# Question about Star Trek canon after the latest movie \[\[edited title; spoilers inside\]\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 28, 2010, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815 "2010-06-28T18:00:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/41 "2010-07-07T02:39:41Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > To me the new movie isn’t canon simply because it’s too utterly stupid. Word! ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/42 "2010-07-07T03:52:24Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > We’ll have to disagree on what is joyful, then. I found the movie actually offensive on several levels. How So? ---
**Author:** ![FordTaurusSHO94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f07891/32.png) [@FordTaurusSHO94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FordTaurusSHO94)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/43 "2010-07-07T04:46:16Z")
As I work through more TNG and DS9 DVD’s, I keep finding more and more stuff that the new movie got wrong. Apparently Scotty discovered how to transport to a ship at warp from a fixed location. However, in a DS9 I watched last week, Dax wouldn’t let Kira transport from a ship at warp to another ship at warp even though they were right behind it because it was too dangerous. Say what you want about “alternate universes,” but Spock Prime is talking about Scotty Prime in that instance. He’s wrong. Or lying. Or both. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/44 "2010-07-07T14:30:55Z")
> [@astro](#): > > How So? Well, I can understand how previous shows and movies didn’t strictly adhere to anything resembling military realism, but this last movie in which a 3rd year cadet is promoted to Captain… well, that’s not only ignorant of how a military works, it’s a willful fantasizing of how a military _might_ work. Compared to this, “Acting Ensign Wesley Crusher” has rock-solid plausibility. I’m also tired of the “maverick who plays by his own rules and expresses blatant contempt for the system yet never faces negative repercussions” bit. If _Star Trek_ was supposed to be sci-fi for the thinking fan, what’s with this cop-show cliché? Original Kirk came up with oddball solutions and was willing to bluff and game the system, but he also had a keen sense of duty. By all indications, this new Kirk is an asshole. When he provokes new Spock into whaling on him, I was frankly rooting for Spock and, I thoguht, so should have all the other characters who respected Spock, instead of meekly going along when Kirk declares himself in charge. The bad guy’s labyrinth plan and the layout of the bad guy’s ship and the cavern of incredible coincidence where Leonard Nimoy just happens to meet newKirk - I felt my intelligence being insulted when I guess I was supposed be politely suspending my disbelief. The intertwined destinies of newSpock and newKirk, according to OldSpock - this isn’t logical, it’s blatant _Twilight_-level fate-baiting (“One look, and I knew forever in my heart that he and I were meant to be together for all time”) . I was just fine (and in fact encouraged) by the reboot aspect of newKirk and newSpock disliking each other. I thought it had strong potential for character drama. But newSpock’s destiny is to be newKirk’s sidekick, and thus he shall ever be. There’s more, but it wouldn’t be adding anything to the previous threads we’ve had deconstructing this film. I put it at the bottom tier, down there with the fifth film, and it is absolutely not because I object to a reboot as such, but rather I object to sloppy, stupid storylines. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/45 "2010-07-07T16:29:30Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, I can understand how previous shows and movies didn’t strictly adhere to anything resembling military realism, but this last movie in which a 3rd year cadet is promoted to Captain… well, that’s not only ignorant of how a military works, it’s a willful fantasizing of how a military _might_ work. Compared to this, “Acting Ensign Wesley Crusher” has rock-solid plausibility. > onard Nimoy just happens to meet newKirk - I felt my intelligence being insulted when I guess I was supposed be politely suspending my disbelief. It is clear from TOS that the original Kirk, though a genius, got to be Captain by learning and making lots of mistakes. I hope that in the second movie new Kirk will get his ass kicked because he is so inexperienced. But I’m not holding my breath. As for Spock, he was such a great character because of his inner conflict. All gone. And, for offensiveness, him eating Uhura’s face shortly after everyone he knows except his father are killed is pretty damn offensive in my book. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/46 "2010-07-07T16:44:51Z")
Alternate timelines and parallel worlds are the same thing. There’s also such thing as an ‘altered’ timeline, when the core reality has something affect its past, but that’s not what happened in the movie. Spock and Nero were transported from the prime timeline’s present to an alternate timeline’s past. Proof : The Star Trek MMO continues in the prime timeline after Romulus’s destruction and Spock’s disappearance. Other Proof : In the prime timeline, Starfleet personnel had different insignia based on a symbol associated with their vessel in the era of the Original Series. Only Enterprise crewmembers used the distinctive ‘curvy arrowhead’ design that was later (in TNG-era) made a general Starfleet insignia. In the movie’s alternate timeline, all Starfleet personnel already use the arrowhead design insignia. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2010, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/47 "2010-07-07T18:19:46Z")
