ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Would More Time Travel Have Been Good

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 8:46 pm

I know time travel was used alot in Enterprise but I wonder if it would have been cool having the Enterprise crew meet other Trek crews like TNG's, DS9's or Voyager's? Or maybe have the crew meet a 24th Century ship that would somehow have been lost in the 22nd Century they explore it but it somehow gets back to the 24th Century.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 8:53 pm

I thought that would have been cool in that episode where they find that ship from the future where it appears bigger on the inside would have been a 24th Century ship instead from further in the future. I think that one was from the 29th or 31st Century right?

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 8:53 pm

I liked crews traveling back, but I don't think I'd like it so much traveling forward.

I could easily have liked ENT quite well without ANY time travel, although I enjoyed some of the actual episodes (Shockwave, Carpenter Street). But I don't think I wanted any more of it.

But here on this thread, I'll bet some folks come up with some interesting ideas! :)

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 8:56 pm

Quote (grigori @ Dec. 27 2009, 8:53 pm)
I liked crews traveling back, but I don't think I'd like it so much traveling forward.

I could easily have liked ENT quite well without ANY time travel, although I enjoyed some of the actual episodes (Shockwave, Carpenter Street). But I don't think I wanted any more of it.

But here on this thread, I'll bet some folks come up with some interesting ideas! :)

I think one episode they could have done would have been based on that Star Trek Calendar image showing the crashed Columbia in the Gamma Quadarant. They did that in the Star Trek: Destiny book series.

I could imagine funny scenes seeing Archer and crew activating the EMH and seeing the dedication plaque on the bridge.

Middleman

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3657

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 9:04 pm

I don't know if it would have made anything more interesting. It may have given the die hards something more to complain about. Wasn't too much time travel a pet peve of many of those critical of the series? Anyway, my head is still spinning from the time travel in STXI.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 9:15 pm

I would not mind if they time traveled to meet a future crew because it would be good to see the future crew "recognize" the Enterprise crew. It would be much like when the Original Series crew meets Zefram Cochrane in Metamorphosis. In a way even These Are The Voyages can be considered similar to a time travel episode. It was also interesting to see the Enterprise J in the future episode.

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this Dec. 27 2009, 9:36 pm

Quote (Narada @ Dec. 27 2009, 9:15 pm)
I would not mind if they time traveled to meet a future crew because it would be good to see the future crew "recognize" the Enterprise crew.

Actually THAT would be cool--weave the NX-01 back into the story and see how later generations view the crew.

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 2:52 pm

Yes one problem with meeting crews from the future is it reinforces that time is somehow predetermined or cannot be changed. This is not a concept which blends well with "exploring the unknown." This issue was addressed in the past by making a past crew meet an "alternate future crew." Like with Archer meeting Daniels in different conditions or the Yesterdays Enterprise crew or even the All Good Things episode these examples all showed future possibilities. The irony or paradox with this scenario is technically these alternate future crews do not even exist if that is not what really happens in the time line.

Jereath

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 3:05 pm

It would be cool

Dbear1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1594

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 5:40 pm

I personally am not a big fan of time travel, all of ST used that way too much IMO along with the reset button.  I also was not a huge fan of the alternative universe concept either.

Plus if they traveled into the future and met future crews it would likely totally screw up the timeline. In fact the future crews would try to stop them from going back to their original timeline to protect it.

I think there was plenty of adventures the crew had left to do in their timeframe and universe.

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 5:42 pm

Quote (Narada @ Dec. 29 2009, 2:52 pm)
Yes one problem with meeting crews from the future is it reinforces that time is somehow predetermined or cannot be changed. This is not a concept which blends well with "exploring the unknown."

I think this IS exactly what I wouldn't like about such visits from the future. In Trek, we are all too used to seeing "possible" future scenarios which never happen--and which our present-day crew members are often told they can PREVENT from happening. So what then, when the "fixed" version of the future comes along and presents itself? Will present-day crew members see something in it they want to change? 'Cause we know they CAN. But in this instance Trek as we know it won't let THAT version be changed.

So it just messes with what we're used to. It was bad enough, Daniels telling Archer "YOU have to do this to protect MY way of life in the future"--but at least he was a professional and didn't reveal that actual future.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 5:44 pm

Was that plausible about Archer ruining Daniles future just by bringing him foward to the 31st Century?

Dbear1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1594

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 5:57 pm

Because the crew would learn about events and technology from the future and likely would be affected by it even if they tried to not take advantage of it.

SCFI has always treated time travel a bit too lightly IMO.  The chances of screwing something up (weather going into the future or past) it boggles the mind.

I remember when Daniels was trying to talk Archer out of going onto the Xindi weapon and he said Reed was not important to the timeline, I remember thinking how the heck would Daniels know? Reed could do one thing that would have huge affects on the future but never would make it into the history books.  Many unknown people have done things that either affect a famous person or do something that does not seem important at the moment but later has a huge affect.  Especially in a military type scenario, the Captains, Colonels, Generals and Admirals might be who history remembers, but a lot of times their winning a battle is decided by a private, who history may not even notice.

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 6:07 pm

Quote (TrekFan1701E @ Dec. 29 2009, 5:44 pm)
Was that plausible about Archer ruining Daniles future just by bringing him foward to the 31st Century?

Yes. We see within the events of the series that without Archer there's no Coalition, without the Coalition there's no Federation.

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this Dec. 29 2009, 6:09 pm

Quote (Dbear1 @ Dec. 29 2009, 5:57 pm)
...he said Reed was not important to the timeline, I remember thinking how the heck would Daniels know? Reed could do one thing that would have huge affects on the future but never would make it into the history books.

I thought the exact same thing then! Good point. That was stretching MY belief a bit.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum