenberg. Star Trek made me a hard SF fan in the first place, and it’s great to see that Bob Orci and the gang steer Trek back into these waters.
So, Bob, did you discuss quantum mechanics related TT a lot with Damon, regarding a certain island?
I’m really impressed with the thought and care put into this production thank you Mr. Orci for carrying the Star Trek torch.
1. The question of Kirk’s character is not nature vs. nurture, but rather an aesthetic question about the identity of Trek. If the character does not share enough in common with TOS Kirk (for whatever reason) a character central to TOS stories will have been diminished.
i love that i can actually read this and understand it…thank you college education. i was seeing this movie regardless…now after reading this i’m all set to go with no doubts…well almost no doubts.
59. thorsten – December 11, 2008
“So, Bob, did you discuss quantum mechanics related TT a lot with Damon, regarding a certain island?”
Damon and I have no idea what you’re talking about…
So yeah, why does Spock care if Nero goes back in time? That means all Nero is doing by destroying the Kelvin is creating an alternate timeline. Spock’s timeline (aka the last known Trek timeline) will continue to exist. So why bother chasing after Nero?
This sort of need for convoluted reasoning explains why Canon is the cause for the death of Trek.
Any other, regular franchise, would have just had this sort of movie be its prequel movie. The fact that the movie looks different from the TV show could be entirely attributed to “Its a movie, they have more money, lets enjoy it!”
Instead, the writer have to bend head over heels to try and find a way to appease fans who are more concerned about whether their Star Trek Encyclopedia remains accurate as opposed to whether or not the movie has a good story.
This is how excessive fandom can kill fun, this is how excessive fandom isolates people.
I am looking foward to what JJ Abrams has done. I am just disappointed by the scientific contortions his writing staff has had to pull off.
57
Well actually no. Star Trek canon is full of time travel and alternative timelines. Quantum mechanics only comes into play when you want to know what happens to the other timelines.
Some fans who have guessed that the film includes an alternative timeline have suggested that it therefore ‘rewrites’ the ‘classic’ Trek timeline. The ‘Parallels’ explanation of quantum mechanics shows that the classic timeline is not rewritten or erased. Therefore Picard, Janeway, etc are not ‘wiped out’ by the new movie.
Is the main point of the article that we should take comfort in knowing that there is some other universe within the multiverse where this creative team decided to reboot Pigs in Space instead of Star Trek?
2. Quantum Physics does not demand that we accept any metaphysics of the sort described. There are determistic versions of QP, indeterministic versions, there is version for every taste. The article latches on to the multi-world version as if it were THE interpretaion of QM.
So, I wonder, since this timeline is slightly different, if Kirk survives the incident on the Enterprise B and lives on. Im guessing most likeley not, since the 2 timelines in question are so similar, but it would be cool to know.
66,
Correct. The “Multiverse Theory” essentially explains everything. It states that everything that CAN happen, DOES happen.
So effectively, the only difference between us and another universe might be that 1 single electron is out of place, as where another universe, half of us might never have been born, the Terran Empire controls the planet, and is in a huge civil war.
So think of it this way: Somewhere in the grande scheme of things, Star Trek DOES happen…. How’s that for food for thought? That is, assuming that the laws of physics allow it.
@63…
Thanks, Bob,
you just saved my uncertainty principle!
I feel a bit more relieved after hearing this. Some will bitch about the alternate timeline, but I like it. Its kinda like a Star Trek side story. And with this done, they could go back to the prime universe and it wouldnt be effected at all.
Well, said N
I think canon should allow a loose frame work (see Terminator or Bond series). It allows you to deviate some while still keeping a semblance of continuity.
And I totally agree that it looks different because the production had cash to burn.
Well, doesn’t take away the the prime motivation for writing the story the way they did: “let’s make changes”.
When I first heard that the “new” Star Trek movie would be set back in Kirk and Spock’s time, I was excited! Wow—we would get to see all those old back stories that were referenced in the series—and get to see how the crew first came together. I never thought that one of the first changes would be rewriting how it all happened. Ouch. It really doesn’t matter how they explain the changes. They were working from square one and they chose to write the history-altering time travel event for the wrong reasons.
I wanted to see how it all started. I can certainly think of some things in TOS that could use updating but I never thought the character backstories needed to be fixed. Was anyone asking for a Trek movie with a new history? Didn’t we just want to fill in the gaps?
It’s not like Orci and Kurtzman were sitting in a room one day writing the coolest Trek story ever and then Nero suddenly when back in time and erased it all. They chose to alter how it all came together and then searched for reasons to explain how they could get away with it and still retain some fans (ahhh, the magic of time travel).
3. (my third point not a ref to 3rd post)
The article totally misses the distinction between quantum and classical level events. The probabilities only attach to quantum phenomena and not macro-level events. This conveys an unfortunate sense of fatalism – “Sorry son, it was written in the sum over path histories that you would be capt. of the Enterprise. “
Nero going back in time to destroy the Kelvin. That is part of Trek lore. We can’t ignore time travel. By the way, according to canon, there was even a temporal prime directive, the temporal accords, and even a TEMPORAL COLD WAR!!! That is ALL CANON! Whether you love or hate Star Trek: Enterprise, that series is authentic canon. It would have been a crazy storyline if Nero was part of the Temporal Cold War. But I like Bob Orci’s explanation. Quantum Physics. This theory actually validates the new Star Trek movie with all the changes made. Hey, if Tasha Yar, instead of being killed, was still alive and somehow influenced the Romulan Empire by her offspring…wait a minute…could Nero be somewhat a consequence by Tasha Yar offspring’s dealings? Not much is known in the Romulan Timeline. Hmmmm. Just speculating.
If, by any chance, there are “Six Feet Under” fans here, the Many Worlds Theory was explored so brilliantly in the season 3 premiere, where Nate — upon his supposed death — experiences the vast number of possibilities that could have or did happen in alternate universes. A line is uttered in that episode whilst Nate is on this journey: “Everything that can happen does, Somewhere.” TNG’s “Parallells” is very similar and I never appreciated the depth of that episode until now. I feel even more reassured that the writers of the new Trek film are totally aware of what they’re doing with the Trek universe.
Ok so I just reread the interview and answered my own question. Basically, we have to wait to see the movie to see what Spock’s mission/point of time traveling is? Because if there’s no grandfather paradox…Spock/Picard/Riker’s 24th century timeline still continues despite Nero creating an alternate timeline. Um, right?
Wow! That’s ambiguous! And too convenient an explanation for my liking. At first I fairly much embraced this film. The closer it gets to release, the more sceptical I become.
To: #74 “McCoy”
With all due respect, I don’t think you have it quite right:
“It’s not like Orci and Kurtzman were sitting in a room one day writing the coolest Trek story ever and then Nero suddenly when back in time and erased it all. They chose to alter how it all came together and then searched for reasons to explain how they could get away with it and still retain some fans (ahhh, the magic of time travel).”
I disagree, I think that Orci and Kurtzman wanted to write a cool Trek story, and were probably really excited by the chance to give the actors a real budget for the uniforms, and to have awesome scenes with Kirk seeing the Enterprise under construction.
But then they went:
“Wait, no matter how cool our sets look, or how great our story is, if it does not conform to canon down to the last scripture, our fans will hate us and not see the movie and just complain!”
“Well maybe we should have Kirk go to San Francisco to see the Enterprise under construction”
“But thats just appeasing fans when there is just as good enough a reason for the Enterprise to be in Iowa. If its in his homestate, that is better for the story.”
“But the Encyclopedia says…”
Its true they wanted to “make changes” but those changes would have been for a good story and a great experience.
My concern is that large portions of fandom were not interested in any changes if it that meant that the uniforms looked practical as opposed to looking like pajamas, and that in order to appease them, they used Quantom Physics.
This reeks of “Crisis on Infinite Earths” or of “Marvel Universe and the Ultimate Marvel Universe”. Its just going to add more complications in the long run.
This is not a reboot. This new movie can fit with canon. Canon must be upheld. Quantum mechanics is the answer to it. With quantum mechanics, you can actually, I dare say, reconcile every medium that is not considered canon. Quantum mechanics can make the animated series, the novels, the comic books, the fan made internet shows, and etc. etc. canon. Quantum mechanics is real science. Great work Bob!!! You are making Star Trek more real than you ever know. Mainstream audience may not know it, or even appreciate it, but your detailed explanation will satisfy most, if not all, die hard trekkers.
Nice nod to the original and pass of the baton to a new Trek! I am looking forward to the new path of possibilities…
#65
Don’t blame the EVIL FANS for cocking an eyebrow at the semantic soft-shoeing or the Deus ex Quanta.
They don’t have to anything, but it would sure be nice to be told straight – Yeah guys, we made a few changes so that we could have a future to grow into rather than ossified canon to be dutifully recited. JUST TELL IT STRAIGHT and stop trying to sell the Kool Aid. If it’s good, it will sell itself.
Sure, it’s yet another time travel caper but I applaud the real thought and effort that went into the research for this story. The theories behind multi-verses and alternate time lines are being physically tested in ongoing research, at facilities like CERN. For now I’m putting my trust in the likes of Doctor(s) Stephen Hawking and Michio Kaku. If they continue saying all of that is not only possible but likely, then that’s still a great plot device with a lot of mileage.
Bob Orci’s comment about “nature or nurture” resounds with me as an adopted kid, who recently was contacted by birth family; and discovered eerie similarities between me and my bio-sibs. From personal experience, I believe how you are raised (and by *who*) has profound impact on the person you become, yet there are personal traits originating from the genetic level that will emerge regardless of nurture. Somehow though, I don’t think that had I been raised by different parents, (or an abusive uncle) it would have changed the color of my eyes from hazel-brown to a sparkling blue. Now that would be a bit of a stretch. ;-)
I have to say that I had to read that twice, but what it shows more than anything is that this team really put their thinking caps on big time.
I can see some of the same crowd that have been raiiling against this movie and even now that they have their answer as to how this thing fits within their holy scriptiure, they are still screaming. It is clear that there is no movie that willl satisfy these people.
When I first heard about this movie I assumed it was going to be another Batman Begins. That made sense from a Hollywood point of view. Trek was dead, last movie and TV failed, time to literally reboot it. Obviously they are doing that to an extent, but you have to give them credit for going out of their way to also tie it into canon (and even tie it to TNG with the new comic book)
I continue to be excited about this movie.
#81
QM is real science, real science which gets missapplied by pop-science gurus to explain free will, spirituality, and now rebooting a series.
Sorry, but the QM being discussed here is closer to Deepak Chopra than Richard Feynmann.
80.
There are tons of exciting stories written around “hard facts” every day. If the Enterprise was finished in space, they should have had Pine see it in dry dock. Perhaps they wanted to avoid a dry-dock reference because Robert Wise already did it? The mysterious new audience they are trying to include would not have remembered that scene from TMP. But for fans, it could have been a nice tie-in. Great hand off. Maybe a young Scotty gave the young Kirk his first flyby. But if not, that would still have been an acceptable change in history. Not too many elements would have had to be moved to justify that—and all the fans would have understood the emotional benefit. Of course there wouldn’t be much emotion at all if the Enterprise herself had too many changes. It would have to have been a detailed-up Enterprise we grew up with.
I don’t think a lot of fans expected the history of Trek to be changed. Probably most were thinking the uniforms would be the first to go (and yet the uniforms are acceptable solutions IMO). I don’t think every physical thing has to be exact, but I do think it has to be closer than what we have.
There are those of us who do not read the novels and do not retain all the backstories on a daily basis. It would have been awesome to see a film that put it all together. All the info into a fun romp in the Star Trek universe. A story that boldy said “I am Trek” instead of, “uhmm…well, Trek wasn’t quite up to par and we felt that we needed wholesale changes to mold it into something believable. We then sprinkled in some references to keep it Trek. What we were left with was only the core. The sprit. That’s all the fans wanted, right?”
I’m pleased to see the Many Worlds Interpretation mentioned by name, as it’s what I’ve had in mind all along, from the moment I came to understand the time travel plot of STXI.
I agree with some of the other posters, however, in contending that Star Trek need to lay off the time travel based plots for a while. It’s starting to become more “Time Trek” than “Star Trek”.
86 YARN — I agree with you, and I almost sat down and wrote a long-winded thesis as to why what Pascale and Orci are technically incorrect. But then I realized that no one would bother reading such a thing, and I actually have work to do tonight, so I’d better not spend 4 hours expounding upon the subject in a Star Trek board. I think the bottom line is, it’s Science Fiction, and there are moments when the fiction takes precedence over the science (though occasionally I would like to see a Hard SF movie). If I enjoyed the Parallels episode — and I did, thoroughly — I may as well enjoy the ride on this movie too.
I saw another movie the other night — The Butterfly Effect (Director’s Cut). While the movie has a great many flaws ultimately, it posed the question of time travel in a way that, I think, is quite similar to the way Orci is explaining above. Again, technically, it’s not correct, but it’s an interpretation worth thinking about.
Yet another movie comes to mind as well: a low budget Indie movie called Primer. That one, in my opinion, is far superior conceptually to The Butterfly Effect, but may come even closer to the holy grail of Hard SciFi. In the end, it’s a bit hard to grasp, but that may very well be its strength.
^ correction: “… as to why what Pascale and Orci are saying is technically incorrect.”
c
i agree w/ 15
its an escuse to SELL it ot the nextgen of viewers.at tht end itll all be tos fine and tos fans can have their trek back.
now try this
if the time travle did all this. then how long has it been going on. long enough to inflence the ent desgin or those kirk family genes that gave him blue eyes. and gave him driving lessons?????
despite the odd canon mistep here and there the trek franchise holds up rahter well. we usualy tend to ignore the mistakes (note them yes) an even argue over it. sometimes the show hads even broken the rules. some one tried to use gene to make a point over it. sometimes whemn this happens we tend to in a non-spoken majority rules group togther (as fans) and accept certain things as despite evidence to the contrary. it has been noted in more then one ep that a ship can operate with only ONE engine despite the old rule that trek ship should have engines in pairs. most fans tend to favor the even egine rule.
so why does the what is it the Kelvin have one? does neros influence go that far back. Nero was zeeks teacher. gave him a paper virus. :D
is it one of those fan made engines that have two engines glued together housed in a single naccel look?
I just read this article with 6 busch lites and a half bottle of stinky gringo in my body… I have a headache and will wish that I can go back in time in the morning play with quantum mechanics.. Awesome article but good god man… My head hurts.. Will reread in the morning.
There s a bit of a problem with what’s been said here. If I’m not mistaken, the past can’t be changed …….. there will always be a repairing factor that will repair the consistency. For example, if someone were to travel to the past to kill someone, something will happen to rectify the timeline. That is what we saw in every Star Trek episode …… the past in overall can’t be changed.
The changes, if there are any, will bee minute.
So….we’re gonna have two seperate Trek time lines now. Everything from TOS-NEM, and now the timeline from the new movie, and yet they will bo co-exist as a result of quantum theory…..
One word sums that up: LAME.
Either do damned remake of TOS or dont.
http://www.stinkygringo.com…….. still hurting..
To McCoy’s poor gall bladder (#24):
Planets are big.
94 Penhall — In a way, this is no worse than there being a Mirror Universe, only instead of there being ‘a’ mirror universe, there are an uncountably infinite number of mirror universes. Metaphorically speaking, instead of just a ‘black’ universe and a ‘white’ universe, a continuous spectrum of universes in shades of gray.
Geez.
I’m gonna have to take some Extended Ed classes to understand all that stuff.
Bob’s comments also remind of this quote from Yesterdays Enterprise,
“Who is to say that this history is any less proper than the other?”
Which reminds me further – when are we going to see TNG on HD? If “remastering” the FX are a big pain in the a**, they should choose a few select episodes and put em out on Blu-Ray – sort of like TOS, but with real CGI. Give it to the dudes who did ENT. They did a pretty decent job.
I really enjoyed reading the back and forth – so Anthony and Bob, thanks for sharing that with us. This sounds just like an excellent sci-fi story should – combining a great adventure and making you think a bit as well. I’ll admit I had some concerns about the movie but now I’m completely satisfied with the explanations and can’t wait to see it!
Good explanation, as long as the timeline of the Star Trek we love still exists then good.
I am hoping it will all be reset in the end.
I still feel it was a sloppy excuse to explain inconsistincies
Although there was a lot of tehnobabble in there, what I do like is that they are putting some SCIENCE into science fiction. A lot of Time Travel movies just dont make any sense at all, when you really think of them, including Back to the Future. Why do those photos just slowly ‘fade’….either you eliminated yourself or you didn’t. I like this ‘no paradox’ form of Time Travel, and it has the nice bonus of not wiping out the trek we know.
However lets look at this even closer, a couple of things struck me:
1. Jonathan Archer and all of Enterprise exists in both timeline canons
2. certain things should exist (exactly as seen before) in the new timeline, such the V’Ger, The Botony Bay and anything else that was launched prior to the USS Kelvin
so they can do a Chris Pine Kirk v Khan movie. So lets star the ‘who should play khan’ game?
What I would like to see from Bob, maybe after the movie comes out, is what does he consider unchanged in both time lines? So did Scotty kill Archer’s beagle in the ‘classic’ timeline
Also, Bob, if you are there, what shall we call the two timelines. Is it Prime and ’sub Prime’ (ok maybe not that’)
101. Just a Fan – December 12, 2008
“Also, Bob, if you are there, what shall we call the two timelines. Is it Prime and ’sub Prime’ (ok maybe not that’)”
Leave that for you and others to decide…
I see no one has bitten on the meatier stuff, so I’m just going to say…
Dude, cool! Quantum mechanics are gnarly! But tubular! Plus the Kelvin looks rad!
Very pleased these guys are taking the time to explain this to the fans. Im even more pleased that they took the time – in the first place – to give the film and it’s effect on cannon this much thought.
wow, that was a fast response! I must say this site has good service, I must remember to tip my waiter
OK Bob
So in your world, is there any way to ever return to your own timeline once you leave it? In both parallels and in Mirror Mirror, they move back and forth between universes. So can Nero and Spock get back to the Prime timeline?
105. Just a Fan – December 12, 2008
Well, let’s see… zzz.zzz…zzzz…… good night…
So…like if Spock has to go into another timeline past after Nero, but Spocks timeline won’t be altered by any of Nero’s actions, then Spock must do so because Nero took something that was needed back in Spock and Nero’s timeline that Spock or the federation had only one of.
Nero goes back in time and that could make sense only if he was ticked off and demented. Nero goes back to kill someone or stop something from happening then in theory he could stay in altered timeline and die; while being born again in altered timeline.
He must have taken like Spock’s keys. Damn him! NNNEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is the big question and Bob ducked it in the interview as well.
Is Spock trying to reset the timeline? Is he trying to get back to his timeline? what exactly is he doing back in time? If we are going to extend the Back to the Future picture above, if Nero is Biff, and Marty is Kirk, then Spock is the Doc….so at any point in this movie, does Spock say ‘great scot’!
I get why they are using time travel. It solves every problem it is like some kind of miracle cream. It lets you use Nimoy. It allows you to both break cannon and keep canon. It is a floor wax and a desert topping.
OK fine
But for the sequel, bob, please, no more time travel. Just Kirk versus some amalgum of Khan, the Space hippies, and the space amoeba
Bob,
Thanks for taking the time to visit this corner of the web.
Really appreciated by all of us here.
Now get some sleep.
#101 “what shall we call the two timelines? Is it Prime and subPrime?”
How about Prime and……………………(wait for it)……………………..Prime Lite?
LOL
I think the explanation is just serving to justify what they did. I don’t think the fact that the normal timeline still exists will be shown in the movie. It only exists to encourage fans that everything is OK. The value of the past DVDs still exist.
Having said that…if so many multiple timelines exist, how can Spock go back to the exact timeline Nero went to? How can Nero jump ahead from the attack on the Kelvin to the future of the same timeline to attack Vulcan? Why wouldn’t Nero accidently jump to a different timeline? The only solution is the same one the writers of back to the future came up with. Once you change the past, you can only go to the future of the timeline you are in. Since the audience is making this same journey, the audience, figuratively speaking, will be unable to go back to the “normal” timeline as well. Therefore, we have to assume that all previous Trek is now invalid. It won’t happen as we move forward.
Anyone that buys into this is giving the writers way too much rope to play with.
Hey, wait, even better………
Classic Trek will be known as PRIMORDIAL!
Abrams’s movie will be known as NEW PRIME!
When a six-sided die is rolled there are six possible outcomes of the roll. In alternate realities each of these outcomes exists and the perceived existence of a single state is not due to a fixed reality, but a fixed point of perception from which the other outcomes are not observable. This has led to the concept of the ‘preferred timeline’.
I am glad someone is putting real thought into all of this. Time Travel is always confusing.
I cant for the life of me follow the time travel rules of the Terminator franchise past the first movie, and the Terminator TV show is getting very confusing. And the time travel on Heroes, that is a total preztel…I don’t think they have thought that through at all.
Am I a super-nerd for understanding everything they said with crystal clarity?
Yes
OK, I just came up with a new theorem:
“If any fiction serial is composed by more than one episode, then its canon will be affected”
(And thanks, Bob, for the interview!)
How about, “if the gunpowder in your canon is all wet, will it still fire?”
As my fellow northern german countryman Max Planck, who came up with the whole quantum scheme in the first place, put it:
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
Well, for the first time since this movie was announced, I am deeply and thoroughly disappointed.
There is a clear and rather obvious difference between what happened in, say, “Past Tense,” which created a new timeline but ultimately kept *all the details exactly the same* and what is happening here when you rewrite Kirk’s past and fail to reset it. I’ve spent a great deal of time explaining to movie bashers that Bob Orci and the Abrams team are *way* too smart to try cheating their way out of the Trek canon into their own little separate universe and then claim that “oh, this movie still respects canon.” Because, clearly, if you jump out of the canon boat and swim to a new boat as fast as you can, sure, maybe you didn’t blow it to smithereens behind you, but you can hardly say you’re respecting that which you’re running away from.
Yet it seems that Bob Orci and the Abrams *are* that stupid, and Orci is happy to use huge gobs of highly speculative technobabble to try to make the outrageous claim that this has been done before. Technically, if you hinge the whole Trek scientific universe on one line by one character in one episode (a wild leap of faith in itself), it could be *technically* true that Trek has created and moved between many, many different timelines. But, narratively? Has Trek ever gone and permanently rewritten its own past, fundamentally altering certain established facts about our characters and the setting?
No. Every other Trek time travel story in history cleans up after itself. They restore the original timeline, and either incorporate or unhappen everything that happened in the alt realities. *This* proposal is more “Crisis on Infinite Earths” than a Trek storyline.
I *hate* Crisis on Infinite Earths.
I’m stung, honestly. After that much energy defending these guys, it’s just a huge let-down to see that the people I’ve been debating with were largely right. It doesn’t mean the movie will suck, necessarily–but it does put the sanity of all Trek canon at risk. And it does a great deal to undermine my confidence in the team.
To quote Mr. Probert on this site some weeks ago: “Sigh.”
P.S. All this is null and void if the movie *does* and up cleaning up after its own time travel mess like every preceding Trek. Orci notably didn’t comment on that, though, and he seemed to be saying everywhere else that it doesn’t matter what timeline we end up in, because the “Prime” universe (uggh… that is *so* Crisis terminology) will go on with or without us there to see it. Which is just complete humbug.
So let’s hope.
It’s 4:30 AM. I’m going to bed.
So this quantum mechanics explaination works with the Mirror, Mirror evil universe?
#86 – Feynman would have a field day with this one but the fans would end up just fine.
If you went to MIT, just ignore this article, all will be fine. Techer
Believe it or not, I like that idea. :) TOS is one timeline (for me and for others, it will always be the original, genuine one) and everything the film tells us is another timeline I may accept or not. This may not be exactly what Bob Orci said, but this is how *I* understand it. :)
Only question is (now more than ever), why on earth…
Ah, you all know the rest. :)
In advance, I congratulate anyone who makes it to the end of THIS posting. It makes sense to me, anyway; it really does!
***
Let’s consider a bit of the ‘going in’ approach for this film: to make it something for Trek fans – and for everyone else, too.
Before reading this, I had already reconciled with the film as a largely-altered timeline that has the same essential points (that is, our Enterprise group). A cynic (such as myself) would say that it provides the production staff an opportunity to make it a ‘reboot’ that exists within the timeline originating from Nero’s (and, subsequently, Spock’s) incursion.
But is there anything ‘wrong’ with that? We are offered another exploration of our heroes’ adventures, and the Tre universe in that light.
Take Data’s diagram pictured (far) above, and consider the old classic: a family tree. With each incursion comes a new branch on the family tree, whose DNA closely resembles it — but at each junction, it gradually becomes less and less closely related to the line that we know and love.
***
Therefore, I propose: While indeed, as pointed out in #66, Picard and etc. continue to exist in the timeline we know, it is possible that the timeline in which the 2009 film exists may have a dramatically different 24th century — so the ‘prime’ timeline MAY lack Picard or the others. Indeed, we have no way of knowing, either way… but the timeline familiar to us would still exist.
Along those lines, there exists still another timeline, in which Nero’s incursion does not occur at all (perhaps by not escaping Rura Penthe, or an ‘unfortunate accident,’ or something). What, then, is the proof of that? Well, it’s the timeline in which our beloved ‘canon’ exists — and those closely related. After all, ‘our’ timeline doesn’t have an iBridge; an Enterprise that looks like THAT; or Kirk and Pike having met far more than once or twice.
***
In ‘the City on the Edge of Forever,’ Spock refers to time having currents and eddies. This does foreshadow this ‘quantum’ view of things.
For instance, is it not possible that the ‘mirror universe’ may in fact be an alternate timeline of Earth history? Despite some fundamental differences in human society, we nonetheless find that all of the familiar characters are born. If human history was so altered, there is little reason — aside from the ‘currents and eddies’ — to expect so many of the characters to exist.
… and yet they were!
***
So, what’s the deal? How do we reconcile this ‘quantum’ thinking with everything else? Let’s keep in mind Spock’s ‘currents and eddies.’ Perhaps we can assume certain timelines to be more ‘dominant’ and certain to be more ‘recessive.’ ‘Our’ timeline could be one; the ‘mirror universe’ could be another.
The exchange between Picard and Guinan in ‘Yesterday’s Enterprise’ is a perfect example; the special trait of El Aurians, perhaps, may be to discern the ‘dominant’ timelines from the ‘recessive.’
In short, Guinan’s actions in ‘Yesterday’s Enterprise’ — and Kirk/Spock’s actions in ‘the City on the Edge of Forever’ — could then be argued to reassert the ‘dominance’ of their respective timelines — with acceptable alterations.
As for shifts of perception from one timeline to the next: there is probably a metaphysical explanation ‘in-universe.’ However, I am not able to propose that, aside from it being somehow related to my theory of ‘dominant’ and ‘recessive’ timelines.
***
Did all that make sense? Of course it did; how could it be any other way? My apologies.
@120…The Reset Button at the end of every Trek Ep dealing with Time Travel was neccessary to cope with the requirements of Network TV… A weekly audience needed to be reassured that all the time they invested into the dramatic adventures of “their” crew was not erased by some timewarp, to keep them watching the show. So Trek used TT as a vehicle in stories like Voyagers “Year in Hell” to kill people and destroy ships to up the ante, just to reset everything back to normal in the end, how boring is that?
The permanent switch into another timeline, with all the consequences for Kirk and company, is exactly the bold step that Star Trek needed to survive, a pure stroke of genius, not just a simple plot device to get rid of the obstacles of 42 years of canon.
What is the point in time travel at all if one accepts the many worlds interpretation? Why bother going back to change the past if it doesnt affect the timeline you came from any way? Why bother following someone back to stop them if it isn’t going to affect your time line?
I think we’ve discovered the name of the new movie:
Star Trek: The Solace of Quantum
Arrrgh. So I came back. Why? Because I’m a stupid, sick man with a bad and unshakeable case of Trekkie. I apologize to the society on which my obsession with canon is a cancerous growth.
Urk.
What I think bugs me about this isn’t that they seem to be just trying to satisfy the fanboys with a technical pat on the head before scurrying away from them as quickly as possible–though I get *some* sense that that’s exactly what’s happening, it goes against everything I know about Orci, so I refuse to believe it. What *really* bugs me is that, for me, this movie was going to be the big revelation of how Kirk and Spock, the man of Earth and the divided Vulcan, somehow became the Kirk and Spock of TOS–how Kirk becomes the man whose very nature Spock defends against invincible computer evidence in “Court Martial.” That was my major personal selling point on this film, and I didn’t realize until now just how important it was to me that this movie tell that story to me.
Now it isn’t doing that at all. These are different versions of Kirk and Spock who may never actually have the adventures of TOS. They’re not prequel characters; they’re *reboot* characters, designed not to augment the universe we have but to launch a new one. For reasons I am having trouble pinning down at 4:47 in the morning, that changes my whole perspective on the movie. Might it be a good movie, even a great one? Yes. Am I going to get the pleasure of trying to resolve its so-far mostly minor inconsistencies with the rest of canon? No.
Is it going to be a Star Trek movie?
This morning I would have screamed, “Yes!” Now all I can muster is, “…maybe.”
Of course, I’m still going to see it several times. Just now with much lower expectations.
Alright, now, bed.
Thank you for taking the time, Mr Orci. I guess you’re saying very nicely that this is a reboot. Thank you for finding a canon way to make it happen. It’s still a reboot. To continue the Back to Future analogy, we’re in 1985A now.
#124: Yes, the reset button was also a problem. This is why I generally think time travel episodes are a bad idea, although certain hours (”Past Tense,” “City on the Edge,” “All Good Things…”) carried it off quite well without a pointless reset. But, as you say: “A weekly audience needed to be reassured that all the time they invested into the dramatic adventures of “their” crew was not erased by some timewarp.”
Exactly! Except I’ve invested my *entire life since before I learned to speak* in the dramatic adventures of my crews. And I do *not* want my crew either erased in a timewarp or, as Orci posits it, shunted into a side universe while the rest of the show moves on and redoes everything.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and make a Sweeping Generalization. Correct me if it’s wrong: the only people who will like this idea are (1) people who already wanted to chuck canon overboard and see this as a good way to satisfy the fanboys while still getting to *mostly* chuck canon, (2) people like Iowagirl who don’t like this movie at all and would rather keep it outside the canon as far as possible, (3) incredibly technical minded fans, of the sort who start to cry whenever they see a model of a Saladin-class but wouldn’t notice or care if Spock went out of character and started doing the Chicken Dance on the Bridge, and (4) Andre Bormanis. (I could be wrong about the last one.) Everyone else is going to see this and say, “Abrams and the Supreme Court saw the canon and wanted to get the hell out of Dodge, but they don’t want to admit it.” Am I wrong?
That’s three posts from me now, all on no sleep, and I’m not even sure I’m being consistent between them. Hopefully, the sheer number of words I’m excreting will partially make up for that.
I am still stoked for this film, can’t wait to see this new take on Star Trek, but a little part of me is sad that yes, this isn’t actually the backstory to the Kirk/Spock and co whose adventures we have watched, regardless of what Bob says about soul- everything I’ve seen so far is great, but it will be hard to relate these characters to the original crew, in anything but name.
… where Biff is in control, the court house is a casino, and the doc in in mental hospital…
@129…
James, its 12:13 in my timeline, and I know exactly what you are talking about. I am a hardcore trekker since 1970, when I was five years old. I am happy that it was not my job to come up with the script to that film. But I embrace it wholeheartedly because I have the feeling that Orci and the gang really did the right thing, they came up with the best possible solution for 2009.
Good night ;))
Everything unfolds as I have forseen it!
Why couldn’t they just make a decent Trek movie that wouldn’t require a lot of explaining and justification for the fans to accept it
134. Send your screenplay to Paramount, then.
Ok. So, mostly my main beef is with the enterprise itself how its changed. I dont mind the warp nacells so much, cause the motion picture proved to me they are interchangable. (they had complety diffrent nacells then the tv show)
But, the rest of the body, mostly the extended sensor dish in the front of the ship, kinda pisses me off a bit, because it looks kinda like the enterprise has a bulbus bow (a buldge in the front of the bow of a ship to streamline the waves and make it easer to cut through the water) and not to be a jerk, but kind of make it look like the enterprise has a hard on!
But, if the ship gets damaged throughout the film, which i highly suspect it will, and we both know scotty is brought onboard at some point in the story, maby he fixes up the enterprise and it ends up looking alot more like the TOS enterprise! Easy way to fix that.
For her being built in Iowa, is it that big a deal? I mean, i think our problem is when we think the naval shipyards of San Fransisco we are thinking the enterprise is being built in some element of water, which i doubt would be the case. Iowa, from what i know, is a large open landscape (i have never been there myself) and has alot of Elbow room to build somthing as big as the enterprise without having major tall buildings near by, god forbid somthing major goes wrong with the construction or durring its launch!
I still would have liked it built in pieces on earth, then assembled in space, but what ever. Not that big a deal.
Hell for all i know, they could still do that in the movie. When they built the statue of liberty, they completly built it in France, put it together in france, took it apart, then shipped it to new york, and rebuilt it there! Maby thats what they are doing with the enterprise?
As for the look of the enterprise, with the Ibridge kinda feel to it, you got to update the stuff somewhat. I mean, common, the communicator from the old show looked amazing back in the 60’s, but today its laughable as future tech. As for canon wise, who knows, maby at some point in the trek universe, the sleek slim iphone look goes out, and the old more clunky mechanical look comes into play for some weird reason. Maby they realise, hey we can get things working better, but they end up looking crappy (by todays standards). Fashions change all the time. Look at the technology of computers from the 80’s on to todays machines. Whos to say the 80’s clunky style wont make a return at some point?
But, all that said and done, i dont see any major timeline violations that can be fixed with some decent story telling.
^timeline violations don’t matter, it’s an alternate timeline now. Maybe the original designer of the Enterprise died in this timeline and someone else saw his rough plans and made a similar ship.
#121 I think the only question regarding the Mirror Universe is when exactly it was created (maybe it was hinted at in ‘In a Mirror Darkly’, when Cochrane shot the Vulcan. Maybe that’s what would have happened if the Enterprise and the Borg hadn’t showed up in 2063, creating thus creating the Mirror Universe.).
Actually, I find it quite refreshing, this new approach. No reset button, and the narrative perspective is *not* the guys from the Prime timeline, but from the new one. I think it makes you care more about the alternate guys. I wish Star Trek would have had the balls to do a non-reset button show in its 40+ years. Better late than never.
@boborci
I wonder, from your perspective, what it would feel like if some writer in ten or twenty years decided to pull the plug on yout new timeline and finally do the reset-button. And I wonder how we would react. Or maybe CBS/Paramount decide to continue the TNG adventures in the Prime timeline (TV-show, mini-series, whatever).
Have you decided on how to call the new timeline yet?
The question is: in the end, with timeline will stay? the old one or the new one?
If the wanna do another movie, the new one would stay.
According with Nemesis, the relationship within the Federation and the Romulan Empire wasn’t that bad, why this Nero is doing this? if they come from that very timeline universe?
139: How did Nemesis say the relationship wasn’t that bad? Because Donatra was able to bring a measly two ships to help defeat Shinzon, a man who had assassinated the Romulan government? Nothing in Nemesis indicates improved relations between the romulan empire itself and the federation.
And in some universe, it will be produced!
>> “Anthony: So, for example, Kirk is different, because his back story has totally changed, in that his parents…and all that. But you are saying that maybe Scotty or Spock’s back story would not be affected by that change?
Bob: Right.<<
Naturally the character I care most about is the one they mess with the most…..
Sorry but I feel like we are being played like violins Technobable to explain a reboot.
Keep in mind folks WE FANS are the only ones that will even KNOW there was any other history. All these supposed new fans will accept this as how it always was. So when people say this will not change interest in the existing Trek TV series and movies that seems very unlikely and well just bs. IMO Very few “new fans” will have any interest in what happened before, since they will accept this as the start of everything for them That IS and has ALWAYS been the problem with this movie taking such a radical departure from the Trek history that was established over the last forty years. Yes all our dvds will still exist but who, besides us, will care? And once we move into this new Trek universe what interest will Paramount have in keeping the old one alive?
I appreciate their efforts to ‘reboot’ the franchise without saying “nothing that happened over the past 40+ years matters anymore”. This way there could be another TNG movie and it would just take place in the timeline where Nero disappeared.
im sure the movie will be fine, dont worry
that said, after reading this im not sure physics will be fine ;p
It doesn’t make any sense at all. Why travel back in time when you can change nothing? Where is the point in that?
If Nero leaves for the past and the changes he makes there do not affect the “original timeline”, why does Spock follow him? Let Nero go. If he is gone and nothing changes, all the better – they would be rid of him.
And all this talk about about “original timeline”… so what we have seen so far is the “original timeline” and the new movie takes place in some other?
I think all this explanation of Mr. Orci makes the movie obsolete. It doesn’t take place in the “true original timeline”, all the changes Nero wants to do to the timeline won’t affect the original. So there is nothing at stake…
But nowhere have I read about them going back in time to a couple years ago and preventing the idea and execution of a movie which attempts to contrive some origin story with a new cast.
I would pay big money to see that.
So… in an alternative timeline Sylar is Spock???
Does that mean, that the vulcan ambassador is Sylars real father???
;-)
That’s a lot of explanation for what they could’ve easily described as Deus Ex Machina. Why not just say the Prophets reset everything? Or Q reset everything? Or that Kirk has some sort of historical singularity …
I don’t know …
I’ve always liked the theories of Time Travel Star Trek has showcased, but apart from enjoying the physics theories and how they might work I generally regard them as the weakest episodes and I regard “mythos” episodes like … Romulan or Klingon or Orion conflicts … as far superior.
Except Voyage Home. Voyage Home rocked.
I’m quite happy with the concept of classic Trek, rebooted, and I wouldn’t have needed the “respect for canon” or “excuses”. I understand showing the fans respect … but we’re Star Trek fans. We’re easily smart enough to juggle multiple continuities, compare, and contrast, and not give a crap about what the broader “casual movie-goers” interpretations are.
Expository Time Travel information could get kind of heady for laymen and non-Trekkers …
any article that can tie in Star Trek AND Back to the Future is all right in my book. After all, Marty had Darth Vader come from the planet Vulcan….remember?
great job Anthony, as always.
Y’know, I would have been more than happy to just accept that some things look different and leave it at that. All this stuff about it being in an alternate quantum reality is just silly.
My interest level was pretty high up to this point. Now, not so much.
#150, I absolutely agree: Everything I have seen about this new film is great, and I’m really looking forward to it. But explaining the changes they made with an alternate timelinke, I think, quite frankly, is a bit lame. It was clear from the very beginning that they’d have to change things, that the Enterprise would not look like the Enterprise etc., and the reason is not that there is an alternate timeline, but that they’re makeing a big-budget movie in 2008. I understand that, completely. Even as a die-hard fan I would have made the same decision, to break with a few details in the tradition in order to go back to the core themes that created the tradition in the first place. I just don’t need a scientific explanation for that.
When you think about it in depth – this may be a stroke of brilliance on the part of Bob et al. Now, for all future generations forward, Trek may have a way to reinvent itself. If there is always a Nero – then at some point in the future he will always go back and mess with the timeline. That brings Trek the opportunity to introduce a new set of actors and renewed element of danger to our beloved characters as a new timeline is brought into being. Does anybody follow what I’m saying? I think I have a headache now.
Well, the nerdy “canonite” in me lets out a big sigh of relief – pheeew…
Oh, and interesting discourse concerning the “science”-bits … considering time travel stories “Parallels” has always been the episode which “suitied my beliefs” the most (considering I’m not a pro on that matter) … yet “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was more entertaining (:
My burning question is…Why????
Why not use what was already known about these characters and history as a starting point for this movie? From the little that has been revealed about this movie it seems change was wedged in just for the sake of change…. oh and possible shock value to the old fans .
I also wonder if any of this is influenced by the fact that the movie and TV rights lie in different hands. If there is a new show, is it possible it’ll be set in the ‘original’ quantum reality?
The fact is, these characters are not the characters we know, period. Certain events might transpire in their futures which mirror the stories we’re familiar with, but it’s not them.
Many thanks to Bob and Anthony for this interesting interview.
Only one comment about the science: Quantum mechanics is one of the best-tested and most successful scientific theories today, true. But the Many-Worlds-Interpretation invented by Hugh Everett is what its name says it is, an interpretation. The big philosophical problem about quantum mechanics is that it’s not clear why the mathematics of the theory works so well in describing and predicting physical phenomena. In other words, we have nice formulas which work extremely well, but nobody knows why they work so well and how they should be interpreted. So we have a lot of competing interpretations of the mathematical formulas of quantum theory, the Many-Worlds approach is one of them, but there is no consensus among physicists which interpretation is preferable.
Therefore, one should not call the Many-Worlds view the best available science, the Many-Worlds view is really one possible INTERPRETATION of the best available science.
Sorry, Bob… but, using quantum physics to explain human/vulcan motivations hardly cuts it. Physics is just that, the physical… metaphysical stuff doesn’t come into it until you posit an “evil twin universe.” That’s fun Trek, but hardly scientific. ‘Parallels’ might change Kirk’s eye color, but they wouldn’t change his outlook per se.
Anyway… I’m just grumpy because all I got for Christmas was Tom Cruise in a Nazi uniform. grrrr.
“So, if the Universe tends to gravitate towards what was intended to happen, does that mean in any alternate reality I’d still be stuck with taking Debbie Simms to the Senior Prom?
Aw, crap!”
Harry — she’s lost weight and gotten toned. But, she snores, so you’re probably right to have dumped her.
Can’t wait to see this movie so all the questions get answered and I can get off the “will it suck or will it be brilliant” roller coaster. I’m familiar with the many worlds theory and like some other posters, suspect it is being used as a convenient device to make changes. Which is ok (I’m not a canonista), but I am pretty tired of time travel and Trek. It truly pains me to say that this just feels glib to me.
I’m amused. A little sourly, to be sure, but amused.
It doesn’t seem to matter whether Bob, or anyone connected with the movie, explains anything or not. If they don’t explain, there are people who howl. If they *do* explain, there are people who howl.
Bottom line is that the people for whom canon (how I’ve come to despise that word) is desperately important will go on feeling exactly as they please regardless of what anyone says, and people who are looking for reasons to hate this project will assuredly find them.
Ditto for people like me: all I want is a terrific movie; all the endless, endless, ENDLESS talk of canon is nothing but fanwank to me. I appreciate and respect Bob and everyone else for doggedly doing their best to placate the whiners; but in the end, I’m sure they just want one thing: for us to see the movie they worked so hard on and to enjoy it.
That’s my plan. I welcome everyone who joins me…
It’s just a movie. I’m looking forward to a couple of hours of entertainment when it comes out. I don’t care if Jim Kirk has a beard, just make a good movie.
While this still didn’t address any of my concerns, it did at least provide amusing new ones :)
And for all those out there that think the only ones concerned about the film are canonistas, let’s say it one more time: I could give a flying flip about canon. I just want a good movie, and on _those_ grounds I am concerned.
163:
I don’t think that only canonistas are concerned about the movie’s quality. I do think it seems remarkably pointless to be worried about that, however, given that:
1. The picture is almost done and locked; if there’s anything in it you won’t like, it’s too late to change it now;
2. It doesn’t come out for six months; and
3. When it comes out, you’ll *know* whether you like it or not. Until then, is it really worth being concerned? Interested, sure….
The last question is the real killer. A great example of a well thought out series of questions building to…. a brick wall in this case. For the most part I accept Orci’s time line opinion but in terms of storytelling and entertainment it is extreme and fatalistic. In every episode of Star Trek where they go back in time and seek to change or restore something they could have simply followed Orci’s rule, not bothered and gone home straight away because why does it matter? Just leave the new parallel time line to do its thing and get back to your own. What a waste of so many hours of TV. And so the killer question asks what is the point of Spock going back in time at all. He can happily live in his own parallel universe and let Nero wreck the other one. There’s nothing to fight for, nothing to drive them.
It’s going to have to steer a course though between this level of detail (which I suspect isn’t going to have an expositional half hour in the film) and keeping the average audience member engaged.
Thing is though, having it as a new timeline re-introduces some jeopardy in the film(s). Maybe in this timeline, Uhuru really can die when she’s attacked by the Bug Beasts of Thrall. In the original timeline she just can’t. It might work dramatically.
In my opinion – This is total BS and is exactly what I was afraid of…….I am not one to fret over every minutia of canon, I could live with some reworkings for more appeal and drama, But to me this is just cheap writing.
CSM
Ultimately, I’ll judge this movie on the basis of whether it’s a well-written, well-acted, well-crafted story. I appreciate that the prodicers and writers are trying to appease people with the whole ‘quantum realities’ thing, but it just seems like a crutch to me. I sincerely hope that crutch isn’t an indication of the quality of the story being told, but if it is I’ll likely be disappointed overall.
Still, the movie isn’t aimed at me, so no loss there. The new fans will have their movie, and I’ll still have my DVDs.
Exactly Doug, ….Exactly (In my best McCoy impersonation)
Anthony and Bob thank you whole heartedly for all the info and insight. Bob I personally appreciate all the research and dedication you have put into Trek lore and Quantum Mechanics. You seem to be very passionate about whatever project you take on.
Post #161: I agree completely.
And one last note.
1. Time Travel: canon
2. Alternate timelines, realities, universes: canon
3. Old school time travel theory (i.e. Grandfather Paradox): canon
4. New school Quantum Mechanics TT theory (i.e. NO grandfather paradox, also refers to #2 above): canon
So we have two completely different and competing views of time travel and it’s consequences present in the Trek Universe: amazing.
Now I know why Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics.
What about the 29th century Federation Time Police, The Temperal factions of the TCW and posible Krenim type temporal sheilds.
I’ve always thought that Spock’s time travel would have the effect of setting Trek on the timeline we know as canon. That is, if Spock had not intervened, things would have gone wonky. He did, and they don’t.
In other words, the movie doesn’t depart from canon so much as it begins it.
Why do I get the feeling that if they had made a “reboot” everyone moaning away here would be screaming ” why not just make it a time travel story that way you could make the changes and …Blah, blah blah”.
At least the writers have made an effort to tie things together in such a way as to explain to fans, (not the general public who, frankly aren’t going to care about the “past”).
We should be celebrating the fact that they’ve even thought about the fans and canon. I seriously suspect that Bob Orci is giving away NOTHING with this interview, I think that there are going to be some major surprises when the full story unfolds and I for one am hoping that I get those surprises at the cinema and not being spoiledbefore hand.
Both Star Trek and Quantum Mechanics are science fiction.
I am looking forward to this movie and appreciate all the info. I have to say, I am not one of these ‘canon’ people that get so worked up over it – however, this explanation is not going to satisfy that crowd (IMHO). To me, this is a really lame excuse for changing some things and not others. I am of the opinion that they should have just started over with the core of characters as the basis and went from there. If things change, thats fine. The idea that the sets and props need to look like they did in the 60’s on a TV show is ridiculous to begin with. The core of Star Trek is the characters and the story, everything else in the end doesn’t matter.
Thanks to Anthony and Bob Orci (again) for a great interview, once again, covered some things I was curious about and reassured me of a few things.
Thanks fellas.
Still need to sort that ship out though….
Boborci:
Is it too late to insert a scene where Spock uses a tricorder to see if Schrödinger’s cat is still alive in the box?
“… but I am pretty tired of time travel and Trek. It truly pains me to say that this just feels glib to me.”
Gotta agree with this (and it pains me).
Cool. Quantun-physics. I like it.
But I’m hoping someday there will be a sufficient timeline-theory in Star Trek, besides quantum physics, because in the 23rd century quantum physics is more than 300 years old. Not that it would be wrong in that time, but I guess mankind will find out much more of how the universe works as we know today.
In regards to Vulcan’s Blue Sky. Orci and Co have stated several times they consider some of the book ideas to be canon. In “Spock’s World” in particular i recall some vulcans stating that vulcan’s sky is not uniformly red all the time, and can be different colors.
Someone correct me if im wrong.
Will – You are right, The core of Trek is the CHARACTERS and that is part of what these folks have tinkered with. I don’t care if the ship looks different, the corridors, the consoles – so what. It still looks Trek…..Only an idiot would have expected this movie to look exactly like a 60’s TV show – That would be a Galaxy Quest thing… But the characters should NOT be messed with – Dress up the ship and the effects all you want, but leave the characters intact.
And if #173-justcorbly is correct – THAT, I can live with….
Can I ask a favor of those here that apparently have some issues with Mr. Orci and crew…….Bob is right here, reading these posts, so please stop referring to him in the third person. Especially those that decide to insult his writing abilities/intellect/personality. I mean, seriously, he reads these comment boards because he really does care about what we hardcore fans think, and maybe we should all realize what that says about his commitment to Star Trek and his lack of commitment to just making Paramount some money. But, most of all, I just feel very annoyed reading posts that bash on him, but yet sound like we are talking behind his back. If you really have little to no respect for what he is attempting to do, then tell it straight to him. Maybe that might make you stop and think about your anger at this new movie, instead of just sounding like children whining because the world didn’t give you everything exactly how you wanted it.
To Bob and Anthony, thanks for letting us in on the conversation, and yes, even though you guys have taken a little liberty with the whole quantum mechanics stuff, Star Trek really never has followed it to the letter, so its all good. Physics (well, more MetePhysics) does posit the idea that other universes can follow different laws of physics, which has been examined in many a Star Trek book, so I am happy hearing the explanation either way. Plus, I am one of those that totally digs the new look, and especially the fact that the Big E is now being built in my home state, thanks Bob!
Boy, After reading this, I’m happy I can just sit back and accept it, be it in a timeship, a tricked out Delorean or a guy sitting in a chair attached to a spinning satellite dish. All I need for it to work is Spock saying he is going back in time.
if Nero acts in a parallel universe, and creates a parallel universe by travelling back, and the past of the first timeline is not put in any danger why Spock should travel back and try to change things at all?
73. Aragorn189 – December 12, 2008
How about this for a canon explanation for bond….
007 – James Bond – CODE NAME given to each succeeding 007 agent. M and Q as well. All the same universe, just each bond is succeeded by a new bond for whatever reason.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
This interview has scared me more than anything yet — I like the alternate timeline reboot, which has been pretty clear for months. What I don’t like is Bob Orci’s weird, fawning “I don’t understand anything about science, but I hear quantum mechanics is awesome!!!” justification. How many times can someone appeal to the “most advanced” or “most current” scientific theory when, really, there’s nothing terribly sophisticated or new about this? This is just more watered down versions of Bryce DeWitt’s many worlds theory — a theory that is, essentially, untestable and unfalsifiable. So, how does that make it the “most advanced?”
Cutting Orci some slack, he’s just a screenwriter who’s now in the unenviable position of trying to justify choices they made for narrative reasons by appealing to some form of wishy-washy technobabble. Since things like “soliton field generators” don’t exist, he falls back on the 20th century equivalent — quantum mechanics.
Jordan…
I just… how is that BS? You might not like it. But it doesn’t affect anything that you love and have access to watch anytime right now.
Maybe if they said, “Screw it all, we do what we want!” you could call BS.
But creating an alternate timeline is not only a logical solution to trying something new, it’s firmly within the Trek rules.
So… just, for the sake of accuracy, could everyone say something like, “Man I don’t like that, I think it’ll suck, and I’m gonna go watch my TOS DVD’s instead,” instead of, “BS!”. It’s more mature, it communicates better and it doesn’t slap objectivity (a Trek principle) in the face.
Boborci,
in fact, quantum mechanics is the most successful, test-proven theory in the history of science. But keep in mind that this means it can predict quantum events with incredible accuracy (and that presumes particles can be in many places at once, you can’t know everything about anything, and so on, and so forth).
The “many worlds” thing is just an *interpretation* of quantum mechanics. And, as such, is not at all a proven conclusion. It can be that way, but maybe it is something else. That is what frustrates most people, when they try to “get” quantum mechanics: nobody knows what it truly *means*.
What worries the most, actually, is that we’re talking this stuff to justify a business decision. Business is very messy, but is still much simpler than quantum mechanics. Let’s not complicate things too much!
Best regards and keep up the great work!
Salvador
This is exactly why they shouldn’t have used time travel. At this point in both Trek and scifi in general it is contrived and overused. In this case it has needlessly complicated the backstories of these characters so that the movie team could have free reign to rewrite or make-up new history for them. No offense to Mr. Orci, Kurtzman and Abrams, but it looks like they wanted to make their jobs a whole lot easier by using the time travel angle. Conforming to the canon and what we already know about these characaters AND making the movie they wanted may have been too great a challenge. “Hey, we’re not violating canon because Nero screwed with the timeline!”
Yeah, yeah, yeah, great news, a lot of people have been assuming this for a while, canon, yadda yadda yadda.
But is it a good story, or is it as silly a story as the previews suggest? That’s the crux of the whole matter, and it’s driving me crazy that I won’t know the answer until May!!!
#189: “What worries the most, actually, is that we’re talking this stuff to justify a business decision. Business is very messy, but is still much simpler than quantum mechanics. Let’s not complicate things too much!”
Exactly! This is all justification for the hardcore Trekkies who have some vague understanding of the science involved and need convincing of why Kirk’s not on the Republic or Farragut, etc.
It’s a STORY decision. One that’s made on business concerns. This many worlds stuff is all just silly post-hoc justification and looks, IMHO, embarassing for Orci.
In every universe… Kirk still pulls his boots on one at a time, right after he does your sister.
#86.
I don’t think QM is being misapplied here. Humanity is a passionate species. And to see humanity different “fates,” is a reflection of QM. I really commend Bob Orci for trying his best to meld QM with Trek lore. It is putting SCIENCE in science fiction. I mean, if QM cannot be an answer to reconcile canon, then let’s ask “Q” to just snap his finger to put everything in order. What would you prefer, QM, or “Q”? (And “Q” is definitely canon!)
This whole explanation is why I *hate* time travel stories.
IMnsHO, using time travel *is* an excuse to do whatever they want with the story. I would rather they did the original Kirk’s origin, rather than a new timeline. Of course, that would’ve taken more effort and study to try an match all the little details from the original series.
I’m still going to go see it, but I do admit, I’m a little disappointed.
Perhaps Spock prime is aware that Nero plans to destroy Vulcan in the alternate timeline — the chance to save billions of Vulcans would be motivation enough to follow.
Star Trek, a QM production.
Tonight’s Episode: “Hickory, Dickory, Doc… Spock Runs Out the Clock.”
Good Morning!
Great interview/conversation, Anthony!! My brain almost exploded, but it was definitely insightful.
As for Bob, well, all I can say is WOW!! I’m extremely impressed. Now, If I can just pronounce his last name correctly.
I’m going with “or-see” :)
I already see a flaw in the logic. If Kirk is right out of the academy, how is it he has reached the rank of at least LT Commander…..
Also how is Chekov on the bridge of the Enterprise. Isn’t he 10 years younger….
….I assume that you get out of the academy at age 19-20….then Chekov would be 9-10?!?!?
Kirk has to have served on the Farragut…There is no way is he only 19-20…..
I ain’t being Canon anal….I just want it to be logical. I can buy the quantum mech, but somethings need to at least add up…
196. I fully agree.
The fact that Spock doesn’t know or care about most realities is valid too. he cannot do anything about things he doesn’t know about. All life is sacred – The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few… or the one. And since he KNOWS about Nero, he can SAVE some lives SOMEWHERE. The attitude “it wont affect my time line, so who gives a s**t” is NOT Spock. He is aware this is happening, and hopes to save lives.
I enjoyed reading Bob Orci’s comments about the new film, and I rather enjoy the possibility that the original timeline might be permanently altered. For all those people who keep harping on the “reboot” issue, you might want to try rebooting your attitudes. Apparently, the realities of CHANGE in this world does nothing to inform you. I’m as hard-core as any Trek fan, and I think this new film is the best chance to energize the franchise, by allowing for new opportunities and new possibilities. Living in one specific box all your life can be quite a limitation, don’t you think??? Hey, If I’m wrong, so what? We’ll end up right where we are. If I’m right, all you critics will have to find new ways to justify your position.
Bring it on, Bob & Alex!
For me, this also raises the question of why is Nero going back in time to mess with another quantum reality, rather than his own?
I can buy Spock trying to fix it out of a sense of responsibility, a simple desire to do the right thing, even if it doesn’t directly affect his world. But if Nero is hellbent on revenge, why would he not attack the ‘real’ universe? Does he not realise he’s in an alternate universe? Or does he not care? Both are possible, but from a story-telling POV, would also weaken his strength as a villian.
Wait and see I guess, but this is the first comment that’s really given me pause.
Time travel – the cause of, and the solution to, all of life’s problems.
Good morning, Chris. Our heads are still ringing with the quantum mechanics lesson, too. I’m sure it all makes perfect sense to Scotty. He probably has the warp drive reconfigured to jump to any desired reality.
I wish some of you would go read Hawking’s “The Universe In A Nutshell.” Heck, get it on CD of mp3 if you prefer. It would help you understand that Orci is actually on the cutting edge of current science.
Granted, I think JJ and co. need some excuse to justify a non-reboot reboot.
But it is very “Star Treky” to use science as your pathway to a reboot.
And like Orci said, the “prime” timeline still exists on DVD, syndicated re-runs, and soon in glorious BluRay.
For a bunch of Star Wars fans, I think they get Trek better than many Trekkies do. Trek “canon” was never meant to be canon or a scripture. This isn’t religion- though it may function as such for many fans (as it once did for me back when I was an atheist.)
Trek is wonderful story telling and great characters exploring the possibilities of the cosmos- nothing more and nothing less.
Based on this interview, it sounds like this new incarnation of Trek will carry the batton wonderfully well.
@198…
good morning, Chris…
as somebody who actually walked on that ship, did it feel like another universe to you?
;))
“According to quatum mechanics”? Surely quantum mechanics are just
tiny little guys with wrenches. Why should we take their word for anything?
Although I’m happy with the explanation I agree with #13 that a straight up reboot would have been easier rather than explaining all this as a new alternate timeline- both Batman and Bond have been rebooted and people can still enjoy all the old DVDs and reruns regardless.
I have a feeling that the next Trek movie after this one Bob and co. will definitely admit to it being a reboot… ;-)
@202…
if Nero travels back in time in his own universe, and attacks the Kelvin in his past, this is the incident that creates the alternate timeline. There is nothing he can do about it.
You change the past, you create a new universe that coexists with the one you came from in the first place.
Great, more excuses to tell a bad story. If you care why can’t you write a good story that fits?
198
I agree, nearly had a head explosion as well…should know better than to read articles like this first thing in the morning!
Awesome discussion, though. Very cool of Bob to get into the science nerdery with us!
I find it amusing that the people on this site talk so much about the potential of mankind. You say you believe in a utopian society that some dead guy purportedly thought up in the 60’s–you say you believe the human race can succeed and survive and exist in an optimistic future–but you can’t even stop slamming each other over a television series.
I’m a die-hard “canonista” by the way. And I completely accept this new movie on the grounds with which Mr. Orci has so eloquently described. I have no problems with alternate realities. I quite enjoy them, as a matter of fact.
Is this what I personally would have done? Nope! But I still accept Voyager as canon despite it being the worst television show I can remember watching outside of “Dark Angel” starring Jessica Alba. But then, this is only -my- opinion. There’s room for more than one opinion, it doesn’t mean we have to bash people. IDIC!
The audience is aware that it’s quantum mechanics.
However in the Trek Universe it may be impossible to tell which time travel THEORY is actually proven time travel REALITY (or hard science, truth).
The characters must act as though any timeline incursion will have drastic and dramatic effects.
@ 209 – where does all the new matter and energy come from to randomly spawn an entire new universe every time something that has more than one outcome happens come from?
Oh, and thank you Anthony and Bob for the enlightening article! Class acts all the way! IDIC!
Can anybody tell me anything Orci has done that is any good? From what I see on imdb it looks like he has only done crap. I mean, this is the guy who made “Parts: The Clonus Horror” look good.
Recently found missing part of the interview…..
Anthony: You’re really just making this shite up as we go along aren’t you?
Bob: Yup ;)
Well…
Yes, the concept of the “Many Worlds” theory falls within Star Trek’s canon. And, obviously, this is basically a fancily-dressed-up cover for the fact that the makers of this film felt that, for whatever unknown reason(s), simply telling a story within the Trek Universe as it has existed for the last 4 decades was insufficient.
However…
If one accepts the premise (which I’m not sure I do) that *any* time travel creates an alternate timeline, what we have obviously seen is that the vast majority of time travel has resulted in parallel worlds that are functionally indistinguishable from the originating timeline.
So the question becomes: Is what results from this film close enough to the prime timeline (defined in this case as the continuum in which the general events from ENT through “Nemesis” all take place, aka the one we thought we’d been following for all these years) so that the rest of Trek still “counts”, and we will not be treated to this parallel timeline as an excuse for ignoring, in future films, all that’s come before?
If yes, okay then.
If no… Then color me unhappy and disappointed.
Assumedly the key answer to that question is embodied in the part that Bob can’t give away, and I shall certainly be checking out the movie in May to find that answer. :)
“the worst television show I can remember watching outside of “Dark Angel” starring Jessica Alba”
That was a tv show? I thought it was just random images of Jessica Alba.
@209
Except that’s not been the way it is previously. It certainly isn’t the case in First Contact, or Yesterday’s Enterprise.
Clearly both are possible, so either Nero screwed up, is ignorant of the facts, or doesn’t care.
I’m not going to judge the story until we see the movie, but I can’t say this is a creative decision that sits well with me.
@208
Yeah, I agree. It is a reboot, and that disappoints me.
Oh, and I really like that line about how are DVDs won’t vanish when the new movie comes out. I hope they don’t becasue I’ll be watching those instead of going to the theater.
Just got the third season, btw. The remastered Cage is really great! It also doesn’t have time travel.
My physicist side gives a thumbs up to Bob on this one… Although it is a bit like the “Learning Annex” version of QM, it’s close enough.
I’m glad a few have pointed out that there are different flavors of QM other than Many Worlds. I prefer the universe of the means approach, that the general equations of state of the majority of universes has a particular mean (or average) set. If someone goes back in time, it causes a change in the average universe (or as some prefer and have mentioned, a “preferred” or “dominant” universe).
So, some have questioned, if Nero goes back and is changing a different universe, why should Spock care? Because if not combatted, the average of all the parallel universes will shift in order to keep a preferred or dominant state. Thus, when returning, there is a high probability he would land back in his corrected, or a satisfactorily similar universe (and all the other Spocks at the same time would end up in satisfactorially similar universes.)
Bob is right to quote TNG’s _Parallels_, as it’s a “canon-based” explanation for the events of this movie.
#198 How do you pronounce Doohan? ;) Silent h? Rhymes with “doing” when pronounced as “doin’”? Let’s also call George “Takai” and see how that goes ;) At least Bob continues the requirement to have an unusual last name to pronounce! When I see his surname though, even though I know how to pronounce Spanish… I keep hearing “orr-i-sigh” because of that season of Stargate SG-1….
So the point is.. When everybody says (Shatner’s) Kirk is dead they are correct. In that particular timeline he died on Veridian III. And thats all I’m gonna say about that…
Bob Orci (if you’re reading):
See, what this discussion confirms for me is what I already knew–that all these fanboy concerns about canon aren’t what really matters here. Sure, it matters on a certain level, you can’t just toss everything out and start fresh–a lot of people are expecting a certain thing that lies within certain limits, and you can’t just violate that. But all the little details here and there—I mean, come on, the canon never agreed with ITSELF one hundred percent, anyway. Nobody imagined back in 1966 that any of this shit would matter to people so much, forty years later. They weren’t even clear as to exactly WHEN Star Trek was taking place.
THAT actually is the better way to go—not telling the audience too much. The subsequent ST series continuously painted themselves into corners by letting too much out and leaving far less to the imagination.
Anyway, back to the point. I’ve said on this site many times that all this stuff about canon—it isn’t the vital thing to me. I’m more concerned about character. And Kirk is a mythic, iconic character. He’s in that league with Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, the Shadow, Batman… and these are characters one, as a writer and filmmaker, shouldn’t f**k with lightly. This is why I thought killing Kirk off was a ridiculous, bumbling mistake—not because I’m some fanboy who cried my eyes out because my imaginary hero croaked—but because I’m a well-educated writer myself and I think I have a strong grasp of the importance of these kinds of fictional entities and why they matter to us, in a mythic sense–and why, therefore, you don’t go killing them off or giving them too much fill-in so that they become ordinary beings like the rest of us. Conan-Doyle made the mistake of killing off Sherlock Holmes once because he’d grown tired of the character and thought he himself, as a writer, should be doing better things (Edgar Rice Burroughs, a less full-of-himself craftsman, never made such a mistake–not to my knowledge anyway). Money drove him to revive Holmes in as nearly an unlikely scenario as any seen on Star Trek. And Holmes has remained alive since. It’s not that killing him would be criminal; it’s that killing him would be stupid. And harmful to our cultural/mythic needs. We need immortal, timeless heroes.
But you also don’t f**k with characters like this, either. Because it has the same effect as killing them off. On the other hand, you have the advantage of the fact that all of them have vague and sometimes undefined backgrounds. We don’t know a lot about Tarzan’s childhood except that he was orphaned and raised by apes. Maybe not a lot of room to maneuver there (his adoptive gorilla mom and dad couldn’t send him to college, and he couldn’t take a job in the family mango-canning factory or any such thing) but still, there’s stuff to play with there. Same with Kirk.
You’ve addressed my concerns before about Kirk’s character being tampered with in the upcoming film, and so that’s that. If it works, great. If not, there’s no taking it back. Que sera sera.
But in the future—if there is a future, if there’s more of these films… I hope we can just move on, and play it smart. I know you guys had to go it this way THIS time, because you’re trying to both connect the old with the new AND excite new audiences… but in the future—let’s get away from the “battle in space” plots, okay? No more villains for a while, okay? It works once in a while, but endlessly reporting a formula just makes it stale. Star Trek ain’t freakin’ Captain Video, with the weekly villain who tries to take over the universe with a new deathray. Are you guys familiar with sci-fi back in the day before it became all cyberpunk and technobabble? It was about intriguing and often bizarre concepts, and was also closely akin to horror—which is NOT just about watching people die in gory ways, but is REALLY about creepiness and eerie-ness, and a feeling of being pitched out of reality, of glimpsing some weird, nightmare/dreamlike existence. The original Star Trek touched on that a lot back in the day—The Next Generation and the other subsequent ST’s and films–hardly ever. I know a film has to have a great conflict and all that, and great drama. Okay. But I hope you guys can put a stop to it being played ultra-simplistically. No more villains for a while… no more Khans and Neros and whatnot. Star Trek isn’t Star Wars, it isn’t some mythic battle of good vs. evil. Star Trek doesn’t need its own version of Darth Vader every other film—it needs new and weird ideas that have depth and provoke thought as WELL as emotion. Monsters that aren’t really monsters–Hortas and other such weirdness—bizarre worlds and concepts that undermine our sense of normalcy and reality—action that’s more than just picking up a phaser and blasting somebody or something. That’s what made Star Trek so successful in the first place. And ask yourselves, too—what ARE the sci-fi/fantasy properties that made themselves mythic, that projected themselves for all time into our psyches? Star Trek. The Twilight Zone. The Outer Limits maybe. A few others. And they all have that weird, creepy, sometimes horrific sense of the nightmare or the dream about them… even Star Trek.
Can we please get back to that, and no more geek fantasies like The Next Generation? I guarantee you that if that’s done–Star Trek will win a larger audience and will survive. Because people enjoy being weirded out and scared and made to shiver, even if only intellectually. It’s why The Matrix was so successful. Why the X-Files was a huge show. Abrams should know this, given what he did with Lost. That’s what I’m talking about. People love that stuff. But they DON’T love being made to feel like nerds because they’re watching something that is, frankly, nerdy.
I find all of this speculation and discussion a little too much for me. I’d rather just see the end product and evaluate it from there. I know I was warned about spoilers…
This is all a little too theoretical and not very entertaining.
#214- It isn’t new matter. This is complex, but I’ll try to give a over-simplified answer. Quantum Theory suggests that every partical which exists in this universe is similatniuously existing in every possible universe.
In other words, each universe doen’t have its own supply of matter. Rather, every universe shares the same matter at the same instant. Even if a given particle is doing one thing in universe A, something similar in universes b-q, and is located in an entirely different galaxy in universes r-z, it is still the same particle. A new universe wouldn’t require new matter.
Again- go get a copy of “The Universe In A Nutshell” for a reasonably accessable intro. to this stuff. It isn’t a perfect book and it is somewhat dated, but it does a good job of making the mind-bending aspects of all this make a little bit of sense.
I think Doc Brown would say, “way to think 4 dimensionally Mr. Orci!”
222.
How you doohan. Yes, that’s correct.
206
There were a few times that I had to tighten my seatbelt, but it was an incredible ride. I had the time of my life and Bob made me feel right at home.
@220…
you are right, Nick, it all depends on the way the story is returned to it’s normal state.
Yesterdays Enterprise was different because what we (and Guinan) saw was the changing of the timeline as a “live effect”, with the temoral rift open.
In First Contact the crew tried to hinder the Borg changing the future, succesfully. I don’t know how the Enterprise returned to the future in that movie, but with all the reset-button Time Travel remains the problem how to select the correct future on your Time Machine dial… because while there is only one past, there are lots of possible futures…
BOB ORCI or ANTHONY..
I appreciate the interview!! Wow…It will be a great watch..and I look forward to it! I still love how it ties the TNG back with Nimoy … and for all we know since the universe holds itself together, who’s to say that the events we see may not still happen (unseen) in the new universe in a form or fashion…. Now…I do have one thing to say in response…
Quantum Shmantum… !!!! I WANT A NEW PIC OF THE BIG E!! (pretty please?)) Any Idea when we might see some more pics of our new E?!?!!
@228…
cheers for sharing that, Chris!
#23 – “What about when the Borg ended up in the arctic in Enterprise? That changed everything we know right there.”
Ahh, but did it? What if that had already happened in the original timeline? That would certainly explain why (as some folks wondered after “First Contact”) Picard didn’t make any effort to clean up the Borg wreckage. Why? He *couldn’t*. He knew it was found in the 22nd Century, and if he didn’t leave it there, it could mess up the timeline. But I bet it stuck in his craw…. ;)
#65 – “This sort of need for convoluted reasoning explains why Canon is the cause for the death of Trek.”
No, it explains that it would have been much simpler, and more rewarding, to just follow basic continuity and move on.
“Any other, regular franchise, would have just had this sort of movie be its prequel movie. The fact that the movie looks different from the TV show could be entirely attributed to “Its a movie, they have more money, lets enjoy it!” ”
With that, I agree. I would have had no problems with the production design changes, assuming the storytelling continuity holds together.
“Instead, the writer have to bend head over heels to try and find a way to appease fans who are more concerned about whether their Star Trek Encyclopedia remains accurate as opposed to whether or not the movie has a good story.”
Again, we have the assumption taht the two are mutually exclusive, and IMHO, that assumotion is a false one, as is the implied dichotomy.
“This is how excessive fandom can kill fun, this is how excessive fandom isolates people.”
I just don’t see how this conclusion follows, I’m afraid. The existing continuity had lots of little gems that could have served for some incredible storytelling, but they will now be ignored, it would seem.
