Jack_Bauer

Click for Spoiler:

Secondly, Romulus is destroyed in 2387 of the prime timeline.

 

Click for Spoiler:

This is the question I have, who says that it's the "prime timeline"? Is it an alternate timeline itself which skews even further with the time travel?

Of course my theory is the so-called Mirror Universe is the way things are supposed to play out and we only have the series / 1-10 movie timeline because of the Enterprise-E's interference with First Contact.

Possible, but unlikely. Reading up on the subject, it seems to be suggested that the Terran Empire predates 2063.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Terran_Empire

The Shakespeare line definitely supports the pre-2063 conclusion.

Click for Spoiler:

Also, as I said earlier, Romulus and Remus no longer exist in the future prime timeline (2387), they remain in the altered timeline.

Do you have that reversed?

 

Click for Spoiler:

Isn't the movie the alternate timeline? So if the planets were destroyed in the movie, they remain in the prime timeline and are gone in the altered timeline.

Click for Spoiler:

Also, as I said earlier, Romulus and Remus no longer exist in the future prime timeline (2387), they remain in the altered timeline.

Do you have that reversed?

 

Click for Spoiler:

Isn't the movie the alternate timeline? So if the planets were destroyed in the movie, they remain in the prime timeline and are gone in the altered timeline.

 

Click for Spoiler:

What it is, which I hadn't fully thought of when I initially posted is that Romulus and Remus are destroyed in the future. Nero and Spock get thrown into the past (was it 129 years?). So when Nero and Spock get to the past they're there at a time before Romulus and Remus are destroyed. Romulus will still be destroyed, but not till the sun goes super nova in another 129 years (if I got that number right).

 

So Vulcan is gone, 10,000+ Vulcans are all that's left but Romulus and Remus are still there... for now.

 

The question in my mind now is this, is the whole "Romulan sun goes Super Nova" thing all part of an alternate universe and not part of Real Star Trek?

Well, I was going to write a review, but your review say just about everything I wanted to say...

 

A few thing I'd like to add:

 

1. The Enterprise was not built on the ground! It's to big, THAT is something that should not have been changed by the altered timeline.

 

2. Where was the Relativity (and other timeships) during all this? Isn't it their job to fix when people mess with the timeline?

I kept expecting it to fade to the Relativity at the end and show them resetting the timeline.

 

 

Overall I enjoyed it, but I would have liked it better if they fixed a few of the tech errors (i.e. Enterprise being built on the ground) and reset the timeline at the end.

Actually, without replicator technology, it would make a lot more sense to build starships on the ground. In fact, Starfleet continues to do so into the 24th Century (there are screenshots of Utopia Plantia which show starships being built, at least in pieces, on the surface of Mars: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Utopia_Planitia.jpg).

As for the Relativity, they fail to show up a lot. Considering the number of temporal incidents seen on screen since the introduction of the Relativity in Voyager's fifth season. Also, them showing up would be counter productive. If they had reset at the end of this movie, you might as well bury the franchise. The whole point of this movie is to get the franchise to a point where it can tell new stories with its most popular characters without being constrained by existing canon. They have managed to do so without erasing existing canon.

This is as much Canon as Enterprise is and in fact this movie helps to further cement Enterprise as Canon. That said....

 

Click for Spoiler:

This movie really throws a lot of Trek history into question, which of course goes with an alternate timeline. First, is Tuvok ever born? His date of birth is 2264 but Vulcan is destroyed in 2258. I know that Tuvok is born on Vulcanis Lunar Colony but where is that? How close to Vulcan is it? If it's close enough to be destroyed by the black hole that destroys Vulcan then Tuvok is in trouble. This could be explained away by saying that Tuvok's parents were among the 10,000 or so survivors.

 

Another thing, everyone points out that Vulcan is destroyed but so too is Romulus and Remus. If Romulus is destroyed then how will the Federation defeat the Dominion in the Dominion war... assuming that the war even happens. ...

 

Those are just a few issues that I've thought of and I know they can all be explained away as an alternate timeline and thus "our" timeline is still there, it's just existing as a parallel timeline but I'm really hoping that they set things right in the next movie.

