Time Travel gives you a headache...

December 14, 2008 5:30 PM

The new Star Trek movie is both canon and a (partial) reboot.Screenwriter Roberto Orci explains using canon examples - and a discussion of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Or: screenwriter wants to have his Trek and retcon it, too.

posted by crossoverman (107 comments total)

Must....make....Star Trek....movie....before....Nimoy....passes....on.
posted by mrmojoflying at 5:39 PM on December 14, 2008

Ok I'm not a physicist. So, perhaps I'm wrong, but something strikes me as wrong.

He say this, "According to the most successful, most tested scientific theory ever, quantum mechanics, it continues."

Um.. hasn't relativity (special or general) been tested and confirmed way more than any particular flavor of QM?
posted by oddman at 5:45 PM on December 14, 2008

I was under the impression that the Standard Model was the most well-verified scientific theory of all time, or so I've been given to believe.
posted by adamdschneider at 5:47 PM on December 14, 2008

So basically: a wizard did it?
posted by blue_beetle at 5:48 PM on December 14, 2008 [9 favorites]

I was really looking forward to reading this, but a message told me that I was the 999,999th visitor to the site and that I had won. So cannon or reboot?? I let the thread nerds decide. I'm off to Antibes to roll around naked in my newfound riches.
posted by dobie at 5:49 PM on December 14, 2008

Well, this does short-circuit most of the arguments over continuity. I suppose. (Chekov's age aside.)
posted by thomas j wise at 5:51 PM on December 14, 2008

Um.. hasn't relativity (special or general) been tested and confirmed way more than any particular flavor of QM?
posted by oddman at 5:45 PM on December 14

He's probably referring to quantum electrodynamics.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 5:53 PM on December 14, 2008

fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap

P.S , I love fanwank.
posted by The Whelk at 5:53 PM on December 14, 2008

I'm gonna go with "fucking makes babies" as the most widely tested, and funnest, scientific theory. Remember to use negative controls.
posted by Science! at 5:56 PM on December 14, 2008 [4 favorites]

Can't they just admit that Star Trek is bad at and doesn't value continuity and consistency instead of making up really weird excuses?
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 5:58 PM on December 14, 2008 [7 favorites]

He's probably referring to quantum electrodynamics.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:53 PM on December 14 [+] [!]

Ahh.
posted by adamdschneider at 6:00 PM on December 14, 2008

Quantum mechanics to explain the script and its relation to previous Star Trek episodes/movies? Hilarious. Just say no to time traveling the next time, ok? 53 (!) previous episodes/movies featuring time travels is enough.

Next time, how about a movie about Spock partnering up with Jar Jar Binks to run a detective agency on Narn? wouldn't that just rock?
Huh, guys?
Hello...? Hello??
Jerks.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 6:00 PM on December 14, 2008

Does anyone still care about Star Trek? I mean, the way they used to?
posted by JHarris at 6:03 PM on December 14, 2008

Uh, yeah, well, whenever you notice something like that... a wizard did it.
posted by elwoodwiles at 6:03 PM on December 14, 2008

JHarris: I have looked into my secret soul, and the answer is FUCK YES.

This film, though, is not something I have high hopes for. I do have high hopes for Trek escaping the reservation. This film appears to me to have been inspired by fan-created content. The way I see it, the idea of canon is in fact dead, which may be the screenwriter guy's take for all I know. That means all the seventies novels, all the fan film, all the K/S: legit. True. Not even fictional, dig?

With that in mind, may I remind the inattentive of the amazing thing that is Spock, Messiah?
posted by mwhybark at 6:16 PM on December 14, 2008 [1 favorite]

As long as it doesn't suck, they can "explain" their continuity problems away any way they'd like.
posted by digitalprimate at 6:20 PM on December 14, 2008 [12 favorites]

E.E. CUMMINGS ON THE SET OF STAR TREK XI

pity this busy monster,manunkind,

not. Progress is a comfortable disease:
your victim(death and life safely beyond)

plays with the bigness of his littleness
—electrons deify one razorblade
into a mountainrange;lenses extend
unwish through curving wherewhen till unwish
returns on its unself.
A world of made
is not a world of born—pity poor flesh

and trees,poor stars and stones,but never this
fine specimen of hypermagical

ultraomnipotence. We doctors know

a hopeless case if—listen: there's a hell
of a good universe next door; let's go
posted by steef at 6:58 PM on December 14, 2008 [3 favorites]

This guys bio made me dislike him. The interview made me hate him. Quantum mechanics and the "many world theory" are terribly interesting and should be the basis of great science fiction.

