Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 3
 

Its kind of sad that basically all media appearances for this film will now be hijacked by star wars questions .

New Thread!
http://www.forevergeek.com/wp-conten...45-930x381.jpg

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Well at least this movie would get more hype now the director of Star Trek 2 is directing Star Wars 7.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Star Trek 12. :o

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Damn straight.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

What I love about the 2009 film is that its both a sequel, prequel, and reboot all rolled into one.

Its a sequel because Spock and Nero come from the original timeline AFTER the events of Nemesis.

Its a prequel because it has younger versions of the original cast members, and shows how they come together in this version.

Its a reboot because its now an alternate timeline and they could go in any direction they want to go in. Total freedom.

So in a way, the 2009 film was Star Trek 11, and we are now waiting for Star Trek 12.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

While I'm not crazy about the reboot, I do think it's awesome, borderline genius even, how they were able to to do all of that stuff with one story in one movie.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

So as I posted in the comic thread, there is some kind of crazy stuff in the lead in comic for this film.

Possible spoilers.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Yeah, I can't stand the idea of it being called Star Trek 2. Its not really Star Trek 2. Although I say Doctor Who Series 7 all the time...

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Yeah, Star Trek needs more awareness outside US & this will help it get that.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Interesting. ...Since April was the 1st captain of the original TOS era Enterprise, and he was Captain for it's first decade of service before Pike took over, they may be using that to explain why the Abrams ship was built later and made it's maiden voyage under Pike (and is obviously different in size & design).

Perhaps the TOS era ship we all know did still exist in this new timeline (though it would still have been built after Kirk's birth), but it was destroyed while under April's command. With that and other ripples from Nero's interference with the past the original 'Constitution Class' design was discarded in favour of the Abram's one (maybe).

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

It's funny that they call this Star Trek 2 and the next one Star Trek 3 when in reality they're still part of the same timeline but the next James Bond is called Bond 24 and Skyfall was known as Bond 23 before it got its name when it probably should've been called Bond 3 since it was a new timeline. My head just exploded. :oldrazz:

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

From what I've heard around the Star Trek BBS boards, originally the Kelvin destruction in the first film was originally pitched as the destruction of the classic enterprise we all know and love but the studio put a hard smackdown on that idea.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

And a good thing too. That could've been perceived as a slap in the face or giving the middle finger by fans.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

If that`s true, then I think that was the best call by any studio ever in the history of Mankind... :)

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Was the original canon ever clear on whether another Enterprise was ever in service between the NX-01 and NCC-1701? Maybe that could be the case here, and even if there wasn't, this being an alternate timeline could allow them to establish there having been one in this universe.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

I don't think there's any in canon reference to an inbetween ship from the NX-01 to the NCC-1701, though there's a lot of time there (about 80 years or so) so there could well have been.

However, the constitution class (original 1701 design) was said to have been in service for 40 years before the TOS 5 year mission. I don't think it was ever stated on film though, so that's up in the air as far as canon goes, however if we were to assume that is correct then that design of ship would have existed at the time Nero came back.

And afaik the only references for Robert April came from the animated series, which confirmed he was the 1st captain of the original 1701 before Pike (not a different ship, the same one)

I think Roddenbury stated he accepted that bit of the cartoon was canon himself (Robert April was the original name he wanted to use for the Pilot episode before changing it to Christopher Pike), but from memory I can't I recall if the April name was ever used in any series or film, so they can play that one as they wish I guess.

Anyways, with the comic confirming April did command a ship called Enterprise, that does give them the opportunity to explain why the Abrams 1701 is rather different than the TOS one. Would actually be neat if they showed us the original design in action, if only briefly.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

This would be a bit of a retcon, but maybe they could say that the ship was actually undergoing a major refitting during Kirk's years at the Academy instead of being built for the first time as the film suggested?

Though I'll admit it would be a tall order to pull that off convicingly.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Yeah, I don't think they can get away with having the new ship as a 're-fit' of the old one. It's more than twice the size for starters (it's about the same length as TNG's Enterprise E).

Maybe it will be that the original TOS NCC-1701 was lost/destroyed while under April's command, and when they built the new one they simply kept the same registry number.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

I don't think there will be any "original" TOS NCC-1701 in this continuity. The one we're seeing which is a lot bigger IS the same "original" Enterprise. It's just that, in this altered timeline, things have developed differently because Nero travelled back and upset things. When the Kelvin was destroyed, that changed continuity. The Enterprise was therefore constructed on a larger scale and with a different interior design than it would have been had the Nero incident not occurred.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Maybe, but I wonder why they'd throw Robert April into the mix now as that only convolutes matters for the reasons I noted: The TOS 'Constitution Class' design was already in service before Nero came back in time (in the original timeline the Enterprise itself that used that design, that April was first to captain, I think would have been built when Kirk was in his teens).

The new Enterprise was being built when he enrols at the academy, which is presumably later than he did in the original timeline due to not having his Dad around (so while he took a shortcut to the Captain's seat in the new timeline, he is not vastly younger than when took the chair in the original one). This would place the new ships construction a good few years after the TOS one was built, which we now know did have a predecessor in this new timeline.

So just what Enterprise did Robert April Captain in this new timeline? We know it was called Enterprise, the TOS design was in service prior to Nero's interference, but that's it atm.

So I dunno. It seems a bit redundant to use him at all if not to fill in the questions as to what changed things to make the new ship so different. His ship might end up being different than anything we know, or it might be the one we know very well.

Will have to wait & see atm.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Inside Look at J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness

https://www.facebook.com/Esurance/app_131772983653777

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Ok let’s get the Timeline straight, so here it goes

Prime Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161
Alternative Timeline Enterprise NX-01 Launch - 2151 - Decommissioned - 2161

Alternative Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233
Prime Timeline James T Kirk DOB - 2233

Alternative Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2258
Prime Timeline Enterprise 1701 Launch - 2245

The prime timeline Enterprise 1701 was launched 12 years after Kirk’s birth so was not in service when Nero appeared and the NX-01 Enterprise was Decommissioned 72 years before Kirk was born and at this time we don’t know of any other ship named Enterprise that was in service between the dates above, so what Enterprise April claims to have commanded is still a mystery and it will be interesting to find out what they’re doing with this story line and how much it plays into the movie.

Re: Star Trek Into Darkness - Part 4
 

Those dates seem correct to me, and as you say the Enterprise April captained in the new timeline, and when he commanded it, is a mystery atm, however what I'm saying is the TOS design (not the NCC-1701 Enterprise, but it's design) was in service when Nero arrived: Starfleet was using that design for about 40 years or so before the TOS 5 year mission (not sure if this ever was stated on film though), which dates it back to around 2220-2225, so it is possible Aprils ship did use that same design.

If they do use it I would guess they will change the number though.