Man… I love it when I’m right – and this makes twice in one week for me. 
Over the course of the last few weeks I’ve read small comments by Roberto Orci over at the TrekMovie site which led me to believe that yes, Star Trek “canon” issues (how this film fits into the overall Star Trek history) would be addressed in the new movie.
Today we not only confirmation of that – but exactly HOW these apparent inconsistencies will be addressed.
| |
In an discussion over at TrekMovie, Anthony (who runs the site) finally asked the question that Trekkies have been wanting the answer to:
“OK, now let’s get really into it… the big question is: Is the destruction of the Kelvin, the canon reason why everything is different?”
Will the following answer be satisfying? I’ll leave that up to you to decide. I’ll include bits and pieces of the interview, you can head over to TrekMovie for the whole thing (which is quite long and technical and will be a joy to read for real Star Trek fans).
Roberto Orci: It is the reason why some things are different, but not everything is different. Not everything is inconsistent with what might have actually happened, in canon. Some of the things that seem that they are totally different, I will argue, once the film comes out, fall well within what could have been the non-time travel version of this move.
TrekMovie.com: So, for example, Kirk is different, because his back story has totally changed, in that his parents…and all that. But you are saying that maybe Scotty or Spock’s back story would not be affected by that change?
Roberto Orci: Right.
Anthony: Does the time travel explain why the Enterprise looks different and why it is being built in Riverside Iowa?
TrekMovie.com: Yes, and yes.
So J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek movie takes place in/creates an alternate timeline/version of the Trek universe we know and love. He talks a lot about quantum physics and the new way of viewing time travel (if it were actually possible). According to Orci, the old time travel paradox question of whether you can go back and kill your own grandfather has been answered – and the answer is: Yes.
The idea is that event would exist in an alternate timeline in which you would never be born. In that timeline you’re a guy who came from nowhere and killed the man who was to be your grandfather. In that timeline you will never exist. According to this theory there is NO WAY to go back in time and change events that will affect the timeline you started from.
The problem with even this explanation is that it goes against what has been established in previous Star Trek episodes and movies: In prior Trek time travel DOES repair problems and the crew returns to the “fixed” future they left. Examples of this include the TNG episode “Yesterday’s Enterprise” where a starship was sent back to fight a crucial battle and it set the existing timeline straight, and the film “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home” where Kirk and Co. went back in time to bring humpback whales back to the future to avert the destruction of humanity.
The reasoning given is that at the time those were filmed there was a different view of time travel. Actually the version of time travel they’re using in the new film goes all the way back (in movies, anyway) to the first Back to the Future film, where Dr. Brown explains the splitting off of an alternate timeline to Marty as a possibility if something went wrong.
Anyway, here’s the summary of the whole thing in bullet point form:
- Q: Why do some things appear different in the new Star Trek movie?
- A: There is an alternative timeline created by Nero traveling back in time.
- Q: Is everything different in the alternative timeline?
- A: No, some things remain the same.
- Q: Does this alternative timeline wipe out the original timeline (from TOS – Nemesis)?
- A: No, quantum theory says they both co-exist.
- Q: Does the original timeline continue?
- A: Yes, again as explained by quantum theory.
- Q: Does this quantum theory approach conform to ‘Trek science?’
- A: Depends on the episode, but it is explicitly cited by Data in the episode “Parallels.”
So there you have it. What do you think? Are you satisfied with this explanation of why and how they were able to update and change things in the movie?
Star Trek opens on May 8, 2009
Loading ...
85 Comments
No, no, it makes sense to have the Quantum Theory version of time travel rather than the “Hollywood” rendition, but it’s cheap story telling. It makes time itself kind of meaningless, and time travelers even more so.
sooo…we still have a huge contraction then if it goes against those examples you point out about time travel theory in old trek movies and eps?
assssssss1!!1!
That’s one hell of an alternate time-line then. I’d like to see those two Enterprises’ face off. Although that probably wouldn’t be a fair fight.
y’know this is similar to an explination given by Trunks on DBZ (anime geek time) in the show, he said the reason why the androids were still alive in his time was the fact that his coming back through time only afftect the current reality that they were in and not the one he was in. That also explained WHY he and his younger self could touch and be near each other withour ripping the fabric of the universe apart
I wonder if super glue could repair the fabric of the universe in a pinch?