They should not be a shitty excuse for some asshole with a history of raping sci-fi and fantasy classics to run amok with a much revered serial institution; especially in a current media climate where such institutions have been commonly offered up for raping to the highest bidder or the (Transformers, the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, I am Legend, War of the Worlds, Speed Racer, Aeon Flux, Day the Earth Stood still, Dare Devil, Constantine, etc...)

I'm all for playing about with current mythology (I love Grant Morrison and Niel Gaiman, and all) but movies are still an art-form that is prohibitively expensive enough to do real lasting damage or credit to a series no matter how widely or thinly they are received (people are STILL making fun of Captain Americas rubber ears!)

The previews don't look awful, but this post doesn't make me feel good about the prospects for this movie. I hope this fellow proves me wrong.
posted by es_de_bah at 6:58 PM on December 14, 2008 [5 favorites]

meh! there's a stray *or the* in there that made it through my laser like drunken sunday nite editing. please disregard.
posted by es_de_bah at 7:00 PM on December 14, 2008

Maybe I didn't follow the proposed explanation, but assuming the time travel results in a new alternate timeline and the current timeline continues on normally....why would anyone ever try to stop someone else from doing this? There would be effectively zero consequence to you or the universe you live in. Just let em go, man.
posted by nightchrome at 7:12 PM on December 14, 2008

You don't need a load of bollocksy pseudoscience to basically say "this is a what-if story". "The original series went one way, we're writing one where someone went back in time and made it go a different way because we wanted to do Star Trek Babies in the manner of an '80s Saturday Morning cartoon but they weren't all together then so we fixed that." The many worlds drivel he's spouting here was just a way of saying "we don't claim to be invalidating the original series here."
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:13 PM on December 14, 2008 [3 favorites]

This is a whole lotta 'spainin' about why some other guy is playing "Kirk." Shatner is too old, but let's just leave it at that. You can't wiggle your way out of The One True Kirk. Asshats.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:25 PM on December 14, 2008 [1 favorite]

Oh man, I'm s psyched this is coming out on my birthday. NERDIEST BIRTHDAY, EVAAAAR!
posted by piratebowling at 7:26 PM on December 14, 2008

timey-wimey
posted by Artw at 7:40 PM on December 14, 2008 [6 favorites]

I hate time travel.

HATE it.

Every time a Star Trek franchise dabbles in time travel it ruins everything. Time travel is the stupidest idea in all of stupidville. It is lazy, and pointless, and cheap. It's cheaper than the way hundreds of years of Star Fleet officers never figured out that landing without environmental protection on strange planets is a good way to get diseases/weird alien symbionts/expose untrustworthy members of the crew to exploitation by evil robots/mad scientists/godlike aliens.

If I had time travel, I would travel back in time to the person who first thought of writing about time travel in science fiction, and kill them. Even if they were my grandpa or ancestor or something, I would kill them. It would be better for everyone.
posted by winna at 7:47 PM on December 14, 2008 [8 favorites]

Are there crystal skulls in this flick? And refrigerators? Nazis?
posted by potsmokinghippieoverlord at 7:54 PM on December 14, 2008 [1 favorite]

They could have kept it a lot shorter by just saying "we're doing stupid shit for money."
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:58 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

Star Trek Babies in the manner of an '80s Saturday Morning cartoon

Made by Paramount or other big-budget entities with a copyright-back argument for canon: WOULD SUCK

Made by some crazy, loveless psychpath who knows how to use flash while nestled in the retarding confines of his mother's basement: WOULD RULE
posted by mwhybark at 7:58 PM on December 14, 2008

