[Beetlescott]

Originally Posted by Samuel

Worse for some. Probably just fine for most. Today we are very used to reboots and if its done well most just think of it as such. Daniel Craig has not nor ever will destroy Sean Connery but he is Bond just as much as any of the other actors were. Well, maybe all but David Niven.

I don't think you could find a handful of Trekkies who would think of it as fine. That would be the ultimate insult. To wipe out 43 years of Star Trek and say, throw it out, we are starting over. That is where I think Star Trek differs from Batman or Bond.

[flw]

Originally Posted by Mjolnir2000

Every single time there's been time travel in star trek, the prior timeline is erased. That's how time travel in star trek works.

You're right - when we're just talking about travel back and forth within a particular timeline, as in "City on the Edge of Forever", "Yesterday's Enterprise", or Star Trek: First Contact. This movie involves leaping into another, independent timeline that already exists in parallel. Call it what you will, but I think we're seeing travel both in time and across dimensions. You might want to read the recent movie-prequel comic series "Star Trek: Countdown" that provides a good lead-in to the new movie - in fact it links the events after "Nemesis" to the new film very nicely, I think. It was written by Orci and Kurtzman (the film scriptwriters) and is available in trade paperback on Amazon or at any comic shop.

[flw]

Originally Posted by Samuel

Well, maybe all but David Niven.

Nah - the ultimate Bond has to be Woody Allen!

[Mjolnir2000]

Originally Posted by flw

You're right - when we're just talking about travel back and forth within a particular timeline, as in "City on the Edge of Forever", "Yesterday's Enterprise", or Star Trek: First Contact. This movie involves leaping into another, independent timeline that already exists in parallel. Call it what you will, but I think we're seeing travel both in time and across dimensions. You might want to read the recent movie-prequel comic series "Star Trek: Countdown" that provides a good lead-in to the new movie - in fact it links the events after "Nemesis" to the new film very nicely, I think. It was written by Orci and Kurtzman (the film scriptwriters) and is available in trade paperback on Amazon or at any comic shop.

Yeah, I know what their explanation is, and how they're trying to make it all fit, but that's not the point. Even if they came up with some flawless scientific explanation, the fact of the matter is that this is effectively a reboot, for all intents and purposes - after this film, it's very unlikely that either of the sequels will ever refer to the prime timeline again. Now a reboot doesn't bother me - reboots can be great (BSG, for instance) - what bothers me is that they think they can just appease fans of the original by throwing in some complicated time travel element.

[Samuel]

Originally Posted by Beetlescott

I don't think you could find a handful of Trekkies who would think of it as fine. That would be the ultimate insult. To wipe out 43 years of Star Trek and say, throw it out, we are starting over. That is where I think Star Trek differs from Batman or Bond.

Trekkies no. But everyone else yes. That said, I am interested in different ideas of Trek and would never throw out what has been. If you have $150 million, make your own interpretation, and it is good then I will be just as interested in your ideas as well. If for arguments sake you also said you were throwing out those 43 years I would say 'yea right... keep telling yourself that and shut up so I can enjoy your movie".

[flw]

Originally Posted by Mjolnir2000

Yeah, I know what their explanation is, and how they're trying to make it all fit, but that's not the point. Even if they came up with some flawless scientific explanation, the fact of the matter is that this is effectively a reboot, for all intents and purposes - after this film, it's very unlikely that either of the sequels will ever refer to the prime timeline again. Now a reboot doesn't bother me - reboots can be great (BSG, for instance) - what bothers me is that they think they can just appease fans of the original by throwing in some complicated time travel element.

Sure it's a reboot, and nobody's fooled by it - but a lot of Trekkies like to "live" vicariously in the universe of Trek. As long as we can still be there, a lot of us will be happy - me included.

Just my opinion.

[Bright Eyes]

I had been led to believe that the intervention of Nero in the past results in all the time line changes that we have been seeing, but now I have been brought up to speed with spoilers and I must conclude that this is not quite true.

spoilerish

Nero's appearance in Trek's past at the time of the Kelvin and its destruction, changes Kirk's personal history, but not that of Starfleet. Nero's real impact on the time line happens 25 years later (who appears to have sat on his hands the whole time, only to be brought out when the writers wanted him again), when Kirk is a cadet. In the time between, without any influence from Nero, the technology of Starfleet and some of the known history, are manifestly different to what we have seen before. There is no hint of an explanation of how the destruction of the Kelvin has brought about such changes to Starfleet, and there is no reason to think that Nero has caused this.

The only conclusion I can see is that while this is a time change story, it is already set in a different time line from all the other Star Trek before Nero even arrives in the past. It would appear that both Nero and Spock Prime are from that time line's future, and not from the time line we are familiar with.

[kevin]

Several reviews have clearly stated that the film explains the reasons for the changes that certain characters give.

I'm sure what the writers intention was will become clearer at that point.

Seems to me that there is no evidence the 'new' timeline exists prior to the arrival of Nero. Which also doesn't mean it didn't. But then that doesn't fit with what I've been reading. The 'new' universe is created from the 'old' one at the moment of Nero's arrival and meeting with the Kelvin.

[Bright Eyes]

We shall see. Couching every discussion point inside a spoiler tag is tiresome, so I going to drop this, except to say that I think that the in-movie explanation for all the changes is going to prove to be less than satisfactory.

[kevin]

That is to be expected - nothing was ever going to prove satisfactory to every single viewer.