I think the alternative timeline explanation is just a copout for poor writing skills by people not familiar enough with the franchise to do it justice. Shame-shame-shame! I’m still looking forward to the movie though, because it has been so friggin’ long since the last one!
I hate when they use Quantum Physics like this…Sure superposition(being everywhere and nowhere all at once is being proven a reality) can work in the way they are applying it but…^&&**(&* what a cop out…Another set of characters in another reality is all this is turning out to be This was done to death on TNG…Just name them Kirk SPock etc(to try and keep the old fans of the multitude of other Star Trek properties on board..this will be JJ Abrams bastardized version. This may be the reason why they have been holding back and been mum on almost anything to do with this movie.
I still want to see this though..though now I’m a lot more guarded against it
I really do think they’re trying here – update it for new fans but not enrage existing fans too much.
Another bit of good news we didn’t write up is that Majel Roddenberry will be reprising her role as the voice of the computer. If THAT doesn’t make this feel like Star Trek, nothing will.
Vic
Yeah she really is the voice the “Computer”…at least we have that
Being more of a fan of the movies than the series, I do want to see the moment when Kirk assumes command of the Enterprise…as the films were set in the twilight of Kirks career…
I know that this is off topic, but for those who do not know tv guide channel is airing a behind the scenes look of the new trek at nine tonight
At this point you can tell the clowns who write for Star Trek are OUT of ideas. Everything has to involve time travel, almost all the TIME now…..
Don’t have an idea? WELL, make a time-travel episode, and then you can spew ANYTHING at the fandom, and then they can’t say “hey, that doesn’t make sense…..”
RIP Star Trek franchise…..Oh the money making, craptastic stuff will keep coming, but nothing with decent acting, good plots and devoid of the time-travel fall-back-on……hope the next Hancock arrives REALLY FAST.
It makes sense but the only ones that will get that explantion are the Trekkies,,,
The film has to blow them away or this new Trek will fall back into just another summer movie…
Btw I think a lot of us pretty much saw this coming at warp 9.98888996
Never forget these words Abrams,,, “I’m taking an awful risk Vader, this had better work!”
(Grand Moff Tarkin,,,).
He was dead within 24 hours. Just fyi
No surprise. Best approach to placate the old fans, bring in new fans, and wipe the board clean of canon to allow fresh new voyages to take place.
I have been hoping this was the explanation.
It works for me.
Hmmm… This is all I know about time travel: You can go back in time and become your own grandfather and cuddly-miniature carnivores who sound like orson welles have the power to fix it… (or not, it’s their choosing).
But seriously, this does get me a little more interested in Star Trek again. This is good news to me.
I’m a Star Wars fan, and I’m REALLY looking forward to this Star Trek movie!
Is that a good or a bad reflection on the movie? I mean, I’ve never really enjoyed Star Trek… but this one has me very intrigued.
(My Trekkie mate thinks its a sign of the apocalypse!)
ahh but it does coincide with the old episodes of the “fixed” future.
because! assuming the fabric of time isnt as fragile to change as it is supposed to be, fixing a problem in the past will change nothing but the problem in that past’s future (the new timeline).
so.
if you had timeline A, and you go back in time to fix something in the past, you create an additional timeline B, separate from A. and you can go forward in time to timeline B where only one detail has changed. aha!
so that’s why the alternate timelines Are consistent with ye olde view of a single timeline. hee
then again, this negates the whole butterfly effect theory, one that i find fascinating enough to declare it as TRUTH.
Not meaning to split hairs (but it’s a bit of a geek trait, let’s face it)… but wasn’t it the second Back to the Future that Doc Brown explained the alternate timelines thing? After old Biff went back with the sports book and changed history.
It’s my preferred view of time travel anyway, it’s easier to understand and hurts my head slightly less!
@Lank
I’m pretty sure the Back to the Future reference was from the first film.