George_Spigott nailed something that has bothered me about the previews. "Star Trek Babies" is really the vibe that I've gotten out of what I've seen so far. I mean, I hope the movie proves me wrong, but after being subjected to so many things like "Muppet Babies" and "Tiny Toons" (Tiny Toons had a few things going for it, actually) this movie has a lot going against it.
posted by azpenguin at 8:03 PM on December 14, 2008

You don't need a load of bollocksy pseudoscience to basically say "this is a what-if story"

You don't need a lot of bollocksy pseudoscience to say "this is all technology so advanced it's completely indistinguishable from magic to the twentieth century mind," but that hasn't stopped five television series and ten movies from doing it, and frankly, I'd say the fanboys need it for this one.

That said, I'm totally looking forward to this.

But yeah, ditto on the time travel thing, which I've always hated. (I subscribe to the Gargoyles model myself. I don't care if it's scientific or not, it's much better, less lazier storytelling.)
posted by lou at 8:07 PM on December 14, 2008

It would be one thing to say to hell with continuity and just have fun in the Trek universe.

But to make up shitty excuses for retconning is LAAAAAAME.
posted by SirOmega at 8:19 PM on December 14, 2008

Artw: best. time travel. quote. EVAR.
posted by jazon at 8:33 PM on December 14, 2008

nightchrome writes "why would anyone ever try to stop someone else from doing this? There would be effectively zero consequence to you or the universe you live in. Just let em go, man."

Well an instance of yourself continues in that alternative instance. Anyone who would attempt to save a family member from tragedy would probably expend at least a little effort attempting to save themselves.
posted by Mitheral at 8:45 PM on December 14, 2008

I think if you ever use the word 'canon' in regards to a fictional franchise, then you're an irredeemable nerd.
posted by empath at 8:52 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

Also, and probably moreso: 'retcon'.
posted by empath at 8:53 PM on December 14, 2008

Anthony: So everyone in the prime timeline, like Picard and Riker, are still off doing there thing, it is just that Nero is gone. Bob: Yes, and you will notice that whenever the movie comes out, that whatever DVDs you have purchased, will continue to exist.

I also found this guy a bit bollocksy, but this quote redeemed it for me.
posted by dammitjim at 9:11 PM on December 14, 2008 [5 favorites]

Ok, it's a neat fictional universe. I like it. I've liked some of the characters, some of the storylines, and some of the ideas. Can we move on? Are there really no other possible universes to explore?

Is this the film version of serial books that keep getting pulped out because writers/publishers have realized that people love their barely-changing cast? Isn't that what a (tv) series is for?

For awhile now, this has reached the state of fan fic, just written by professionals.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 9:13 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

> They should not be a shitty excuse for some asshole with a history of raping sci-fi and fantasy classics to run amok with a much revered serial institution; especially in a current media climate where such institutions have been commonly offered up for raping to the highest bidder or the (Transformers...

There was a lot of this sort of talk when the Transformers movie came out, and while it certainly sucked (even worse than I expected it to), I didn't understand why anyone thought of it as this beloved sci-fi classic to be approached with reverence. I mean, we all enjoyed playing with the toys when we were kids, and it was awesome when Optimus Prime died in the original movie, but...we're not exactly talking about H.G. Wells in terms of source material here.

/ just sayin'
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:18 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

This is probably the most cynical effort to get some geek cred going that I've seen for a while. The reason Enterprise died is they didn't understand what should have been their core audience: nerd boys; the ones who liked the Asian communications specialist when they were supposed to like the silicone Vulcan. This reportedly pissed the producers off and rather than go with it, they started writing the former out of the script and giving her head colds and stuff. Genius.

These guys may not understand the words they're using, but they're a little more clued in than that, anyway. Probably hoping if they throw enough pseudoscience around it'll get a blurb on Wired com and someone will dutifully post it to slashdot.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:26 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

So the interviewer repeatedly (and accurately) points out that Star Trek has never seriously used the many-worlds interpretation, and Orci repeatedly insists it must, because Star Trek "has to conform to the latest scientific theories and the most advanced and complete."

