The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > The Enterprise
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-06-2008, 06:17 PM
MrSpock2002's Avatar
MrSpock2002 MrSpock2002 is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 24
Default The Enterprise

Ok.. I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but here it goes.

The Original Series Enterprise was first commanded by Captain April many years before Pike, than Kirk. In the first pilot you can even see major differences between April's Enterprise bridge and Pike/Kirks version.

Now the preview of the movie makes you think that the Enterprise is being built. But wouldn't it be a re fit???? If going by canon it would be... The Enterprise already had many many lightyears on it before Pike and Kirk got command of it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-06-2008, 07:10 PM
MissionTrek08's Avatar
MissionTrek08 MissionTrek08 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,562
Default

The short answer is: the STAR TREK teaser from last January was NOT meant to be taken literally. It's a metaphor for a 'fresh start' on the TREK franchise, and at least one of the film's creators confirmed that the footage in the teaser was created specifically FOR the teaser, and may not appear in the final film at all.

Beyond that, your question will be answered in full next May when the movie opens. Meanwhile, welcome aboard.
__________________

MISSION:TREK's in-depth review of STAR TREK


Proud member of the Friends of Zardoz Association. Avatar courtesy of Eliza's House of Avatars with three convenient locations near you. Free balloons for the kids!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-06-2008, 07:14 PM
jb42682's Avatar
jb42682 jb42682 is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 43
Default

This is a excellent point I agree 100%
However based on what we know of the new movie i think all time lines or pre refrences are out the shuttlebay. J. J. seems to want to keep the very core elements there but wants to revamp the franchise in order to pick up a new audiance. I.e. the romulans they look nothing like what were use to. To me this is a welcome change it's like the hair bands of the 80's you do something over and over and over the same way it gets old even for the most hardcore of fans. There is no doubt a lot of things will be missing and a lot things will be new to the "Kirk era" of star fleet we just have to wait and see. For me the time line isn't important if it means the survival and growth of the franchise.
__________________
Scotty, I need warp speed in three minutes or were all dead.-James T. Kirk
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-06-2008, 07:48 PM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

The idea that Robert April commanded the Enterprise five or so years before Christopher Pike is one that has appeared in many non-canon works, including fairly recent novels, various reference books written by Trek production personnel, and the still often debated TAS.

The new film may once and for all finalize April as Enterprise's first captain, but Pike is the first captain as far as live-action onscreen material is concerned. Personally, I tend to favor the April idea myself, but I know that many don't and will unleash unholy canon war at the very mention of him...
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:46 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

I've personally never had an issue with April as Enterprise's first captain or with TAS as canon. Although it TAS got a bit silly on occasion, it was never markedly more silly than some of the campier episodes of TOS, anyway... *shrugs*

As to the rest, I think I've made it pretty clear by now where I stand with the idea of 'throwing out' or 'rewriting' things, but in case our OP poster has missed it, my view is that if they're going to throw things away (as opposed to just not touching on them) then they should have come up with an entirely original premise and created a completely new property of their very own instead of trading on the name Star Trek.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-06-2008, 11:12 PM
jtrek79's Avatar
jtrek79 jtrek79 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Athens,Greece
Posts: 3,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSpock2002 View Post
Ok.. I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but here it goes.

The Original Series Enterprise was first commanded by Captain April many years before Pike, than Kirk. In the first pilot you can even see major differences between April's Enterprise bridge and Pike/Kirks version.

Now the preview of the movie makes you think that the Enterprise is being built. But wouldn't it be a re fit???? If going by canon it would be... The Enterprise already had many many lightyears on it before Pike and Kirk got command of it.

If thats the case,april-first,pike-second,and the film overlooks it,some of us are willing to forgive this minor detaili am one of them
Welcome to the board
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-07-2008, 01:58 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

First I agree that the teaser trailer footage is just a metaphor for the re-launch, hence the 'Under Construction' tag double meaning.

But back to the order of Captain's. We know the Enterprise had a long service life (the 20 years mentioned in TSFS is, I think, a blooper because a basic look at timelines doesn't bear it out), so not all her history can be filled in one film. I think the film will not throw out anything purely for the sake of it, but the writers will not adhere strictly, I think they themselves have said they are not above some 'minor' violations for the needs of the re-launch. What that means is anyone's guess until we see the finished film, but although I'm a fan of continuity and canon, I can live with a few changes for the larger picture - to get Trek back on track.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-07-2008, 04:10 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

The E went in service in 2245, Kirk took her in 2265. No one has been cast as April as far as we know it, so it seems unlikely that he will be in the movie, three captains for one ship are too much to show in one movie and one should carefully avoid the impression that the E is indeed already 20 years old when Kirk takes command.
So either they ignore TAS and April and show that Pike is her first captain or they simply ignore her first years and start off while Pike is already in command for a while, perhaps a scene alongside the Kelvin. The latter seems most likely IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-07-2008, 10:45 AM
MrSpock2002's Avatar
MrSpock2002 MrSpock2002 is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
The idea that Robert April commanded the Enterprise five or so years before Christopher Pike is one that has appeared in many non-canon works, including fairly recent novels, various reference books written by Trek production personnel, and the still often debated TAS.

The new film may once and for all finalize April as Enterprise's first captain, but Pike is the first captain as far as live-action onscreen material is concerned. Personally, I tend to favor the April idea myself, but I know that many don't and will unleash unholy canon war at the very mention of him...
Yeah, Having April being the first captain would make sense as the first pilot the enterprise bridge looked out dated compared to the "newer" version with Kirk.

It's funny as the "official" pilot was actually put in as aired #3 (I think 3..) and had a vastly different cast, and the bridge was different as well. I never quite understood why that was the case, as the series proper was different.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-08-2008, 02:08 AM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionTrek08 View Post
The short answer is: the STAR TREK teaser from last January was NOT meant to be taken literally. It's a metaphor for a 'fresh start' on the TREK franchise, and at least one of the film's creators confirmed that the footage in the teaser was created specifically FOR the teaser, and may not appear in the final film at all.

Beyond that, your question will be answered in full next May when the movie opens. Meanwhile, welcome aboard.
Great summary MIssion!
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:59 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.