#72 – “And with this done, they could go back to the prime universe and it wouldnt be effected at all.”
And if I had any faith that they’ll do that, I’d be cool with the side-story, too. But…
Great interview, and was glad to hear an explanation, such as it was, as to why this will conform for canon…sort of. But there is still one MAJOR show-stopper for me that has not been answered. How does Kirk go from a Starfleet Cadet to Captain? Sorry, but you just don’t get promoted to command a ship by any other means than earning it over a long and distinguished career no matter how good you are and connections you might have. If we are going to take a modern scientific theory to explain the canon differences, the least we can do it use the modern military career model for when a person is qualified to command a major asset such as a ship. The “prime” timeline Kirk had the experience and training due to his previous assignments as a junior officer before he was given command. This Kirk shows a little spunk and ability, and he gets promoted to Captain and command of the ship dropped in his lap. Sorry, but that’s not how things work in the real world. There are undoubtedly thousands of officers who would have been senior to Cadet Kirk who would have been far more qualified. Heck, if we take this new timeline seriously, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov are all senior, with more experience and are more qualified.
I am still looking forward to the movie and will be in line with the other Trekkers to see it, but this one little point is going to stick in my craw.
I wonder how many times Mr. Bob read The Entropy Effect.
Liz- I will mix the LIITs if you bring TWO flasks, as one will not be enough.
@226, thanks Captain Otter…
my brain just collapsed the other possible, but uncertain, explanations ;))
Good Lord, that was WAAAYYY more explanation than we needed!
It’s just a friggin’ movie, for cryin’ out loud!
You don’t have to explain it to the canon junkies! You don’t!
Fascinating, though….
This is just getting stupid. Not in the sense of Star Trek geekery, but just storytelling in general. This is a prime example of overthinking a very basic idea.
Enterprise overdid the timeline alterations and its ratings and reception suffered as a consequence. Utilizing time-travel and alternate storylines as a plot device is not only cliched, even for Trek but lazy storytelling. These are ALL PLACES, both in location and in story that WE’VE BEEN SO MANY TIMES!
The creed of Trek’s adventures was that they were explorers. They were seeking out new planets, new life and civilizations, boldly going, yadda yadda yadda. It’s not easy to come with new alien life concepts (Enterprise at least tried with the Xindi, a world with 6 intelligent civilized species), but I’d like to see Abrams attempt to do something that actually captures our imagination rather than eye candy and technobabble.
I’m really starting to get fearful for this movie.
I always assumed that Spock Prime traveled back to attempt to restore what Nero had changed, similar to COTEOF, First Contact, Terminator, BTTF, etc … but if the prime timeline exists no matter what Nero does???
Yeah, I’m with all the folks who are scratching their heads on that one. I hope like hell this’ll be explained better in the movie.
Wow, just enjoy the damn movie people. Canon is anything the producers and writers that Paramount hires at any given time say is canon. Live with it.
I’m modifying my list of Trek cast members (and/or relatives thereof) I’d most like to have a beer with to include Chris Doohan :)
Like a poor markman, you keep missing the target.
IT WAS SUPPOSSED TO BE STAR TREK TOS THIS TIME!!!
#164:
I dont understand point #1 at all … that’s true of _any_ film, surely? I’m not a filmmaker.
Point #2: sure. True.
Point #3: Not necessarily correct. It’ll depend on reviews, etc. I skipped the last two, after all – still haven’t seen either of ‘em … so I still don’t know if I’d like them. Same may apply here.
180 CaptainRickover: Today’s quantum theory will be totally outdated in the 23rd. Good point! But if you try to fictionally depict the science of the 23rd century, you’d have to depict something incomprehensible to us. But that wouldn’t make a very attractive story, I guess. So I think it’s not simply a lack of imagination when SF writers present us with extrapolations of science and tech which are actually much too close to home. It’s a (literary or cineastic) necessity to do so.
162 scooter: “It’s just a movie. I’m looking forward to a couple of hours of entertainment when it comes out.”
To me it’s also a form of entertainment to participate in these discussions here.
Harry,
You will never cease to entertain me.
Question:
“also do not conform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history”
Does this mean Quantum Mechanics.. or just in general that Star Trek doesn’t conform to the “latest greatest, most highly…” etc. etc.?
Great interview.
It confirms what I have thought for a long time. I think it’s a pretty clever direction to take the series.
My chief concern is that if this apparently rather convoluted plot with such time-line disruptions and quantum mechanics references are potentially confusing a lot of longtime, die-hard fans, what effect will it have on potential new ones? I hope it won’t leave them cold.
I think a lot of people stopped tuning in to the 24th century spin-offs because of their excessive “technobabble’ and instead are drawn to the grassroots plots of TOS as its jargon was very minimal in comparison.
Guess will have to see next summer …
I think whoever complains about canon should stop complaining now. IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE NOW. WHY THE ENTERPRISE IS BEING BUILT THE WAY IT IS PPL. NERO DESTROYS THE KELVIN…. THE FEDERATION GETS READY FOR A WAR OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT…. THE ENTERPRISE IS BEING BUILT MORE LIKE A WAR-TYPE SHIP…… Hence the difference between the designs. I think jj and his team have an explanation for everything that has been edited in this timeline. This Trek movie is simply a new beginning. This is going to be a great movie for all trekkies and non-trek fans. Can’t wait !
“I wonder how many times Mr. Bob read The Entropy Effect.
Liz- I will mix the LIITs if you bring TWO flasks, as one will not be enough.”
I have been re-reading some of the older and wonderful novels. Entropy Effect is one of my favorites mostly because it’s so Kirk/Spock friendship-centric. It’s a time travel story I can behind. This movie,so far, not so much. But yes, I’ll bring a multipack of flasks. Or we can just hook up an IV. Like you said on chat, this can be a good movie, it’s just not gonna be our boys. ;( But heh, Len is in it so that’s a good thing, right?
Alternative realities simply do not exist. I could never fathom the idea that my beloved SAINTS could ever win the Superbowl in this or any other Universe.
2nd
in my opinion if anyone, by travelling back in time, creates an entire new universe (and he doesn’t find a preexisting parallel universe) then:
1 : if he cares about parallel-universe-life should (almost feel obliged) to send many people in the past and literally create new universes with new people
2: if spock travels back in time he doesn’t find the universe in which Nero arrived but just another universe with a new parallel nero. So Spock would have just doubled the danger
See I’m not a fan of Quantum Theory in this regard. Once you go back in time, you become part of history. Since history has already happened you’ve must have always been a part of it even if you never knew that until you actually went back.
Still it probably makes for some boring story-telling.
Sorry, this is so simple:
As RO stated, “Parallels”, a Trek episode, therefore canon, is used to explain the time-line change. He and the Supreme Court are trying to use Trek universe info to explain the changes they want to make in regards to film making profitability.
Canon is now thrown in your face and many of you don’t like it. If you can’t accept the changes for New Trek, I guess you can’t accept canon. It’s canon within canon. My brain just stopped hurting.
I like the explanation, works for me. Very Trekian.
“There are always options”.
“Oh no – I’ve gone cross-eyed!”
250 – lol! Good one! Thanks for adding a laugh to a rather dreary day I’ve been having…
Hey, but if my Packers won one again twelve years ago, anything can happen!
While I’m not making any judgements before seeing the film, barring any correction of the timeline in this or future stories, this could, sadly, invalidate many beloved stories involving Kirk’s history.
Did Kirk witness Kodos the Executioner commiting his holocaust? Was Ben Finney ever passed over promotion in favor of Kirk? Does Gary Mitchell ever serve on the Enterprise? Is Kirk able to adequately pursue the white cloud that killed Captain Garrovick without previous first-hand knowledge of the cloud? Is he now more pliable or complicit when Spock decides to kidnap Pike and head to Talos IV? Indeed is the whole crew willing to conspire to “save” Pike?
You can see the can of worms opened up by this if there is no follow-through.
I am really starting to hate being a fan of Star Trek. I mean I understand the fear this new chapter of classic trek could be a major disappointment for fans. However, this is a movie. Many sci-fi entities have enjoyed success based on good story telling and great visuals.To go see this movie one must get over the idea that this Star Trek will be vastly different from other incarnations. OK I can either read up on it to ruin the actual experience or I can stop now and wait for the next trailer and when May 9th comes I can enjoy it as a film or not.. I still come here to see what other factoids I could get to see if it is worth it. Is it worth it to fight over continuity ??? Is it really worth making it the last great hope of a money losing franchise??? Should there even be a battle over whether or not this is going to be faithful; to the original series ??? I do not know. I see the fighting ,the name calling,the “my idea is better than your idea” mentality and it is now making me sad. I once thought that being a fan meant having opinions but being open to new, or borrowed ideas. I know for the most part fans will do just that. This movie is just a movie. I do not want to compare anymore.
It looks like it could be fun. It might be mindless fun ,but sometimes it is ok to just dance in the rain just because.it feels good. So I will take my fan status and put it on the back burner …when this film comes out I hope it is fun and entertaining. It star trek lives(which it will either way) on through it , cool , if not then so be it. I just want to have a good time I just hope Star Trek delivers.
1. This is far from conforming to science. The real theory deals with particles. It does not exist on a macroscopic level. Science fiction came up with that idea.
2. It’s the same crap DC comics came up with. “We want to use these characters, but don’t want to conform to any rules… let’s just make a whole bunch of alternate universes! Then we can do anything we want!”
Angry Spock, Kirk driving a car quite well (despite not being able to do it in TOS) with an alcoholic, abusive uncle (okay, so far that’s rumor) and being taken under Pike’s wing; the Enterprise looks virtually unrecognizable… yep, my DVDs will continue. I think I’ll watch them instead.
Basically, they’re just making another sci-fi movie while trying to capitalize on Star Trek’s name.
…unless of course that it’s made very obvious in the movie that this is an alternate timeline which is restored at the end. That I could live with. If that’s the case, I’d go see it… IF.
I think the biggest point people who are critical of this explanation are overlooking is that we have no evidence that Spock Prime can return to the Prime Timeline after these alterations. Even if the multiple timelines/universes principle is the one holding this particular story together, who says that once Spock enters the timeline that Nero has altered he can ever get back to the one he left? Maybe it is a complete crapshoot and he doesn’t know which future he’ll emerge in?
To me, that this film is already posing these sorts of questions tells me that it is truly Star Trek, regardless of cosmetic changes. That was always what set Star Trek apart for me – the ‘possibilities’ posed. Star Wars was great, but that wasn’t really what it was for. And that’s okay, I do think the two can coexist without destroying the universe. ;)
It’s so mind bending to hear some open-minded fans declare that canon is the world’s worst medicine. If you take that idea to the extreme, you essentially don’t have any Trek facts in the movie. Everyone has different names and the movie takes place under water.
So we can acknowledge that some Trek facts are required to make a movie about Trek. Canon is a good thing.
Now without going to the other extreme about how many inches the Captain’s chair is from Sulu’s chair, we can conclude that more Trek facts are better than less. Some people want that line drawn much closer to what we had before (I’m obviously in that camp) and others want the line drawn somewhere much farther. But we are all interested in some degree of canon (or history) and really need to accept that and stop smirking at the people who were wishing for more continuity.
#138 – “Actually, I find it quite refreshing, this new approach. No reset button, and the narrative perspective is *not* the guys from the Prime timeline, but from the new one. I think it makes you care more about the alternate guys.”
It doesn’t do that for me, because they are not the people I came to care about. They are alternate, parallel versions of those people, and I have no stake in them whatsoever.
#142 – “IMO Very few “new fans” will have any interest in what happened before, since they will accept this as the start of everything for them That IS and has ALWAYS been the problem with this movie taking such a radical departure from the Trek history that was established over the last forty years. Yes all our dvds will still exist but who, besides us, will care? And once we move into this new Trek universe what interest will Paramount have in keeping the old one alive?”
Precisely my concern, as well. Not unreasonably, they will go where the money is, and if this movie is a hit, the money will not involve supporting previous Trek, unless there is some very overt resolution that allows things to be reconnected.
#150 – “Y’know, I would have been more than happy to just accept that some things look different and leave it at that. ”
Just so. I agree.
#166 – “Thing is though, having it as a new timeline re-introduces some jeopardy in the film(s). Maybe in this timeline, Uhuru really can die when she’s attacked by the Bug Beasts of Thrall. In the original timeline she just can’t. It might work dramatically.”
{Yawn} That’s what new characters are for. There’s no need to rewrite the histories of existing ones.
#195 – “I would rather they did the original Kirk’s origin, rather than a new timeline.”
Agreed.
“Of course, that would’ve taken more effort and study to try an match all the little details from the original series.”
Not much! There are, maybe, a half-dozen discrete datapoints to keep track of. Maybe 20 if you count all the other characters, too, including their years of birth. ;) How hard should that be in making a 2-hour movie?
233 is spot on, I will be very disappointed if this is the case.
So it’s confirmed finally….
….and we are given a *different* timeline ‘TOS crew’ and imagery by the makers, which is explained away by ‘Quantum Physics’….
At least I know now going into this Movie. But there’s still a bit of me that would have far preferred this Star Trek relaunch to have dealt with the *actual* TOS series timeline as it continues ON after the events of the last original episode….
Oh well. Star Trek lives!, regardless.
#233, 262
Problem is, that problem was part of original canon, too. Kirk jumped ranks pretty darned fast according to the ‘official’ continuity, so if anything, the new movie would just be holding true to what’s already been established with regard to that particular issue.
Total BS.
This is not the story of how our Trek crew came together it’s Bizarro Star Trek.
Piss poor…
261 – Very good points and full agreement from me (if you should even care).
This isnt really news, we all guessed that it was an alternative reality, pretty cool that its in keeping with real science and supported by trek canon (Data)
Is it bad that im more interested in how they do the post Nemesis part of this movie?? wonder what will change there or how much we’ll see of it… I mean Klingons in Helmets…
251. Conard
It’s thoughts like those that make me sad when I continue hearing of a time travel storyline for the new movie. They just don’t make any sense. GIVE US A REAL STORY WITTH REAL PROBLEMS!!!
J.J. said that he wanted to ground Star Trek so that is tied to our future, to make it more of a real drama. I do not see how, in any way, that the alternative reality plotline is going to help achieve this.
This one seems to be way of the mark I.M.O.
But perhaps it will still be entertaining.
Personally, I’ve always preferred the “single-stream” theory of time travel, in which there’s one time stream and going back and changing it actually changes the timeline…frankly, it’s just more dramatic that way, quantum physics or no quantum physics. Knowing that, because you’re in the past, any slip-up could result in massive changes makes for better drama than “Oops…I assassinated Abraham Lincoln. I guess I just created another alternate timeline. Oh, well…”
Also, the whole alternate timeline thing just gets confusing over the long run, when it becomes impossible to tell what’s the “real timeline” and what’s not…and while, scientifically speaking, that may be okay, dramatically speaking, it’s kind of annoying. After all, we (the audience, that is) have become emotionally invested in the characters (from all of the series), and being able to say what “really happened to them” and what didn’t *is* important, if only on an emotional level. The whole alternate timeline thing just begs the question that, if, as you’ve said, there is no “correct” or “central” time stream, then why we following *this* particular time stream, instead of the 250,000 others? What makes this timeline so special when compared to the others, that every single Star Trek series should follow it? What makes the Picard, Riker, etc of this time stream any different from those of the other ones?
However, I’m perfectly willing to accept an “alternate timeline” time travel story, so long as its well done…I actually quite like Parallels, even though I dislike the alternate timeline concept in drama, because it uses the concept smartly, to make a very interesting plot. I have no doubt that, dramatically, at least, you can make the parallel timeline thing work…but it seems to pose, at least in the long run, more problems than it solves.
Just my 2 cents…
I suppose I’ll just have to say I respect the opinion of those hurt by this change, even if I can’t comprehend it. I’ve been a Trek fan my whole life (30 years) starting with TAS (unorthodox, I know!) then the films, then TOS, then TNG, etc., and I have absolutely no problem with a clean slate. To me, this explanation is a way of not completely chucking out 42+ years but working around it. ‘Bending’ the rules instead of breaking them. That sounds pretty Kirkian to this fan. Plus, half the history of the TOS characters really didn’t jibe (Kirk ESPECIALLY). Just as soon they keep the key points and move on.
Star Trek failed the hard physics test the first time the ship jumped to warp after Uhura received a faster-than-light subspace message (both warp drive and subspace comms are enought to raise the spectre of causal paradoxes).
This whole discussion is massively off target. You don’t judge artistic integrity/cohesion in terms of scientific criteria.
I guess for me it ultimately comes down to story and character. A large part of telling a good story is to have a strong motivation for your characters, and especially for their protagonists.
If Nero is simply a hate-filled badass who wants to set out to create his own little pocket universe, rather than tackle the people and events who actually lead to his downfall, then I think I’d find that a rather weak motivation. More Ming The Merciless than “a proud Romulan patriot.”
YMMV of course.
271. YARN
272. Nick Cook
Your making my point perfectly.
Guys, he’s just explaining their approach to time travel in this story. You either accept it or you don’t.
274: Exactly.
[...] TREK XI IMPOSTATOSU UNA TIME-LINE ALTERNATIVA su Star Trek News 24 VO (che senn Bill non legge ) EXCLUSIVE: Bob Orci Explains How The New Star Trek Movie Fits With Trek Canon (and Real Science) | T… Ora, delle teorie quantistiche non me ne frega una ceppola, ma mi sembra pi di un escamotage per [...]
274. Sean, you’re right of course, though at this stage I’d have to say it’s an approach I simply don’t agree with. Unsurprisingly, the world continues to turn though. :)
So Mr. Orci.
How the hell does Spock get back to his own timeline?
What would the point of Spock time travelling even be if it didn’t effect his own timeline????
Huummmmm???
#269
Exactly. There is no drama in doing a story set in an alternate timeline, as no one cares about it. We care about the original timeline in which every episode and movie has taken place so far.
But as I think this won’t be explained in the movie at all, maybe we are talking about something that will never become “canon”. If this movie doesn’t explain that everything takes place in an alternate timeline, it won’t. The average moviegoer will just think that is the way everything happened and that every episode of every series and every movie happened thereafter.
And if it is explained Joe Average won’t understand it.
278…
You are sooooooo right!
The alternative timeline allows for the creation of a new star trek which we needed.
I don’t think that Orci and the other writers have read the three “The Other Marty McFly”-articles in Starlog. The BTTF guys clearly constructed a very similar framework with two alternate timelines, two McFly families etc., already for the first film. (But I’m not really sure if they did it after- or before-the-fact.) They actually admitted that the fading-photo gimmick didn’t fit this “quantum mechanical framework” of BTTF, but was necessary for dramatic reasons, for tension and intention, even if it was illogical. (The normal viewer wouldn’t get it anyway.)
#277
As it does when things i don’t like take place, too! :)
I guess my primary offer of consolation is I doubt ANY of this will be touched on in the actual movie. Thus leaving the ‘canon’ of the situation up to fans, really.
274. sean
Sean, if you are any kind of TOS fan, then I think you might agree that seeing how the real crew cam together would have been just as entertaining. Now there is a backstory that goes around 3 or 4 centuries of Trek history. How can the average or new Trek viewer possibly get their heads around such mind boggling Alternate Timeline science?
KEEP IT SIMPLE!!!
Hopefully things will BE RESTORED as they should be TOS Style.
Really TOS style has been missing since DS9s tribute. Trials and Tribulations was a real pleasure – in my humble opinion.
All TOS needed was slight updates to the set designs.
They could have easily made it look real – Yes, not like the plywood they used in the 60s ( obviously.) And with the iconic TOS characters it would still have easily been a slam dunk at the B.O.
We’ll see. I am sure it will still be a good pic. My hopes are still high. Thanks Bob and Anthony!
The answer is simple, Spock cannot restore the old Time line, when He goes back things will be different, unless of course, Spock is not going to survive at the end of the film.
If you take it from Spock’s previous experience in time travel, every time the Enterprise was involved in an incident, they became trapped in a new universe/timeline, and then upon seeing the need to repair the timeline, actually created a third universe that more closely resembled the first. From their perspective, they would think they were back in timeline #1 and would have a complete misunderstanding of what had just happened.
You’d think The Guardian of Forever would have shared this little nugget, but he/it was always very enigmatic.
Simlarly, Nero wants to get out of universe #1 and effectively create another universe more suited to his preferences. Once you’ve gone back and made the change, you can go forward in universe #2 and believe you’ve actually changed the universe you’re in. So, in essence, time travel only matters to those that actually do it. Everyone else is not only clueless, but actually unaffected.
And I thought “Parallels” was a very cool episode, especially alternate Riker’s crazy homeless beard.
224. Randall – December 12, 2008
I think, Randall, you got it right in your op-ed. Even in the world’s first Technocratic society, nerdiness is declasse and a turn off for most. I say this with one professional foot in the IT world, and as a holder of a valid Amateur Radio license!
Your link between horror and the unreality of good sci-fi also intrigues. The Nexus, I suppose, attempted such an unreality and it was one of the best parts of Generations. (Does anyone here remember “Mars is Home!”, a short story from the Golden Age?)
I’m glad Orci addressed most of this, but it seems his movie tries to be all things to all people, and that probably will be its greatest risk.
Canon, Nostalgia, & Entertainment… I hope there remains entertainment value in Trekkish nostalgia, but I confess validation for old time’s sake is very welcome in our world gone mad. Having said that, I suppose we must settle for entertainment. Expectations are high that Orci can suspend disbelief the same way “National Treasure” and “Indiana Jones” do — a familiar “everyman”, a bit preposterous if you think about it (but who dares?), and the makings of a great adventure many of us would take in a heartbeat.
Thinking of iTrek this way gives me great hope for a fun 110 minutes!
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
Just my own opinion – but this is fantastic news. This means that for the first time in a lot of years, I feel like Trek has a whole universe to explore without much sense of what is out there, instead of having 20+ seasons of continuity to exist within. The original timeline continues to exist and that’s cool – but at the same time we have this new universe to play in.
I respect those who disagree with this – everyone has their own opinion – but I’m up for something new. Let’s see where they take it.
#270 – “Plus, half the history of the TOS characters really didn’t jibe (Kirk ESPECIALLY).”
Now, see, this interests me, because I never had any difficulty fitting the various bits of Kirk’s backstory together into a cohesive whole. And most of the other characters, aside from Spock, had so little canonical backstory that fitting it together shouldn’t be any sort of issue.
Thus, I’m curious about what you think didn’t jibe.
272 – What is “YMMV”?
Your (something) may vary? Motivations? Meaning?
Best I’ve been able to guess at.
Bob,
Was there ever a “non time travel version of movie” (script)?
I don’t have a problem with creating this alternate universe as long as the writer’s bible prohibits the use of time travel as a plot device from any subsequent films or TV series for a LONG time. This new universe opens up countless new story ideas for the TOS characters without having to resort to time travel again.
YMMV= Your mileage may vary.
291. Anthony Thompson
I second that query.
Was there ever a “non time travel version of movie” (script)?
This film also works in the sense that if it is not a hit, they can just forget about this alternate time line and start back (in one form or another) in the original universe that we have been watching for all these years.
Bob: “We have to deal with it, with the fact that Star Trek episodes that don’t conform to our theory of it, also do not conform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history. So I would default that it is the science that counts. ”
Here is where I disagree. I am no scientist. I’m just a private business owner who happens to be a Star Trek fan. I hope that Bob will forgive me if I do not subscribe to the notion that “actual science” supercedes the value of an entertaining story. After all, Star Trek is fiction. I don’t need anyone to tell me that it is possible to travel faster than light to enjoy it, nor do I need to believe that transporter technology is possible either.
I think that acknowledging “quantam mechanics” might hamper the story. It certainly seems to negate some of the dramatic jeopardy with regard to Spock travelling back in time with the intention of countering Nero’s plan.
I have always dismissed Data’s theory, and done so ‘because’ it invalidate’s episodes like “City On The Edge Of Forever”.
If applying Data’s theory, when McCoy prevents the death of Edith Keeler, there should have been no consequences for the Enterprise crew in their own timeline. The result would simply have been an alternate, “spinoff” timeline in which the Axis won the Second World War.
That is not, by any means, the only example of how Data’s theory conflicts with previously established canon—just a very prominent one.
With that said, Bob is absolutely right about one aspect of this. Most audience members will not have read this article. Even some of us who have can still ignore that theory and its properties, and enjoy this time travel story the way we enjoyed “COTEOF”.
For the purpose of telling a story within the Star Trek Universe, I prefer to think of the potential consequences of time travel within more conventional canon guidelines.
I hope I can view this story in that way.
Speaking of the Nexus, using the same theory, even as presented in Generations, Soran made it to the Nexus. Just because Picard prevented him from getting there the second time, doesn’t negate the first time, since the second time couldn’t have occurred if both Soran and Picard didn’t make it into the Nexus in the first place.
ACK!?
So in that instance, you get to have your cake and eat it too. The villain is vanquished at the end, and yet the once harmless man driven mad by loss and despair does achieve the ultimate happiness. Who knows, he might even be playing Fizzbin with Guinan and Kirks’ echoes.
Why not create a new alternate universe for every new Star Trek movie? Then every time we would get something new, new fans would be attracted by it. This is the ultimate idea! This way Stat Trek never gets old and will never amass a huge continuity to consider for new stories! Just create new timelines with every movie! Maybe this is the concept about the “new” Star Trek… But then it should be renamed to “Universe Trek”.
I’ve been against this movie since it was announced. I feared for canon! :) Well, this changes everything; if what we’re seeing is an example of the multiple worlds theory, color me exited! I was hoping this is what they’d do.
#279
I will agree that I don’t think this will be explained at all in the film. However, I do appreciate the idea and reasoning behind it.
Re: 298
I would refer to Data’s answer to his father’s question on “Why do humans feel this need for continuity?” as a response to your query.
That’s why they do sequels and remakes in the first place.
@299…
They boldly go where no one went before…
;))
Even if…and I say IF…they somehow try to imply that events in this timeline make it possible for the events in the other timeline to take place at all, that seems like a really convoluted set of events for non-Trek fans to follow. And in the end tries to set the new timeline upon a higher pedestal than the old. Purposely saying that this timeline is “better” or more valuable and not leaving that decision up to the fans.
Unless there is a reset button at the end of this film, the audience will still **be** in this new timeline or alternate reality. As soon as they tell me this is an alternate reality, I won’t care who dies—so it doesn’t matter that they’ve somehow created some imaginary tension as to who will survive or not.
194… I sooo want a Q movie
Huh. I’d have preferred a simple reboot where shows like Voyager. Never. Happened. And couldn’t he have just told us, “Things are different in our story because it’s no longer 1966 — special effects and set designing has improved; only a handfull of people know these obscure facts about Kirk’s family other than the brother he finds dead in that one episode; Spock no longer will have ever been called a “Vulcanian;” and we recast the crew because, for example, there’s no chance in hell that Shatner could pull-off playing a guy in his 20’s…”
Does there really have to be more of an explanation for change than that?
These interviews seem to keep trying to geek-back-up what looks to be the first geek-free Star Trek movie since the 80’s. I mean, no offense, but though it’s quite awesome at times, Star Trek is just an entertainment franchise and not, you know, real…
Hey Bob,
one question completely unrelated to the topic in this thread, but I kinda hope you will read this. For 40 years all other Star Trek incarnation avoided that topic. In your Star Trek version – will there be gay characters? I just read Battlestar Galactica is going to be groundbreaking yet again by introducing one of the lead characters as gay? Don’t you think it’s time for Star Trek and its humanistic and tolerant society to do the same.
PS. I think its awesome Bob that you find time to chat with the fans. THANK YOU.
#219: ““the worst television show I can remember watching outside of “Dark Angel” starring Jessica Alba”
That was a tv show? I thought it was just random images of Jessica Alba.”
Random images of Jessica Alba and “worst” are contradictory concepts.
I would say this is somewhat similar to the “course correction” concept which played out on LOST the past two seasons. Desmond finds out that you cannot change the future. Yes you can go back and change the past, but the Universe has a way of stabilizing itself and bringing it back to where you started.
This would make sense then that even though things are different in the past they will eventually work back to being together as a crew and having “most” if not “all” the same adventures which we saw previously with TOS.
305. janekliebe
Really? I thought most of the crew are already happy.
You know, I can’t help thinking that all this “changing the timeline” stuff is mostly just a convenience to keep the canon-obsessed fans happy. I’m perfectly comfortable with the notion that things are different because this is a reboot and it provides effective drama in the new movie. But I guess it works either way.
OF COURSE this has to be some sort of alternate timeline. To make this a truly believable, truly canonic prequel, the look of the ship, uniforms, etc. would have to be identical to the original.
In order to go back and forth between the stories the told in TOS and the new stories that will (hopefully) be told with the new actors, the look and feel would need to be close enough to suspend disbelief regarding the recasting.
While some fans would love nothing more than to have this scenario realized, in my mind, the fact that these roles HAVE been recast simply demands that we re-invent Star Trek in a new light. This does not mean that canon can’t be reflected, but having two casts in the same roles, filmed 40 years apart, doesn’t allow for a neat folding of the old and new together. I’m perfectly happy with new stories being told with the spirit of the original characters echoed in the performances of this stellar new cast.
Creating a distinct timeline gives these and future writers creative license to work in the Trek universe without having to dodge or account for specific events at every turn. Let Trek become, once again, a vehicle for exploring ideas and possibilities. THAT is the Roddenberry legacy I’d like to return to.
Weren’t both Lt Hawk from First Contact and Mayweather from Enterprise runored to be gay characters? I gues it’s still “Don’t ask, don’t tell” in the 24th century.
Is it possible that Old Spock might not survive?
You know – rumors are fine, but since we are so deep into the whole canon discussion, I do believe rumors are definitely NOT canon. ;o) If you know what I mean.
The question is—since we’re trying to beef it up with science: If you go back in time, you don’t “change history”, but create an alternate timeline. Fine—great way to avoid the usual time-travel-paradoxes. But then your framework has to remain non-paradoxical, which means that you’re then part of that new timeline. Many people don’t realize that we are all time travellers, because we move forward in time. But we always stay in our timeline, while other versions of our world branch off in the multiverse theory. But you can’t “jump across” and return to your original world and timeline. Even if you try to do this by going back in time *again*, it wouldn’t work, because you’ll only create another alternate universe, branching off from the alternate timeline you’re already in. The world you originally came from would be forever out of reach. A real tragedy!
Alternatively, timelines can maybe collapse into (merge with) parallel alternate timelines, so there might be a possibility of Old-Spock actually returning to his original post-Nemesis TNG world. But I doubt that this would be possible from a timeline that has been altered as heavily as the new Star-Trek-timeline. It might only work with really small-scale changes. Once these changes become macroscopic, it’s fixed, and you’re bound to this new alternate timeline, when moving forward, whether naturally or by time travelling technology.
So Old-Spock will not be able to return to his original world. He will stay in the newly created timeline and will emerge in ITS post-Nemesis future. If one doesn’t take this into account, all new scientific explanations for this new Star-Trek-timeline may probably be worthless. (Just my thoughts here, though.)
For those who don’t want to be spoiled, the gist of Bob’s interview is:
“Don’t blame me Trek fans! Quantum mechanics made me do it!”
#289
Alex, I think we as fans can manage to make even the most blatantly contradictory information contained in Star Trek ‘work’, but ultimately these folks inserted facts based on whether it serviced the story at hand, without a significant amount of attention paid as to whether it fit in with last week’s episode (later shows certainly paid greater mind, but TOS was pretty inconsistent in many ways) or some other established ‘backstory’.
I think Kirk’s academy days/time on the Farragut, Republic, etc. alone are rife with questionable dates/facts. Again, we can make them work, but yes, I’d say a lot of it doesn’t really ‘jibe’, as far as I’m concerned (and apparently Memory Alpha and the Star Trek Chronology agree with me).
Interesting. I suggested the very same thing (without a detailed knowledge of Quantum Physics) in a thread a few weeks back, but was told i was wrong lol Looks like my interpretation of this timeline was very similar to the way Bob views it.
Star Trek and current/future science have always had an intrinsic relationship. One of the first things Gene did when developing Star Trek was ask some of the greatest minds of the time where technology was heading. It’s no coincidence that we are now using flip top mobile phones, portable palm computers and non-invasive medical instruments.
There will always be time travel episodes that support and contradict. Star Trek never ever nailed its time travel rules.
Altho the very first episode that dealt with time travel with any detail was Return to Tomorrow.
It would also support Bob’s theory of changes taking place in an alternate universe.
When Kirk and Spock returned Captain Christopher back into his jet, there was no Enterprise from the future there to take him back on board. Ditto the military base guard. If it was the same universe, there would have been two different Enterprises one that first arrived and the one that took them back to an earlier time.
I don’t think that everything would return to a central point tho after something as significant as the movies events. I can’t believe The Enterprise would ever be in the same place to pick up Khan. It’s quite probably Kirk never had relations with Carol Marcus, is no longer best friends with Gary Mitchell etc.
If Kirk doesn’t serve aboard the Farragut — He doesn’t witness Garovick and the crew dying by the cloud creature. Therefore he will not be “obsessed” and used his instincts to save various planets attacked by the creature in a further point in the timelines.
PS – a rematch with Khan would be good. Star Trek 12 anyone?
310 – I agree with you here. I should also point out that Canon should be adhered to, even via alternate timelines, from a story standpoint.
Visually, they have far more leeway. The new Bridge, the new Enterprise, the design of the Kelvin, Phasers, Tricorders etc., SHOULD be different, by virtue of this being a Movie.
For ST:TMP and TWOK, they simply had the Enterprise being refit, and some time passing for the characters so that uniforms and the Enterprise look very different, while adhering to the same basic ideas.
For JJ Abrams’ Trek, an incursion in the timeline is what allows the look and feel of everything to change.
If the filmmakers were not given this kind of creative license, then the recasting of Saavik for Trek III would violate canon, rather than simply the same character looking different due to the actress playing her.
To be honest, is it really believable that the Space Stations, Uniforms, space station styling, technology items, with EVERYTHING Starfleet and Klingon seen in ST:TMP would change as much as they did from the Original Series?
Visually, I’m giving the filmmakers far more lattitude than with Story regarding Canon.
With the STORY, the alternate timeline is needed to account for many of the changes for this movie.
Personally, I’d like to be able to watch this movie, then ST:TMP onwards and simply believe that Kirk and crew got older, and things changed between JJ’s Trek and the Movie Era.
“Jim, the Enterprise is 20 years old. We feel her time is over.”
I’d also like to believe that the majority of the Original Series, even The Enterprise Incident, pretty much happened the same way in the new timeline, and that TNG/DS9/Enterprise events remain the same for 99%, barring the look of the Enterprise recreation in Relics, and how the Enterprise appeared in Trials and Tribbleations etc.
All of this would be in keeping with Orci’s application of Quantum Theory.
Another big question also concerns the psychology involved: Why would Nero even go back in time? He cannot change his OWN world and timeline, the world HE cares about, because by going back in time he’ll create an alternate universe. So why would he even bother? Or has Nero somehow completely missed out on the advancements of physics, and therefore acts out of pure ignorance? Either version wouldn’t make for a very compelling villain.
317 – The Enterprise WOULD be in a place to pick up Khan, in one of the multiple realities created.
Every possibility has happened, is happening, and will happen.
Each time a particle changes direction or form in any way, all of the possible directions are taken in each of the infinate spawned universes from that action alone.
At least, that is how I understand quantum theory.