Vic
An Analysis: So Orci pitches this new twist of a prequel under the premise of Quantum Mechanics.
Then Abrams, et al, can pitch their version of Trek in terms they think the fans will eat up. Then the fans will be more willing to accept the new version of this Star Trek world.
Not a bad BUSINESS plan if you think about it. This way, we don’t come away from the movie confused because we’ve been prepped. They spin technical jargon that trekkies are known to eat up and it creates a whole new opportunity of direction for the franchise. Free of all the burdens of past mythology.
I’m a bit disappointed in yet one more time twist from the mythos of Star Trek, but again – fresh new directions, no past to create expectations and new material for countless conventions to come.
You go Abrams!
PS: I don’t dislike the idea. I’m just using the pragmatic side of my brain at the moment.
I’m actually wondering whether they address this alternate timeline business explicitly in the film.
Vic
Okay so let me get this straight… The Star Trek movie that is coming takes place in a Parallel world. The original Star Trek we know and love is still exists. For some reason Spock travels back to change things. Isn’t this a bit much for the average movie goer take in?
I’m a Trek fan and I like this idea. We have to be honest; there were aspects of TOS that didn’t fall in line with itself. Take, for instance, warp speed itself; the slingshot timetravel calculation that Spock used in Naked Time, Yesterday is Tomorrow and Trek 4 doesn’t make since if warp speed is many times the speed of light (they should have reached our sun in less than a second). The reference to Parallels where Worf jumps from universe to universe is a more valid representation. Also, current string theory could be involved in this. It is also a good way to introduce new Trek stories involving the same original characters.
Also, Vic, I think Back to the Future 2 was the movie where Doc Brown makes reference to not being able to jump to an original past timeline unless you go back to prevent the timeline from changing in the first place (stopping Biff from using the almanac).
@Alfredo
Would you believe I understood what the Architect was saying in Matrix: Reloaded? Ok, after seeing it for the third time I understood.
If we Trekkers can understand Geordi and Data, this shouldn’t be a problem.
@Kahless,,,
The reference to TNG’s Parallels, episode…
If you recall the Enterprise’s all looked the same,,,
Oh and they were from alternate realities…
So what..
Yes the Time Travel could change
*Voyager arriving on Earth in the mid 90’s (and in pursuit of a mad Bill Gates type who reversed engineered the future
*DS9 Crew coming back to stop the assassination of Capt. Kirk;
*Saving the whales for the future
*Enterprise E stopping the Borg before they stop Cochrane. (Is Ensign Hawk still floating in space?)
*Is Archer’s Enterprise still canon? At least until that last episode,anyway?
Questions, how perplexing! I have but one answer!
Better sit down for this one, folks!
If this movie screws up and they want to do another Trek film to clean up the mess?
Bring in ye ol’ deux machina….Q.
There it is. No concerns.
you make the title of the article a spoiler? thanks a bunch!
When I heard that Nimoy was in and Shatner was out I had hopes that time travel was not going to be the story line copout that that it seems to be. To me this is just a way to placate old fans (which I’m one), and draw new ones. All without getting overly creative and develop a story line that can peacefully coexist with TOS canon.
My version (the one that came to me after a lot of cleaning with strong ‘household’ chemicals, in an unventilated room) had old Spock as a Starfleet Academy Professor giving his final lecture and the students convincing him to speak about the early years of the most famous of starships: The Enterprise. This would allow for deviations from canon, which students could question and Spock would clarify (ala The Princess Bride).
I know this post is a little late, but in an alternate timeline I was the first to leave a comment. Time travel can be so time consuming.
I must admitt that I was pretty excited to hear about a new movie release. But after hearing the plot about change of cannon has me rather disappointed. Why change the cannon and all the history over the years. I’m really speachless over the matter. At first glance this looks like what they did to the orginal Star Wars by making the new movies geered towards teenagers.
How I see it, its a cop out. Since we know jack about time travel, its the producers saying they acknowledge some canon but not all. That is all they have to say. Canon says going back in time means going back and changing things and popping back in time for the tea you were about to have.