Except for, ya know, transporters, warp drives, universal translators, alien/human interbreeding, and mind melds.

Bob Orci is, quite possibly, a blithering idiot.

Listen folks, here's the problem with the Many-Worlds Theory of Sci Fi Time Travel: There's no fucking point in time travel if sci-fi time travelers are creating parallel universes. Why would a bad guy go to the effort of building a time machine, traveling through time, and trying to kill Captain Kirk (or Sarah Connor, or whoever) if it didn't actually improve the bad guy's world? (For that matter, why would the good guys care about stopping the bad guys if it didn't affect the good guys world?) Creating a parallel universe where the good guys lose isn't revenge, or even victory. It's just spiteful and cowardly. Can't beat your opponent in your universe? Make a new one and hide there!

There's no real winner or loser in this scenario. Good guys get a universe, bad guys get a universe, everybody wins. Except the audience, who usually get an incoherent time travel story that has no real point.

It's time to declare a moratorium on the use of the phrase "many worlds" in time travel stories. It's destroying the genre.
posted by faster than a speeding bulette at 9:30 PM on December 14, 2008 [9 favorites]

Star Trek Babies in the manner of an '80s Saturday Morning cartoon

I call it the Scrappy Doo effect. Of course I'm a big Star Trek hatah, so this tickles me pink.
posted by trondant at 9:36 PM on December 14, 2008

Despite all the shit being thrown around in this thread one thought is in the back of my mind: It could be worse.

He could turn it into a shitty tween drama that would become so far out there on its own narratives that it rapes the franchise a'la Smallville.
posted by Talez at 9:43 PM on December 14, 2008 [1 favorite]

It's quite possible to create really cool fiction based on the many-worlds theory, but I can also see it being used to reboot a franchise into oblivion.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:45 PM on December 14, 2008

One more thing, can we come up with another word besides 'rape' to talk about sequels you don't like?
posted by empath at 10:09 PM on December 14, 2008 [10 favorites]

He could turn it into a shitty tween drama that would become so far out there on its own narratives that it rapes the franchise a'la Smallville.

"Welcome to the USSENCC-1701, bitch!"

Do-do-doodle do, do-do-doodle do, do-do-do do doodle doo, doo doo doodle doodle doo, doo doo doodle doodle doo...

We've been on the run
Sling shotting 'round the sun
Looking out for Romulans
Final frontier here we come
Right back where we started from

Red shirts grab your guns
Our back story weighs a ton
Restarting with seventeen oh one
Franchise reboot here we come
Right back where we started from

Franchise reeebooooooooot!
Here we coooooooooooooooooooome!
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:37 PM on December 14, 2008 [2 favorites]

See, the only thing I don't like about a multiverse in which every probability is present in some universe somewhere is the guilt I experience knowing that, in this model, there's a universe out there somewhere where the only thing different between that one and this one is that fact that I chose not to wear pants while typing this message.
posted by WolfDaddy at 10:42 PM on December 14, 2008 [1 favorite]

Oh, we're not including in this discussion the multiple-Enterprise episode on TNG, are we? With the crazy battle-addled Riker? Cause that was awesome.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 10:59 PM on December 14, 2008 [6 favorites]

Can't they just admit that Star Trek is bad at and doesn't value continuity and consistency instead of making up really weird excuses?

Can't Star Trek fans accept that fact without it having to be explicitly stated, but still appreciate the franchise?
posted by Riki tiki at 11:43 PM on December 14, 2008

I read Obama said the movie would be awesome, so don't worry about it.
posted by TwelveTwo at 12:39 AM on December 15, 2008

If I had time travel, I would travel back in time to the person who first thought of writing about time travel in science fiction, and kill them.