[QUOTE]264. sean said: Problem is, that problem was part of original canon, too. Kirk jumped ranks pretty darned fast according to the ‘official’ continuity, so if anything, the new movie would just be holding true to what’s already been established with regard to that particular issue.[/QUOTE]
Are you kidding? We know that Kirk rose in the ranks very quickly and went on to be the youngest Captain in the history of Starfleet at age 31, but promoted to the rank of Captain straight out of the Academy is a little ridiculous. Let’s consider how things work in the real world and not in the imaginary world of Hollywood and Science Fiction.
For the sake of argument, let’s say that the average cadet enters the Academy at age 17. That’s four years at the Academy, and they graduate and commissioned as an Ensign at age 21. Time in grade (TIG) requirement for promotion to Lieutenant Junior Grade is two years and is an almost automatic promotion unless you are a real screw up. So they are now a JG at age 23, and their next promotion is Lieutenant. Let’s be generous and say that a minimum TIG is another two years (usually more like 3), then the officer is now 25. Let’s again be generous and because the officer is really on the ball, they are promoted to Lieutenant Commander in another 2 years. They are now 27. Really exceptional performance (and being even more generous) makes the next promotion to Commander again available in 2 more years. That’s 29 years old. Now since we know Kirk was a prodigy, he again gets promoted in another two years, and that makes him 31.
Please bear in mind that no one in the real world gets to Captain this quick, but in the world of Star Trek, I can suspend belief a little and allow Kirk extremely rapid promotions through the ranks. Even with a minimum of two years between grades, he can still make it at age 31. I can live with that, but I cannot suspend belief enough to believe that Kirk skips every rank from Ensign to Commander and goes right to Captain or that his time in grade for each is measured in minutes or days. Simply not believable.
#307—”I would say this is somewhat similar to the “course correction” concept which played out on LOST the past two seasons. Desmond finds out that you cannot change the future. Yes you can go back and change the past, but the Universe has a way of stabilizing itself and bringing it back to where you started.”
That is precisely what I immediately thought of.
I like that concept as a storytelling element, but the problem is, it doesn’t mesh with previously established guidelines on the consequences of time travel in the Star Trek Universe.
But again, this is a canonical contradiction already inherent in Star Trek. TNG’s “Parallels” presents this problem, not Bob Orci’s script.
“Parallels” (TNG) contradicts “City On The Edge Of Forever”, “Tommorow Is Yesterday”, “Assignment: Earth”, “Yesteryear” (TAS), “Yesterday’s Enterprise” (TNG), and many other previous entries that suggest that interference with the past will have consequences that affect the current timeline.
Orci has told us all along that, in the case of an already existing contradiction in canon, the “Supreme Court” would have to make a ruling one way or the other.
It’s not unlike the age of the Enterprise. “The Menagerie” suggests one thing, while TSFS ignores that, in favor of something else.
It seems clear they made a ruling there too. I may not agree with the creative choices, but I do acknowledge that it had to go one way or the another, as long as this is the story they want to tell.
From the fact that quantum mechanics is our best current science, it doesn’t follow that (and it isn’t true that) the many-worlds *interpretation* of quantum mechanics is our best current science.
312…
don’t…just…don’t go there…I saw him die once..not..not again…(whimpers..)
#317—”I suggested the very same thing (without a detailed knowledge of Quantum Physics) in a thread a few weeks back, but was told i was wrong lol Looks like my interpretation of this timeline was very similar to the way Bob views it. ”
Actually, I never said that you were wrong. I simply pointed out that it was contradictory to other previously established canon.
It still is. But in fairness, TNG’s “Parallels” creates the contradiction, not anything Bob Orci or the rest of the self-proclaimed “Supreme Court” has done.
#284
Simpler? I suppose, in a way, it would have been simpler. But I think it would have been half as interesting. Where’s the suspense when you know what’s going to happen? This method allows a huge loophole whereby the past isn’t negated, but merely bypassed. Personally, I give them credit for the ingenuity.
I’m beginning to see why Abrams was never allowed to screw with the beloved Superman mythology as he came *this* close to being authorized to do with his crappy screenplay!
My only fear is that they will try to do the same as with every retelling as far as props go.(Make ships,costumes,computers, more sophisticated and updated in the past) EX..floating interrogation droid(with syringe) in Star Wars IV….Way more advanced weaponrY in episodes I-III,….Computers running DOS in future timelines and running more advanced in past timelines….Take Enterprise for example……It seems more like the Defiant.
240
The pleasure would be all mine. We need to bring Bob along. :)
242:
“I dont understand point #1 at all … that’s true of _any_ film, surely? I’m not a filmmaker.”
Point #1 is: the movie is now what it is. It won’t be altered by any problem any of us have with it, either six months in advance or after we see it. They’re not going to go back and reshoot scenes, redub dialogue, or do anything to change something we don’t like (and, of course, there’s no earthly reason they should even if they could.) So what, exactly, is the sense in worrying about it?
“Point #3: Not necessarily correct. It’ll depend on reviews, etc. I skipped the last two, after all – still haven’t seen either of ‘em … so I still don’t know if I’d like them. Same may apply here.”
You’re splitting hairs. My point was that the movie won’t be available for our perusal for months. Maybe you’ll see it, maybe you won’t; maybe you’ll like it, maybe you won’t. For the next six months, NONE OF US KNOW. So why, exactly, are so many people wasting so much energy wringing their hands about something they haven’t seen?
I used to think that Shatner’s infamous SNL sketch was more parody than reality. I don’t think that anymore. We’ve turned a simple little job he did for a lark forty years ago into a COLOSSAL waste of time.
#321
First of all, we have no idea what led to Kirk becoming a Captain in this new movie. We don’t know the details, the timeline, etc. We already know the movie jumps around quite a bit. Now, I’m not totally on board with Kirk just magically turning Captain, either, but what I was pointing out is that even in the original continuity they had Kirk as an instructor whilst simultaneously a cadet, as well as being promoted to Lieutenant before he even graduated. Those points raise eyebrows amongst plenty of military folks, but we accepted them. Many of the non-canon stories have Kirk going from Lt to Captain as the result of some ship disaster. We know Picard became a Captain as a result of his Captain and First Officer’s death. Who’s to say what we might see presented in this flick will be any less consistent with what we’ve already seen?
I love how we all speculate about timelines in a TV show.
A TV show.
Read it again.
Ok, now you may enjoy this movie.
#317 “a rematch with Khan would be good. Star Trek 12 anyone?”
I’ve been putting forth that idea for awhile now. While some may think it repetitious, the return of the most popular foe certainly worked for the Batman franchise.
If they keep with the tradition of hiring Latins to play Easterners, Benicio Del Toro gets my vote!
330 “….We’ve turned a simple little job he did for a lark forty years ago into a COLOSSAL waste of time.”
Then why are you even on this site?
Star Trek, the fictional universe, has existed for over 40 years. Like it or not, there are people who care what happens to that fictional world.
cleverness or cop-out?
Well, boo. I eat crow: I was rooting for them NOT using the “alternate timeline” excuse for things they did differently. I guess, when it came down to it, I was for a reboot of sorts, after all.
But, I can embrace this approach. I’ve always thought of time travel and alternate universes along these lines (having grown up on the old Doctor Who); that you can mess with events, but things will still maintain a kind of inertia to play out in the same way. We’ve seen this in episodes/movies where a certain character is “supposed” to die, or a certain character is supposed to make a certain discovery. Messing with the particulars didn’t matter: as long as certain pivotal events take place, the universe will sort the rest of it out.
#284—”How can the average or new Trek viewer possibly get their heads around such mind boggling Alternate Timeline science?”
My impression from the interview above is that they will not be expected to, nor will they be required to in order to understand the story. They can probably view it through the eyes of the more traditional notions of possible consequences to interference with the past.
Despite having read the interview above, which is interesting, I probably will too.
Hey, Bob, you wouldn’t happen to know what the “most successful and tested scientific theory ever in the history of the universe” is, would you?
224. You’re really talking about a future TV series. Sadly movies are self-continued stories that must embody 2 hours of attention riveting plot.
Take any franchise film series. Bond is probably the longest running one over Star Trek. There’s a supervillain in every one trying to take over the world/universe. The same for Star Wars, the same for Raiders of the Lost Ark, Harry Potter and even the comedies like the Pink Panther series of films.
Sadly, the Star Trek films that did not have a supervillain, but rather some kind of weird alien entity, or a mere mortal trying to grab for power all failed miserably. The very nature of these movies is epic. Therefore, you hire Shakespearean actors who are used to dealing with these huge plots and like Shakespeare pit the characters in life and death struggles with lots of fights and witty dialogue and a satisfying ending that delivers an often not-to-subtle moral message. That’s what audiences have want since the 16th century. Nothing has changed.
In TV, you literally have to fill-the-hour. So interesting character studies and bottle-shows end up filling a much larger proportion of the schedule. Why do you think techno-babble became so endemic on the TNG era of shows? Because it helped fill the time. You could do an episode where everyone was trapped on the ship due to some technical malfunction and mesmerize your audience by throwing a bunch of details at them – suicide in the feature world. I mean look at CSI, the highest rated TV show in the Universe for a decade. They do it every episode, endless technobabble, but one thing they do that ST never did was dumb it down with visuals that clearly explain it to the audience. What would CSI:Trek or Trek:FCIS look like? FIne character study pieces that can explore esoteric ideas. Now let me ask you this, could there ever be a CSI feature film? Doubtful. ST is an epic space adventure and as such, we expect epic stories. Whatever else XI is, it’s epic.
Like you, this whole doublespeak think Orci is doing better not turn up on the screen. My feeling is he is trying to tow the company line in an attempt to ensure most of the core fans show up and buy a ticket. Whatever the reason, what he says in that interview better be transparent to the mainstream audience or this film will die a horrible death worthy of the Tantalus device.
“Personally, I’d like to be able to watch this movie, then ST:TMP onwards and simply believe that Kirk and crew got older, and things changed between JJ’s Trek and the Movie Era.”
In other words, dump The Original Series out of the continuity of the franchise it started and is the foundation of.
Sad.
Anyhoo, glad to see Mr. Orci finally owning up to what many of us have been saying for weeks, even months. All that “respecting” and “honoring” the canon business was was just PR BS. I guess Mr. Orci got stuck with “Trekkie Control” as part of his job description on the film, and I have to give him credit – he did an excellent job of muddying the waters in a very legalistic and “it all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” Clintonian sort of way. Do you have a law degree, Bob? If not, you might have missed your calling.
334:
Yeah, I was waiting for that.
There’s an enormous difference between liking, appreciating, even loving something — as I do Trek no less than any of you — and beating the fracking thing to death. A lot of people here are way over that line.
Great thread. Thanks for the thoughtful interview A & B.
I hung out with Martin Landau last night, who described his experience with Roddenberry and Desilu, among other things. As many of you know, he was the first actor offered the role of ‘Spock.’ When he ended up on M:I, their dressing rooms were right next to each other.
So in the new QM-clarified understanding of Star Trek canon, there is an alternate universe where Mr. Spock was played by Martin Landau. Too bad he wasn’t cast in this movie as a Vulcan elder.
Can’t wait for this movie. Normally the expression goes, “time flies.” But now I’m saying, “Fly, time! Fly!”
Wow 340+ Comments!
people with headache, read or watch “the elegenat universe” by Brian Greene
I’m still looking forward to the new movie and hopefully what follows. Star Trek rules in ALL universes
326 “…..Where’s the suspense when you know what’s going to happen?”
This requirement is a myth.
1) The so-called newbies they are targeting won’t know what will happen
2) Fans who enjoy Trek but have not read the character back stories won’t know what will happen
3) Fans who are so deep into Trek and already know what will happen, will be happy **when** it happens. Think of the ‘Titanic’: everyone knew what was going to happen in that film but went back to see it many, many times.
#338
Fire??
342:
Hmmm…
Now I’m wondering if there’s an alternate universe where ABC actually did agree to pick up the series in 1965. Even as we speak, there is a website in that universe where people are complaining about the following things:
1. The actors playing John Tiberius Robinson and his wife, June “Bones” Robinson, are too young.
2. The new design for the Robot sucks.
3. Dr. Zachary Spock actually stowed away in the cargo hold of the Jupiter II, not, as seen in the trailer, in the trash compactor. Therefore this movie is not canon and is a travesty against God, Man and Gene.
4. Rick Berman still needs to be burned at the stake even though he’s got nothing to do with the movie; and
5. It sure is nice having Bill Mumy back to play Old Will, though.
213. Admiral_BlackCat – December 12, 2008
“The audience is aware that it’s quantum mechanics.
However in the Trek Universe it may be impossible to tell which time travel THEORY is actually proven time travel REALITY (or hard science, truth).
The characters must act as though any timeline incursion will have drastic and dramatic effects.”
Excellent point, which mirrors my statement in the interview that most of the audience will still be feeling all the potentially misplaced drama of classical physics.
My God… after all this, I have a new respect for the “Lost in Space” TV series. I used to think that some of the things they did made no sense at all, but compared to “Star Trek: Universe 2″, LIS is much easier to swallow.
Good to know that my Star Trek DVDs and digital copies won’t just fade away after next May.
#316 – “I think Kirk’s academy days/time on the Farragut, Republic, etc. alone are rife with questionable dates/facts. Again, we can make them work, but yes, I’d say a lot of it doesn’t really ‘jibe’, as far as I’m concerned (and apparently Memory Alpha and the Star Trek Chronology agree with me).”
I’m still confused about how you think they don’t jibe. Just repeating the assertion doesn’t add to the discussion. For example, here’s a possible Kirk chronology:
2233 – Born
2250 – Enters the Academy at age 17
2254 – Graduates the Academy and enters Command School as an Ensign. Serves aboard the training vessel Republic and as an instructor (much as do grad students at universities today).
Sometime between 2255 and 2257 – Completes Command School, is promoted to Lieutenant, and is assigned to USS Farragut on his first deep-space assignment. Apparently is a Lieutenant prior to receiving his assignment aboard Farragut, since he is still teaching while holding that rank.
Sometime between 2254 and 2257, Gary Mitchell is an Academy student and becomes friends with Kirk.
2257 – The Farragut encounters the cloud creature at Tycho IV. Captain Garrovick and half the crew are killed. Kirk blames himself for hesitating before firing phasers at the creature.
2265 – With Kirk in command, the Enterprise begins a 5-year mission of exploration.
The only meta-canonical element I included was Command School, which fits because Kirk wouldn’t simultaneously be a regular Academy cadet and a commissioned Ensign at the same time. All the rest are canonical aspects, and they fit together just fine. They’re also just about the only datapoints we have, aside from Kirk maybe being grim as a junior cadet and cheating on the Kobayashi Maru (possibly while at Command School?).
So… That’s 8 datapoints covering Kirk’s established past, including when he becomes CO of Enterprise. And I came up with them off the top of my head. Staying consistent with that is hardly an onerous burden for a well-paid screenwriter, IMNSHO.
That all said, I’m still curious. What doesn’t jibe?
I didn’t find the discussion particularly confusing…but perhaps that just means I spend too long thinking about timelines. ;)
Nevertheless, you’d have to count me amongst the disappointed camp–sure, you can “explain” this quasi-reboot by being a big fan of quantum mechanics, but (souls aside) this isn’t the crew I grew up with.
Sorry, but who cares about canon? What canon? is a reboot abot a franchise. I love Star Trek, but is NOT a religion. Or you can say that TNG is absolutely “canonically” related to TOS? No way.
Is a reboot, and that’s ok with me.
337. Closettrekker
I would have combined a few early Star Trek – The original Series episodes into one movie. SIMPLE!
And it worked best with “The Wrath of Khan”, did’nt it?
MY GOD MAN! These days It’s like every young hotshot director says that movie is the BEST of TREK (obviously) and possibly the BEST OF SCI FI!
I deeply appreciate Bob and Kurtzman passion in writing this new plotline.
However, I wonder how many discussions they had about how to reignite the franchise. Surely they see the draw of Star Wars. Are’nt they supposed to be trying to transform Trek into more of a mainstream genre?
I think they are trying to take the best of Trek and put it all out there. But suddenly with a Time Travel or Alternate Earth plotline we are missing the mark for what an average moviegoer or Star Trek fan will expect. Thereby also missing the greatter impact that this movie could make for the Trek Universe in general.
With a young Kirk, Spock and McCoy (and company) in the cast the average guy is going to expect a good the “Original Series style” adventure. Its just my opinion that after all the effort this is going to really muddy the water as to WHAT WILL REALLY SELL as good Star Trek.
Once again, I would have combined a few early episodes and stuck to
TOS designs and styles. Which episodes would I choose? Perhaps “Space Seed”, “Mirror, Mirror”, “The Doomsday Machine” and “Amok Time.”
I know its alot but a few plotines could play throughout the movie.
Again, its what people expect, can retell and relate too, and it could be done as well what Trek 09 promises..
Plus, it could be a cool setup for….
KHAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’d like to point out that just because you know how the reboot mechanism functions doesn’t mean it’s not still a reboot.
Or do car mechanics not believe in the existence of cars?
I remember when it was announced that although this was a new cast taken on familiar characters, that Leonard Nimoy was going to be in this movie reprising the role of Spock. And he was going to be acting a ‘torch barer’ that would bridge what we knew to what was going to be new. And I remember most people were pretty excited about that.
My question for those who are complaining about the time travel stories: How else did you expect Leonard Nimoy’s Spock to be part of the story?
If you ask me, the whole reason why this is a time travel story is so that Leonard Nimoy’s Spock is a part of it.
#347—”Excellent point, which mirrors my statement in the interview that most of the audience will still be feeling all the potentially misplaced drama of classical physics”
Exactly. And despite having read this interview and your commentary on the subject, I hope you’ll forgive me if I look at it the other way as well.
I concede that (TNG) “Parallels” presents a notion of the potential consequences of time travel which is contrary to previously established canon. That the only inherent canonical contradiction in Star Trek.
But “real science” was never essential to my enjoyment of Star Trek. I don’t care if warp drive is feasible, even in the future, nor do I mind the suspension of disbelief required to accept transporter technology as a viable means of human transportation 200 years from now.
I value the sanctity of “City On The Edge Of Forever”, “Tommorow Is Yesterday”, “Assignment: Earth”, “Yesteryear”, and “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, far more than I value the application of current scientific theories (which happen to contradict the canonical legitimacy of those stories) to a setting which is fictional to begin with.
:)
328,
The whole “Star Wars” tech thing can be explained the fact that once your entire galaxy is purged into war, resources tend to get spread thin, so you go for quantity, not quality, which is what the Empire did. And the rebels had to scrounge for whatever they go.
As for the new Enterprise bridge/phasers/ships, it can be explained by that we now have the know-how for what computer technology should look like. Back in the 1960’s, it was still a pretty distant concept.
#356 should read: “That isn’t the only inherent canonical contradiction in Star Trek.”
Sorry.
#330:
Point #1: Same answer as before. And I’m not worrying, so the new comment doesn’t apply to me.
Point #3: I”m not among those you mention.
And remember, for some of us, Shatner’s little job those years ago are sometimes our current jobs here in the 21st century. I have had Trek put groceries on my table on several occasions as a writer, wouldn’t mind doing so again. If this new film turns out good, that would benefit that possibility.
Closet, there is a reason we love you on Chat.
Very interesting.
New fans (viewers) won’t care about this. It’s part of the story. Old fans will be divided between those who accept, and those who will clutch their ragged copies of the Star Trek Technical Drawings and cry.
I love it.
291. Anthony Thompson – December 12, 2008
Bob,
“Was there ever a “non time travel version of movie” (script)?”
No, because getting Nimoy into the movie was one of the first things we felt we needed, and having him sitting around a camp fire sharing his memories was never gonna cut it.
@342…
Nice, Tuber.
Please tell Martin that he totally rocked in Entourage,
which I only saw last week
;))
Wow, that’s just a bunch of scientific nonsense…
Too bad.
Seems like you were saddled by Kirk’s demise in Generations and its foolish plotline. I would have ignored it completely. No reason you had to be strapped with that in mind.
Perhaps you are a Trek purist Bob.
If the Kelvin is the “inciting incident” in Nero’s destruction of “our” timeline, shouldn’t it look like something out of the Cage and not like STTMP? I think Mr. Orci has done his homework, but you need Michio Kaku to explain this. I think the whole thing is a fancy way of just doing what they want. What are the stakes for Spock if its just an alternate timeline? Why do anything if he can’t fix the “real” one? And will any of this techno stuff be in the movie itself?
329. Chris Doohan – December 12, 2008
240
The pleasure would be all mine. We need to bring Bob along. :)
HIYA, CHRIS!
@366…
We have not seen the interior od Spocks fancy Time Ship yet, maybe there is a timeline selector in the cockpit for the safe return to PRIMETIME…
335. Finny – December 12, 2008
“cleverness or cop-out?”
Quantum mechanically speaking, it’s both at the same time.
Yes hopefully primetime. And on TV too.
From Wikipedia (an admittedly unreliable source, but anyway…):
“In quantum physics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that the values of certain pairs of conjugate variables (position and momentum, for instance) cannot both be known with arbitrary precision.”
So, if you invoke the Heisenberg principle, you cannot really know how Kirk, Spock, et.al. will turn out in the future, if you go back to the past. You know how they turned out if you’re in the present, and you know the past that formed them, but you don’t really know where they’re going because their potential futures are all smeared together.
I think that’s a pretty good way to describe this movie. Nero knows how Kirk turned out, so he decides to go back and eliminate his future (in Nero’s timeline, at least) by killing his parents (but only succeeded in killing Kirk’s father), but Kirk’s future wasn’t eliminated, only smeared. Nobody knew which way he would ultimately go. That’s why Spock went back to try and un-smear the future for Kirk by putting him in the center seat where he belonged. But that only unsmeared one possible future for Kirk. If quantum physics is truly in play, then Kirk’s other futures are still smeared at that point, and when (if?) Spock goes back to what he thinks is his own timeline, he may find that he didn’t succeed in unsmearing Kirk’s future in that timeline – he’s still dead, lying under a cairn of rocks on Veridian III.
At least, that’s the way I kind of understand it. I think. I’m kind of uncertain. :-)
338. Roadblock – December 12, 2008
“Hey, Bob, you wouldn’t happen to know what the “most successful and tested scientific theory ever in the history of the universe” is, would you?”
OOOH, I KNOW! QUANTUM MECHANICS!!!
339. RD – December 12, 2008
“Like you, this whole doublespeak think Orci is doing better not turn up on the screen. My feeling is he is trying to tow the company line in an attempt to ensure most of the core fans show up and buy a ticket.”
LOL! I love the idea that QM is Paramount’s “company line.’” I’d love to see that memo.
Bob, the Narada is not build for Time Travel, right?
Time moves in eddies and currents.
359:
I find it interesting that Trek fans tend to interpret an attack on their own attitudes as an attack on the property itself.
Let me be absolutely, completely clear:
Star Trek is terrific. There’s nothing wrong with it. I like it more than I like peanut butter — and I REALLY like peanut butter. While I may consider some permutations of it to be of higher quality than others (*cough cough VOYAGER cough*), it has brought joy, inspiration, happiness, fun, eggs, bacon and Spam to millions upon millions of people, provided income for scores of actors, writers, technicians, executives, creative talents and not-so-creative talents, and put dinner on the table for a small but notable score of people such as yourself. Also it blows up stuff real good, and I like watching it.
Okay? We clear?
There are Star Trek FANS, on the other hand, who have taken this wonderful, lovely, happymaking fictional creation and spent far, far, FAR too much time obsessing — and I use that word in its full dictionary definition — over minutae in such a way that there is no phrase that better fits than “colossal waste of time.” At least, not in MY personal thesaurus.
Over to you, Enraged Masses…
That interview could be summed up in two words: “Damage Control”
362. Bob Orci
Bob, thanks for making yourself available to the other Trek fans.
“….getting Nimoy into the movie was one of the first things we felt we needed, and having him sitting around a camp fire sharing his memories was never gonna cut it.”
If time travel is the cause for the changes, I probably would have chosen to not have Nimoy in the film. If Paramount or JJ is the cause for the changes, and you attempted to explain them using Nimoy, it would be great to hear that. That way we at least understand the true “why.”
I’m sure I’m alone in this, but I would have loved to see a simple 15-minute short about Spock rescuing Kirk from death—with a campfire scene at the end. Maybe it took several years for Spock to have the right time travel technology. Would have been a nice Christmas gift for trekies and cost a lot less t make. :o)
I think that the ships are updated to look more like the future of today than the original series version and that that is just a production decision. The quantum mechanics are used to justify canon issues other than ship designs and so forth, such as Kirk’s backstory, Pike, Romulans, and so forth.
And what about more successful, more tested, more advanced and more complete, greater, (I’ll leave out the ‘human history’) theories like:
gene regulation
theory of mind
evolution
muscle contraction
neurophysiology
hormones and behavior
…
377. Captain Dudeman – December 12, 2008
That interview could be summed up in two words: “Damage Control”
Or it could be summed up as “what we were thinking”
Oh, I have no problem with this at all. This is estentially the theory that Closettrekker has been posting and it does help explain updated technology and still fall in with canon.
Works for me, but, (looking above…) I see people taking their cheap shots.
I commend Bob Orci for sticking with us and giving us this information.
Ok so any time incursion could possibly alter the current timeline which Spock would presume is a threat. So does that mean that the quantum theory isn’t that valid? In fact I think beyond “Parallels” it does contradict other episodes and movies in which there was time travel. Take First Contact for example. Clearly the Borg’s changes to the past changed the current timeline that Picard and Crew were in. So the film still contradicts Time Travel ‘Canon’ in Star Trek.
But please continue explaining. This is fasinating and exciting stuff to talk about.
378. McCoy
“I’m sure I’m alone in this, but I would have loved to see a simple 15-minute short about Spock rescuing Kirk from death—with a campfire scene at the end. Maybe it took several years for Spock to have the right time travel technology. Would have been a nice Christmas gift for trekies and cost a lot less t make”
—
I was going to post that too. But I could’nt get mey head around Generations. That’s just too bad. Gererations really did kill the Trek.
anthony..,y not worry less about quantum mechanics of the timeline and notice more about basic science? namely how theres no oxygen in space so why would there be visible explosions with fire? if its cinematic effect that’s your excuse, just look at the shockwave explosions from generations— amargosa observatory–no fiery explosion…destruction of veridian 3—no fiery explosion…yet in the trailer…THERES FIERY EXPLOSIONS IN SPACE…hmmmmm
101. – who to play a new Khan vs. Pine’s Kirk? None other than Oded Fehr, if you ask me!!!
377. Captain Dudeman – December 12, 2008
“That interview could be summed up in two words: “Damage Control””
What damage?
So really, if time travel is possible, then there is no point in doing it because you are just jumping to an alternate universe. There’s even less logic in chasing someone and Spock shouldn’t really care then because in “his” universe everything remains the same. So why chase the bad guy when you could just as easily be glad that he is gone and now living in an alternate universe that better suits him?
….and for 385. A large ship in space with a lot of pressurized habital volume, (i.e. air) could lead to explosions. In addition there are other oxidizers than just oxygen.
#378
Sounds like the ‘valentine’ we received at the end of Enterprise. Thanks, but no thanks. I agree with Bob, Spock sitting around a campfire would hardly be satisfying (and it might induce PTSD in Closettrekker and I with memories of TFF!)
369. boborci – December 12, 2008
335. Finny – December 12, 2008
“cleverness or cop-out?”
Quantum mechanically speaking, it’s both at the same time.
LOL!! A scientifically literate “Hollywood” writer. Kudos!
I am a huge TOS fan, including making my 8 and 3 year olds sit through repeated viewings of Daddy’s favorite characters.
But DAMN, am I looking forward to this alternate universe version of the characters I so love!! TREK LIVES!
385. i like this ship…it’s exciting!!! – December 12, 2008
“yet in the trailer…THERES FIERY EXPLOSIONS IN SPACE…hmmmmm”
And what could possibly cause a fire in space?…Oxygen and a spark, maybe? They gotta breathe something…
388. OV-106
Such is the problem with Time Travel. Sorry to have the same complaint after all this time.
Keep it simple in the sequel.
367
HIYA, BOB!!
Have a great weekend!! ‹(•¿•)›
First of all, for all my concerns about the new film, I must acknowledge what a great privilege it is to be able to ‘discuss’ the film with one of the writers. There is no doubt that Bob is a big Trekkie, which is certainly comforting in a film which promises so much change. I also appreciate the regular feedback we get to assuage some of our concerns.
That being said, I am still concerned. Here’s why. According to the interpretation of time travel being employed in this film, whenever someone travels back in time, an alternative timeline is created with the time-traveller moving from one timeline to another without destroying or, in any meaningful way, changing the original timeline. Fine. Unfortunately, if this is the case, Nero would just move to another timeline and his intervention will not affect the previous timeline. What, therefore, is Spock’s motivation in thwarting Nero? Whatever heinous acts Nero commits, he commits them in an alternative time-line, which will not affect Spock or anyone in existence in his timeline. Note: if it does affect Spock or anyone in existence in his timeline, then history is being rewritten, which, naturally, would trouble some fans. We face a dilemma: either Spock’s action is pointless or Spock’s action rewrites canonical history.
Remember Picard’s line from Yesterday’s Enterprise, which, roughly paraphrased was, ‘Who’s to say this history is any more proper than the other’. Guinan rejoins, ‘I suppose, I am’. To which Picard bellows, ‘Not good enough! Dammit! Not good enough!’ Similarly, who is Spock to judge which timeline is best, proper, or correct? Any number of alternative timelines could be created with time travel. Is Spock to change them all? And why would he change any?
I’ve been trying to follow this thread since last night and can barely keep up! I had to read the interview a couple times and now my head doesn’t hurt so much. The only one thing I want to add is to those who say, “Why should Spock care if it’s not his timeline?” Well to me if Spock followed Nero in the past and sees he’s trying to harm his best friend Kirk (even though it’s not HIS Kirk) I expect Spock to want to save him. Maybe that’s a little too emotional for Spock, but he seems to find cleaver logical ways to say his actions aren’t from his emotions (though it sure seems that way sometimes). Just my two cents:)
JJ wanted to do a story set in Kirk’s time because there was something special there that said “Trek” more than any other Trek series.
Then, he proceeded to change 90% of Kirk’s time reducing the film to Trek’s “core” principals. However, every Trek series, no matter how bad, had these core principals. Even Stargate SG-1 has them. Galaxy Quest has them. How far removed from Trek are the mysterious new fans they are hoping to bring to the theater? What are their ages? Have we really been without core Trek principals that long?
And if your saying you want more than just the core principals from TOS, aren’t you asking for a more TOS-related look and feel and/or (at a minimum) the normal TOS history?
Isn’t this really all just about letting someone new try their vision on Trek? Whether we wanted it or not?
I wish he would just say:
“Watch this movie or watch your franchise fizzle out and die…quantum mechanically speaking.”
So, 400 posts later and I’m still wondering …… why do Spock Prime & Nero go hop-scotching around a universe that isn’t (and doesn’t effect) theirs again?
#339 RD:
Your attempt to “correct” my statements or my thinking on certain points doesn’t work. Let’s take it bit by bit:
“You’re really talking about a future TV series.”
No, I’m talking about films. None of what I said could NOT be applied to a film. I’m not talking about a plot DEVOID of action. I’m talking a plot that does not CENTER around it. I’m talking about plots and scenarios where the action is incidental. There are far more films of this nature than the reverse.
“Sadly movies are self-continued stories that must embody 2 hours of attention riveting plot.”
A) what is “sad” about this? B) how is episodic TV *not* this? A TV episode must also maintain attention. Your point is frankly unclear.
“Take any franchise film series.”
We’re talking film, yes, but Star Trek is not ONLY a film series.
“Bond is probably the longest running one over Star Trek. There’s a supervillain in every one trying to take over the world/universe.”
BECAUSE that is the nature of a Bond story, RD. Bond is a secret agent who battles bad guys. Period. Star Trek, however, was NEVER just that, and we all know it. To LIMIT it to that, to a formulaic “good guys vs. supervillains” model, is to say it’s no better than or different from any other formulaic model—a comic book, say.
Star Trek isn’t great literature, of course—I’m not saying that. I’m simply saying it was ALWAYS far more broad than merely ONE layer or level of storytelling, or one form of storytelling. It’s science fiction. It’s a broad category. Bond isn’t; Bond is simply a spy who fights other spies and bad guys. Bond isn’t even as deep or broad as more realistic spy series where the lead characters are more like real people. Bond is more of a cartoon–which is not to denigrate the Bond series, James Bond is a great iconic character. But Star Trek is more than just one character and more than just one formulaic model. It’s about the future and human beings out there in space facing ALL kinds of conflict and weirdness–not just bad guys.
As I said earlier, make it JUST that, and it might as well be Captain Video. I mean… why bother? Are you actually defending the idea that Star Trek should always have some supervillain in it?
“The same for Star Wars, the same for Raiders of the Lost Ark, Harry Potter and even the comedies like the Pink Panther series of films.”
And again, it’s not right to draw that parallel. With the exception of Star Wars, each example you’ve brought up is about ONE hero figure who faces some problem or other. There are bad guys then, who the hero has to defeat. (Though there isn’t always ONE big villain–for instance with the Indiana Jones films). In Star Wars you have one big, huge villain (whether you call it Darth Vader, or the Emperor, or the Empire itself) and a bunch of heroes fighting it. That’s Flash Gordon-ish. Fine. But that’s not Star Trek. Star Trek is the old Western, or the pulp sci-fi idea of Man In Space. And in the Western or in sci-fi, you don’t just have plastic, flat heroes flying out to fight bad guys–or if you do, it’s probably pretty bad stuff, probably very simplistic and probably very adolescent. Again, not that Star Trek is *superior* in any sense—it’s just DIFFERENT. It comes from a different lineage, a different tradition. It’s the Horatio Hornblower series, or, as I said, the Western. There always has to be a conflict in the story—but it doesn’t have to be some comic-book supervillain. And in fact, it rarely was, and rarely should be about that.
“Sadly, the Star Trek films that did not have a supervillain, but rather some kind of weird alien entity, or a mere mortal trying to grab for power all failed miserably.”
You didn’t read carefully what I wrote earlier. I said—the reason why these films failed was because they in fact did NOT really move away from the simplistic villain formula. Instead, they just compromised on it–they’d water down the villains, spread it out amongst several instead of one—or they’d make the “villain” some macguffin that was really just a villain without a persona.
“The very nature of these movies is epic.”
Please. That word is ridiculously overused. Star Trek, overall, is in a sense epic, yes. But the films don’t NEED to be “epic.” And in fact, they really haven’t been—not any of them. Go back and look at true “epics”—”Lawrence of Arabia” for instance—and you’ll see that not one ST film has gotten anywhere near that kind of sweeping, grand enormity of story and impact.
A Star Trek film doesn’t need to be “epic.” That’s reaching too far, which is another reason why some of them fell flat. All a Star Trek film needs to be, to be successful, is intriguing and interesting, and it has to grab you in some way. A couple of them got close to that, and are, therefore, decent films. Not great, but good. But the problem with the ST films is that they have NOT gone this route, they have tried to follow a formula of good guys vs. bad guys or good guys vs. this silly “thing” out there. And as I said, sometimes that might work, but used over and over again, it’s going to fail.
“Therefore, you hire Shakespearean actors who are used to dealing with these huge plots”
What is so “huge” about all these ST film plots? Name one that was really “huge” where it required “Shakespearean actors.” Maybe First Contact comes close, but it in fact did NOT employ such actors. (Except maybe Alice Brige, I don’t know). In fact, off the top of my head the only REAL Shakespearean actor (other than a couple of the regulars—Shatner and Patrick Stewart) who’ve been in the ST films was F. Murray Abraham.
“and like Shakespeare pit the characters in life and death struggles with lots of fights and witty dialogue and a satisfying ending that delivers an often not-to-subtle moral message.”