This canon ignores that, which I have no qualms with they should just say it.
I take issue with the certainty that Star Trek IV is not consistent with our theory of time travel. Nothing in that movie precludes one from concluding that the crew went into a parallel universe, grabbed some whales (and a blond) and returned to their own universe. In fact, it makes more sense given their recklessness.
If they address the alternate time line quantum physics conundrum I hope they say it plainly and not in a bunch of treknobable.
Bob, I’m willing to give the film a chance,,,
I was real happy that Majel was brought on for the voice work as the starfleet computer !!!
Very cool !!!
I assumed they were using Majel as the computer until I read somewhere that it wasn’t sure she would be the computer. That was my only worry about the movie. I guess she will maintain her record of movie and tv appearances in Trek. She should be the voice of every computer in real life too. lol
Lol KenGe, I have Majel as a ringtone on my Blackberry.
I use it as an email announcement sometimes. Its her voice saying “Incoming Transmission”.
I love it,,,
@bob orci
First, (if it is in fact you) welcome to the site!
Based on your conversation over at TrekMovie, I would think that one goes back in time to the same timeline but making a change puts you in an alternate one – thus when you return you’re going back to a different future than the one you left.
This, as opposed to arriving at an alternate timeline when you first go back. Therefor I would think that the crew in STIV would never have returned to the Earth where the oceans were being vaporized and THAT Earth would have been destroyed – with the crew saving an alternate Earth instead.
Assuming that one DOES apply the alternate timeline theory to that film.
Vic
Hey Vic,
the way we understand it, going back in time deposits you at a universe that is indistinguishable to the one you left up until the moment of your arrival. When our famous crew leaves again, they could go to the future of the timeline they are in (which is now the second universe) or they can return to their original universe at the moment that they left, with whales on board. In the many worlds theory, the universe you leave isn’t destroyed by going into the past (like Back to the Future 2, which, while mentioning alternate timelines, is still a movie using classical rules of time travel). Star Trek 1V does not really take a position based on the event of the movie.
Time travel has always been one of my favorite science fiction themes, even if I don’t think it is actually possible to travel into the past.
That being said; I agree with Bob. The fact that you arrived in the past when you never existed in the first before precludes it from being the same universe you departed from.
The problem I see is how do you return to the same universe you departed from? If time is linear, then you would most certainly proceed into the future of the second universe. The only possible way to return to the first, is if you start your return trip from the exact moment you arrived in universe #2 (like Doc Brown said). To do that would mean traveling into the past again to the original moment (and probably place) that you first arrived, say hello to universe #3.
Here is where the sticky wicket gets started; if you must return to the original time and place of your original arrival, you run the risk of being seen (or worse interacting with) yourself when you originally arrived and changing the events as they happened originally! Say hello to universe #4 and a paradox!!
Even if you don’t see or meet yourself you still have the paradox of being in the same place at the same time in a different universe as yourself and with yourself. This is where is time and space collapse and explode in another big bang and we get to start all over again from the very beginning. say good-by to universe’s 1 thru 4. and hello to universe #2A.
The next time someone tells you to go do something with yourself, remember the paradox, is hell!
I so love this idea. I think it’s brilliant in so many ways for them to approach Trek in this manner. It doesn’t invalidate TOS, in fact, it makes it’s history necessary in order for the story to take place. And after this origin story is complete, the universe is the limit for our famed crew. I hope everyone who might be interested in this film hops over to trekmovie and takes a look at this subject thread. Great stuff from Orci and the fans. And every now and then our guru Vic shows up. And for those of you who think this story line is a cop out or lazy writing – just give it a chance in May – I think we all will be pleasently surprised.
This constant talk about “canon” is what makes Trekkies sound like fanatics to the rest of the world. There is no such thing as “canon” in science fiction! SF is a speculative genre, which, by definition, precludes “canonical” thinking. Religion asks for canon; science asks for logic and facts. SF only asks “What if…?”