> [@NoClueBoy](#): > > And, you have drink tranya and eat orange jello whilst so involved. I would relish this as much as you. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2010, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/48 "2010-07-08T06:48:52Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Alternate timelines and parallel worlds are the same thing. There’s also such thing as an ‘altered’ timeline OK well that’s semantics. > [@CandidGamera](#): > > when the core reality has something affect its past, but that’s not what happened in the movie. Officially, it is. > [@](#): > > Spock and Nero were transported from the prime timeline’s present to an alternate timeline’s past. They were transported to the prime timeline’s past. > [@](#): > > Proof : The Star Trek MMO continues in the prime timeline after Romulus’s destruction and Spock’s disappearance. 1. The MMO isn’t canon. 2. Star Trek timelines and rules of time travel are subject to the whim of the particular plotline, there’s no consistency. Previous to this movie we had already seen various possible future timelines, some mutually exclusive. Things are always changing. 3. Not that Trek sticks to one model of time travel mechanics, but in some models, going into the past just creates a branch, and the original timeline still continues on separately. > [@](#): > > In the movie’s alternate timeline, all Starfleet personnel already use the arrowhead design insignia. Was this by Kirk’s time (when Kirk finally got there) or at the time of Kirk’s birth when the Romulan ship first arrived? The changes in the universe by Kirk’s later years are supposed to all be explainable by the incursion of the future Romulans early two decades earlier. So that first encounter should have had original timeline tech/styles/etc. If it didn’t, well, production mistake. The various people involved have made it clear what their intention was, and it was an ‘altered timeline’ as you call it. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2010, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/49 "2010-07-08T07:44:54Z")
The new Star Trek movie was awesome wrapped in awesome speeding through space at Awesome Speed. It was one of the best films I’ve seen in the past 5 years and the best thing that happened to Trek in over 40. So there. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2010, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/50 "2010-07-08T12:48:57Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > Officially, it is. Nope. Cite? An altered timeline and an alternate timeline are more than semantically different. An altered timeline is one that has been changed, via time travel. An alternate timeline is one that exists, but differs from the primary timeline. > [@](#): > > 1. The MMO isn’t canon. Sure it is. It’s soft canon, but it isn’t contradicted by anything. > [@](#): > > 1. Star Trek timelines and rules of time travel are subject to the whim of the particular plotline, there’s no consistency. Previous to this movie we had already seen various possible future timelines, some mutually exclusive. Things are always changing. > > 2. Not that Trek sticks to one model of time travel mechanics, but in some models, going into the past just creates a branch, and the original timeline still continues on separately. #2 is irrelevant. #3 is incorrect. Star Trek time travel is actually much more consistent than a lot of their other technobabble. If you travel into the past, and alter that past, you do not create a new branch. You alter the timeline you’re in. Of course, there’s zero evidence to suggest that Nero and Spock travelled to their own past in the movie, and at least one piece of in-movie evidence to suggest that they didn’t. And there’s at least one other canon example of a ship in disrupted space being sent to the past of an alternate timeline. > [@](#): > > Was this by Kirk’s time (when Kirk finally got there) or at the time of Kirk’s birth when the Romulan ship first arrived? The changes in the universe by Kirk’s later years are supposed to all be explainable by the incursion of the future Romulans early two decades earlier. So that first encounter should have had original timeline tech/styles/etc. > > If it didn’t, well, production mistake. The various people involved have made it clear what their intention was, and it was an ‘altered timeline’ as you call it. When Kirk is in the middle of his five year mission in the original timeline, each ship has a different insignia. In the alternate timeline, at the time of Kirk’s birth, Starfleet is already using the same insignia for everyone. At least thirty years before they should be. So, your position is “canon evidence that contradicts my presupposed notion about the timeline is a production mistake”? ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2010, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/51 "2010-07-08T13:28:08Z")
Ha! I’ve got my cite. > **[EXCLUSIVE: Bob Orci Explains How The New Star Trek Movie Fits With Trek Canon...](https://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob-orci-explains-how-the-new-star-trek-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/)** > > One topic that seems to come up quite a bit with Trek fans regarding the new Star Trek movie, it is the subject of the Star Trek continuity (or canon). It has been the contention of the film makers that despite how some things may appear to be... The production team discusses the situation in detail. They consciously decided to ignore how time travel works in the Star Trek Universe prior to the movie, and instead use quantum mechanics theory, so Spock and Nero’s journey to the past creates a branch as they arrive. Which means the prime timeline, where Vulcan remains intact, and the events of the NextGen series and others occurred, remains unaffected. There it is, black and white, Spock and Nero did not alter the primary timeline of Star Trek. So the textual evidence favors my position, and the meta-textual evidence favors my position. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2010, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/52 "2010-07-08T14:57:52Z")