EXCUSE ME? How is ANY of that “like” Shakespeare? Have you ever READ any Shakespeare? Shakespeare was occasionally potboiler-ISH, in many ways…. but that didn’t make his plays actual potboilers.
No, let’s stop comparing Star Trek to Shakespeare, okay? That’s where people like you get into ridiculous trouble. Stop even thinking like that. Star Trek is a western, okay? It’s an old sailing ship series. Think that. Think of people trying to explore an uncharted land where they meet different societies or where they’re out there on the sea, heading into weird and unknown waters. THAT is Star Trek. Not good guys vs. bad guys.
You want that, go watch Star Wars. Go find some old kinescopes of Rocky Jones, Space Ranger.
Star Trek is the Twilight Zone, the Outer Limits. Star Trek is Forbidden Planet and the old Robert Heinlein books. Star Trek is the Hornblower series.
“In TV, you literally have to fill-the-hour. So interesting character studies and bottle-shows end up filling a much larger proportion of the schedule.”
I wasn’t recommending “interesting character studies,” RD, for the films. READ again what I wrote earlier. You clearly didn’t read it carefully. You want to THINK I was focused on TV ideas, but I wasn’t. Just because I mentioned the way the series did things, that doesn’t mean I was thinking small. Great stories, intriguing plots, weird and horrific scenarios—they’re not small. They can be very big… and, in fact, I’d argue they can be much more “epic” than any of the “villain” stories the movies have spat out so far.
“Why do you think techno-babble became so endemic on the TNG era of shows? Because it helped fill the time.”
Rubbish. The TNG shows in fact had LESS time to fill than the original series… episodic TV has been cut down over the years for more commerical time. The reason TNG was filled with technobabble was the same reason that the films have been formulaic failures—bad storytelling and lame scriptwriting. Good writing doesn’t rely on technobabble—it might drop it in every once in a great while, but it doesn’t need it. And beyond this, the reason TNG had so much of it was bad VISION. TNG had a compromised, touchy-feely vision of Star Trek’s original vision–and what that does is lower the conflict level AND the level of drama AND weirdness/eerieness. It makes it soap opera-ish. So we saw, in TNG, a lot more soap opera-like interaction with the characters… which would have been okay if TNG had instead been a crime series or some show about lawyers. But science fiction is larger in scope and NEEDS to be. Hence, the original series was MUCH better science fiction and MUCH more “epic” and iconic than TNG ever was or could have been. Think, for instance, if TOS had never existed, and there had only been TNG. Would we even be here talking about it? Would there be all these films? Of course not. TNG never had that iconic/mythic force. Rather, it DREW on the iconic/mythic force of TOS, and took it elsewhere—away from the original vision, in my opinion. Some liked it. I personally did not, though I didn’t totally hate it. But I damn well knew it was not of the same caliber as the original show.
“You could do an episode where everyone was trapped on the ship due to some technical malfunction and mesmerize your audience by throwing a bunch of details at them – suicide in the feature world.”
And again, that’s not the kind of thing I was talking about.
But I think you’re also being disingenuous. MANY films work in MANY different scenarios. LOTS of horror films, thrillers, and suspense films work in tight parameters, in claustrophobic surroundings, etc. And many of them make tons of money. You’re looking at sci-fi in very comic book/flat terms. You’re looking at it in Star Wars terms. There’s nothing wrong with that–but it’s not ALL there is to sci-fi and certainly not ALL there is to Star Trek.
@399
Because they don’t know that.
It will affect Spock’s timeline.
The QM talk is really going nowhere.
Mr. Orci,
Since you seem to be checking in on the thread at the moment, I just wanted to take this opportunity to say that I do appreciate the time you’ve taken to engage with those of us who frequent this site. Not all of the people who have concerns about where this new version of Trek is going are bottom feeding trolls who feel the need to sink to cheap shots and personal insults. While I may not agree with many of the artistic choices you and the rest of the production crew appear to have made, they were always YOUR choices to make, of course, as the duly appointed representatives of the United Federation of Paramount in this sector and there’s no need to slander you for doing your job as you best saw fit. As a member of the Loyal Opposition I’d just like to say thanks for taking the time to keep us in the loop.
The question of the reason why Spock would be concerned..if not his timeline is curious…Bob..can you address this?
403. earthclanbootstrap – December 12, 2008
Fair enough… thank you.
Speaking of time travel – there’s a call on line 3 for Young Kirk. It’s Marty Mcfly – he wants his jacket back
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/bttf/images/a/a4/Martyjacketdry.jpg
***
Ah the lovely differences between alternate and relative time travel theories.
Back to the Future uses relative time travel theory to create branches of reality – where the old future gets rewritten with a new future (such as Biff’s having the gambling magazine)-
And Star Trek’s alternate time travel theory creates new realities with jumpers moving from one parallel reality to another -
it’s really not that difficult to understand and definitly follows the idea of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
The idea is growing on me, but I’ll have to see the movie and how it’s handled before my mind is made–
I may be reading into this — but if the Kelvin is in the Classic Trek time line– will that bridge be closer to the 60’s design? Perhaps the destruction of this is what JJ and crew talked about being sacrilegious.
403. I’m a Doctor not a ___________! – December 12, 2008
“The question of the reason why Spock would be concerned..if not his timeline is curious…Bob..can you address this?”
yes… in May!
I think it’s pretty funny that the writers are trying to use science to explain throwing cannon out the window, while at the same time saying “we’re not actually throwing cannon out the window.” Marketing, marketing, marketing. I also love how he keep saying “it’s quantum mechanics.” like that’s all there is to it.
Reminds he of that scene from “Thank You For Smoking”.
“You’re going to make a new film showing smoking in space”
“Wouldn’t you die in an all oxygen environment?”
“One line of dialog and it’s all taken care of, ‘good thing we invented the, whatever, device.”
403, I have to agree re: Bob Orci’s presence. I can’t remember a writer being so communicative with the fans. Maybe JMS back during the B5 days when he’d talk to folks on usenet.
That alone makes me want to see his movie. Hollywood would do well to pay attention to what’s going on on this site.
I meant 402, whoops. Can I go back in time and reset the quantum state of my post?
Problems so far: SCIENCE
1. The mistaken representation of a metaphysical theory about quantum mechanics as tested “hard science.” Multi-world theory is one of many theories.
2. Misapplication of quantum averaging to macro-level phenomena. The most probable or average universe amongst competing possibilities has NOTHING to do with human institutions and behaviors like career choices, ship assignments or paths to promotion. This is a significant, because it pawns off fatalism (a very old and non-scientific theory) as if it were a core tenet of quantum theory (i.e., “The most likely universe is one where Kirk is Cap’n of the ‘Prise!” – as if the universe is probabilistically organized to produce Starfleet captains.
As a follow up, I’d just like to say that if I have sunk to the level of a few biting ‘colorful metaphors’ (particularly right after the trailer first came out) just chalk it up to all of the LDS I did at Berkley…
405
I get it. Perhaps Kirk (JTs father,) will be killed on the Kelvin early on. Before the actual ships name is shown. *gasp.
I can address it now:
Space, you see, is the final frotnier and these are the time travelling voyages of the Vulcan Spock. Whose ongoing mission is to explore strange new timelines, seek out new time life and civilizations, quantum mechanically speaking and boldly go where no Trek movie has gone before…. a place where it dominates the box office.”
406- Bob Orci
..I understand….I look forward to seeing it!!! …..
…NOW ABOUT THOSE NEW PICS OF THE BIG E I INQUIRE ABOUT…..
Dear Bob,
Thank you for reviving the franchise. I’m a little worried about you though because you’re spending an awful lot of time here. Why aren’t you working on the sequel?
So, this is just a smoke-screen way of saying that the orginal TOS timeline will jump tracks from now on. Or, since this is Science Ficiton, will future movies put some things back in place?
STTOS tended to use the reset button for good reason. So that it could continue in syndication for years to come and be shown in any order without having to worry to much about continuity. When the TV show “The Fugitive” ended its series by letting the viewers know who the killer was it hurt its future in rerun syndication. Since everyone knew the outcome, there was little interest in watching reruns in syndication. TV shows from that era tended not to be serialized or have story arcs purely for financial reasons. Later Trek shows did not always use the reset button. For example in STD9 Miles O’Brien was killed after becoming infected with delta-series radioisotopes following an accident aboard the station. This, coupled with the presence of a cloaked Romulan Warbird nearby, had the effect of shifting him forward in time by several hours. His death occurred when he deliberately contaminated himself further in order to determine the exact cause of events he had witnessed. He was ‘replaced’ by his counterpart from the timeline he visited. Thus, events that occurred to O’Brien from this point on involved the future version, rather than the ‘original’.
“Everything that can happen has happened.”
Well, I wish I could at least get a glimpse of the universe where I’m filthy rich, married to a supermodel and have been to the ISS.
It would mean at least one of me was very very happy.
Mickael Okuda is gonna be….one….pissed….off….dude…
i
Save me Jebus!!!!!
People are still gettin bent out of shape over every conversation or soundbite that is transcribed on here.. “pitch-forks at the ready folks!!!!”
give it a rest already…
did Bob Orci explain every decision and the reasonings behind every plot point from when they wrote the script??? no, and he shouldn’t have to..
you’re supposed to be goin seein this movie next year to enjoy a good story.. and am assuming that the writing team had that somewhere on the list of priorities, up there with ‘raping my childhood’ and ‘making my dvd collection out of date’.. boo hoo…
even the colour of a characters eyes is being scrutinized.. i mean, come on… really????
and all this talk about “well, is this the type of time travel we have come to expect? the temporal directives have been thrown out the window by Orci and his cronies.. when according to the episode blah blah blah…”
When JJ was talkin about parodies he should’ve looked here.. cos it’s sad that some so called ‘fans’ have become a parody themselves now!
but, if it makes you feel any better.. you can hope that George and Gracie turn up at the end, and since their time travel experience, they have developed a magical ‘time paradox fixing kit’… and since they owe James T a favour, they put everything right…. but, beware the next instalment people: Picard is Welsh… and has ginger hair… canon out the window!!!
still got them pitch-forks????
I guess I don’t understand the need for the timetravel stuff. There are some references to Kirk’s past in TOS but there are huge gaps. Can’t they just tell a story of how they got together once when they were young that can be exciting? Does it have to connect to plots in the future stories? Do they have to save the universe for it to be interesting?
I can overlook a bunch of things to make a good movie, sure you can say the ship is more futuristic looking, that Kirk does not know how to drive (A Piece of the Action) and a bunch of little things. Some things are harder to swallow, like Chekov being around 12 years younger than Kirk. If that’s how old he was then don’t put him in, do we have to have him?
Kirk could still be a senior cadet on a training mission with junior cadets that fall into a situation with a training ship Kirk is commanding as a “Cadet” Captain (much like Red Squad in DS9)
Ya, you can explain things with timelines, but why go there, do you need to?
I of course will watch the new movie, I am just hoping it sets a good base to continue Trek stories on, and the timetravel stuff is always a bit unstable.
Problems so far: Scientism Intruding on Narrative Form
1. The whole question of whether Kirk’s genetics would cause him to be Captain-y is misplaced. Kirk is not a real person. Kirk is a character associated with a corpus known as Star Trek. The question is not whether it would be realistic for Capt. Kirk to do anything in some strict scientific sense, but whether it is fitting for the character to act in a certain way. Not what would Kirk (as a hyperliteralized person) do, but what Kirk should (as a literary figure) do.
2. The “new” history of Trek justified by “science” misses the point that if you are going to call an artwork “Trek”, thus trading on the ethos of mythos of earlier artworks by that name, it should have enough of a family resemblance to be called by that name (so far, it looks like the new movie passes this test – so there is no need to try to outsmart canonites).
EXAMPLE: I do a story about two monkeys who ride a ballon over Virginia in the 1930’s. They escape from a zoo, have a wacky adventure, and are then returned to the zoo after they cheer up a dying boy. I call the story STAR TREK XI and laboriously set out to prove that there is a possible world in the Trek canon where this story could have happened – TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT.
416. JR
“…will future movies put some things back in place?”
Does’nt look like it. We will have to look to Cawley and the likes for the “real” TOS experience.
Ahhhehhh… I gotta ask it.
Does Star Trek really need this story right now?
Multiple universes is one interpretation of quantum physics – it isn’t a fact like wave particle duality is.
This movie (I hope) will be regarded by the majority much like those Doctor Who movies with Peter Cushing – names are the same but it doesn’t count and maybe it was an excuse to eat popcorn at the time. I think this will be especially the case when Kirk apparently goes straight from Cadet to Captain (as appears to be the case) and insults the intelligence of fans. I’d be less hostile if it wasn’t such a obvious reboot but being denied as one.
Chekov somehow managed to get born a bit earlier in this new universe.
Problems so far: The Time Travel Dilemma
1. If the original timeline is preserved, Spock has no need (no logical motivation) to save the past.
2. If the original timeline is altered, canon is changed, and hardcore fans through themselves off of rooftops like “The Happening.”
If the original timeline is preserved, Spock has no need (no logical motivation) to save the past.
Well he has one reason. He is Spock. Spock always does the right thing when it concerns others. Even from another universe. Just as Kirk from our universe lectured Spock in the Mirror universe to change things. Kirk didn’t have to tell Mirror Spock anything.
#360—”Closet, there is a reason we love you on Chat.”
The feeling is mutual. I always enjoy getting your take on things, especially since it comes from someone much younger than I. This movie is for you and my kids, much more than it is for me.
#403. I’m a Doctor not a ___________!
“The question of the reason why Spock would be concerned..if not his timeline is curious…Bob..can you address this?”
#406 boborci
yes… in May!
Now *that* is reassuring. Somewhat.
Sorry I talked about you in the third person; I didn’t know you were still reading the thread here. I really want to believe in this script, but this hinting at a straight-up reboot gives me serious pause.
OHHHH.
Well, that explains it.
-beats self for reading those spoilers-
And, Andros, #413… You crack me up. xDD That was genius.
#389—”…and it might induce PTSD in Closettrekker and I with memories of TFF!”
Funniest thing I’ve read all day!
394. Alec
Wow. Nicely put.
That was a great episode. I think I’m watching that with popcorn May 8th.
I feel better about the movie now.
#421: “Can’t they just tell a story of how they got together once when they were young that can be exciting? Does it have to connect to plots in the future stories? Do they have to save the universe for it to be interesting?”
No, unfortunately. I think that’d be fine, but the movie would get SLAMMED by the Trek fans who are like… die-hard for canon.
William Shatner actually wrote a book (start of a series) called, “Academy”. I thought it was amazing. It gave development into Jim’s background, and also a theory on how he met Spock… It got PUMMELED by reviewers. Those that were Trekkies, anyways.
@421
“I guess I don’t understand the need for the timetravel stuff. There are some references to Kirk’s past in TOS but there are huge gaps. Can’t they just tell a story of how they got together once when they were young that can be exciting? Does it have to connect to plots in the future stories? Do they have to save the universe for it to be interesting?”
The problem with doing that is that we know that no matter the danger they will sruvive it so it eliminates the feeling of suspense and drama if we know the protagonists aren’t in any real danger. With an “alternate timeline” we don’t know what’s truly going to happen.
#397 – “I wish he would just say:
“Watch this movie or watch your franchise fizzle out and die…” ”
If the result of this movie is that Trek’s continuity is lost, I’m not really sure what the difference is.
Said in #422 by Yarn: “EXAMPLE: I do a story about two monkeys who ride a ballon over Virginia in the 1930’s. They escape from a zoo, have a wacky adventure, and are then returned to the zoo after they cheer up a dying boy. I call the story STAR TREK XI and laboriously set out to prove that there is a possible world in the Trek canon where this story could have happened – TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT.”
That is a rather grosse bending of the scenario, and I suspect you know that.
Now to what I think your point really was, there is a long-standing history in the arts to re-craft narratives through time. There is also warrant in the history of the arts to take a known character and place them in alternative circumstances.
Robin Hood is still Robin Hood, no matter how altered the politics of Nottingham are from incarnation to incarnation. Heck, the Disney fox cartoon is no more or less Robin Hood than Costner of Flynn or any of the guys from the BBC incarnations. Robin Hood was still himself even when the Dreamworks people gave him a french accent.
James Bond was once a cold war character, now he isn’t. Still, Bond is Bond, no matter what actor plays him or what ever historical era the Bond story is set in.
This is what Mr. Orci is describing- taking the Kirk character and giving him new circumstances which differ from previous versions of the Trek story- ditto w/ Spock and the others. Their biographies may have changed, but the hearts of the characters seem intact, at least from the few clips we’ve been given thus far.
And if that is the case, then this have every right to be called Star Trek.
Bob – Thanks for the updates and I have to say that as long as it’s a good story with the Great Bird’s optimism for the future, that is all that really matters.
The important thing is that the message of hope inspires another generation to reach to the stars.
Oh, and to make enough $$ for the sequels, of course…
425 — Yarn, good points.
Ok here’s my timeline analysis. Note if certain events intertwine in the 24th Century, I’m just using the start of those stories as base points.
Normal timeline
Original Backstory – TOS – movies up to 6 – TNG – Generations – DS9 – Voyager – First Contact
1st subtely alternate timeline
First Contact – Enterprise – Some of the Orginal Backstory – TOS – Movies up to 6 – TNG – Generations – DS9 – Voyager – First Contact – Insurrection – Nemesis – JJ Abrams Star Trek Countdown/Star Trek
2nd Subtely alternate timeline
First Contact – Enterprise – JJ Abram’s Star Trek (an possibly some orignal backstory elements left unmentioned but not changed)- TOS – movies up til 6 – TNG – Generations – DS9 – Voyager – First Contact – Insurrection – Nemesis – Star Trek Countdown/ Star Trek
As you can see, certain aspects of the timeline change, but the normal flow of time can still remain the same. Temporal problems are as hard as you make them seem. All these timelines can coexist at the same time. Apparently, most Trekkers are believers in only one alteration. With the new paradigm of a second subtlely altered timeline (which to some is a major change), not everyone is going to go over at once. I dare anyone on the site to come up with a better organization or try to do it with the 53 times that time travel has been involved (that is going to be one deep flow chart)
Bob & Chris! You guys rock for taking the time (so to speak) to drop in once and awhile in all of these threads over the past year.
Uh, as for the sequel…the Gorn in “Arena” scared the pee outta me back in 1973 at age 5 while watching it with my dad, imagine an updated version with today’s tech on IMAX. Or “The Doomsday Machine.” Just sayin’. :D
#426
“Well he has one reason. He is Spock. Spock always does the right thing when it concerns others. Even from another universe. Just as Kirk from our universe lectured Spock in the Mirror universe to change things. Kirk didn’t have to tell Mirror Spock anything.”
Spock should not even be arriving in the same universe as Nero. They took different ships. The original timeline is t1. Nero’s is t2. Spock’s is t3.
Regardless of whether the universes split or whether you simply arrive in a different preexisting ‘verse, he should be in a different place.
And Kirk didn’t go to the mirror universe by choice – he got stuck there and made and tried to make a case before he left.
@ 435
“If the result of this movie is that Trek’s continuity is lost, I’m not really sure what the difference is.”
The difference is that continuity will never be lost because its already there. You’ve already watched it. Its already happened. Did the existance of Enterprise kill TOS continuity? No, we just shrugged it off as unexplained. This movie is a saving grace to a dying franchise and I don’t understand why people can’t see that. Why anyone would rather have something that they are passionate about cease to exist rather than see it grow is beyond me. If the movie Enterprise suddenly had four nacelles, would that change TOS’ great episodes? NO.
#436: “..This is what Mr. Orci is describing- taking the Kirk character and giving him new circumstances which differ from previous versions of the Trek story- ditto w/ Spock and the others. Their biographies may have changed, but the hearts of the characters seem intact, at least from the few clips we’ve been given thus far.
And if that is the case, then this have every right to be called Star Trek.”
Amen. That was really good. Because, really, that’s the whole point of… Star Trek… and the franchise… and stuff.
I think this movie will be really good, even if the canon isn’t perfect!
After all… has continuity EVER been flawless in Star Trek? Really?
#347
WooT!!
In this new timeline, are they the same charcters, or different characters? Do we care if they live or die? Is it the same Enterprise or a different one? Do we care is this ship gets destroyed? What does the Trekkie audience think of this? What does the general (mainstream) audience think of all of this? How about elder Spock or Nero, what would they consider the same and different?
I’m being more retorical than anything. :)
Repeatedly saying “our most successful theory of science” in the interview, for me, drives home the fact that this probably was a sort of mantra for the Quantum mechanics story element. Treat it like FACT when writing the story, don’t deviate from it and the story will flow Still treat it as THEORY and there could be uncertainty in the decision to make some of the changes to canon. But if it’s treated as FACT then these changes actully have to happen. I’m not trying to tell Bob Orci or anyone how they should have done it, I’m just going on about how I would have gotten myself onboard with Quantum Mechanics had I been involved. (Blame my over active imagination.)
RE: #19. Michael – So how do these multiple timelines explain Vulcan’s BLUE sky in the trailer?
Vulcan may be an M-Class planet in this alternate timeline, and the drilling beam coming from the platform Nero extends into Vulcan’s atmosphere may be a catalist for Vulcan’s red sky we are all so familiar with.
It could be a way for the universe to ‘right’ this alternate timeline and bring it closer to the prime timeline.
re: 12. Leonel – Has anyone tried diagraming the many different timelines that are how out there?
I’d love to see that! Perhaps even show how this new alternate timeline could collapse back into the prime timeline.
445 and 12
I made a very rudimentary one using the changes from First Contact and the new film only. It’s on post 439. I also have a standing challenge to do a more complex one utilizing the 53 (54 now) time travel points laid down in canon so far (as a college student during exams, I don’t have that much time.) Check it out and let me know what you think.
#3-
Part of the latest and greatest theory of quantum mechanics states that not only can a particle be in 2 places at the same time, it MUST be in 2 [or more] places at the same time. It’s from whence the Heisenberg Uncertainty Proiciple derives. It’s why transporters have a Heisenberg Compensator.
2 Spocks coming face to face is possible under certain conditions under this Quantum Theory.
They probably wouldn’t faint but would examine each other with great curiosity if each knew exactly who the other was facing.
#435
“If the result of this movie is that Trek’s continuity is lost, I’m not really sure what the difference is.”
IMO there is none. ‘Our’ Trek is presumably relegated to the bargain bin of history. :(
OK, quantum mechanics.
But what about the universal/string theory?
Also, is there a possibility the two timelines “converge”?
I didn’t read all the posts, but I agree with:
13. Gravitic Yours – December 11, 2008
I’d rather have seen a Batman-style reboot than this, personally. Time travel is too easy to get wrong plus we have seen it way too many times. The canonistas won’t be happy in any case so why bother with the silly pretense?
this whole time travel nonsense is not necessary. Just do a reboot.
3. Enterprise said:
“If Spock and Spock meet the universe will either explode, or they’ll just faint.”
LOL!
449. John from Cincinnati – December 12, 2008
OK, quantum mechanics.
“But what about the universal/string theory?”
so far, no testable experiments available, unlike QM.
10. sean said:
“Reading this article gave me a technobabblegasm.”
Yes, but remember this a real-world physics explanation for the movie. Not typical Trek-babble.
Here’s my latest and greatest half-serious/half-notserious:
In the wake of Nemesis, the Federation (and, to a lesser extent, the Klingons) and the Romulans got into a better relationship. Not a alliance by any means, but certainly better than it ever has been. There have even been some calls for a movement for reconciliation with the Vulcans. There are some violently against this, led by Nero, who had been a patriotic hero of the Romulans during the Dominion War. Nero, along with other radicals and a few military men, were eventually captured by the Klingons and put on Rura Penthe. Eventually, however, he escaped and with his fellow Romulan extremists (who can easily be identified because of their prison-issue tattoos and shaved heads) hijacked a new and horrible weapons ship that is capable of traveling through time and destroying an entire planet. Spock found out about this and “borrowed” (since Vulcans don’t steal) a Federation prototype time-ship to follow him into the past. (most of this would be off-screen or in the prequel comic book that will come out, I’d think)
Nero realizes that since he will have no supplies he needs to change the past with as little effort as possible. To simply blow up Vulcan would possibly bring in too much trouble, but to go back to the Romulan-Earth War or a similar point in time would be too likely to change the timeline so much that his initial quest becomes irrelevant. So he decides to do the easy thing: Kill James T. Kirk before he is even freaking born. If he is able to kill Kirk before he is born and a trip back to the future reveals that Romulans still aren’t the big bosses of the Galaxy in the new timeline, he’ll go back and do more. Or if Kirk survives he’ll go back and do more. No big deal. He has all the time in the world (heh).
So we go to the USS Kelvin in the year 2233ish, investigating some weird anomalies (including the disappearance and believed destruction of 47 Klingon ships!). It is under the command of Captain Robau, with first officer George Kirk. Just then, Nero’s ship attacks. Caught completely by surprise, the opening volleys of the “battle” lead to the Captain dead and George in Command. He orders all non-essential personnel- including his pregnant wife- to abandon ship not in the escape pods but by using the Shuttlecraft, leaving many of them severely overcrowded. During the escape, some of the crew use their craft to cover the extremely-heavily damaged Kelvin on a kamikaze attack on the Romulans. The Kelvin is further aided by a mysterious ship (Spock’s timeship). It works, but the stress causes Mrs. Kirk to give birth prematurely as her medical shuttle goes into warp to escape. The Romulan ship, although still operational, is badly damaged and escapes through time to safety (some point in time where they can just go orbit some random moon and do some repairs and get ready for their next attempt at destroying the Federation). We’d then see the Time-ship go through time too, probably going ahead to check to see what this has changed in this “new” timeline which is similar but different from the original one. Spock cares about this new Timeline because, quite frankly, it is the logical and moral thing to do.
We’d then go through a short vignette of Kirk and Spock growing up. Spock has some pressures growing up with being Half-Vulcan, Half-Human, but Kirk’s childhood is more interesting. His mother either died or left him with his idiot Uncle, who Kirk despises and proceeds to aggravate by driving his antique car into the future site of a Starfleet Shipyard with “Magic Carpet Ride” by Steppenwolf playing on the radio all along(oh sure, it wasn’t in the trailer, but POST-PRODUCTION, people!). When the Cop (who is wearing a robosuit to enhance the abilities of himself) catches him and brings him back to his Uncle, he gets into big trouble. It is never stated or shown that Kirk was on Tarsus, but it is never directly denied either (although I’m gonna guess he doesn’t, but everyone can fanon up a explanation, I’m sure.) One thing that changes though is that because of his different upbringing, he never feels obligated to join Starfleet, instead hanging around Iowa causing trouble until one day he enters a bar being frequented by new Academy recruits visiting the shipyard. He gets into a barfight after hitting on Uhura and is then accosted by the famed Captain Christopher Pike of the being-built USS Enterprise. Pike talks Kirk into joining Starfleet.
Kirk’s time at the academy is unorthodox. While the Axanar mission, Finnegan, John Gill, Ben Finney and Gary Mitchell aren’t seen or mentioned, they aren’t directly denied either. However, Kirk does cause trouble in the academy: He hires a Orion Hooker, he cheats at the Kobayashi Maru and is only saved from expulsion when someone points out that he has shown great original thinking. But still, when first assignments are handed out, he’s left on the ground, primarily because there are still concerns about his conduct with the Kobayashi Maru.
His friend Dr. Leonard McCoy (AKA “Bones”) is able to sneak Jim up to the Enterprise, under Captain Pike and his first officer, Spock. The Enterprise is the most advanced ship in the fleet and this will be it’s first real mission (while this would seem on the surface to eliminate the Talos incident, you could maybe retcon it into having taken place during a shakedown cruise or testing run gone awry). They get a message in from Vulcan about “lightning storms”, causing Kirk to panic about a Romulan attack. He’s right, and when they arrive above Romulus the Enterprise finds a good chunk of the fleet blown to bits and the Romulan ship drilling into the planet itself (in the future of this new timeline, Picard refers to Wolf 359 as the SECOND worst loss of Starfleet life in history. Also, with much of the fleet blasted up in this new timeline, future sequels will have a explanation as to why the Enterprise is always the only ship in the sector/quadrant/system/whatever). Pike gets a message from Nero asking for a meeting, and since there are transporter problems he goes there using a shuttle, out of which he has Kirk, Sulu and Olsen jump out of to try and disable the drilling.
Kirk and Sulu are able to badly damage the drill (Olsen begins the fine Redshirt tradition), but they are too late and the anomaly black-hole is sent into the planet. Spock beams down to help evacuate the planet, as Kirk and Sulu are then beamed back up (thanks to Chekov’s quick-fix of the Transporter), while Spock continues to save his family down on Vulcan. Jim essentially takes over the ship and attempts to use several methods to try and destroy the black hole, but ultimately fails until Old Spock’s Timeship arrives and closes it just in time. Spock beams back up while most of Vulcan continues to evacuate because of aftershocks from the attack. The Romulans leave (possibly though a time bubble) to regroup. It appears to only be a hollow victory, as the Romulans could still easily try again. Worried about the Romulans coming back, the Enterprise runs like hell. Meanwhile, all the turmoil boils over inside of Spock (Vulcan? Human? Neither? Both?) and he breaks down and throws Jimbo onto a ice planet. This may be because Jim is under the impression he saved Vulcan when in reality it was mainly Deus Ex Spock’s Time Machina.
Meanwhile, on the Romulan ship of DOOOOOOOOM, Nero decides not to kill Pike, because why do that when he can torment Pike with information FROM THE FUTURE! Yes, you will be assassinated in Dallas… err.. wait… I mean, you will be confined into a black box for your entire life and will only be able to answer “yes” and “no” to every question. MWAHAHAHAHAHA! Pike uses some badass words pointing out all the flaws in Nero’s plan, because that’s what he does.
On the Ice Planet, Jim finds himself wandering aimlessly, no doubt cursing about the stupid Vulcan and the stupid emotions he shouldn’t even have. Eventually, he will begin singing “Mr. Tambourine Man”, causing a monster shockingly like the one in Cloverfield to become enraged. Thankfully, old Spock shows up to save his ass. Because that’s how old Spock rolls. A little bit of exhibition follows in which Old Spock proves that he is, indeed, Spock (this may or may not involve a rousing single of “The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins”). Old Spock drops some zen and backstory, and then they go and see the last dude to get stranded on this Ice Planet: Montgomery Scott.
Scotty was transferred (by which we mean “dropped”) on the Ice Planet because he dematerialized Porthos VI. Not the Planet, the Beagle belonging to Admiral Archer. Old Spock totally breaks the Temporal Directive, makes everyone smile, tells Kirk to piss Young Spock off and get command of the Enterprise and then sends them on their way with a “Live Long and Prosper”. The crowd cheers.
Kirk then goes to the bridge, and proceeds to really piss off Young Spock. Then, using the Starfleet regulation, he is able to become Captain. Kirk then announces that Scotty is now Chief Engineer, and tells everyone that from now on, he is the biggest badass in the Galaxy. He then hears that the Romulans are doing repairs in a white nebula, probably getting ready to blow up Vulcan again.But now that James T. Kirk is in command, no force in the universe can stop the USS Enterprise. Nothing! NOTHING!
We get a gratuitous “prepare for battle” sequence like that in “The Wrath of Khan” and “Nemesis” (come to think of it, that might have been the only good thing in Nemesis’ final battle). The sequence is awesome, and when the DVD comes out Youtube is flooded with remixes of the scene put to such songs as “Eye of the Tiger”, “Flying High Now”, “You’re the Best (Around)”, “Lose Yourself”, “The Touch” and, of course, “The Rocky IV Training Montage in Siberia”.
So, the Enterprise goes one-on-one, mano-a-mano with the Romulan Ship. Assisting in the battle, again, is Old Spock’s ship. Kirk beams over to the Romulan ship, frees Captain Pike (who then beams over back to the Enterprise, which he still is technically in command of), and then fights Nero hand to hand. Nero makes the foolish mistake of cutting Kirk’s shirt, making him very angry and unbeatable in hand-to-hand combat. Kirk then proceeds to make Nero launch the black hole things INTO THE SHIP ITSELF. He then beams out as the Romulan Ship is literally absorbed into itself. Nero, saddened, begins to fiddle, then notices that Old Spock’s ship is still out there. Surmising who it really is, he begins to gun for that. Kirk (Pike is in Sick Bay) orders the Enterprise to risk getting caught in the Romulan Ship’s event horizon to protect the ship. Needless to say, they save it (because Spock dying again doing anything less than a heroic sacrifice that saves the entire universe would be cop-out). The Enterprise and the Time-Ship race away just in time (as always). Old Spock then sends a message to the Enterprise, although only Kirk and Scotty know who it is since Spock’s voice is so different in his old age. The message: “Jim, it has been an honor serving with you one last time. Live Long and Prosper. Thank You.”, he’ll then time-ship out of there.
In the aftermath (with the Enterprise being repaired in space dock), Pike tells Kirk he has exceeded even his Father, and that he is proud that the Enterprise will next be commanded by such a great leader. Pike himself says he intends to move on, he was in line for a promotion anyway. Kirk puts on the Golden Tunic of Awesome to the cheers of the crowd and walks onto what is now HIS bridge. Spock, fully realizing that he had let his emotions get the best of him, thanks Kirk for what he has done, but asks him how he knew about the regulation to get him removed from command. Kirk says something along the lines that it was something he learned from a “new friend”. He then tells everyone to buckle up, the Enterprise is a ship for exploration, and there is a ton out there to explore.
He then says “Set course for… (pick one: Cestus III /Organia/Eminiar VII/Sherman’s Planet/Ceti Alpha V/Altair IV/L-374/Halkan/”Second Star to the Right”)”.
We then get Pine doing the famous “Space, the Final Frontier” narration. Only one difference: When he’s done, Spock tells him that those are fine, evocative words. Kirk then says the final lines of the first TOS Kirk episode (”Where No Man Has Gone Before”): ” I believe there’s some hope for you after all, Mr. Spock. ”
Warp!
Fade to credits and the musical stylings of Michael Giacchino.
To invoke the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and Schrodinger’s equation, a quantum system’s wavefunction will only collapse into a given Eigenstate if an observer makes an observation and thus forces it to. Thus the original, prime timeline will become the real one again if after every viewing of the new movie someone watches an original episode of TOS.
I like that better than the multiverse theory, which is increasingly out of vogue due to its inherent untestability and the perennial problem with M-theory of dealing with 26 dimensions instead of 10, which is just hard to swallow.
I have spent 10 years of my life on this analysis.
Hmmm…I might be the only fan who figured this out instantly. The only thing that he confirmed for me is that the “prime” timeline does indeed continue. And the beauty of that is that you can have two “separate” franchises. One following the TNG crew(so a TNG movie is NOT out of the question) and one following the new Kirk and co. Yay for quantum mechanics. Boo for time travel headaches. =P
20. McCoy’s Gall Bladder said “Quantum Physics doesnt jibe with Einstein Physics anyway. If everything that could happen does, and already did, then what’s the point of doing anything at all?”
Because you and I can’t travel to alternate realities. We’re stuck with this one, so we must do the best we can while we’re here.
My take on why Spock goes back (even though the Prime Timeline remains completely intact):
1. He doesn’t KNOW that it’s an alternate timeline.
and/or
2. He could have knowledge that Nero plans to destroy Vulcan (better yet, Spock is somehow the catalist to this event) and Spock feels obligated to follow Nero back in time to try to save as many lives as possible and he knows Kirk is the only individual who can effectively lead the Enterprise to save the planet/save as many lives as possible.
Again, over-active imagination. ;)
If you want to talk about time travel, this is a very reasonable way to approach it. No further justification is needed. Roberto Orci does try to dress the idea up by bringing quantum mechanics into it, and the results, unfortunately, are pure hippie physics. He relies heavily on dropping the names of ideas he doesn’t understand, and hopes that if he does it often and emphatically enough, and waves his hands a lot, he’ll intimidate his audience. Heavy, man.