So, what if we could re-imagine the origins of our beloved Star Trek characters in a way that appeals to contemporary viewers (new and old fans)? This should be no harder to accept than an Elseworlds or What If comic book. Most classic characters have been re-imagined over the years (Sherlock Holmes, Batman, Superman, and coming soon, The Spirit). Rather than ranting on about “canon,” real fans should be cheering the survival and persistence of these timeless heroes.
@bob orci
I *love* time travel stories, but they make my head hurt.
I do believe they’ve been overused a bit in Trek over the years, but I can understand its use as a device in the new movie.
@professorj
I agree with you about the nitpicking of “canon.” I’m a HUGE Star Trek fan going all the way back to TOS but I’m not going to get bent out of shape if the crew of the Enterprise sees Romulans before the episode “Balance of Terror” takes place and all that.
As long as this film is faithful to the spirit of the original and the characters and doesn’t get too goofy with the humor (PLEASE tell me the “swollen Kirk” scene is as bad as it gets!) then I’ll be satisfied.
Vic
@790
IF I RECALL???!!! I am Kahless, the Unforgetable!!! What part of “Unforgetable” don’t you understand, petaQ??!!!
I don’t think that means you don’t forget anything, Kahless.
And your “opinion” counts about as much as your species…NOTHING!!!
Okaaaayyyy. Someone got a bad bash of gagh.
;-P
Yes they did look all the same, but if you recall, all universes hadn’t seeped (I guess that’s the proper word for it) into that quantum universe. We are such geeks. B-)
May your Bloodwine be served at cockpit tempature Kahless!!
Alternate universe’s are all part of the quantum mechanics.
Those Enterprises’ according to Orci’s law of Quantum Time Travel theory should have looked the same yet slightly different…
(Just like this new ship)
But I guess Berman & Braga had a different opinion of Time Travel…
I loved that “parallels” episode,,,
And what’s with the Spock gravatr,,, Klingon?
@professorj
I wholeheartedly agree.
But they must have Finigan; I have to insist on that.
I have to say that I think this IS the best thing they could do for the movie. It allows JJ and his team to use the original characters and the Enterprise in a familiar setting while still allowing them to be creative with the plot and design of what we know as Star Trek.
Now, I’m quite surprised at the reaction of some of those who commented on this post. I thought they’d be glad that the more dramatic changes don’t effect the sacred canon, because history is altered at the beginning of the movie. But they’ve come up with, ‘this time travel theory violates the canon because this is not how Star Trek portrayed time travel.
Look, none of us know anything about what really happens in time travel because no one’s ever traveled through time. So how do we know that this new theory isn’t really accurate?
I’m just saying that this makes everything that happens in the movie okay to me because in the end, the “real” Star Trek still happens, (happened?) while still giving me a newer version of the greatest Sci-Fi creation of all time.
And I don’t think this is a full cop out because it probably took a lot of time and energy to come up with this new time travel theory. And it had to make the story acceptable to old fans, new fans, and still respect all Trek that came before it, and this works, I think. So I’m glad that this is the route they took. Can’t wait ’til May!
There’s a theory on time travel I read once that speculated time travelling to the future was not possible as the future is not set, its constantly in flux. (There goes fate)
You could only time travel to the past,,,
It is possible to warp time, as we all know by constant acceleration time moves slower for the traveler than the surrounding universe.
Traveling to the future I think is the only way possible, but than you would be stuck there. Going into the past seems like making a waterfall fall up, or putting a nuclear explosion back into it’s bomb casing! Once time has past it is, as they say, history. There is no putting the genie back into the bottle.
But this is Star Trek! Kirk would never let a little thing like a genie stop him!
OFF THE SUBJECT
It just hit me one thing that bugs me about the new Enterprise: The saucer looks like a piece of plywood! About 5/8ths I’d say.
Yea, yea I know. I’m the one who a time machine.
We have to take into account that we are talking about a plot device in a science fiction film…
^
However David, if what you believe is true, mastering time travel would also mean mastering parallel dimensional travel,,,
As a matter of (theory) travelling inter-dimensionaly would give you the side effect of time travel…
So really having a time travel device is quite primitive,,,a dimensional device would be the real deal,,,
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!