NextGen2085 GROUP: Members POSTS: 91  |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 12:47 am
I don't know why but wouldn't it be better if the enterprise was pulled in with Nero to the other side and were sent into the future. Thus entering an alternate timeline due to the events Nero caused. I don't know why but I think the sequel will deal with this aspect of what happends to Nero in an alternate timeline or mirror universe.
|
Narada GROUP: Members POSTS: 4006 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 3:19 am
Interesting point ! This would be nice but not entering this singularity also means accepting your reality and not choosing another alternative. It would be meaningful to accept another destiny of a past life but this movie is about accepting a new destiny or possibility.
|
|
GROUP: Members POSTS: 0 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 3:57 am
This movie is about overwriting the old canon and flipping the bird to longtime fans.
The problem is the idiots in charge won't admit it.
They have to hide behind an 80 year old man to defend it.
|
WkdYngMan GROUP: Members POSTS: 3948 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 5:13 am
^^ Enough of the trolling Matt.
|
|
axilmar1 GROUP: Members POSTS: 1576 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 8:33 am
How about entering the prime Universe at time of the battle of Wolf 359??? now that would be extremely interesting...and a chance to see the TNG crew once again!
|
DarthRage GROUP: Members POSTS: 289 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 10:41 am
How do we know the singularity created at the end of the movie would send them forward? It could just have easily sent them back to the past.
|
Captain_Storma GROUP: Members POSTS: 11836 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 10:56 am
| Quote (BrianHMay @ Aug. 13 2009, 12:57 pm) | This movie is about overwriting the old canon and flipping the bird to longtime fans.
The problem is the idiots in charge won't admit it.
They have to hide behind an 80 year old man to defend it. |
ROFL... so true...  |
|
Captain_Storma GROUP: Members POSTS: 11836 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 10:57 am
| Quote (axilmar1 @ Aug. 13 2009, 5:33 pm) | | How about entering the prime Universe at time of the battle of Wolf 359??? now that would be extremely interesting...and a chance to see the TNG crew once again! |
Would also explain the hull of the Constitution-Class in the graveyeard scene  |
|
Captain_Storma GROUP: Members POSTS: 11836 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:24 am
|
Ali88 GROUP: Members POSTS: 889 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:24 am
This has really nothing to do with this topic but I was really disappointed that Scott Bakula didn't have a cameo as a very old Jonathan Archer in the new movie, maybe been taken on a tour around the new Enterprise, maybe with Spock, like McCoy and Data in TNG pilot episode
Yes I know his dog was mentioned that wasn't good enough
|
|
Captain_Storma GROUP: Members POSTS: 11836 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:25 am
| Quote (starbase63 @ Aug. 13 2009, 8:19 pm) | | Quote (BrianHMay @ Aug. 13 2009, 3:57 am) | This movie is about overwriting the old canon and flipping the bird to longtime fans.
The problem is the idiots in charge won't admit it.
They have to hide behind an 80 year old man to defend it. |
Testing, hello, are we reaching?
Nothing was overwritten.
The original timeline still exists. CBS still owns it.
The new timeline is Paramount's.
All is well. All is well.
 |
Thanks God  Let's keep our fingers crossed that CBS decided to make a TV show set in the prime timeline, long time after NEMESIS and the world will be in place again. |
|
Captain_Storma GROUP: Members POSTS: 11836 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:28 am
| Quote (Ali88 @ Aug. 13 2009, 8:24 pm) | This has really nothing to do with this topic but I was really disappointed that Scott Bakula didn't have a cameo as a very old Jonathan Archer in the new movie, maybe been taken on a tour around the new Enterprise, maybe with Spock, like McCoy and Data in TNG pilot episode
Yes I know his dog was mentioned that wasn't good enough |
Actually it could not have been Jonathan Archer. Scotty refered to Admiral Archer, yet Jonathan Archer should at that point of time be refered to as President Archer (since he was president of the UFP in the late 22nd century). Retired people are always called by the last rank they had. So if Scotty refered to Jonathan Archer he should have called him President Archer, instead of Admiral. Of course this could also be an error and bad research on the writer's part. |
|
Ali88 GROUP: Members POSTS: 889 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:35 am
| Quote (Captain_Storma @ Aug. 13 2009, 11:28 am) | | Quote (Ali88 @ Aug. 13 2009, 8:24 pm) | This has really nothing to do with this topic but I was really disappointed that Scott Bakula didn't have a cameo as a very old Jonathan Archer in the new movie, maybe been taken on a tour around the new Enterprise, maybe with Spock, like McCoy and Data in TNG pilot episode
Yes I know his dog was mentioned that wasn't good enough |
Actually it could not have been Jonathan Archer.
Scotty refered to Admiral Archer, yet Jonathan Archer should at that point of time be refered to as President Archer (since he was president of the UFP in the late 22nd century).
Retired people are always called by the last rank they had. So if Scotty refered to Jonathan Archer he should have called him President Archer, instead of Admiral.
Of course this could also be an error and bad research on the writer's part. ¿ |
That's true Actually I thought Archer would be dead cause didn't he die a day after the original Enterprise was first launched in the original timeline I wonder if T'Pol is still alive in the altered timeline or was she on Vulcan when it got destroyed If she's alive, she should appear in a future sequel |
|
Ali88 GROUP: Members POSTS: 889 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:38 am
To be honest, I don't really care for JJ Abram's star trek because a timeline can be changed in so many different ways and we can have so many different realities, what makes this one so #### special?
And because it never gets any better than the original timeline because it has been and always will be the real reality
|
rocketscientist GROUP: Members POSTS: 9987 |
Report this
Aug. 13 2009, 11:44 am
| Quote (Captain_Storma @ Aug. 13 2009, 11:28 am) | | Quote (Ali88 @ Aug. 13 2009, 8:24 pm) | This has really nothing to do with this topic but I was really disappointed that Scott Bakula didn't have a cameo as a very old Jonathan Archer in the new movie, maybe been taken on a tour around the new Enterprise, maybe with Spock, like McCoy and Data in TNG pilot episode
Yes I know his dog was mentioned that wasn't good enough |
Actually it could not have been Jonathan Archer.
Scotty refered to Admiral Archer, yet Jonathan Archer should at that point of time be refered to as President Archer (since he was president of the UFP in the late 22nd century).
Retired people are always called by the last rank they had. So if Scotty refered to Jonathan Archer he should have called him President Archer, instead of Admiral.
Of course this could also be an error and bad research on the writer's part. ¿ |
Or it can be explained as another Archer, not the one from ENT. Maybe Archer had a son or a nephew or something that liked beagles too. Simple as that. |
![Star Trek Into Darkness Enterprise Falling Movie Poster [11x17]](http://shop.startrek.com/img/product/resized/672/00452345-948672_catl_125.jpg?k=eda57382&pid=452345&s=catl&sn=startrek "Star Trek Into Darkness Enterprise Falling Movie Poster [11x17]")