Yes, quantum mechanics is a very successful theory. (It goes back to the 1920s, by the way, so it’s hardly the “latest” word on the subject.) Yes, Hugh Everett did have a Many Worlds *interpretation* of quantum mechanics, formulated in the 1950s, which has had varying degrees of popularity since, but isn’t the mainstream view that Orci implies. But most physicists are uncomfortable with it, if they’ve thought about it at all, because it posits that whole universes come into existence when a wave function “collapses,” which seems pretty extravagant, particularly since we can’t even verify whether these universes exist. Most physicists, I think, doubt the possibility of time travel in any interesting sense, precisely because you get into problems with causality, apart from the fact that it’s very hard to demonstrate that it’s physically possible. (Though there’s more to that story than there’s room for here.)
So putting together Many Worlds plus time travel is fringe stuff. Doesn’t mean that it isn’t interesting to speculate about, or that you couldn’t find some physicist somewhere who’s thought about it — Kip Thorne, for example, is very well-respected for his work on general relativity, and he’s wondered about such things. But it’s not something that most physicists take seriously, let alone the “latest” and “best” theory of anything. Physicists prefer ideas you could at least hope to test, or did before string theory came along.
Whatever the physical plausibility of time travel, fiction writers have thought about it a lot, and splitting time lines is probably the most common approach. (For a more sophisticated alternative, using something closer to pure quantum mechanics, see the physicist Gregory Benford’s Time-Scape.) Talking about it as if it were a new idea, and needs to be justified, makes one sound a little naive about science fiction. While I like Roberto Orci’s enthusiasm, I wish, for his sake, that he’d stick to more solid ground.
#442 – ““If the result of this movie is that Trek’s continuity is lost, I’m not really sure what the difference is.”
The difference is that continuity will never be lost because its already there.”
As it would be without this movie, too. But if, moving forward, the original timeline is no longer supported except by fans, what would be the difference between this movie and the status quo without it. Oh, right. The licensees were still busily supporting the original timeline. Will they still do so?
(Note: that does assume that what results from ST09 is sufficiently different as to be non-congruent to the rest of Trek, and I’ll freely admit that we don’t yet know that.)
“You’ve already watched it. Its already happened. Did the existance of Enterprise kill TOS continuity? No, we just shrugged it off as unexplained.”
I didn’t. I saw no contradiction between the two.
“This movie is a saving grace to a dying franchise and I don’t understand why people can’t see that.”
First one has to accept the premise that the franchise was dying. I don’t.
Second, one has to accept the premise that a continuity-buster/alternate universe/reboot is a saving grace to anything. I don’t.
“Why anyone would rather have something that they are passionate about cease to exist rather than see it grow is beyond me.”
Growth is what I want, not rewriting what has already been established. The latter isn’t growth in my book. It’s reinventing a wheel that didn’t need to be reinvented.
442:
“The difference is that continuity will never be lost because its already there. You’ve already watched it. Its already happened. ”
Lame excuse IMO. Trying too hard to justify changes and uplift their version of events, for no valuable reason.
“Did the existance of Enterprise kill TOS continuity? No, we just shrugged it off as unexplained.”
I shrugged off the whole series.
“This movie is a saving grace to a dying franchise and I don’t understand why people can’t see that. Why anyone would rather have something that they are passionate about cease to exist rather than see it grow is beyond me.”
That is such a myth. Star Trek will never die. But if you want to grow it, continue a timeline forward from TNG. Going back to rework TOS is not growth.
“If the movie Enterprise suddenly had four nacelles, would that change TOS’ great episodes? NO.”
Correct! However, I would be even less-likey to ever see this film and would certainly do to it what I’ve done regarding Enterprise—write it off.
454
BRILLIANT..AND FUNNY! ..what’s scary is….I can see this…especially the youtube montages ..<>
To: 224. Randall…
Very well said.
Reality……………what a concept!!
459
“Hippie physics” …that would be an awesome band name :D
“First one has to accept the premise that the franchise was dying. I don’t.
Second, one has to accept the premise that a continuity-buster/alternate universe/reboot is a saving grace to anything. I don’t.”
River. Egypt. You know…
#424: “This movie (I hope) will be regarded by the majority much like those Doctor Who movies with Peter Cushing”
By a very, very small and obsessive minority at most.
#461 – “That is such a myth. Star Trek will never die. But if you want to grow it, continue a timeline forward from TNG. Going back to rework TOS is not growth.”
Correct. Or even just introduce new TOS-era situations, e.g. ST: Vanguard, which is one of the best examples of growth in Trek in the past 10 years.
#466 – Prove me wrong. I have yet to see any serious evidence that either of the aforementioned premises was true.
258. Kevin said “1. This is far from conforming to science. The real theory deals with particles. It does not exist on a macroscopic level.”
Wrong. You are the Weakest Link. You must leave now. Bye, bye!
#461 – “That is such a myth. Star Trek will never die. But if you want to grow it, continue a timeline forward from TNG. Going back to rework TOS is not growth.”
“Correct. Or even just introduce new TOS-era situations, e.g. ST: Vanguard, which is one of the best examples of growth in Trek in the past 10 years.”
Any franchise can die, Star Trek is not immune. And heralding new TOS era situations is hypocrytical based on the comment you’re agreeing with. What’s the point of new TOS era adventures? Wouldn’t that dilute the greatness of TOS Enterprise crew?
#466 – “Prove me wrong. I have yet to see any serious evidence that either of the aforementioned premises was true.”
Cancelled series, last movie bombed. Yeah, I don’t know why I would think that. If it weren’t for this very movie all we would have now is books. Not to mention we wouldn’t even have that many books if the interest in Star Trek hadn’t been reignited as far as general audiences are concerned.
In any case, I won’t change your mind and you won’t change mine so whatever.
This is just bull crap. They just needed an excuse to change star trek to fit there own image, and say the hell with canon, and get all the cash they can, out of the kiddies, and teens. Can we say star trek 90210. I for one am not going to see this lame movie. How much you want to bet that this movie bombs like cloverfield.
#461:
“…But if you want to grow it, continue a timeline forward from TNG. Going back to rework TOS is not growth.”
I beg to differ. The basis of this is a misunderstanding of what MADE Star Trek mythic and powerful in the first place. Going back to the roots, to the basis of it, and those characters that were a part of it, is the only way to breathe new life into this thing.
Your premise is off the mark—jumps were taken off of TNG again and again—not just directly, but in terms of style–DS9, Voyager, then the TNG films, and Enterprise, which followed in the formula of TNG. And what happened? ST got progressively weaker and staler.
TNG compromised the force of what made Star Trek anything strong and iconic and mythic in the first place. That doesn’t mean TNG was all bad–it certainly wasn’t. But it can’t sustain the identity of a cultural icon, following the TNG route. It doesn’t work. You need to bring back the mystery and excitement, and bring us back to larger than life characters–which TNG did not have.
This is EXACTLY what I’ve been saying in multiple threads. Nero’s actions don’t so much alter the timeline as they split off another entire universe, a la Mirror Mirror. That means anything the new creative team does in the future is NOT bound by the constraints of what we have seen already in TOS/TNG. The new Orci-verse can move forward doing whatever it wants.
It’s sort of like those “choose your own adventure” books. The fact that the new guys are going down one path does not mean that the other path (TOS/TNG) doesn’t happen exactly as we’ve seen it. It just means you’ve shifted your viewing from Universe-Prime to the Orci-verse.
Unfortunately, this means that Kirk still dies in Universe-Prime. But the new Pine-Kirk in the Orci-verse doesn’t have to meet the same fate in 40 years. I suppose that opens the door for Shatner to reappear in an Orci-verse flash-forward. :-)
Ha Ha!!! Not to sound vain or anything, but Bob Orci just confirmed what I’ve been saying about this film’s approach to time travel since the movie was announced!
As Data’s better looking cousin Kryten would say; ‘Ah. Smug mode. Well, I can’t hang around here saving your necks all day. I think I’ll go make a start on that ironing!’
;)
448. Nick Cook – December 12, 2008
#435
“If the result of this movie is that Trek’s continuity is lost, I’m not really sure what the difference is.”
IMO there is none. ‘Our’ Trek is presumably relegated to the bargain bin of history. :(
– Taking this comment seriously for the sake of discussion, if KO hadn’t taken the temporal tack with Star Trek, eventually canon would simply be full or complete. It’s a finite universe and there are only so many stardates and character-based tales to tell. I’m sure that, even as it is now, it’s impossible to line up every TOS episode, comic, book and TNG-based historical reference and make it fit.
The thing that impresses me most, and that I’d suspected myself on these boards, is that Bob is addressing the nature vs. nurture issue and looking in to Kirk’s soul. That’s the most interesting thing about the new timeline: the opportunity to learn more about our characters by contrasting them with new characters, situations and challenges.
And it’s not just Kirk. For example, as Kirk is nurtured differently and grows into a different version of himself, he draws out different qualities in those around him. The only apparent example of this so far is Uhura. As far as we know, raised by both parents and following dad in to Starfleet, Kirk Prime needed alien influence to kiss Uhura. But this Kirk hits on her at a bar, gets caught under her bed and breaks the sexual tension between them before they even know each other. Add months and years to that relationship… and where Uhura Prime may have simply respected her Captain and his outsized personality, this Uhura knows her Captain, can anticipate his leadership and ultimately form a better team.
Anyway, my main point is, for all of the purists and as they’re called in Constitutional Law, “Strict Constructionists” like Nick Cook above, who think their Trek is being trashed, what the hell would you do with yourselves and your canon when the story is complete?
Would you actually propose ending TOS-based storytelling? Hell no! No more than you would sell your copy of Monopoly after finishing the first full game you play. Like Monopoly, you’d go back to the beginning and roll the dice again, to see how the players fare when fortune falls a different way.
This conversation is making my head hurt… uh. folks it is just a movie… say it with me, it is just a movie, it is just a….
Really what Orci is doing is using existing science theory (Quantum Mechanics) to explain a Star Trek idea most of us are already familiar with – the Mirror Universe.
In essence the destruction of the Kelvin created a divergent parallel universe (2.0) that shows a different life for Kirk. The events of the movie, Nero, Old Spock all take place in this 2.0 universe.
By movies end I am betting there will now be three main parallel universe – Prime, 2.0 and MU. That is really what Orci is saying without directly saying it.
I love quantum theory. I’m not a scientist or a mathematician, but I’ve been fascinated by the concepts for years.
And to the people who say ‘why bother getting out of bed’ my answer is that somewhere a version of you does, but you still won’t. Quantum theory basically says: go out and get on with your life or someone else will!
It also brings me comfort to think that somewhere, my loved ones whom I’ve lost, are still alive.
And maybe, if we get very deep and into spiritual territory, we’re immortal because perhaps all the different incarnations of us in all the universes share the same soul!
Randall in 399-
I find your assessment of TNG to be interesting, specifically, “TNG had a compromised, touchy-feely vision of Star Trek’s original vision–” The first season if TNG is about the most pure Roddenberry form of Trek we have, with the possible exception of “The Cage.” The network in ‘65 forced many changes on Roddenberry, and a lot of the character development in production we know was actually due to Gene L. Coon. TMP was really more Robert Wise’s vision than GR’s as I understand, and GR had issues with all the films leading up to TNG. He was very active in its production and wrote the show bible setting it up as a pretty preachy show using more intellectual solutions to problems than photorps. Indeed, when poor health caused GR to back off, TNG became more action oriented and had a lot MORE in common with what we knew of Classic Trek. May the Great Bird bless GR, but I’m not sure a lot of fans really understand what they are asking for when they want HIS Trek.
The way this movie is going is not how I wanted it to be. If however it delivers on a storytelling level, if I can buy these new actors are the characters, if on a visceral level my little SF warped brain reads this as “Star Trek” then huzzah. I wanted the last episode of DS9 to be different too, but it still satisifed me intensely.
Mr. Orci- Quantum Mechanics involves a lot of “observer effect.” If my DVDs do disappear because you presented the possibility I am going to be cross… ;)
So, wait…(sorry if this has been brought up before…) boborci, does this mean that “Enterprise” is still canon in BOTH Prime and New universes?! And is this made clear in the movie? Just curious…!
Also, thanks for taking the time to talk to us like this – we squabble like small children at times, but we appreciate it really =D
#470 – Any franchise can die, Star Trek is not immune.”
Of course. that doesn’t change the fact that there isn’t any compelling evidence that it’s happened, or is happening, to Trek.
“And heralding new TOS era situations is hypocrytical based on the comment you’re agreeing with. What’s the point of new TOS era adventures? Wouldn’t that dilute the greatness of TOS Enterprise crew?”
I think you lost me on the logic of that one. Who says that the Enterprise crew is the only crew of note in that era? I never did. I don’t see anything hypocritical about expanding Trek’s world in the TOS era, any more than doing so in the TNG era was a problem.
“#466 – “Prove me wrong. I have yet to see any serious evidence that either of the aforementioned premises was true.”
Cancelled series, last movie bombed. Yeah, I don’t know why I would think that.”
Star Trek has never been limited to TV series or films, so those things don’t seem to have been any sort of death-knell. Ironically, within a year of the cancellation of “Enterprise”, Star Trek was already starting to see a resurgence, led by interest in TOS, and that was still well in advance of the announcement of the Abrams film. Indeed, we got very close to green-light of a different movie project entirely, before regime-change at Paramount killed it.
“If it weren’t for this very movie all we would have now is books.”
Implying a premise that the books are of lesser value, yet another premise that I do not accept.
“Not to mention we wouldn’t even have that many books if the interest in Star Trek hadn’t been reignited as far as general audiences are concerned.”
The books seem to have been doing pretty well, independent of the TV series. And since that reignition of interest in Trek was getting underway prior to the Abrams film.
“In any case, I won’t change your mind and you won’t change mine so whatever.”
Likely so. We’re working from a really different set of axioms, so even if our respective logical arguments are flawless, we’re gonna get to different conclusions. :)
1) Thanks to Messrs. Pascal and Orci for their outreach to the restless natives. They may not suffer fools gladly, but they never let us see that.
2) Several months ago, I posted a speculation about a “multiverse” type of solution to the “non-canonical” aspects of the new movie. I will reiterate what I said then – Philip Pullman did the ultimate multiverse (say that three times fast) story with the “His Dark Materials” trilogy. In those books, the multiverse is not a “deus ex machina” but is instead essential to the dramatic tension at the heart of the plot. There are no “prime” and “non-prime” or “sub-prime” characters. Here, as I understand Mr. Orci’s explanation, the multiverse seems to serve as the same kind of plot device that the transporter did in the worst TOS episodes – “Scotty – save my ass!’
3) That being said, as so many have pointed out, the immediate future of ST in THIS universe IS (nearly) so there is no use getting worked up over it anymore.
4) What is not clear (to me, at least) is if enough of the “good stuff” from TOS has been salvaged. It is my sincere hope that it has, and that it will be carried forward, and that future movies focus on the signature character and plot elements that made TOS better than anything that was out there at the time. You CAN have sh*tty plywood sets AND a hit series at the same time. I don’t believe success springs from biff, bang boom, special affects or formula – success proceeds from originality, from an emotion that registers as real when seen by your heart, from characters you care about, stories that draw you in and ideas that inspire you.
I find this to be cheap excuse to throw away 40 (almost 50) years of back ground and replace it a more “Star Wars-y” flash over substance style. Berman tried this with Enterprise and now Orci and friends are trying the same stunt. Roddenberry and his team created a rich backstory for his characters and now the Bad Robot folks feel it’s ok to change it because J.J. just “didn’t get Trek”.
I’m sure that this will be a block buster and that there will be more movies with under the Trek title but I’m afraid they’ll just be Paramount’s cash cow and not Roddenberry’s Star Trek.
I don’t think that this “alternate timeline” version of TOS characters – if not necesarily actual events – can be considered a reboot along the lines of the current Batman franchise or RDM’s Battlestar Galactica. In both of those cases the previous series (films/TV episodes) did not have any direct effect upon the new incarnation of the story, although many of the same characters appeared in both versions in order to provide a point of entry/familiarity at the beginning of the new version. The fundamental mythologies are different while being based more or less on the same original concept. With the new Star Trek, the established mythology is still in place, but as a result of time travel from a recognizably “canonic” point in the future the past winds up heading in a different direction. A direction that still results in some inevitable encounters taking place, probably engineered by Spock Prime.
This Star Trek movie is also not really a TOS prequel, because a true prequel would have simply taken all of the events that were hinted at or suggested in episodes and movies and fleshed them out in order to tell a fundamentally uninteresting story. While it might be fun to imagine Kirk in the Academy, Kirk on the Farragut, Kirk at Tarsus etc. such a movie would not have really told a Star Trek story. A Trek fan might have enjoyed such a movie (although I am sure nitpickers would have had a field day with such a concept!) but I doubt it would have created a reinvigoration of the franchise – the catchphrase that the writers, director and actors seem to champion. In order for something fresh to happen to Star Trek that is not just another movie in the same vein as all of the previous movies and TV series (all of which I have enjoyed, some more than others) this kind of story is probably necessary.
So we can either look forward to seeing this movie and appreciate how our beloved characters react in these new and unfamiliar circumstances, or ignore the movie and just continue to watch the old episodes and movies – none of which will apparently be invalidated by the quantum mechanical interpretation of spacetime that allows “new” and “old” Star Trek (fans) to exist side by side. It may seem like this is a fundamental reimagination of the Star Trek universe, but I do believe that the old Star Trek universe is essential for this new vision to come into being and for it to be appreciated. It would be nice to know the complete story of this movie in order to judge how closely the canon of the new timeline will match the canon of the “known” timeline (and why those differences exist), but that’s why I will be lined up on opening night. I have a feeling that this is going to be a great movie; one that will excite a new audience while “stimulating” the established fanbase.
#484—-Very well said, Peter. I think you and I are on the same page.
476= heretic
; )
339 RD
“Sadly, the Star Trek films that did not have a supervillain, but rather some kind of weird alien entity, or a mere mortal trying to grab for power all failed miserably.”
Sorry but this simply isn’t true.
Top three US grossing ST films:
TVH, FC, TMP (that’s two weird alien entities and one hybrid alien entity/ super villain )
Top three worldwide gross:
FC, TMP, TVH (that’s two weird alien entities and one hybrid alien entity/ super villain )
That is unadjusted for inflation. Adjust for inflation and TMP is by far the most successful of the Trek films.
———————————————
On topic:
The idea that this movie is based on the “most successful theory of science” is misleading. QM is well tested and proven. However the multiworld interpretation of QM (that Bob Orci alludes to) is one of many interpretations of QM and is not so “successful.” It is not even the most widely accepted interpretation and many critics reject it because they feel that it is unfalsifiable (cannot be tested.) Also not all interpretations require parallel universes.
Every reveal about this movie dampens my enthusiasm. Initially, when the teaser came out last January, I thought, Wow! Finally, we are going to get a movie of unparalleled believability and beauty (like TMP was in 79) but with a director that can tell an exciting story (and about Kirk and Spock, to boot!)
Then came the reveals. The altered timeline. The iBridge. The Uglyprise. The trailer where it is clearly not the backstories of the characters I grew with. The synapses and reviews of The 20 Minutes. And now it’s not even an altered timeline but a different universe where the Kirk and Spock I knew may never exist?
Ugh! No thanks
#475 – “- Taking this comment seriously for the sake of discussion, if KO hadn’t taken the temporal tack with Star Trek, eventually canon would simply be full or complete. It’s a finite universe and there are only so many stardates and character-based tales to tell. I’m sure that, even as it is now, it’s impossible to line up every TOS episode, comic, book and TNG-based historical reference and make it fit.”
We may be getting close to flling the original 5-year mission, yup. But the time between the various TOS-based features? Not yet even close. :)
And when one adds in hundreds of ships, planets, etc., over more than 2 centuries (fictionally), we have a long, long way to go before it’s “full”.
“The thing that impresses me most, and that I’d suspected myself on these boards, is that Bob is addressing the nature vs. nurture issue and looking in to Kirk’s soul. That’s the most interesting thing about the new timeline: the opportunity to learn more about our characters by contrasting them with new characters, situations and challenges.
{snip}”
Then why not introduce real, honest-to-the-gods new characters and explore how different life paths might go? Even have those new characters interact with the folks from TOS and see what the comparisons and contrasts bring to light?
“Anyway, my main point is, for all of the purists and as they’re called in Constitutional Law, “Strict Constructionists” like Nick Cook above, who think their Trek is being trashed, what the hell would you do with yourselves and your canon when the story is complete?”
Since my idea of the “canon” is the Trekverse as a whole, and not having originally been named Akharin ;) , I don’t anticipate living long enough to ever see the story truly complete. I’ve written close to a million words of Trekverse-based storytelling, myself, and I feel like I’ve only scratched the surface of the characters and situations about which I’m writing.
“Would you actually propose ending TOS-based storytelling?”
I’m not concerned about it, really. I just don’t see it as an issue. Check back with me in another generation or two, if we’re all still here to discuss it. :)
“No more than you would sell your copy of Monopoly after finishing the first full game you play. Like Monopoly, you’d go back to the beginning and roll the dice again, to see how the players fare when fortune falls a different way.”
Or bring different players to the board and let them have at it. :)
No one is going to read this comment, but oh well I want to put this out there. If you scrolled own all the way to here, awesome.
They’re using quantum theory as a crutch to keep loyal trek fans into this movie. Unless it is somehow mentioned in the movie, it’s bullshit.
BTW: Star Trek will never die as a Franchise. It may be stagnant, but it won’t die. Even if the movie were to bomb, eventually (maybe not this decade, maybe not next decade, but EVENTUALLY) they’d try again. It’s just the nature of Hollywood: If it has made money before, it can make it again, so long as it is not racist (why do you think we haven’t seen any Charlie Chan or Mr. Moto movies in a while?)
In other words, this isn’t real Star Trek. What a load of horsesh*t. This isn’t Star Trek, it’s a grab at Star Trek dollars using a pretty crew and a dumbed-down story-line. It is what it appears to be, and what fans were afraid it would be. And don’t let anybody tell ya any different. Trust what your eyes see, not the “sell” from the PR department.
Unless you really need to groove on the new FX and an effeminate-looking Kirk with pouty lips, why bother? I don’t need to see Girlkirk in the captain’ seat. It would just make me squirmy, and clearly the Heroes guy has missed Spock by a galactic quadrant, which is probably why Nimoy jumped frantically to his side to try to do a last-minute “save” before he could screw it up completely. Jes*s Chr*st, this looks just awful.
Michael Isbell
“Mr Sheldrake”
Former NYC Critic for Ain’t It Cool News
One notion for food for thought.
We have seen adventures of the crew(s) of the Enterprise in its many versions (not to mention DS9 and Voyager) that have involved time travel.
If we multiply that times hundreds of Federation starships, not to mention other planets’ ships, there is no such thing as a pure timeline. It is impossible.
Maybe this is an inherent danger of breaking the light barrier…
The universe is soooooooo f**ked!!! (grin)
491
….clearly….
mmmmmm…….ok.
The interesting thing with the concepts we’re discussing is that in The City on the Edge of Forever, it’s possible that there’s still a Federation and an Enterprise. Given the Guardian is a gateway to many universes, it could simply be that McCoy running into the gateway knocks Kirk and co into a separate universe. In Amok Time, the Enterprise disappears with all hands in the original timeline. In the new timeline, the Enterprise appears.
If you think about it, the Scotty who appears in Relics is the one from the supposed TOS timeline, but the Scotty and Kirk who appear in the time-travel-related events of Generations are neither the characters from TUC or Relics, hence Scotty in Relics didn’t know about Kikr’s ‘death’!
On the other hand, maybe the TNG universe seen in Generations only exists after Kirk is thrown into the Nexus!
Heh heh! We’re going to have so much fun now the quantum concept is 100 per cent official canon!! Canon is dead, long live the venn diagram-ey ‘multicanon’ thingy!
I think the reason they took this route with Nero altering the timeline is so they would not piss off the fanbase and not erase 40 years of continuity. With BSG it was different. BSG did not have a long shelf life like ST. Nothing from BSG is memorable. Star Trek built a solid continuity. You can’s just piss it away. If TOS was all we had to work with then cool reboot but you have a lot of TNG disciples out there and they last thing you want to tell them is that Picard no longer exists. I think it’s smart what they did. If you think about it, it makes sense. I always knew that eventually they would bring back the old characters with new bodies. There is a lot holes in that old continuity. You can play with it for years.
…because after all Data is a real scientist…
#491:”I don’t need to see Girlkirk in the captain’ seat. ”
I dunno, Pine doesn’t look nearly as feminine as Shatner did in his youth.
“…clearly the Heroes guy has missed Spock by a galactic quadrant, which is probably why Nimoy jumped frantically to his side to try to do a last-minute “save” before he could screw it up completely.”
Okay, so we’ve established that you don’t actually know anything about the history of the project.
“Former NYC Critic for Ain’t It Cool News”
Quite an impressive accomplishment
#448: “IMO there is none. ‘Our’ Trek is presumably relegated to the bargain bin of history. :(”
Yeah, but Nick – that happened in 2005. There was never any chance that the studio was going to greenlight a big TV or film project that represented a direct continuation of a franchise that had simply faded away.
So by changing the timeline, this new movie is potentially undoing all three seasons of TOS as we know them, and all the movies too.
Fans ain’t going to be happyyyy.
491. Michael Isbell – “Mr. Sheldrake” : ‘In other words, this isn’t real Star Trek. What a load of horsesh*t. This isn’t Star Trek, it’s a grab at Star Trek dollars using a pretty crew and a dumbed-down story-line.’
You’re only saying that because you know JJ Abrams won’t beat the crap out of you in a boxing ring the way Uwe Boll took out MiraJeff (probably the worst critic ever to (dis)grace AICN!)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=G8MO4QfTHwo
Laugh at the nerdy critics!!! Ha ha!
498. Peter Lemonjello: ‘So by changing the timeline, this new movie is potentially undoing all three seasons of TOS as we know them, and all the movies too.’
Dude, read what he’s saying! All those timelines still happened! But the new series of films are wide open for anything to happen!
@498…
nothing is undone, these stories coexist forever…
Wiki’s article on the many interpretations of QM, in case folks are interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_Quantum_Mechanics
I see a very interesting book collection coming up: what happened to the original universe from Naked Time where the Enterprise vanished into the new timeline? What about the universes from Cause and Effect?
Even more interestingly, when one universe’s Enterprise shifts into a different universe, does a different Enterprise arrive in the original timeline.
They could call the book Widowed Histories!
Just my 2 cents about the whole Quantum Physics.
Well if you’ll recall how Terminator 3 was. Judgment day was supposedly averted in T2, but come around in T3 John was like confused as to how it was possible for Judgment Day to still happen.
I think the overall argument was yes history was altered but not so much as to change history completely. John destroyed anything that would lead to the development of Skynet but all he did was merely postpone it as it was something that was going to eventually happen.
So in regards to Star Trek, yes minor details were changed within the time line but the major things in the timeline were not, such as Kirk being the Captain of Enterprise along with the rest of the crew.
So think of this analogy, imagine a stream deviating from its orginal path. Regardless if its changed course chances are its still running in the same direction it originally was.
I am scanning for a post by an actual physicist. Is there a physicist in the house??? A real physicist’s comments would be … fascinating. In the meantime, it’s really a mind-bender to contemplate the *number* of parallel universes that just exist. If a quantum event, like which neutron appears in which position, is probabilistic, might a new parallel universe sprout off with each subatomic event? The word “infinite” doesn’t seem to capture the awesome hugeness of what is being contemplated. My brain hurts!
@505…
don’t worry Neal… your brain will just collapse the quantum events that are relevant for your bubbleverse ;))
Think of this film as a slight detour of history and Nero as a roadblock and Old Spock as the traffic cop. Same thing happened in First Contact. History took a slight detour with the Borg as a roadblock and Picard and Crew as the traffic cop.
Also, nothing is saying that what has been established in canon as certain backstories are not going to occur. They are just going to occur in a slightly different manner (not to mention half of the dates of backstory are conjecture anyway).
503 _DOM
register that intellectual property, copyright and trademark now!!!
258: you have hit upon something…
what if the end of this movie somehow takes us right to the events of the LAST episode of TOS? Wouldn’t that be awesome? Follow me here…
this way, we have a telling of events prior to TOS, we have all of TOS to enjoy, and now the next movies can be made from the end of TOS up until TMP!
When Bob mentioned “quantum mechanics” a few weeks back, I kinda figured all would be well.
I was right.
NOW will everyone finally shut up and be happy??
I will!
(But I’ll still bitch about the barcode scanners;)
PS THANKS Bob and Anthony- this was needed.
509-Will
I like…I don’t think there is any way that will happen….but I like
Let me see if I’ve got this right……………
All these many years the fans of Star Trek and Star Wars have been sniping at each other for dominant position…..
Paramount has finally blinked by relaunching Star Trek as an alternate universe…..about as close as you’d ever like to get to “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away”……
Well, that’s it then…..resistance is futile, you will become one with THE FORCE!
I think all my fears (about this movie being a re-imagining) are fading away . . .
I think this is going to be AWESOME!
#497 – “Yeah, but Nick – that happened in 2005. There was never any chance that the studio was going to greenlight a big TV or film project that represented a direct continuation of a franchise that had simply faded away.”
I dunno, Dennis… Either Eric Jendresen was lying to us in a couple of interviews I read, or they came very close to doing just that. Got any reason to believe he was lying?
#376: To whom was your post meant to be addressed? My post (#359) had nothing to do with fandom, or attacks of any kind on anyone (or on the franchise), or on whether anyone here does or does not find Star Trek joyful, etc. (sometimes, I think a post gets deleted by moderators, and then the numbering scheme changes … maybe that is the case here) …
We had exchanged some posts above, so at first I thought you were responding to me directly, but if so I honestly can’t figure out how we got from A to … to some letter in the Russian alphabet, maybe that one that looks like a B but isn’t. I really don’t understand how your post relates to mine; my apologies if I’m just missing something.
Interesting concept. Though I believe it is just good ol’ fashioned destiny. Even when a few elements of the timeline are changed, the destiny of a person or group of people will not be altered; it will just happen in a slightly different variation. And I believe this is what is at the heart of the new “Star Trek:” some events change, but the destiny of the Enterprise crew remains the same.
God bless!
#335: It really will depend, in the end, on the script :)
this is FANTASY…. you don’t try to make something fantasy into something realistic… look at what’s happening to dragonball…
But this is good enough I guess….
damn….
Interesting insights. I’m not a big time travel fan, but from a storytelling perspective, it allows you to play a little with an existing universe. Literally, it is playing outside the time box.
I suppose this means that at the end of the film, perhaps we will see the Big E as it was meant to be seen, at least according to the fans.
@514…
“A project was greenlit by one regime, and by the time it’s delivered, there’s a coup d’etat,” Erik Jendresen said of the replacement of Paramount co-president David DeLine at the time, which was the end for his Romulan War Movie.
491
Agree. Trust own eyes.
Someone probably already said this in the 500+ comments above (I ain’t bothering to read ‘em!) but I am gratified that more current theories regarding time travel are being brought to Trek after so many decades of “we-have-to-go-back-to-the-past-to-repair-the-future” stories. It bugged me for years that the Trek series’ always had a “science consultant” when the “science” was usually simpler stuff than in most college physics classes and could’ve come from any layman’s article in a magazine.
454. LostonNCC1701
Good tale!
519. Phil Smith – December 12, 2008
“…perhaps we will see the Big E as it was meant to be seen, at least according to the fans.”
Ouch! I like it.
So, Kirk’s background doesn’t matter, but he has to be captain of the Enterprise.
It doesn’t matter where the Enterprise is constructed, it must be made and launched.
This has been done before, e.g
Edith Keeler must die,
Bell riots have to occur,
Cochrane must fly the Phoenix,
The Federation must form, etc.
Even though there were other factors interfering with those events, like the Borg attacking the Phoenix launch site, Xindi attacking Earth, crazy McCoy, those events have to happen.
522. Izbot
Ironically, Gregory Benford was the consultant to TNG and wrote the quantum mechanics and tachyon-orientated Timescape in the early 80s. A tough read, which is more down to Benford’s style of writing than the concept, but an interesting one.
@525…
I just overdosed myself with Cordrazine…
@526…
I loved Timescape when it was new, and reread it some years ago.
It aged well, and is still relevant…
Since then I try to send tachyons to my younger self…
My impression of the interview: Bob Orci’s message is basically that it’s a film made for today’s audience, some things fit with canon and some don’t. If it makes the fans feel better, they can consider it an alternate timeline. Otherwise, enjoy the film. That’s the message I’m getting from this interview. It seems to be that simple and the interview above just got into a complicated, and interesting, scientific discussion.
So, wait, is Captain Braxton going to show up at the end and shoot Nero?
We just need one of those patented Star Trek analogies to explain extremely complex things in a simple way.
Of course! Its so simple! Its like snapping a rubber band! It bends and jiggles but works its way back to its original shape!
525. Freerad: ‘those events have to happen.’
No they don’t! That’s what’s so cool about this! The consequences have to happen, but the causes can be different. Maybe Edith Keeler takes to smoking pot and can never be bothered to get into politics. The Bell Riots don’t have to happen, but the attitudes to the dispossessed still need to change. Maybe people come round to the right way of thinking a bit later on without riots. Maybe Edith Keeler’s many-times-Great Grandson becomes president and changes things for the poor instead!
Anything can happen now. Maybe it means life for the crew, mayber it means death. Who can tell?
I’d just like to point out that
Since before your Sun burned hot in space
and before your race was born
I have awaited
a question about whether this movie is canon or not.
IT IS BOTH. AND NEITHER.*
(* I answer as simply as your level of understanding makes possible.)
488. Alex Rosenzweig – December 12, 2008
I was actually strictly referring to Kirk’s first 5y mission with the crew we know. Of course there’s endless variations, along the lines of what the books have explored. But Paramount will not finance a $150M movie about another crew or the post TMP mission. For that jones, we have books like New Earth and Vanguard.
And in that regard, you’ve agreed. The story is all but completely told.
If the movie are ever to proceed to the second 5y mission, short of TWOK, it would and will have to be after the franchise has been restarted with primary colors, short skirts and fist fights. That’s where we are.
But adapting stories from TOS episodes for film lacks suspense and stakes if they take place in the same universe, because you know all major characters, including the E, will survive.
After this new film, presumably they can remake woefully crappy productions like THE DAY OF THE DOVE, which have near galactic significance, but small and shoddy production value. I doubt KO would rule out remaking THE SPACE SEED, but they’d just set themselves up for failure.
We haven’t even considered the impact of Nero destroying many dozens of Klingon ships in this new universe. It’s safe to bet that the next Star Trek film will be a Klingon story and that the destruction of their fleet will lead to an earlier introduction of the Bird of Prey and a new fleet of vessels that can kick the Federation’s ass.
Look, I hear you when you say the universe is not full. But the the first 5y mission timeline is all but filled and this is a brilliant way of retelling the first 5y mission with suspense and the possibility of failing.
528. thorsten
Yeah, me too! Don’t know if it’s worked, though!
I knew the moment I saw the article’s headline this would be a wild thread! My view is such….I personally would rather they did an origin story that is nearly completely within canon, where the Enterprise is largely the same as TOS version, inside and out. I also wouldn’t have bothered including anyone but Spock or Kirk, maybe McCoy. I don’t think the changes and “updates” to everything were really needed. But so be it. I don’t really have a problem with them doing an alternate timeline, but to me if it stays that way, whatever they do from then on is not in the same canon as the previous Star Trek. It’s just not.
