Dec 12 2008'Star Trek' Returns with Classic Plot Device
There's nothing Star Trek can't solve with time travel. Need a few 1980s whales in the 23rd century? Not a problem. Hop back in time, cover Spock's conspicuously pointed ears with a headband, pack some whales in some transparent aluminum, call it a day. It will work out. Don't worry about it.
In a recent interview with TrekMovie.com, Star Trek co-writer Robert Orci has revealed that the trend is not over (spoilers, I guess):
TrekMovie: From the trailer, and certainly from the four scene preview, there is no doubt that things are different. Pike and Kirk are hanging out in a bar. The ship looks different. Kirk is on the Enterprise and not headed to the Farragut. People are seeing Romulans…things are different. Now it has been revealed in the Entertainment Weekly article that Nero goes back in time and attacks the Kelvin, and JJ also talked about this during his previews. So the big question is: Is the destruction of the Kelvin, the canon reason why everything is different?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: 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?
Orci: Right.
TrekMovie: Does the time travel explain why the Enterprise looks different and why it is being built in Riverside Iowa?
Bob: Yes, and yes.
Time travel is like hot glue. It can hold together almost anything, even disjointed canon, and you never notice because it's clear. Ignore that the clearness is often lumpy and has some stringy bits coming off. It works, OK? For all you know, our current timeline is only the result of Q allowing Picard to go back in time to change a 20th century event that would later destroy the Enterprise. You have no room to talk when you may well be the product of Star Trek time travel.
Much longer interview that involves science here.
Reader Comments
1. Zyclonis - December 12, 2008 5:51 PM
Right on Orci! run this movie right into the ground.
2. Centauri - December 12, 2008 6:11 PM
I think the plot sounds interesting. I can't wait to go see it next year.
3. CaptainMorgan - December 12, 2008 6:12 PM
WTF are they talking about? Oh, right, I don't give a crap. I'd rather watch "Ernest in Space" than this garbage.
4. Ted - December 12, 2008 6:42 PM
Wtf was that about? Why do you keep going on about pirate ship canons?? Are they on a pirate ship?
5. Joey - December 12, 2008 7:35 PM
"Canon" ? Give me a break. That's a pretty lofty term when discussing Star Trek. I can't believe what is happening to this franchise. It's awful...
6. dentata - December 13, 2008 3:54 AM
holy crap, they're sure working hard to make Star Trek fans uttelry uninterested in seeing this movie. Worked for me--may not even bother to rent the dvd.
7. Attacklawyer - December 13, 2008 11:27 AM
Yes, I know precisely how geeky this will make me, and I don't care:
Timetravel does not preserve the cannon. This isn't "Star Trek" -- it's "Star Trek: The Alternate Universe."
Orci -- screw you and the parallel dimension you flew in on.
8. Matt - December 13, 2008 11:58 AM
You guys want some more cheese with you whine? This movie is gonna rule and thats the bottom line...end of discussion. You guys can cry yourselves to sleep and continue making really shitty "fan-movies" of Star Trek. I will be first in line to see this.
9. Corbett - December 13, 2008 4:40 PM
I am excited for this movie. I mean it is great that they are gonna get rid of the last forty years of story and just start fresh. It is time that someone followed George Lucas's idea and take something that was great and just throw it away. It shows a true great artist when you can throw away years of a fan following and just start fresh. I heard he was gonna redo the Sistine Chapel next, those murals are just tired and old. And I was afraid that all my childhood heroes wouldn't get ruined before my time, thanks Orci, and thank you J.J..
10. Crystal - December 13, 2008 10:38 PM
This movie looks interesting, can't wait to see it.
11. andy80 - December 14, 2008 1:31 AM
Why does Kirk get to wear a black sweater thing? That's not right. Needs mustard colored shirts that are too tight with gold lining!
12. Matt - December 14, 2008 1:53 AM
Andy....the black coloured shirt is explained...there is a reason behind it.
13. Kenney333 - December 14, 2008 2:10 AM
Woh woh woh, in ST4:TVH they did NOT use transparent aluminum to hold the whales, they used very thick regular glass. Scotty merely traded the formula to make transparent aluminum in return for the glass tank they needed built. Cmon iwatchstuff.com, that kind of mistake can really confuse people.
14. Dave - December 14, 2008 6:58 PM
I'm so glad I'm not the only Trek fan that hates this movie! Reimagining worked for Batman and that was it. Leave Star Trek alone, it hasn't even been off the air five years for gods sake. JJ is sure making it hard for me to like him these days.
15. rob - December 15, 2008 1:35 AM
When I watched the preview I saw the following:
-people hanging off cliffs
-Simon Pegg
-ships exploding as opposed to hearing someone on the deck of the ship SAYING a ship exploded
-a huge, red alien creature that roars
-a woman removing her top
All that alone trumps pretty much all but maybe two of the Star Trek movies. Yeah, this is a "re-imagining" as opposed to treading on the same boring territory this franchise has for the past few decades, but Abrams isn't go to go all George Lucas on this. He's a smart guy who knows how to craft a good story that pleases the mainstream AND geeks like, well, us.
16. Uncle Eccoli - December 15, 2008 10:10 AM
Abrams is nothing more than a self-absorbed stroker. He has no business being anywhere near Star Trek and should stick to the trashy pulp all the bottom-feeders like so well. I hope somebody kills him with a shoe horn.
17. Uncle Eccoli - December 15, 2008 10:13 AM
@12
How about the ship being built on the fucking SURFACE?! Is that 'explained' (away)? What a load.
18. DrNecropolis - December 15, 2008 2:53 PM
Blah blah blah, stop whining about it not matching up with STCanon, seriously all the different series had episodes where they encountered alternate realities/alternate histories, sometimes even different episodes of TNG involved a different continuum as "the main" continuum. So it just happened a little differently in this one, who knows maybe in this continuum cry baby fanboys who don't know how to deal with alternate realities actually get laid, oh wait... no that's not possible, cry baby fanboys never get laid
It's a film, give it a shot and you may be surprised. I would like to see a new star trek movie about the mirror (spock goatee) universe. I think that'd be pretty entertaining
19. LickinBiscuits - December 15, 2008 7:13 PM
"Yes. If you look at quantum mechanics and you learn about the fact that our most successful theory of science is quantum mechanics"
"It continues. According to the most successful, most tested scientific theory ever, quantum mechanics, it continues."
"Yes. I would argue that at the very least, if we are going to do our Star Trek, it has to conform to the latest scientific theories and the most advanced and complete, and right now that is quantum mechanics."
"We have to deal with it, with the fact that Star Trek episodes that don’t conform to our theory of it, also do not conform to the latest greatest, most highly tested scientific theory in human history"
"I would argue that, yes, any time there is time travel that they created a parallel universe, if they want to conform to our most current and advanced thinking on the matter, which is quantum mechanics."
"If we take Data’s description of the most current and awesome scientific theory to heart, then there is no prime timeline."
This guy certainly has a boner for quantum mechanics, though it sounds more like he's trying to come up with an excuse as to why this movie will fit in the Star Trek "canon" verse. This plot device will be greeted by Trekies as poorly as midicholoerians were by Star Wars fans.
20. Uncle Eccoli - December 16, 2008 9:54 AM
@19
Agreed. These people clearly don't know anything at all about ST. He's talking out of his ass.
Death to JJ Abrams.
21. Carl - January 6, 2009 11:47 AM
Gay. Totally ass-raping homosexual. I will not see this garbage.