Timeline? This is no time to talk about time. We don’t have the time!.. What was I saying? ---
**Author:** ![Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2010, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/53 "2010-07-09T12:44:03Z")
> [@astro](#): > > How So? I was offended that the tube of water that Scotty was whooshing around in after the warp speed transport was labeled “Inert Reactant.” Which is the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2010, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/54 "2010-07-09T17:00:35Z")
Well, I guess even Reactant can get tired… ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2010, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/55 "2010-07-09T17:27:11Z")
> [@NoClueBoy](#): > > Roms and Hums should still be like the Soviet and NATO blocks at the 60s level of the cold war. With today’s available screen magic, just about story anyone would want to make about an ongoing conflict would be available to put on screen I had thought I read somewhere that the Romulans were meant to be akin to Communist China, while the Soviets were represented by the Klingons. Although the story of an empire that breaks down into a series of power blocks headed by a house/warlord, would seem somewhat closer to China’s history. Anyway, to the OP, fans have seen, accepted, bitched about, then moved onto this new canon. Which as the film more or less openly states (to hold our hands through the changeover) is set in a new, parallel universe. It makes sense, in a Trekkish way, that it’s not a new timeline, but a whole new universe, branched off from the original. They’re not zapping through a timewarp by shooting around a sun, they’re passing through a wormhole, which leaves it a lot neater for a writer to suggest that it’s an all new universe. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2010, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/56 "2010-07-09T17:41:21Z")
Does newKirk have a brother he calls Sam? I forget, and if he doesn’t, then the changes in this universe predate the time incursions and frankly they shoulda just rebooted without trying to tie in the old storyline at all. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/57 "2010-07-09T17:43:48Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > so Spock and Nero’s journey to the past creates a branch as they arrive. Yeah, creating a ‘branch’ does not change my original point, which was that it’s not a separate canon, but an offshoot of the original canon. In fact, your own cite says as such. > [@](#): > > despite how some things may appear to be rewriting Trek’s history, the movie fits within Trek’s canon In any case, branches are indeed one type of time travel in Trek. Really, it uses whatever form of time travel is convenient to the plot. I stand by my assertion that the movie is not a separate canon, but instead a development of the original canon. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2010, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/58 "2010-07-10T05:40:58Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Does newKirk have a brother he calls Sam? I forget, and if he doesn’t, then the changes in this universe predate the time incursions and frankly they shoulda just rebooted without trying to tie in the old storyline at all. His brother was referenced in the deleted footage. His friend [Johnny](http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Johnny_(Human)) was originally his older brother. But, since it’s deleted, it’s not canon. But Skald has a theory that still makes it work. If New!Kirk was the first child, then, in the original universe, his parents had longer to discuss the naming, and settled on George Samuel. They saved James Tiberius for their second child. He even said it explained the big differences between the two Kirks’ personalities. And Spock didn’t notice the difference because they were identical (New!Kirk shaved his mustache.) And if they had tried to reboot without tying in the old timeline, the fans would have freaked. There’d be no way to say the old timeline was still valid. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2010, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/59 "2010-07-12T13:54:43Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > In any case, branches are indeed one type of time travel in Trek. Really, it uses whatever form of time travel is convenient to the plot. I stand by my assertion that the movie is not a separate canon, but instead a development of the original canon. Nope, branching is used for the first time in the new movie. The example the producers of the new movie cite in that article, “Parallels”, does indeed involve alternate timelines, but doesn’t actually involve time travel - so there’s no analogous precipitating incident. Star Trek time travel never worked that way before. As for your original assertion - 1.) the text contradicts you even if the producers agree with you and 2.) it’s not relevant to my assertion that the original Star Trek timeline continues, unmolested and separate. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2010, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815/60 "2010-07-12T14:04:17Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Star Trek time travel never worked that way before. Obviously. After all, time travel had never been caused by red matter before. It makes sense\* that different methods of time travel would lead to different results. - Insomuch as anything makes sense in Star Trek. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-star-trek-canon-after-the-latest-movie-edited-title-spoilers-inside/544815.md?page=4)