 

If I could ask the producers/directors a question it would be this... Is this an "alternate reality" and is "our reality" (the 800 hours that came before) still there and intact or does this "alternate reality" replace "our reality"?

 

It clearly can't be both ways. When writing "Trek History" you MUST put Star Trek XI into it's own category. It's canon but it can't co-exist with all that came before. The only way you can do it is by making it sort of like the Alternate Universe or all of Worf's different quantum realities in Parallels.

 

I haven't seen the movie yet (going on Monday unless something unforeseen comes up AGAIN) but based on what VBG says

 

Click for Spoiler:

I believe the only way to reconcile some of the events in this movie with canon is to categorize it as an alternate universe. There were episodes at least partially set on Vulcan after 2258 on both TOS (example: Amok Time) and TNG (examples: Unification, Gambit) and we see Romulus (examples: Unification and NEM) and Remus (example: NEM) after that time as well so the three planets exist in the late 23rd century and 24th century of the series/movies. I think any additions to canon made by this movie should be clearly marked as being alternate universe in the same way that characters and events from the Mirror Universe are so we now have, for example, Kirk, AU Kirk and MU Kirk.

Click for Spoiler:

For me, and this is just my personal choice based on the way I define being "from" someplace as I described above along with the official ST website and the Encyclopedia take it as the accepted birthplace by the franchise. I also believe after hearing the news today that Abrams knew that he was straying from canon and that it would end up pissing a lot of people off. He's telling "hard core purists" to stay home because they'll "just get angry".

 

Now is that any way to treat the very fans that made the movie possible to begin with?

 

The video clip from the news is uploading to YouTube now. I'll add it to the thread once it's finished.

 

 

Click for Spoiler:

Ok, I can accept that about Romulus still being there. Temporal mechanics will get you every time won't they? lol Anyway, looking on Kirks bio page at ST.COM it says that his birthplace is Riverside Iowa. So while some of the things can be explained by the time travel (which is being used way too much at this point), how can the presence of the Kirks on the Kelvin be explained? They were already there and Mama Kirk was in labor with little Jim when the attack that kills his father takes place. So they're on the Kelvin before the alternate timeline happens. That's how it looks to me anyway.

This is as much Canon as Enterprise is and in fact this movie helps to further cement Enterprise as Canon. That said....

 

Click for Spoiler:

This movie really throws a lot of Trek history into question, which of course goes with an alternate timeline. First, is Tuvok ever born? His date of birth is 2264 but Vulcan is destroyed in 2258. I know that Tuvok is born on Vulcanis Lunar Colony but where is that? How close to Vulcan is it? If it's close enough to be destroyed by the black hole that destroys Vulcan then Tuvok is in trouble. This could be explained away by saying that Tuvok's parents were among the 10,000 or so survivors.

 

Another thing, everyone points out that Vulcan is destroyed but so too is Romulus and Remus. If Romulus is destroyed then how will the Federation defeat the Dominion in the Dominion war... assuming that the war even happens.

 

Without the Romulans to help balance the sector what happens with the Klingons? The Romulans never attack Khitomer thus never kill Mogh and Worf never gets adopted by humans and in turn never joins Starfleet. Also, the Romulans never attack the Klingon outpost on Narendra III which means that the Enterprise-C doesn't come to the rescue and is never destroyed possibly pushing back the construction of the Enterprise-D.

 

Now, since the Enterprise-C wasn't destroyed trying to defend Klingons there was never a peace treaty meaning that there is no alliance with the Klingons further weakening the possibility of either the Klingons or Humans defeating the Dominion.

 

Those are just a few issues that I've thought of and I know they can all be explained away as an alternate timeline and thus "our" timeline is still there, it's just existing as a parallel timeline but I'm really hoping that they set things right in the next movie.

 

If I could ask the producers/directors a question it would be this... Is this an "alternate reality" and is "our reality" (the 800 hours that came before) still there and intact or does this "alternate reality" replace "our reality"?

 

It clearly can't be both ways. When writing "Trek History" you MUST put Star Trek XI into it's own category. It's canon but it can't co-exist with all that came before. The only way you can do it is by making it sort of like the Alternate Universe or all of Worf's different quantum realities in Parallels.