This is why we can't have nice things.
posted by grouse at 12:53 AM on December 15, 2008 [3 favorites]

Then Spock woke up and it was all a dream.
posted by Phanx at 1:30 AM on December 15, 2008

I was watching Voyager the other day and stumbled onto Harry Kim's throwaway line, "You should have transported him into space!" Sadly this was not followed by a shot of animated light bulbs turning on above everyone's heads.
posted by mek at 1:51 AM on December 15, 2008 [2 favorites]

I don't particularly like Star Trek, what little I've seen (a couple of the movies, a few episodes of the original series, a few more (maybe 5-10) episodes of TNG, and some other small stuff), but I have to say, the trailer for the new movie is the first time I saw something Star Trek related and thought "Hey, cool, this looks like something I might really enjoy."
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 2:36 AM on December 15, 2008

Time travel is the stupidest idea in all of stupidville. It is lazy, and pointless, and cheap.

I think the holo-deck gets that award.
posted by Trochanter at 4:19 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

empath writes "One more thing, can we come up with another word besides 'rape' to talk about sequels you don't like?"

It's a word with multiple meanings being used correctly: "3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice." / "To abuse an object in an extreme manner.". At least I'm assuming no one is imply sexual rape in this context though, what with rule 34, I could be wrong.

WolfDaddy writes "there's a universe out there somewhere where the only thing different between that one and this one is that fact that I chose not to wear pants while typing this message."

We're supposed to be wearing pants?
posted by Mitheral at 4:35 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

I am a Trekkie, cause I read the damn books. And in the books, you have this thing called the "Shatnerverse", where Shatner just does whatever the hell he wants with the Trek Universe and the people that don't like that don't complain, they just don't buy the books. I don't care what they do with the the place, just as long as they continue to write professional grade stories that I can enjoy. I'm sure the day will come where they'll go all "Smallville" and the show will be a half hour of teen angst mashed together with an half hour of fanboy goodness, and I'll probably put up with that too.
posted by boymilo at 5:15 AM on December 15, 2008

It's cheaper than the way hundreds of years of Star Fleet officers

Five years. It's a five year mission. Pfff.
posted by DU at 5:26 AM on December 15, 2008

So the interviewer repeatedly (and accurately) points out that Star Trek has never seriously used the many-worlds interpretation

Wasn't there an episode where Worf had a shuttle malfunction and started randomly hopping universes? And each time he "jumped" it diverged even more from "normal." Then in order to fix it he had to create a situation where all the universes merged and the Enterprise started detecting millions of Enterprises simultaneously. Something like that.
posted by lou at 6:23 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

How can you have a consistent Star Trek canon at all? You'd have to accept things happening, in the original series, which are patently ridiculous and which a modern audience wouldn't accept at all. Like this one where a planet has evolved in parallel to the Earth, down to the American flag.

Or Pike being paralyzed to the point where he can only communicate in yes / no answers. We can already do better than that, (Stephen Hawking, Diving Bell and the Butterfly, etc) and this is supposed to be a culture that has mastered warp speed, transparent aluminum, and kidneys in a pill.

Or even more implausible: Joan Collins working in a soup kitchen.
posted by condour75 at 6:24 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

This is what happens when people mistake entertainment for science.
posted by mrmojoflying at 6:40 AM on December 15, 2008 [3 favorites]

Janeway had it right. My head hurts.
posted by nax at 6:53 AM on December 15, 2008

Here's the whole quote about quantum mechanics.

Bob: Yes. If you look at quantum mechanics and you learn about the fact that our most successful theory of science is quantum mechanics, and the fact that it deals with probabilities of events happening. And that the most probable events tend to happen more often and that one of the subsets of that theory is the many universe theory. Data said this [in "Parallels"], he summed up quantum mechanics as the theory that "all possibilities that can happen do happen" in a parallel universe. According to theory, there are going to be a much larger number of universes in which events are very closely related, because those are the most probable configurations of things. Inherent in quantum mechanics there is sort of reverse entropy, which is what you were trying to say, in which the universe does tend to want to order itself in a certain way. This is not something we are making up; this is something we researched, in terms of the physical theory. So yes, there is an element of the universe trying to hold itself together.