534. Jeffries Tuber: ‘It’s safe to bet that the next Star Trek film will be a Klingon story and that the destruction of their fleet will lead to an earlier introduction of the Bird of Prey and a new fleet of vessels that can kick the Federation’s ass.’
Alternatively, the Klingons turn their fury on Romulus and make peace with the Federation!
Of course, in the Quantum Multiverse, we’re both right . . . and wrong! ;)
#514
There’s lying and then there’s wishful thinking. Jendresen said a lot of things, as did Rick Berman. The outcome? Nothing. Jendresen later admitted the project simply stalled due to lack of interest on the studio’s part. And who could blame them? A failed movie and a failed TV show don’t inspire great confidence in a franchise.
Oh and I’ve revisited the Kirk Problem we were addressing waaaaay up the thread there. I’ll admit, I think I overstated the case when it comes to Kirk’s background (though I stand by the fact that both Memory Alpha and the Star Trek Chronology call his past ‘muddled’).
However, I don’t buy the grad school theory, primarily because every movie and episode has established Starfleet as a 4 year institution (aside from The Omega Glory’s reference to Tracey’s ‘fifth year’, which was clearly before they’d established the 4 year guideline, though I know some assume Tracey repeated due to his ‘instabilities’). There’s no mention of any other education system in place for command cadets.
So I hold my original assumption true – Kirk is implied to have been both a teacher and a Lt before he even graduated the 4 year program. Not impossible, of course, but certainly an eyebrow raiser at best. That’s the kind of thing I refer to when I say elements of Kirk’s past don’t jibe for me. Frankly, the stack of books with legs and the guy that cheated on the Kobayashi Maru don’t really jibe for me either, but I suppose you could pass that off as a young man’s personality developing.
Re: “I’ll go see it. But I’d rather have had a story set in the classic canon TOS universe without time travel for the 53rd time!”
I totally agree.
There are plenty of gaps in the Star Trek “canon” in which to place this story. I can’t help but feel it’s a tad lazy on the part of the storytellers to not use the restraints as a challenge and craft a decent story within structure laid out.
539. Spike47
Too bad. I wonder if Bob feels the same way now?
475. Jeffries Tuber
“Anyway, my main point is, for all of the purists and as they’re called in Constitutional Law, “Strict Constructionists” like Nick Cook above, who think their Trek is being trashed, what the hell would you do with yourselves and your canon when the story is complete? ”
I’d rather you didn’t make the blanket assumption that my simple disappointment with a particular artistic choice makes me a “purist”. I’ve hardly been a member of the vocal minority opposed to this movie. Nor am I now such a person. I am, however, a fan of the 40 plus years of Star Trek and am understandbly sad to see it go into the ether. And let’s be honest, that is exactly what’s happening. I don’t think there’s any shame in my feelings about it.
I bear no ill will to the people making this movie, and I have no doubt they are working with the best of intentions, to make the best movie they possibly can. Their mandate is to entertain, nothing more, and I applaud them for it. Even if it ultimately turns out that this movie is not to my taste, which sadly I’m coming to the conclusion that may well be the case.
Oh well, c’est la vie I suppose.
Yarn, I think you are on the money in entry 410. And I agree that any attempt to “reconcile” the upcoming movie with TOS based on QM is shaky (though in my case I can go along for the ride if it’s fun).
My real question to you is this: How does Orci’s Many Worlds QM explanation inherently drag the STXI story down any worse than the notion of a (one, single) “parallel universe” drags down the story of “Mirror, Mirror”?
It seems to me that the Orci’s Many Worlds QM explanation only serves to back up the story, and does not form the crux of the movie. It’s there if you want it and care for it, otherwise forget it.
The first time I watched Generations, I hated it. Why? Because the concept of the Nexus seemed (and still seems) to me to be logically flawed — no matter how you try to explain it away with QM-style “reasoning”. Subsequently, I’ve found that it’s an enjoyable movie. I just have to let go of the idea that the Nexus is a coherent idea on the part of the writers. It’s just a plot device, nothing more. Forget it and enjoy the fun stuff.
Yarn, you bring up the idea of “family resemblance”. So, here’s another question: What have we seen in this movie that fails to deliver on the “family resemblance” front. To me, the Spocks and Kirk , as well as the shape of the Enterprise, evoke the right gestalt.
“No, because getting Nimoy into the movie was one of the first things we felt we needed, and having him sitting around a camp fire sharing his memories was never gonna cut it.”
Don’t ever let Spock near a camp fire again. Singing and marshmellon toasting might ensue. I’ll join Closet in a case of PTSD !
#514: “I dunno, Dennis… Either Eric Jendresen was lying to us in a couple of interviews I read, or they came very close to doing just that. Got any reason to believe he was lying?”
I have *no* reason to believe that *Paramount studio* actually came *anywhere* close to greenlighting that project.
It did, however, give the producers attached something to do with their development budget until their studio contracts ran out.
There was never a real chance of that film being made, so of course those associated with it blamed its non-production vaguely on a “studio regime change” that in fact had begun long before and hastened the end of “Enterprise” as well.
That was pretty obvious at the time. The thing that actually shocked me was not the predictable death of that project but that Paramount still had enough interest in “Star Trek” to approach people whom they really wanted to work with to do it.
Nick, Why the discomfort with the label ‘purist?’ Anyway, I didn’t mean to bother you. I’m really talking about the idea that canon can get filled up, then what?
Ultimately this is a creative solution and that’s [often] why writers get the big bucks.
You must have faith that the Universe will unfold as it should.
Now I get it. So Daniel Craig is from an alternate timeline while M is from the primary time line. Now it ll makes sense………………….
It’s obvious that Orci has put a lot of thought into explaining the canonicity of the story, and wants to reassure those who don’t want to accept any change whatsoever to the universe that yes, this is still their Star Trek.
I agree with most of what he says really. Quantum mechanics is a bit more complex than the popular version used to explain what’s happening here, and there’s several theories on the subject. The one I was taught during my undergrad years (yes, I’m a physicist) is that basically, you can have a system of several particles in a state of flux.
A “measurement” can be made of one of the particles, that fixes the properties of the others, meaning that several possibilities are not possible. There are plenty of branching off points that also occur during the measurement, and each time the system is measured, you cause a further set of branching off points, basically creating a further set of universes.
This is rather complex, but modern research also says a lot about time travel. There was a paper on the physics research archive (known as arxiv, paper url http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0506027), that might not make sense to a layman, but the conclusions state that:
“According to our model, if you travel into the past quantum mechanically, you would only see those alternatives consistent with the world you left behind you. In other words, while you are aware of the past, you cannot change it. No matter how unlikely the events are that could have led
to your present circumstances, once they have actually occurred, they cannot be changed. Your trip would set up resonances that are consistent with the future that has already unfolded.”
Basically, Nero’s plan is ultimately futile. He can try and kill Kirk, mess up the timeline all he wants, but all he will succeed in doing is slightly altering the events that occur, but still the basic canon will occur: the five year mission, TNG, DS9, Voyager etc will all still happen. Basically, modern science assures us the canon is pretty much still there, but with a few changes.
I agree with many posters aboutthe lack of “real” threat if this is all in an alternate timeline. Why bother if it doesn’t afect you. Spock never went to the mirror universe to correct or change anything. Why does this matter to him?
Also, there is a line in “The Managerie” where Commodore Mendez says Pike and Kirk are about the same age…
I’m okay with some of these small inconsistencies… like the ship being built on the ground…
I also see no problem with Kirk being the stack of books with legs.. – that description doesn’t necessarily mean he was a nerd… just committed to rising to the rank of Captain – Starfleet’s youngest!.
I disagree with those who say at the end of the time travel stories, nothing was changed… because our heroes were afected by the events of that adventure. Kirk was devastated at having to let Edith Keeler die. The probe in Voyage home did some damage to something as they didn’t return from 1986 before the probe arrived (that window at Starfleet HQ was still broken by the storm)
Wjhat Star Trek has exemplified in both “City” and “Yesterday’s Enterprise” is that when the past is changed, so id everything from the point of the change on…. Hitler took over… no federation — Tasha being alive due to the war with the Klingons, rather than the Ent D being a ship of exporation. So if Trek has always perceived time travel this way… how can they say “oh it’s just an alternate timeline”
I’m okay with some changes…. I just don’t want major incidents or events changed. Scotty looks like a buffoon in the trailer – I hope it’s just the clip and we’ll see him as our “Miracle worker” at some point.
As someone so rightly pointed out… there were many holes in the original series to fill in gaps or tell new stories… or even between the series and the movies… seems like folly to rewrite what we all already love, rather than build on it.
548. manitou
But that rather depends on how ‘important’ DS9, TNG and so on are. Does the running of the entire universe depend on small events or massive changes? Does Voyager ***have*** to get stuck in the Delta Quadrant. Does Sisko have to become the Emissary?
Surely the ultimate function of the universe itself is the biggie. Stuff like Kirk’s origins and whether any of TNG, Voyager and DS9 actually happen are pretty small-fry in the scheme of an entire universe!
By the way, I wonder whether the Q operate in this universe and whether they’re the same Q or parallel universe ones!
As I read day after day of this sometime nonsensical nit-picking on any number of points, I have to say that Bob Orci’s devotion to reading and sometimes responding to these posts, even as they number in the hundreds, have given me faith in what he was written for Trek and its devotees. Only a true fan would have the patience and curiosity to put up with this!
That said, as a fan from back on day one in 1966, when many of you were not even born, I look forward to this movie. In my mind, it is just seeing old friends who choose to open a different set of doors this time, that hopefully will lead onto a new set of adventures. I already know what happened in the old time line- now I am excited to see what this one offers, and I am thankful for getting that chance. (And on my birthday yet, though I do wish it would have been sooner!)
549. Dave: ‘I agree with many posters aboutthe lack of “real” threat if this is all in an alternate timeline. Why bother if it doesn’t afect you.’
Well I care about the characters in any decent movie. Just because it’s a different universe doesn’t stop me caring about neo-Kirk, neo-Spock and neo-McCoy! I happen to care if Nero wants to wipe out billions of people and I care about neo-Kirk, neo-Spock and neo-McCoy trying to stop him
No disrespect, but that’s a silly argument really!
515:
Sigh.
S. John, please recall that after I referenced SNL “a COLOSSAL” waste of time, vis-a-vis Saturday Night Live, you leapt to Star Trek’s defense, thusly:
“And remember, for some of us, Shatner’s little job those years ago are sometimes our current jobs here in the 21st century. I have had Trek put groceries on my table on several occasions as a writer, wouldn’t mind doing so again. If this new film turns out good, that would benefit that possibility.”
You may perhaps not feel that you were responding to a criticism of fannish extremes of behavior as if it were a criticism of The Franchise Itself, but it certainly looked that way. And even if you were not, there are undeniably many in fandom, a whole heaping bunch of them right here, who DO respond that way.
So do me a favor, please: reread that paragraph — written in your words — one more time, then reread my answer. I think you’ll find the conversational thread fairly clear. If not, I don’t know what else to tell you…
459. Brian – December 12, 2008
“If you want to talk about time travel, this is a very reasonable way to approach it. No further justification is needed. Roberto Orci does try to dress the idea up by bringing quantum mechanics into it, and the results, unfortunately, are pure hippie physics. He relies heavily on dropping the names of ideas he doesn’t understand, and hopes that if he does it often and emphatically enough, and waves his hands a lot, he’ll intimidate his audience. Heavy, man.”
Yes, quantum mechanics is a very successful theory. (It goes back to the 1920s, by the way, so it’s hardly the “latest” word on the subject.) Yes, Hugh Everett did have a Many Worlds *interpretation* of quantum mechanics, formulated in the 1950s, which has had varying degrees of popularity since, but isn’t the mainstream view that Orci implies. But most physicists are uncomfortable with it, if they’ve thought about it at all, because it posits that whole universes come into existence when a wave function “collapses,” which seems pretty extravagant, particularly since we can’t even verify whether these universes exist.”
RO: Sorry, incorrect analysis. The many worlds theory actually obviates the need for a collapsing wave function or for the preferred status of a wave collapsing observer since everything that can happen, does happen. However, I won’t go as far as saying that you are dropping “the names of ideas you don’t understand.”
“Most physicists, I think, doubt the possibility of time travel in any interesting sense, precisely because you get into problems with causality, apart from the fact that it’s very hard to demonstrate that it’s physically possible. (Though there’s more to that story than there’s room for here.)”
RO: Again, causality paradoxes are the very problems that the many worlds interpretation of QM avoids.
“So putting together Many Worlds plus time travel is fringe stuff. Doesn’t mean that it isn’t interesting to speculate about, or that you couldn’t find some physicist somewhere who’s thought about it — Kip Thorne, for example, is very well-respected for his work on general relativity, and he’s wondered about such things. But it’s not something that most physicists take seriously, let alone the “latest” and “best” theory of anything. Physicists prefer ideas you could at least hope to test, or did before string theory came along.”
RO: Huge fan of his. Have read every book of his I can find. Learned a lot about this very subject form his books.
“Whatever the physical plausibility of time travel, fiction writers have thought about it a lot, and splitting time lines is probably the most common approach. (For a more sophisticated alternative, using something closer to pure quantum mechanics, see the physicist Gregory Benford’s Time-Scape.) Talking about it as if it were a new idea, and needs to be justified, makes one sound a little naive about science fiction. While I like Roberto Orci’s enthusiasm, I wish, for his sake, that he’d stick to more solid ground.”
And I won’t label naive the fact that you’re mistaking my enthusiasm for the appearance of just having heard this theory last night in a fabled Paramount PR seminar.
Generally, events in a universe can unfold pretty much the same regardless of minor changes – depending on whether I’d posted or not, the large scale universe would have remained the same, although there would not have been the same conversations here.
Personally, I’m quite happy with the “same, but different” approach. The events of the movie occur, and quite simply what would happen is if you look up the past in the 24th century, you see that the Enterprise was built in Iowa rather than San Francisco, and apart from that things are pretty much the same.
Ultimately, the small-fry nature of Kirk’s origins etc. on the overall universe is what is reassuring about this – the events are slightly different, but the purpose and spirit of them is entirely the same as the old. I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with that.
And from a marketing point of view, everything pretty much has to be new and shiny – a new Trek that stuck one hundred per cent to old set designs (e.g. the ENT mirror universe episodes), while appreciated by some fans, would probably have killed it outright. Perhaps people should just be happy that there is new Trek (with quite painstaking efforts to keep the loyal supporters happy, I might add), rather than nitpicking every single little detail.
I SAW THIS EXPLANATION COMING…
I HAVE TO SAY ALTHOUGH THIS THEORY ALLOWS US TO LIVE IN THE OTHER UNIVERSE WITH THE FRIENDS WE KNOW SO WELL IT IS ALL STILL TOTALLY UNNECISARY.
THERE IS NO REASON WHY KIRK COULDNT HAVE MOVED TO SAN FRANSISCO AFTER HIS PARENTS WERE KILLED AND SEEN THE ENTERPRISE BEING BUILT THERE OR EVEN IN SPACE- THERE IS NO REASON PIKE HAD TO BE HIS MENTOR OR FOR UHURA TO WEAR THAT AWEFULL WHITE BRA! – LOL.
THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE “THEIR” STAR TREK NOT OURS NOT GENE RODDENBERYS OR RICK BERMANS
THEY NEED TO ACCEPT THAT THE FRANCHISE IS ( OR AT LEAST WAS ) BIGGER THAN THEM.
#556: “THEY NEED TO ACCEPT THAT THE FRANCHISE IS ( OR AT LEAST WAS ) BIGGER THAN THEM.”
Agreed – hard-core trek fans need to accept that the Franchise is bigger than them.
#556: ‘THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE “THEIR” STAR TREK NOT OURS NOT GENE RODDENBERYS OR RICK BERMANS’
GOOD!
Here’s the problem with Mr. Orci’s ideas of parallel universes. I’m not going to say the team’s concept of time travel and paralleles is not valid enough to be used in science fiction like Star Trek, but…
If you think back all the way to the beginning of time and space, as philosophy, quantum mechanics, physics, et al. do, then you arrive at the question of what created the universe. The answer, based on quantum mechanics, is that time is a loop. Something at the end of the previous universe is what created the beginning of the universe we know. And so on and so on. It was either that, or God. But Star Trek didn’t seem big on the God solution, so the solution we end up with for Star Trek is that time MUST be a loop.
On from there, we all know about casuality. We all know that the reason something occurs is because things were set in motion previously to make them occur. Everything in my life, every experience, every idea, every neuron firing, every person I’ve met — all of it, has led to this moment right here, typing this message now on Trekmovie.com. Essentially, we do not have choices. I could not be on a different page right now. My causal history brought me, as yours brought each one of you, to where you are. We seem to have many choices in life, but the fact is, because of everything that came before, there is only ONE that we can and must choose.
Parallel universes are a way of liberating the human spirit, making us feel like we are in charge of our lives and that we can do or be whatever we please. In fact, time is more like a railway track. Laid out already. As soon as the first even occurs (based on the last even in the previous timeline) everything is set in motion. Everything unfolds as it must based on causal history and the instigation of each new event as based on causality.
The track is laid, there is only one way.
… Or so quantum mechanics says, Mr. Orci ;)
PRODUCTION DESIGN IS THE ONLY THING THEY NEEDED TO CHANGE DRASTICALLY AND THE ONLY THING THEY COULD HAVE
CHANGED DRASTICALLY WITHOUT REALLY AFFECTING CANNON.
I CANT HELP BEING RIGHT ABOUT ALL THIS
BUT I WILL STILL SEE “THEIR” VERSION OF STAR TREK IN THEIR UNIVERSE JUST LIKE I WOULD STILL SEE ANY OTHER STAR WARS FILM…
his descriptions of quantum mechanics are stupidly redundant. We got it, it’s awesome and it’s the most current, up-to-date, developed theory in the history of mankind, you don’t need to repeat it every two sentences.
LETS ALL HOPE JJ ABRAMS NEW STAR WARS ILM DOES AS WELL AT THE BOX OFFICE AS THE OTHER STAR WARS PREQUELS…
by the end of the interview it kinda sounded like he was making fun of his interlocutor and trekkies as a whole.
563
Huh?
trekboi
It’s rude to post in CAPS here! Write like everyone else or you could get yourself banned by the mods.
Just a friendly warning, mate! :)
563.
This basically shows that yes, the writers do ultimately have the greatest respect for both the franchise and its fans, and are bending over backwards to try and win over the hardcore. Ultimately, however, the hardcore are just a small audience.
Given the buzz the trailer and other marketing has created, a lot of non-Trek people are excited about it. They will go in, and see a film called Star Trek, about a ship which visits strange alien worlds, and has exciting battles with outer space villains. They will come, hopefully enjoy it, and go away. They won’t worry about canon, and whether the original TOS continuity is wiped out. They’ll just come and see the film, and that’ll be that.
This interview just shows how much the new crew respect the fans, and as a hardcore fan (I can name just about any episode from seeing a few seconds of it while flicking past channels), I appreciate the effort they’ve gone to immensely. Plus, from a physics point of view, it’s sound. And ultimately, remember: it’s just a film!
I love the trailer, the movie looks wicked and i’m gonna love it but i just wished that this was a Batman Begins reboot of the franchise rather than a canon saving but totally wiping the slate clean kinda excuse with this QM theory.
Time Travel has been way over done in Star Trek so i only hope this time will be the last time and then we can get on with movies involving Kirk on some planet in a fist fight with some Gorn army.
564
this?
his descriptions of quantum mechanics are stupidly redundant. We got it, it’s awesome and it’s the most current, up-to-date and developed theory in the history of mankind, you don’t need to repeat it every two sentences.
…just because your interviewer, as hardcore trekkie was concerned about the implications of the plot device (whether it’s really time-travel or not) your movie revolves around in respect of canon.
# 557 DENISE BAILEY
DONT QUOAT ME OUT ON CONTEXT TO MAKE FUN OF ME- I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE RECOVERING FROM HAVING MY CHILDHOOD RAPED BY UBER PRODUCERS WHO CANT FUND THEIR OWN PROJECTS SO THEY JUST VIOLATE EXISTING ONES TO SUIT THEMSELVES.
THE FANS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM- WE ARE STAR TREK WE KEEPT IT ON THE AIR FOR 3 YEARS WE KEEPT IT ALIVE IN THE 1970′S WHEN THE STUDIOS AND PRODUCERS SAW NO STAR WARS TYPE PROFIT IN IT WE FULED IT FOR 18 YEARS ON TELEVISION AND HAVE KEEPT IT (BARELY) ALIVE IN THE YEARS SINCE IT WAS ABANDONED BY THE STUDIOS.
OUR STAR TREK ALREADY EXISTS AND ALTHOUGH GENES ORIGINAL CONCEPT WAS DEMINISHED BY THE END OF BERMANS ERA TO DESTROY IT ALL IS A HARTLESS SELFISH THING- ITS ALL ABOUT THEM- WHY DONT THEY GO MAKE THEIR OWN FILM ABOUT ALTERNATE REALITIES WHERE THEY DONT NEED TO RE-WRITE ANYONES HISTORY AND INVALIDATE A FICTIONAL UNIVERSE THAT PEOPLE HAVE ENJOYED ESCAPING TO FOR GENERATIONS.
WHY?
BECAUSE THE STUDIOS WOULDNT FUND IT OR THEM – THIS IS WHY THEY HAVE TO USE & RE-USE FRANCHISES LIKE STAR TREK AND MISSION IMPOSSIBLE (OR BOND)
STAR TREK HAS ITS OWN LIFE AND FANBASE THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING FOR.
THAT IS WHY PARAMOUNT MADE THIS FILM FOR THE FANS OUT THERE SICK OF BERMANS UNINSPIRED REPETITIVE “MCDONALDS OF SC-FI” VERSION OF STAR TREK AND THE NEW FANS WHO WERE NOT TARGETED IN THE BERMAN ERA
RANT OVER (FOR NOW)
THE DALLAS- “IT WAS ALL JUST A DREAM” EXCUSE IS TRAGIC- REAL SCIENCE OR NOT.
IM SURE ANTHONY WILL DELETE ME ANYWAY- TPTB DONT RESPECT INDEPENDANT THOUGHT- U CANT DISAGREE WITH ANTHONY OR THE STUDIOS AND STILL HAVE A VOICE ON THIS SITE
ALTHOUGH I WAS NEARLY SOLD ON THE “REAL SCIENCE” EXPLANATION/PROPAGANDA- FOR A MOMENT
8 > The last part of the interview is what caught my attention….if the original timeline continues after Nero and Spock go back in time, then where is the motivation for Spock to want to go back in time unless he isn’t privy to the fact that no change will happen and only discovers that later in the movie before returning to his own original future!
Perhaps he wants to arrest Nero.
After all, if a wanted criminal tries to escape into an alternate timeline, SOMEONE should follow…
no more all caps, what you have to say is no more important than anyone else
Maybe, just maybe, Nero didn’t go back to destroy the timeline. Maybe he got there by accident and since he couldn’t return, he decides to shape this new universe the way he wants it (without kirk, spock and pesty vulcans) The larger question becomes why then does ol’ prime Spock follow him to the new alternate universe? Is it a possible danger to ALL universes. An infinite quantum cataclysum? Am I knocking on the door with that? What say you, Boborci?
293 – Thanks for explaining the acronym YMMV.
Glad it didn’t stand for You Make Me Vomit, as there are sometimes far too many squabble in these threads. I was hoping we weren’t getting into acrimonious acronyms as well. ;)
TTFN
#520 – ““A project was greenlit by one regime, and by the time it’s delivered, there’s a coup d’etat,” Erik Jendresen said of the replacement of Paramount co-president David DeLine at the time, which was the end for his Romulan War Movie.”
Just so. :)
My point was, the studio, even after ENT, was indeed willing to move forward on an in-continuity storyline for a feature film. It died in a regime-change, but that likely had more to do with the regime change itself than with Star Trek.
#544 – “I have *no* reason to believe that *Paramount studio* actually came *anywhere* close to greenlighting that project.”
Well, as Thorsten noted, Jendresen has said it *was* greenlit before the regime change. I’m not making it up, just reporting on what the guy who wrote the screenplay said in public. Make of it what you will.
#534 – “I was actually strictly referring to Kirk’s first 5y mission with the crew we know. Of course there’s endless variations, along the lines of what the books have explored. But Paramount will not finance a $150M movie about another crew or the post TMP mission. For that jones, we have books like New Earth and Vanguard.”
To be certain, the advantage to going to Kirk and co. for a big-budget motion picture is that the names are known, and that makes it more easily marketable than something else. Does that mean they couldn’t or wouldn’t do something else? It’s hard to know. As noted above, they apparently got fairly close to doing just that. But it’s also fair to play conservative while rebuilding the public perception of the brand name.
Doing a post-TMP approach would potentially have been interesting, and would certainly be marketable, but the thing is, if they want to skew younger for a youthful audience, it makes more sense to target the characters as young as seems reasonable.
“And in that regard, you’ve agreed. The story is all but completely told.”
But it’s not “the story” of Star Trek. It’s only one small part of Trek. A significant part, to be sure, but a part nonetheless. And even there, significant chunks haven’t been told, especially if one doesn’t include the non-filmed media.
“If the movie are ever to proceed to the second 5y mission, short of TWOK, it would and will have to be after the franchise has been restarted with primary colors, short skirts and fist fights. That’s where we are.”
My thought would be that post-TMP would be a way to go after a successful 5-year mission trilogy. But I fully agree that doing the basics first would be best. I just don’t agree for a minute that continuity needed to be jettisoned to accomplish that.
“But adapting stories from TOS episodes for film lacks suspense and stakes if they take place in the same universe, because you know all major characters, including the E, will survive.”
Just as with franchises like Superman, Batman, et al., I don’t for a moment believe that the characters *won’t* survive. I think “will they die or not” is the ultimate strawman issue. It’s a non-issue for me.
“After this new film, presumably they can remake woefully crappy productions like THE DAY OF THE DOVE, which have near galactic significance, but small and shoddy production value. I doubt KO would rule out remaking THE SPACE SEED, but they’d just set themselves up for failure.”
I would really hope they would, even if they are rebooting the story arc, avoid total creative sellouts like re-making original episodes. Tell new stories!
“We haven’t even considered the impact of Nero destroying many dozens of Klingon ships in this new universe. It’s safe to bet that the next Star Trek film will be a Klingon story and that the destruction of their fleet will lead to an earlier introduction of the Bird of Prey and a new fleet of vessels that can kick the Federation’s ass.”
The bird of prey predates TOS, anyway, but it might be interesting to see how the Klingons react to all this. Perhaps that contributes to the situation leading up to “Errand of Mercy”. ;)
“Look, I hear you when you say the universe is not full. But the the first 5y mission timeline is all but filled and this is a brilliant way of retelling the first 5y mission with suspense and the possibility of failing.”
But there’s simply no need or call to throw out what’s already been established when there’s so much open ground still to be covered. Like I said up-thread, why reinvent the wheel?
It’s great to hear Bob has put so much thought into this movie. This level of care alone is a great sign that the franchise is in good hands.
I just hope, though, that Bob has considered that if “all timelines are valid” then time travel cannot be used to “save the day” because the original, un-saved timeline will still exist.
For example, if the borg go back in time and take over earth, then the Enterprise goes back in time and kills the borg — the timeline where the borg took over earth will still exist.
Effectively, the only way someone can really “save the day” is if they do it in their native timeline without any interference from time travellers.
Generally speaking, though, I find the “all timelines are valid” theory to be depressing from a storytelling perspective, even if it is scientifically valid.
This quantum thing seems illogical to me, anyway. The scientists say that parallel worlds can exist because particles have “random” behaviour. But who’s to say there isn’t some unknown reason behind this behaviour, which would cause them to behave exactly the same in any universe, meaning that there could only be one universe.
Not that I think I know better than the top scientists. I just have never heard any explanation of why particles are believed to behave without reason. That almost seems like a cry of “magic” just because we can’t explain something.
Physicists thought about the so-called “random” behaviour, testing it with a theory known as “hidden variables”. The maths doesn’t really make sense, and as maths usually is backed up by experimental results, we know that it can’t exist.
Indeed, much of modern physics contains a lot of technobabble that wouldn’t be out of place in recent Star Trek episodes. Maybe the writers of some future Trek production might do something with it, who knows?
569. trekboi
‘# 557 denise bailey’
Dennis had a sex change! :0
‘Dont quoat me out on context to make fun of me- i am not the only one recovering from having my childhood raped by uber producers who cant fund their own projects so they just violate existing ones to suit themselves.’
Yes you are!
‘The fans are not the problem- we are star trek we keept it on the air for 3 years we keept it alive in the 1970′s when the studios and producers saw no star wars type profit in it we fuled it for 18 years on television and have keept it (barely) alive in the years since it was abandoned by the studios.’
No they aren’t. Psycho ‘fans’ are. In the end though, they gripe a lot and the rest of us laugh at them. Paramount laughs at them too. So does Bob Orci. So does Anthony. So does Dennis. So do I. So do the press. So do the public. Face it, man, people like you are free comedy!
‘Our star trek already exists and although genes original concept was deminished by the end of bermans era to destroy it all is a hartless selfish thing- its all about them- why dont they go make their own film about alternate realities where they dont need to re-write anyones history and invalidate a fictional universe that people have enjoyed escaping to for generations.’
They haven’t invalidated it. They’ve left it intact, indeed potentially left it open for more stories, rather than overwrite it. It’s no different from Frank Miller doing Batman Year One or John Byrne doing Superman.
‘Why?’
Tell me!
‘Because the studios wouldnt fund it or them – this is why they have to use & re-use franchises like star trek and mission impossible (or bond)’
Hmm. Abrams is one of Hollywood’s hottest properties right now. he’s one of the most creative guys there, making good mainstream entertainment with a real respect for old-school filmmaking on top! He can have whatever he wants made!
‘Star trek has its own life and fanbase that they were supposed to be working for.’
No, they are freelancers who’ve been hired by Paramount to do a job.
‘That is why paramount made this film for the fans out there sick of bermans uninspired repetitive “mcdonalds of sc-fi” version of star trek and the new fans who were not targeted in the berman era’
Um . . . what?
‘Rant over (for now)’
Thank **** for that!
‘The dallas- “it was all just a dream” excuse is tragic- real science or not.’
No that was just plain funny. Besides, that also happened in one version of a New Voyages ep!
‘Im sure anthony will delete me anyway- tptb dont respect independant thought- u cant disagree with anthony or the studios and still have a voice on this site’
Nah. You’re too funny! Besides, you’re copying every lambrain cliche pumped out by the lunatic fringe since this film was announced!
Well, presumably, certain events were in motion before Nero’s inteference, and that will happen in the secondary timeline as they did in the first (likely the whale probe, V’Ger, the Borg’s 2153 message to the Delta Quadrant, the Botany Bay still floating out in space, et al.). Of course, even if the alternate takes on these events are never shown onscreen, I’m sure novels and comics will show them.
What I’m curious about in the film is if Spock is stuck in the secondary timeline/universe, or if he has a way to return to his own time/place in the original.
573. Magister Returns ‘Maybe, just maybe, Nero didn’t go back to destroy the timeline. Maybe he got there by accident and since he couldn’t return, he decides to shape this new universe the way he wants it (without kirk, spock and pesty vulcans) The larger question becomes why then does ol’ prime Spock follow him to the new alternate universe? Is it a possible danger to ALL universes. An infinite quantum cataclysum? Am I knocking on the door with that? What say you, Boborci?’
I was wondering if his plan was to create a Romulan super-Empire in the neo-Trek universe, using his future technology, then return to the TNG universe and invade it once and for all! Hence he’d need to take out all the major players early in the timeline!
Anthony: And you believe that the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics is the Star Trek interpretation, based on “Parallels.”
Bob: Yes.
YAY!!!!!!
The “Parallels” connection is what I have been saying in several previous threads when the canon cops begin going ballistic over non-continuity. It is gratifying and a vast relief to see that JJ, Orci, and company see it exactly the same as I. After this film is released and is the biggest hit in ST film history, the canon freaks will become increasingly irrelevant because, you see, there are actually an infinite number of equally-valid, but different, canons. Their precious TOS 1960’s-era canon will be history, dead and buried, and never again used. Thank God.
#553: “S. John, please recall that after I referenced SNL “a COLOSSAL” waste of time, vis-a-vis Saturday Night Live, you leapt to Star Trek’s defense, thusly:”
Those are my words, but they are not in _any_ way in defense of Star Trek or anything else of the sort.
I understand that you’re passionate about something, but I honestly don’t see how it relates to my posts. Really. Actually. I’m not being sarcastic or dismissive. I just don’t understand.
“there are undeniably many in fandom, a whole heaping bunch of them right here, who DO respond that way.”
Of course. But that doesn’t relate to what I’ve posted, so it’s confusing when you talk about them _at_ me. Does that make sense? I was not discussing those fans and have no call to. So if you want to post about those fans, that makes perfect sense to me, but can you not direct the posts at my name? It’s just odd :(
“I think you’ll find the conversational thread fairly clear. If not, I don’t know what else to tell you…”
I think there’s a very real possibility – and I mean no offense – that what you have to tell, is for someone other than me. None of the things you’re talking about relate to any of the topics I’ve posted on in any way that I can track.
Actually, thinking of it. If Spock has been in the neo-Trek universe for a few decades, maybe he’s quietly helped advance Federation technology to fight Nero’s schemes!
The long and the short of it is that he is not going to follow the Cannon per say, First off they encounter the Romulans, before the events in balance of terror, so already the original timeline continuity has been blown has been blown , on top of the fact that the Romulns attack Vulcan, no Old Spock is not going to fix this, Everything will change to some degree. Even Kirk’s life will unfold differently because of the disruptions, Also Pikes fate might be different. Tha one of the reason I thought about the possibility of Old Spock not surviving, How can he? his time line is gone anyway.
#538 – “However, I don’t buy the grad school theory, primarily because every movie and episode has established Starfleet as a 4 year institution (aside from The Omega Glory’s reference to Tracey’s ‘fifth year’, which was clearly before they’d established the 4 year guideline, though I know some assume Tracey repeated due to his ‘instabilities’). There’s no mention of any other education system in place for command cadets.”
Well, as I said, that’s a meta-canonical theory, but by the same token, nothing on film has established that it couldn’t work that way. Simply because it wasn’t mentioned doesn’t automatically suggest that it doesn’t exist, and I find it easier to buy into a graduate level program or programs than to imagine that people get their officers’ commissions (and in some cases another promotion or two) before they even graduate the institution that’s supposed to be training them. ;)
Ok.. so.. let me get this straight (or, someone else, please SET me straight)…
if Nero’s trip back in time starts a totally ‘NEW’ and ‘SEPARATE’ time line (and he makes changes which will NOT affect our ‘traditional/cannon’ Spock/Picard time line).. then..
why does Spock need to follow him back??
Perhaps a more helpful way to think about all of this is that well, Old Spock or whatever you wish HAS to go back in time. Time itself demands causality – you have to have something to ensure that the passage of history goes smoothly, and haphazardly changing the course of history just causes paradoxes and fouls up the timeline.
The blurb for Star Trek: Countdown states that Nero “will threaten the very future of the entire universe”, well, without anything to stop him, Nero will go blundering about history undoing everything and causing paradox after paradox, threatening the very fabric of nature itself. So Spock needs to go back and stop Nero (who I assume probably isn’t concerned with paradoxes and so forth) from fouling everything up. Without Spock traveling back in time, it’s goodbye universe. Sounds like high stakes to me…
“Like I said up-thread, why reinvent the wheel?”
So you can take more credit if the re-invented wheel is successful (and get a bigger and more lucrative development deal).
586. G
I’ve posted suggestions on 580 and 583. There’s obviously something Nero has up his sleeve that will affect TOS Spock’s universe as well!