 

The Kirk and Spock of ST XI can't be the Kirk and Spock from TOS or the TOS movies. Which brings to mind that James Kirk was supposed to have been born in Riverside, Iowa. Not out in space, so how would that be explained? They were out in space before the alternate timeline took place.

 

Well that was a bit more than I had planned to type but one thing just kept leading to another and I could probably go on with more lol. Despite all of that though, I did enjoy the movie and still plan to go back to the Imax version. I just hope Star Trek XII sets some things right when they make it.

First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

Two words: Alternate Timeline.

And seriously? The horrible example of changing the past you throw out there is six million people NOT being exterminated?

I am inclined to agree with AE. While Star Trek (XI) is not reconcilable with the original or prime timeline, the alternate timeline it exists in is birthed from the original timeline.

So what if it looks industrial? It's a spaceship! It has over 400 crewmen! It is *supposed* to be industrial, not plush the way a Galaxy class is.

 

Ever look inside a submarine? They don't provide for a lot of creature comforts because they want the inhabitants to be "on edge" to some degree so they don't forget where they are and what they are doing.

I have no problem with the industrial look in and of itself. I find it difficult to verbalize my exact problem. May it was just that I felt that there was no sense of order or logic to the design. I'm seeing the movie again tonight, and I'll see if I feel any differently.

* The Red Shirts actually know how to fight, and not a single one dies!

 

Over all I agree with your review, and for that matter all of the reviews so far.

 

Click for Spoiler:

Go back and look at the sky diving part, the one that died was wearing a read pressure suit. He was the "Red Shirt" of the movie.

Click for Spoiler:

I would like to raise the point that those particular Romulans chose that look. They are tattooed and shaven. That's not their natural look. The prequel comic addresses this. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it. It doesn't gel perfectly but it provides more backstory on Nero and Spock Prime's dealings with him.

 

Click for Spoiler:

Yes, but no forehead ridges? If a TNG, DS9, Voyager or Enterprise Romulan shaved his or her head and tattooed him or herself they'd still look Romulan. These Romulans didn't really look Romulan. They looked more like head shaved Vulcans.

I was fine with the shuttlebay. I thought that looked good. So did engineering. They just overused the industrial look. But then again, there was a lot of focus on shuttlebays and engineering. Easily the two most seen areas aside from the bridge. So maybe it just seemed like it.

I give Star Trek a 9.5 out of 10. It was a very solid and enjoyable film with plenty of winks and nods for long time fans (nearly every classic line is repeated). It is very well paced (flies by) and has a very accessible story. It also lays it out quite clearly that this is an alternate timeline and that the destinies of the crew have been altered. The performances are amazing. They may be different actors, but they are the characters. Outstanding effects work and make-up. Additionally this movie is incredibly funny, with loads of character-based humour.

My only major quibble (and I can look past this) is some of the production design. The lower decks of the Enterprise and the Kelvin seem too industrial. I have no problem with that for engineering and the lower decks but maybe we just see too much of it and not enough of the upper decks (though what we do see is nice). I do take issue with the corridor behind the bridge, but overall not a big thing. This isn't the exact same Enterprise.

I didn't blow me away in the way I was hoping though but I think I may have known too much going in.

Overall, the best outing the franchise has had in some time and I eagerly await the sequel.

Yup. Had my tickets for about a week.

Seeing it tomorrow as well.

There are a couple of ways to look at it - it's just a meaningless marketing ploy attempting to entice younger viewers by suggesting anything their parents did was "wrong" - this is what I'm hoping for - just meaningless hype.

 

On the other hand it is meant to be offensive - to the parent generation- it's meant to imply that there is something old fashioned or certainly lacking in entertainment value in the original series - and by association something wrong with anyone that would have liked TOS. I don't really care for that implication.

 

And it also is troubling because it suggests the film will merely reflect the juevenile mentality of Hollywood; fights, explosions and people taking off their clothes. (Wonderful take on this in the Alan Alda movie Sweet Liberty)

 

Obviously, special effects and tecnology have come a long way since the 60's so that's good - I don't like cheesy effects. But if it's all special effects, explosions and naked people with no plot or character development - I will be disappointed. One way or the other I'm going to see it - I just hope I don't come away disappointed.

The first interpretation is the correct interpretation. However, "Not your father's Star Trek" doesn't necessarily imply that the original was wrong or bad. All it truly implies is that this movie is different from what came before it and it is therefore designed to get younger and non-Trekkies to at least try the movie. This TV spot has been primarily used to target these markets. I believe it premiered on UFC Fight Night on Spike and I think I've only seen it myself during Blue Jays Baseball, which are not likely to be watched by the core Trek fanbase.

I will admit this could be taken as offensive I do not believe for a second it was intended as such. All those involved have nothing to gain from alienating the core Trek fanbase. We are still a target market, just not the only target market. No one ever has anything to gain from offending a portion of the audience, especially a target market.

Star Trek needed to be rebranded and it needs to bring in new fans. That may involve stepping on the toes of the old fans a little, but its in the long term best interest of the franchise.

Additionally, while there are explosions and fights, there is no nudity in the movie and only one sexual situation, which is shown in pretty much all the trailers. And by all accounts, the movie does do a good job with the characters (aside from perhaps Nero, who is apparently a somewhat thinly-drawn villain, but still well performed) and I've heard varied discussion of the plot.

I never thought it would come. After the christmas release was pushed forward I wanted to scream. But now it's a little over a week away. I am so excited! I have a feeling though that there will be a lot of rewriting of established star trek history and chronology.

Click for Spoiler:

William Adama

Click for Spoiler:

Bill Adama: The Teenage Years?

 

I wonder if they will explain where that husky voice comes from.

How can it be re-imagined of it is an original concept?

DrWho42 is referring to Battlestar Galactica as re-imagined, not Caprica. It's a spin-off of the re-imagined show.

Overall, I'm not that interested either and I like Battlestar Galactica. Just doesn't appeal to me for some reason. Probably for the same reasons as Van Roy. Although, there is one character who appears in both:

Of course, it's not really the same.

were it not for the connection to Battlestar Galactica it might as well be taking place on Earth.

I think that's the point.

I saw it opening night. I had only read the graphic novel recently as I had wanted to read it before seeing the movie (recently being about two months prior). Overall, I give the movie about an 8/10 (but the novel is still superior). My biggest complaint was the fact that it seemed like they had gone to such extreme detail to recreate the novel but left so many good things out of it (i.e. the origin of Rorschach's mask, Ozymandias' "I suppose I'd have had to catch the bullet" and "I did it!", etc). I am eager to see the full uncut version, as I think it will be better overall.

My other complaints were some of the scoring (all good and appropriate songs, but some were in bad spots. 99 Luftballons and Hallejuah come to mind) and initially I thought some of the violence was excessive but the novel is as well, so I guess its not that bad. I also thought Crudup's portrayal of Manhattan was too emotional and the voice didn't fit.

On the plus side, it was very faithful to the source material, aside from the ending, but the new ending works just as well. I think they absolutely nailed Rorschach and Nite Owl II, with Silk Spectre II, Ozymandias, and The Comedian also being solid. The opening credit sequence is also fantastic.

Everyone up to speed on what the The Vault is, correct?

 

I think we've seen it before and been privy to some things that go on there. In a couple of ENT episodes, (Arenar comes to mind) we see Romulans at an undisclosed location doing dastardly things. I think that location is The Vault.

 

I think it is safe to say that the warbird from TUC was built at The Vault and I wouldn't be surprised if The Vault is where "Future Guy" eventually sets up his shop.

 

Thoughts?

I don't think the either two examples are the Vault. In those Enterprise episodes, the Romulans are operating in a city on Romulus. The technology could have potentially been developed at the Vault, though (presuming the Vault is that old). The other example is a Klingon technology, so it probably not built at the Vault.

Future Guy could be operating there and it wouldn't surprise me if B-4 and Shinzon's Thalaron technology was acquired from the Vault. There was a short story I read that said both came from a secret Romulan facility, but it wasn't the Vault. However, that story would be non-canon and if someone wanted to say they were from the Vault in canon, that would be fine.

The "Bad Robot" (J.J. Abrams' company logo) appears in the comic in a cameo. I believe it is near the end of the second chapter, in a panel where Spock and Picard are conferring in a room on Vulcan after Nero has left. It is shortly before Data contacts them. The Robot is working on a console to the right of the room.