#575: “Well, as Thorsten noted, Jendresen has said it *was* greenlit before the regime change. I’m not making it up, just reporting on what the guy who wrote the screenplay said in public. Make of it what you will.”
Mr. Jendresen can use terminology in any way that suits him, I suppose, BUT…
You find me one announcement, one murmur, even one hand-wave or ambiguous gesture from *Paramount Studios* anywhere in the trade press or elsewhere that even *resembles* what the rest of the industry means by “green-light” and I’ll be interested.
So yeah, if Jendressen says that the project was “greenlit” then I’m saying that the statement isn’t so.
That’s what I will make of it.
Quantum Mechwhatsit?
My indubulator went off trying to keep up with the superfluidity of the conversation. Once I recalibrated, I realized I’d been burping up Hawking radiation all over and without a theory for quantum gravity…you don’t want to do that.
I’m happy as a clam with Bob’s (I think I can call him Bob after all we’ve been through in some of the other universes) explanation.
With the creation of the Quantum Canon Cannon, all possibilities are possible, possibly.
Most excellent, sir…most excellent.
Dom
RE: laughing at the fans
I never laugh at the fans, although I hope I do laugh with them sometimes. And in my conversations with Paramount and with Bob, JJ and the team… I have never ever heard a single one of them say a disparaging thing about any fans. Now JJ has stated, and I think it is reasonable, that they cannot try to make a movie that will fit what every fan wants, as that is impossible.
I think everyone who comes here is a fan in their own way. I do not agree with everyone’s opinion, but I do not discount any opinion (proffered in a civil manner).
And I hope in my interviews that I ask questions that are on the minds of various types of fans. In this case I wanted to get at the meat of the issues:
- how does this film fit with canon, when some things appear different?
- how does this film affect the rest of star trek canon?
All the stuff about quantum mechanics is interesting, but it is really just background information.
575. Alex Rosenzweig
With al due respect, I think Dennis knows a lot more about the business than most of us. It sounds like Jendressen was simply involved in a bit of hype.
Of course, Orci’s and JJ’s biggest problem now is that by invoking the parallel-universe explanation for the canon differences, they are totally invalidating their reasons for not including Shatner in the film. Given the number of major changes in the “original” timeline, it is completely reasonable to think that Kirk would not have been swept into the Nexus and later killed on Veridian III.
Therefore, a cool way to “bookend” the new film would have been to show old Spock from the original timeline at the beginning of the film, and then in the last scene of the film, show an ancient Admiral Kirk (i.e. Shatner) touring the brand new Enterprise-D along with Admiral McCoy.
JJ- It’s not too late to make a huge valentine for the fams and film one last 30-second scene to close the film in style.
592. Anthony Pascale
I’m not talking about fans: I’m talking about the scary types and trolls who are well outside what you could call a fan: hence I used quotes around the word fans. Sorry. Didn’t mean to put words in your mouth!
Why complicate things with yet another time travel deus ex machina and simply tell the accepted story of TOS’ characters’ history?
Clearly this plot was developed because of the desire to involve an aging Leonard Nimoy – Nimoy’s involvement was necessary to give the project some legitimacy.
Dom, not necessarily – but I do sure as hell know what “greenlight” means, and I suspect anyone who follows TV and movie production at all to the extent of just reading the news picks up that stuff pretty easily. And the Jendressen project wasn’t greenlit.
Abrams is going to make the film the way he see’s fit. he’s not going to please everyone , Oh well. The film looks great sounds great . Its going make Paramount a ton of money, Probably kick start the Franchise. and make trek relevant again.
So, Basil, if Spock were to travel back to 1969 and I was frozen in 1967, I could go look at my frozen self. But, if I’m still frozen in 1967, how could I have been unthawed in the 90’s and traveled back to the Sixties? Oh, no, I’ve gone cross-eyed.
A lot of people here seem to think this new timeline will be vastly different from the original one. I don’t think anyone can say how different it will be — other than the writers.
Nero going back in time and destroying a ship might not necessarily have any effect at all on anything we’re familiar with from TOS or TNG. As it happens, we know some things have changed, but it doesn’t mean more changes are inevitable.
Changes in the past send “ripples” through time, but the ripples don’t necessarily spread wider, they could die down pretty quickly. Either way, the ripples don’t affect everything, only certain things.
If I went back in time and blew up a bus full of people, the ripples of that would probably change a few things relating to those people’s future. However, if that bus already had a bomb on board anyway, and I merely blew it up 5 seconds earlier than it was already going to blow up, then you’d probably notice absolutely no changewhatsoever.
The supposed history of the TOS characters was mainly developed as backstory during the series – a line here, a line there – and was presented in a plausible manner within the context of the show. That is to say, we got the reasonable impression that most of these characters had led separate lives prior to their assignments to the Enterprise and that they had grown into their current career and life roles as a result of many experiences and actions over periods of decades.
That’s plausible. Believable. Realistic.
What it’s not, is not raw material for an action/adventure sf movie showing the “origins” of the TOS crew. It’s simply not.
If Kirk were an actual individual of some note whom people out in the world and the public in general might reasonably be expected to be intrigued by, a biographical film utilizing the conventions of that genre might be doable.
Fictional biography, OTOH, is really really difficult to get a mass audience interested in unless there’s something unique and intriguing about the structure of the material or the material itself – “Forrest Gump” being a near-perfect recent example of what works. There’s simply nothing so novel about Kirk’s backstory or that of anyone else in “Star Trek” that it could be sold as a must-see to a big audience.
That’s just the truth. ;)
Extra “not” in that third paragraph. Oops!
Uni-verses:
It is not that which is,
but that which cannot
not
be.
For all things have been
and have
not
But a version
where all possibilities are
not possible
is not possible.
Disproving all possibilities
were possible.
Weak.
600: I would disagree in that Kirk, Spock, et.al. are such iconic figures that they walk the line between historical and fictional characters. Certainly some creative license could be taken, but do we need to go to the extreme of introducing a macguffin to rationalize why James Kirk suddenly grew up without a Father-figure?
For argument’s sake, let’s say your analysis is spot on – then why even bother with this storyline? Why not move forward and introduce a new generation of Star Trek characters, new ship, new adventures? Why follow the Hollywood trend of rehashing old material?
#399 Randall – thanks for clarifying what you were talking about. It’s as clear as mud now. Good luck with that writing career.
585
What gets me is that most everyone (including the Okudas) presupposes that Kirk is only at the Academy once. That he couldn’t have taught later in his career, like maybe right after the Farragut’s crew was decimated by the cloud creature, and he was awaiting reassignment.
Speaking of canon. Is the remastered original series yet another alternate universe. In my opinion it is.
#605: “Why not move forward and introduce a new generation of Star Trek characters, new ship, new adventures? Why follow the Hollywood trend of rehashing old material?”
Those are rhetorical questions with no *single* answer other than one which boils down to “this is the creative (and possibly business) choice we thought best.” Everything I’ve seen so far indicates that they’re making a damned intriguing “Star Trek” movie as a result.
Oh, and I can’t buy for an instant the premise that the Trek characters in any way “walk the line between historical and fictional characters.” The line between real people of note and some imaginary pop culture characters that We Like A Lot is a hard, bright one and ought to be easily recognized even by the most devoted Trek fans.
In the subject line of this article, we see the word “canon.” In the first two sentences of the first paragraph, we see the word “canon.” In the first bolded heading, we see the word “canon.” And then 7 more times before we get to the comments, we see the word “canon.”
Over and over again, many here have pointed out the difference between the words “cannon” and “canon.” So why is it that in the comments section, we then see “cannon” in posts 15, 104, 108, 407 (2x), 560, 584, and 586??????? You might as well be talking about Star Track. Let’s get it right, folks…..please? It’s like using the phrase “for all intensive purposes.” Aaaaarrrrrgggghhhh.
611.
I can’t believe you just typed 2 FULL PARAGRAPHS about the spelling of a single word. Who’s the loser now?
594. cugel the clever
I think that is in the works.
#612: “I can’t believe you just typed 2 FULL PARAGRAPHS about the spelling of a single word. Who’s the loser now?”
People who keep misspelling “canon.”
wow
610
I think that 605 is making the case that iconic fictional characters have back stories that are part of the public consciousness and therefore read as “untrue” when those back stories aren’t adhered to in some way. While I don’t think Kirk and Spock rise to this level of awareness, Superman’s origins, for example, must include the Death of Krypton and the Parentage of Ma and Pa Kent.
I don’t think that it was being said that the difference between real and imaginary people was hard to distinguish.
Ahh good.
569. trekboi – December 12, 2008
” I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE RECOVERING FROM HAVING MY CHILDHOOD RAPED BY UBER PRODUCERS WHO CANT FUND THEIR OWN PROJECTS SO THEY JUST VIOLATE EXISTING ONES TO SUIT THEMSELVES.”
Do I need to define the word “rape” for you? How do you compare a violent and degrading act on a person to a remake your favorite childhood TV show?
You can’t and you insult anyone who suffered the former by citing the latter.
618
Maybe someone should define it for YOU :-)
From Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry:
rape
Function:
noun
Date:
14th century
1 : an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force
2 : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent — compare sexual assault , statutory rape
3 : an outrageous violation
Seems that the third definition could apply from some folks’ POV.
man I hate this, In the time I typed the two posts above, 610 became 609 and 618 became 617.
613.
And not only did you type 2 full paragraphs about the spelling of the word, you actually scrolled through and read nearly 600 entries on here, just to keep track of it and document it (i.e. “you guys misspelled canon in “posts 15, 104, 108, 407 (2x), 560, 584, and 586″)
Dude, as Shatner would say, “Get a life!” (or, a date).. which, with the same ’spelling’ could be defined as both, “a day on a calendar”, or “a woman”. I meant the latter.
This doesn’t bode well at all. Either do a reboot or don’t.
While I’m sure he is scientifically correct, using quantum mechanics to this degree just to explain away reasons why this isn’t a reboot is quite lame.
I am looking forward to this film but not nearly as much as before I read this article.
And from the real world perspective…
If you don’t like it, don’t go to the movie and quit insulting the writers. They obviously have done a lot of homework on this.
#569 Trekboi I think your over reacting here. How can you not look at the previews and not be excited by the fact that we are getting a brand new trek film that’ s actually going to be worth watching. Star Trek First Contact was the last good trek film, Insurrection and Nemesis were both duds at the box office and did not exactly resonate with alot of movie goers,I think Im not going to worry about the two sacred cows trek time line and trek cannon which to me is probably two of the biggest millstones hanging on the franchise neck. The hell with the past , Trek needs this film, its probably the only way this franchise is going to become viable again.
Folks, the only timeline that is REAL, and THAT MATTERS
is ours… Star Trek – 1964 to ?
it’s not dead, Jim.
VIVA THE ORCSTER!!!
=h=
As in the words of a evil commander on a space station in a galaxy far far away, this bickering is pointless. Sure, Bob Orci has come up with a canon solution. Some will find it acceptable, other no. Personally, it makes a whole lot of sense. I actually posted (number 439 I believe) a timeline chart using First Contact and the New film as basis for certain continuity errors and also of an example as to how this applies to Trek that hsa already been produced. I also stated that both First Contact and the new film are only the future trying to guide the past around roadblocks put in the normal flow of time by evil entities from the future. It all fits nicely if you let it. Sometimes, we need to stop sweating certain details and just go with it (the only detail that I will have a qualm with is if they destroy Vulcan. Then it will definitely be a completely alternate timeline [unless of course the Vulcans resettle on a similar planet in the same general region and it is called Vulcan or New Vulcan]).
I think I agree with Janeway.
**goes off to take aspirin**
618. BK613 – December 12, 2008
618
“Maybe someone should define it for YOU :-)”
Maybe they should. I can’t see where using that phrase makes the posters argument. Why are you defending this?
Perhaps it was used flippantly because they have heard it misused several times before, or just to get a reaction? I suspect that tactic.
IMO, there is no “outrageous violation” in remaking a TV show. I seriously doubt anyone has had to see a doctor or get help because a TV show or movie was remade.
…………………..
Sorry folks, I didn’t mean to derail the thread. A comment hit a touchy subject.
#590 – In that case, Dennis, take it up with him. I, however, am slightly more wiling to trust what the guy who was involved in the production said. I certainly wasn’t, so the best I can do is weigh the statements people make. :)
Even if the project never got beyond a screenplay being ordered, and was then canceled when the studio changed Presidents, it’s a long way beyond, “They were never going to do such a thing”, and I really don’t think Kerner and Jendresen were just developing a Trek project in their spare time. I think they were doing something they believed was going somewhere. From what I read, “ST: The Beginning” was hardly the only project scuttled when the regime changed, so make of it what you will.
#600 – “A lot of people here seem to think this new timeline will be vastly different from the original one. I don’t think anyone can say how different it will be — other than the writers.”
This, of course, is one of the unknowns. For example, Mr. Abrams has implied that aside from the visual aspects, the most significant change will be some backstory elements, but that the characters will get to where they were at the beginning of TOS anyway. And if that’s the case, then at least the potential impacts will be relatively minor. (Of course, that would also involve some vague commitment on the part of the people in charge to not decide that they now have a clean slate to just keep on trashing continuity.) But then there are the rumors of much bigger things, e.g., Vulcan being destroyed, which would be much more far-reaching. And, of course, there’s the final resolution which may have yet other effects, but which we won’t know about ’til May.
All of these variables are what keeps me from making a final judgment on the film itself. I despise reboots with a great passion, but until I know the exact nature of what’s happening in it, how can I speak fairly to the specifics of this film?
“Changes in the past send “ripples” through time, but the ripples don’t necessarily spread wider, they could die down pretty quickly. Either way, the ripples don’t affect everything, only certain things.”
A fair and valid point.
#601 – “The supposed history of the TOS characters was mainly developed as backstory during the series – a line here, a line there – and was presented in a plausible manner within the context of the show. That is to say, we got the reasonable impression that most of these characters had led separate lives prior to their assignments to the Enterprise and that they had grown into their current career and life roles as a result of many experiences and actions over periods of decades.
That’s plausible. Believable. Realistic.”
Indeed.
“What it’s not, is not raw material for an action/adventure sf movie showing the “origins” of the TOS crew. It’s simply not.”
No. But what it could have been is the loose framework *within which* such an adventure could take place. As you correctly noted, the implication is that those people had had many experiences in the time before they got to the Enterprise, experiences which could in fact be the subject of a great action/adventure movie. Obviously, we don’t know that ahead of time, because the story’s not yet been written, but to say that it *couldn’t* happen is, IMHO, presumptuous.
Right now, I have a bunch of notes for a storyline adapting what we know of the upcoming film into TOS continuity. Why? Because I believe it could have been done that way. The notes are fragmentary, and will likely remain so for a while, but when the time comes, I intend to prove the point. :)
(Oh, and I freely admit that I’m doing one of those “stand on the shoulders of giants” things. It’s much easier to do that sort of rewrite than it is to concoct the story ion the first place, but I’d like to think that some of the ideas I added of my own are pretty interesting. :) )
{snip}
“There’s simply nothing so novel about Kirk’s backstory or that of anyone else in “Star Trek” that it could be sold as a must-see to a big audience.
That’s just the truth. ;) ”
Dennis, the inevitable question is, how do you know? Who’s to say that a creative writer couldn’t find a tale or three to tell? Frankly, boiling what we know of the current film’s storyline down to 3 or 4 disconnected one-line references, it’s not very compelling, either, but obviously quite a few people think that Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman wrote a pretty awesome screenplay. So who, really, can say?
Taking it a step further, there are 8 years between Kirk taking command of Enterprise and the most recent previous backstory reference in his life. Look at the guy’s history from 2264 or so going forward. Do you really mean to assert that it is impossible that he could have had a movie-worthy adventure in 8 years? And if you do, I call shenanigans. ;)
Bob Orci you amateur, if you’d just said you guys had adjusted the field harmonics of the nadion inducer and re routed it through the gravimetric array we would’ve swallowed it, no problem.
627
“Flippant” and “Extreme” seem to be a recurring theme. Not just here, but on other sites as well. I don’t know why people choose to do this other than to annoy and irritate others.
There’s like 630 posts here so I came to this party really late, and I won’t even try to imagine I read all the other posts. But for my money this is how Time Travel in Trek Universe works, and if I’m wrong please site me an exact example.
When you go back through time “warp ten” or “sling shot” then you can’t change anything and everything will be fine. However, if you use a device like the guardian, which just PLOPS you back in time, you can seriously screw things up.
So I suspect depending on how Nero goes back in time, it will make all the difference. You may now proceed in tearing me a new one.
“Is Spock’s mission to restore his original timeline?”
Perhaps the timeline is “fixed” at the end of the film?
Sling shot back and it’ll be ok, get plopped back and the yogurt hits the fan?
That makes about as much sense as teaching “pick-up lines” to a Ferengi!
There are real wotrld reasons why things are different in this movie, just as there were for differences between TOS and its movie series. Time had pased in the real world and the aesthetic had to evolve. I hope all of you recognized that TMP refit story for what it was. The aesthetic must yet again evolve but the important thing to glean from this is that no matter what universe the crew of the starship Enterprise inhabit, their humanity and courage remain unchanged.
15: Jordan
I fully agree. A copout so they can do whatever type of reboot they want. So the bridge can look a Mac store…
So basically, this isn’t our old crew and E anymore. So why should I care? I was willing to overlook the design changes, the uniform changes, the bloody carppy new bridge design as long as the characters would be the same. They clearly aren’t now. They should’ve just done a new story in the TREK verse. Maybe in the future. The average youg filmgoer today doesn’t really care about TOS. There’s no link, no nostalgia so they could’ve made all new characters. By distorting the old ones, the loyal old-timer fans are just gonna be confused, feel cheated, maybe pissed. “THAT’s not Kirk…”
sigh
What the hell happened today? Seriously, people posting angry missives on this site need to take a fresh look tomorrow morning at the mess on the floor from the night before.
JJ, Bob and Alex are artists. They bring their all to this process. Each of them has a background in television, which trains screenwriters to work creatively within a given character and story matrix.
If the Internet was around in ‘65 and we were all obsessively tracking Star Trek because we were all fans of FORBIDDEN PLANET, WAGON TRAIN and HORATIO HORNBLOWER, do you really think we would have influenced Gene to make a better Star Trek by talking trash and debating his decisions? [Hint: f no.]
Whatever happens, it’s their asses on the line. If the film rules, makes hundreds of millions of dollars domestic and fires up the franchise for another decade… they have to top themselves! Imagine that! If the film craps the bed, embarrasses us all and has a 90% drop off to freaking BRUNO on May 15… Bob will no more be able to avoid these boards than he can now.
And regarding Quantum Mechanics, Bob’s not reinventing the wheel here. He simply had the nerve [and cared enough] to explain the same science in TNG:Yesterday’s Enterprise and Data’s above referenced tutorial.
Gene never did that.
Nick Meyer never did that when he introduced blatantly militaristic uniforms.
Berman never did that when.
And no one have ever come on here to explain or justify that heinous theme song in ENTERPRISE.
So take a breath, take a fresh look in the morning, and stay alive until May.
IDIC
Good. This is the same conclusion I came to so I am very happy to hear that they are specifically stating my theory was correct.
Ken :)
Unlike most people, I have read every comment up until mine prior to posting. Don’t skim – it’s a really good discussion, as they all are here.
Anyhoo.
Back in late 1986, I was very narrow-mindedly against TNG. Perhaps at the suggestion of Doohan and Uhura, who visited Fort Collins Foothills Fashion Mall and very politely said that they “didn’t support it”. Maybe it was Nimoy who at the time predicted that replacing the original characters would never work.
I tried and tried. 87 was the easiest, 88 got a little more difficult… and by 1991 it was impossible. That show was too good, and not in a “taking away” from the original kind of way. I got excited about a new Star Trek that seemed to “take away” from the one that I loved. I tried to make them separate entities in my mind for the longest time. At some point, came full circle and like many others… accepted that this was “the next generation” – the next story…. ie canon, a real timeline.
I’ll never make that mistake again with Star Trek. I welcomed DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. And, every one of the original cast came around as well. Especially Nimoy. Call it growth, perhaps, learning from mistake.
This new Star Trek is going to be a great adventure. I cannot BILLieve how many people are simply hung up on the past, loyalty to what?
How does any of this betray anything? These guys wanted to make the next movie about the TOS era. Check. HOW do you do that, in respecting all that has come before, while hitting a reset button? Who even cares if you know when Kirk dies in generations and can’t die before? AS a storyteller, who wants to tell the same story that was told 40 years ago? Its already been done, with outdated SFX. answer: ALTERNATE TIMELINE TIME TRAVEL.
effing CHECK.
Its an origins story. COMPLETELY unfaithful to the storyline you’ve known for some 40 odd years, because it’s not going to END in the same way its had to end fo some 40 odd years. No Kodos, no Farragut, no Number one, Talos, all the inconsistencies…. Enterprise built on the ground in Iowa. Your childhood, as we hate to say, but it sure looks like – raped, with only a recognizable fragment of what you remember, left.
and who cares? I mean, really?
This is going to be a great adventure with the characters and the star trek universe that we have always loved. Nimoy and Majel RoddenB, not to mention JC, have signed off on it.
Sir JJ, honestly, I don’t trust so much with the sanctity of this without the OrcSter. Sir JJ has made it clear even as recently as the press tour where he affirmatively answered a question that this movie happens right after Star Trek 6. I cannot overlook that kind of blatant negligence by the top man in control of something which i love so dearly. However, my faith is restored by the continued perserverance here of the orcster – who makes it clear that story from concept was his. that guy knows his star trek. trust in the orcster. viva la orcster.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
Anyone remember DC Comics’ “Hypertime”?
Now it’s The “52″!
Same thing!
“Yes, and you will notice that whenever the movie comes out, that whatever DVDs you have purchased, will continue to exist. ”
Whoa.
No, it’s when the movie comes out and your DVDs instantly disappear, then you go…………….WHOA!!!!!!
anyone recall the HYPERSPACE button on the old “Asteriods” Atari standup game?
it was statistically programmed in at a rate that I no longer know that you would re-appear on an asteroid and lose a ship.
i never used that button, and I own a 1978 standup version of Asteroids in the old storage. OMEGA RACE machine as well.
two great games… I hope that the orcster and daimon lindeloffagus re-whatever them in the future.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
I love this multiple universe idea for Star Trek.
There is room for every possible event in Trek history to happily co-exist and allow a writer to move around from time-line to time-line for an endless supply of stories.
And this does leave almost no doubt in my mind that this “time” we will definately see Shatner reprise his role as Kirk since he DOESN’T HAVE TO DIE all over again!!!!
636 said ” I was willing to overlook the design changes, the uniform changes, the bloody crappy new bridge design as long as the characters would be the same. They clearly aren’t now. ”
That’s really it, isn’t it? You don’t want anything to change. You want everything to stay exactly the same, FOREVER.
Is it because your (and when I say “you,” I mean the Carping Canonistas) knowledge of every aspect of Trek minutiae will be invalidated, and therefore your standing in the Eltingville Comic-Book, Science-Fiction, Fantasy, Horror, and Role-Playing Club will diminish?
Some of you talk as if a change in canon somehow makes all of your original series media somehow “unreal,” and therefore unenjoyable. May I humbly suggest that if your grasp on what is real and unreal is so tenuous that a reboot / alternate timeline flick threatens to cause a psychotic break, please seek help NOW. No, really. Please. I’ll wait.
…Well it was never real to begin with, was it? It was a TELEVISION SHOW made by Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz’ production company, made to fill airtime and get viewers to buy Quisp or Tide or whatever. It is a popular entertainment with a Dashing Hero and Loyal Sidekicks and Dastardly Villains with which to have Fist-Fights. There are also soft-focused Pretty Damsels In Distress to rescue, all shot in glorious Technicolor in order to better sell General Electric color TV sets (oh and did you know they owned NBC? Funny that.)
Yes, there was a lot of good writing, with some high-minded notions, occasionally, that paralleled Science Run Amuck, Religion Run Amuck, The Horrors of War, tut-tutting at Imperialism, etc, et al, the party of the first part, and all that, and then a real Science Fiction Spine Chiller Head-Twister (the woman willingly walking into the disintegration booth in A Taste of Armageddon — eek).
But here’s the real notion of this movie. Change may come to characters we thought were immutable. In a TV world, the characters don’t usually permanently die, because we want to see them week after week. That isn’t the case in novels, plays, or non-franchise movies.
In fact most good fiction is about change. How we deal with it, how trying to avoid it leads you to dark choices, or how embracing it lets you live on. Characters that don’t change, in some way, by the end of the film or book, simply don’t ring true. They aren’t believable, and their stories sure as hell aren’t fun to watch.
I mean, who wants to watch the story of Luke Skywalker, Moisture Farmer Of The Year? Or Dorothy, the Girl Who Got Home Safely And Didn’t Get Knocked Out by A Tornado? Or ‘Clean, Upstanding’ Harry?
Frankly, the very idea that ‘the Trek we know, or think we know, is entirely set on its ear, with grave consequences, by meddling in time’, is enough to put bums in seats. What’s going to happen now? We don’t know. It’s the Mystery Box!
*Personally, I bet on Nero doing a Paradox Machine…something that collapses all possible timelines specifically to allow him to rewrite history (yes, Crisis on Infinite Bagels-ish), also seen in H2G2 as the creepy Bird Guide from ‘Mostly Harmless’ that demolished all the alternate Earths…
Orci rocks!
“Parallels” is my favorite TNG episode.
“The Doomsday Machine” is my Favorite TOS episode.
Of course, my favorite Trek episode of all time is “Trials and Tribblations”
Oh, … one more thing
My favorite TV show episode of all time is …
Futurama’s “Where No Fan Has Gone Before”
My problem with this is that the literal reading of the MWH negates, existentially, the humanistic framework of Trek. In the MWH, not only is choice irrelevant (as all are chosen and not-chosen), which resultant choice you remember ‘making’ (or are ‘making’) is the result of chance–whichever universe your newly-fissioned consciousness inhabits (or, more precisely, which viewpoint you are experiencing) isn’t your decision. You just can’t remember making the other decisions that you made, and if you have the bad luck living in a culture in which has developed, scientifically, philosophically or theologically the literal MWH, you don’t really have the choice of deciding whether or not you’re contextualizing your choices in regards to experiential-reality-by-chance or experiential-reality-by-action, because even if you think you are it’s just a flip of the coin.
In essense, the lack of the ability to negate a reality means you don’t really create one, either–you’re a pinball falling through a pre-constructed pinball machine, thrown into the path by whatever you call fate-without-telos.
On a canon level, the time travel episodes, even Parallels, seems to imply a softer reading of the MWH, one in which choice is an active un-realizing of other realities, and manifested–experienced–alternate possibilities have to have active forking mechanisms creating them. Of course, Trek also has people jumping from one AU to another, which would–in a literal reading of the MHW–magnify the possible ‘tracks’ exponentially.
And there’s also the Q. I mean, an infinite number of Q doing infinite numbers of things (including the impossible)? At some point *someone* is going to figure out how to *actual make un-real* extant realities, and at that point you’re deep into The Apocalypse According to VALIS territory.
Trek, despite the SF gloss, has generally* been a vehicle for humanistic allegories–the Organians were metaphors for MAD, the time vortex in Yesterday’s Enterprise (or the Guardian in TCotEoF) just a means of highlighting the issue of sacrificing one’s life for the future.
What’s the metaphor here?
*When it’s been good.
#646 “What’s the metaphor here?”
Don’t count your tribbles before they’re hatched!
545. Jeffries Tuber
Sorry, every time I see someone use the term purist, it’s describing the uber-obsessive naysayers. I had assumed that was your implication. :)
Afraid we’ll have to disagree on the creativity of the solution. I don’t think it is particularly creative, but I’m also not foolish enough to consider my creative tastes to be the final word. I’m sure plenty will love it.
Doctor Who did a very good job of reinventing itself without ditching it’s established history, or being overly reliant on it. I guess I simply don’t see why the producers of this movie couldn’t do the same. Indeed, up until this point, I had believed that was exactly whay they were doing. I believe there are still stories to tell in the established Trek universe, so I’d have to disagree that that story needed to be over.
Still, what’s done is done, and I don’t suppose there’s much point in debating it to death.
#648 “I don’t suppose there’s much point in debating it to death”
Too late!
406. boborci … “yes… in May!”
By that, I assume you mean you’ll be back here in May explaining it to us geeks!
Right now, I just cannot imagine or forsee any possible scenario in the movie in which Nimoy Spock says, ‘Althought Nero is going into an alternate timeline which will not affect my own, I must follow him because…’
I strongly suspect the film will present the standard ‘must go back in time to save the future I know’ scenario. See also: COTEOF, First Contact, BTTF, Terminator, etc…
648 – Well said, Nick. Although we will probably continue to debate it to death, and I don’t even know why. It just seems to be what we Trekkies do.
Someone suggested–don’t remember who, and I lost it in the sea of posts–that we “carping canonistas” aren’t giving Mr. Orci due respect for coming on here. And so let me be the first to say: to have one of the most powerful men in STAR TREK not only doing lengthy interviews to explain himself to us but then seeing him regularly in the comment thread with us afterwards is, frankly, one of the most pleasant and empowering experiences in my entire experience of two decades of fandom. It’s just fantastic. Mr. Orci has a sharp wit and a keen mind that adds greatly to the conversation–his evisceration of Brian upthread was Internet Comedy Gold, just as his deeply intelligent defense of Built-On-Earth deeply impressed the canonista in my brain earlier this year. It is also unspeakably empowering to know that one of the biggest men in TREK thinks I matter enough to have a conversation with me.
And, given recent history, it’s frankly astonishing that a TREK exec producer knows the first thing about TOS, much less quantum theory. :P
So I want to emphasize here–and I think I speak for most people of my persuasion–that the disagreements and disappointments we may have with this interview do not overwhelm our warm feelings for Mr. Orci, a man whose first Trek story has yet to air and who already occupies a place in my heart next to RDM, Berman, Behr, Justman, and the Great Bird himself. Thank you for joining us here, sir. You give us a lot of credit by listening to us; I hope we deserve it.
As for my continued distaste for what was said in this interview, Dennis Bailey and hitch1969 are saying some very sensible things right now, and they’ve helped blunt the keen edge of my disappointment I’d add to hitch’s statement by saying that I had a very similar experience with Enterprise that he did with TNG. I was still in school when the “Series V Production Reports” were rolling out almost weekly on StarTrek.com, and, though I devoured them, I found myself more and more distrustful of what I was hearing until, two weeks before “Broken Bow,” I made a strenuous argument for pre-emptively decanonizing ENT, because it was going to suck and we had the excuse that “Star Trek” wasn’t in the title.
I was dead wrong. Enterprise rocked. Throughout all four years, I only missed one episode first-run. Except that one time (”Fallen Hero,” season one; I was out shopping for Mother’s Day presents), no matter where in the world I was, Wednesday nights found me curled up in front of a TV screen, sucking down Trekkie goodness.
I hope that’s what happens with this movie. I hope my worries turn out to be deluded ravings of a man who hates change, and May 10th finds me shouting to the rooftops that people need to see this movie. I half-expect that to be exactly what happens. But, right now, I’m not seeing the need or the justification for what’s being planned. I hope neither Mr. Orci nor anyone else here considers me rude, angry, or obsessed because that.
Well, okay. “Obsessed” would probably be accurate. :P
I sort of get the feeling that JJ isn’t trying to pull “non-sci fi” people to trek, but rather pull Star Wars people to Trek. The people on the boards who seem most open to changing Trek are probably the people who preferred Star Wars all along. It’s like someone invited them to Trek dinner. Sure they are open-minded. They want in the door to feast upon the glory which is Trek. They didn’t like the food they were getting at the Lucas household and need somewhere to go.
At the end of the meal we will all be Trek Wars. Next episode: we find out Nero is Spock’s father and Scotty Calrissian gets to fly the Millennium Enterprise.
I still have my old episodes. Thank goodness for remasterdness.
Ok…
Xai – i was using the term raped as a metaphore (just incase u didnt get that)- for what i feel is a violation of a creative process/fictional universe not a physical body – this was someting i heard someone else say on another thread.
As for any insensitivity on my part i was raped on nov 23 1997 and i still think it is an accurate description of what tptb have been doing to classic franchises lately and i have no problem using the term.
and #578 dom
id run through all ur comments on my coments and comment on them all if i didnt have better things to do.
but you are right about one thing- tptb have been laughing at the fans for years and looking past them for the box office and oddly enuff the franchise has slid into the toilet as they continue to dilute Star Trek to make it appeal to the non fans.
and finally the production design and visuals in preview do excite me as the Star Wars sequel previews did but the story/writing- re-boting are what turns me cold.
OOPS I FORGOT TO USE MY TRADEMARK CAPS FOR THE HARD OF HEARING…
AND METAPHOR MAY BE THE WRONG TERM BUT NOBODYS PERFECT
I rather foolishly thought when I read the interview that we were having a really nice backstory which while not being for everyone, would effectively nullify the complaints of most ardent canonites. What WAS I thinking?
There is SO much precedent for this in Trek lore. The Mirror Universe supplements the “main” timelines wonderfully and this does the same only with a bigger, more epic scope. They are taking Trek and giving it a story which changes everything you’ll see from now on but doesn’t insult what went before.
At worse, this is a supplement to TOS and Iowagirl had it spot on way at the start of the thread. I’m genuinely appalled at the insulting manner some people have responded with. If Bob Orci reads this far I’d like to add a thanks for being so gracious and patient and for taking time to explain so much. You have thicker skin than I, sir :-)
651. Shatner_Fan_Prime – December 13, 2008
Nope.
Good Q&A between Bob and Anthony. It actually makes sense after the “one to many shots of Cordrozine I had tonight!”
Bob, question . . . obviously contingent upon the success of the movie, do you and Alex anticipate coming out with a ST story that falls in line with what made the series attractive and successful. For example, instead of relying on time travel as a variable in the writing equation, why not go back to:
1. Enterprise on a defined mission. Not the last or only ship in the area to always respond to an emergency.
2. Not a mission where the galaxy is at stake, but where the villain has it out for achieving more tangable objectives; greed, lust for power, but also demonstrates his fallability during his run-ins with the Enterprise crew. More of an impulsive, “colorful” villain versus the calculating kind.
3. Show the Enterprise core characters explore more challenging and demanding persona between each other while trying to defeat the protagonist. The catch would be to do this while trying to stand by each other as the villain offers them “something” they may want to betray each other. Go deeper into the character’s makeup and explore what true “human frailties” they may possess conflicting with their dedication to each other and Kirk.
Just curious questions . . . otherwise, I’m totally psyched about seeing the movie in May. Hopefully, I’ll be back from the Middle East to see the premier!
Beuno Suerte Amico and Ciao!
Sonny B.
Wow and Ouch is all I have to say….Intersting Ideas, Intersting way to come at Trek Fresh…but boy do I think Janway has it right when she says this gives her a headace….I’m comming close…..So many diffrent Cannons so little time….ouch…bet the only person who could love and get used to jumping from Timeline to Timeline and Reality to Reality would be a Q!
and Congrats to anyone who has time to actually read all these post in one sitting with out losing sleep or sanity!
“The people on the boards who seem most open to changing Trek are probably the people who preferred Star Wars all along. ”
Have only ever seen 1 movie of it. So count me out of that. Though, keep on trying with your theories.
lol bulsh1t
with this explanation you can do whatever you like and still say its canon
A rather unsettling interview. Several points/ fears I’d like to share:
Pt.1. [Point]
“Many Worlds” is only an interpretation of QT (Quantum Theory). I’ve heard some other do exist. So it need not be the right/ correct one.
Pt.2. [Fear]
Alternate time-line, hence the “Not your father’s Trek(’s time-line)”, is a concept I don’t like since it sounds like different Trek than t