Yeah. Wow.
posted by delmoi at 6:54 AM on December 15, 2008

Oh and this:

Bob: It would seem very logical. Quantum mechanics avoids the grandfather paradox that Back to the Future relies on, which is: you can go back in Back to the Future and screw with your own birth and potentially invalidate your own birth. In quantum mechanics that is not the case. In quantum mechanics, if you go back and kill your own father, then you just live on as the guy who came in from another universe who lives in a universe where you killed some guy, but you don’t erase your existence doing that.

So this guy is like the fucking expert on quantum effects on time-travel apparently. I doubt he knows what the electrical charge on a quark is, or what a planks length is, but somehow he knows how quantum mechanics effects time travel?

Also, someone should tell him that the many worlds hypothesis is just one interpretation and that has never been proven or tested at all.
posted by delmoi at 6:57 AM on December 15, 2008

One more thing, can we come up with another word besides 'rape' to talk about sequels you don't like?

Blame Canada Parker and Stone.
posted by rokusan at 7:10 AM on December 15, 2008

Of course, we wouldn't need this explanation if all the fanbois weren't crying butthurt from having their beloved franchise rebooted. Wah wah wah. It's Star Trek, damn it. Until you see the movie, and you know for sure whether it sucks or not (like the Star Wars prequels), stop claiming that J. J. Abrams is raping your pwecious childhood/adolescence.
posted by SansPoint at 7:23 AM on December 15, 2008

So this guy is like the fucking expert on quantum effects on time-travel apparently. I doubt he knows what the electrical charge on a quark is, or what a planks length is, but somehow he knows how quantum mechanics effects time travel?

[pedantry engaged] I think a plank's length is about twice the length of a piece of string. A Planck length, however... [pedantry disengaged]

But yes, I agree that we are lucky that Bob Orci, with his solid grasp of Everett's relative-state theory, the superposition principle, and the general acceptance of MWI over the Bohm interpretation, is writing such deathless works as Transformers and The Legend of Zorro.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:27 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

[pedantry engaged]

Now harnessing the power of pedantry on the internet, that's the way to generate FTL travel!

/make it snarky, Number 1
posted by Rock Steady at 8:42 AM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

Oh, we're not including in this discussion the multiple-Enterprise episode on TNG, are we? With the crazy battle-addled Riker? Cause that was awesome.

HOLY FUCK, YES

While I generally agree that time travel in Trek sucks all manner of balls, DS9 did it pretty well; in the tribble episode, for example, they came up with the great idea of a Starfleet division whose sole purpose is to clean up the mess left by time-travel incidents. The officers are humorless and constantly annoyed, which works fantastically as a stand-in for the fans who are freaking out about canon: "Yeah, that was fun and all, but now we have to clean this mess up, and your crazy adventures are not helping." From their brief amount of screentime, you get the feeling that these are Starfleet officers who spend about 90 percent of their days facepalming and sighing miserably. Which is great!

And actually, speaking of DS9 time travel, there's probably a really kick-ass action-suspense time-travel movie to be made at around the time of the Bell Riots. Or even without time travel and appearances by well-known Trek characters, the movie could essentially be a near-future nightmare scenario, a Children of Men type thing but with economic meltdown replacing a sterile population as the origin of the dystopia.
posted by Greg Nog at 8:53 AM on December 15, 2008 [2 favorites]

I think y'all did a little too much LDS.
posted by not_on_display at 8:55 AM on December 15, 2008 [2 favorites]

Set phasers on "dumb."
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:28 AM on December 15, 2008

Oh, we're not including in this discussion the multiple-Enterprise episode on TNG, are we? With the crazy battle-addled Riker? Cause that was awesome.

I don't count this episode because it also introduced the highly improbable relationship between Worf and Deanna Troi.

DS9 had Worf marry Jadzia Dax, and that was by far the most satisfying relationship ever portrayed on any incarnation of Trek. In any universe! Well, except that mirror universe where Kirk boned Marlena to learn about the Tantalus Device.

Speaking of DS9, I've often wondered if this semi-reboot didn't come along because TPTB had no clue what to do with the Trek universe after the massive changes brought on by the Dominion War. DS9 really boldly went, if you ask me.

Oh, and Mitheral, I was talking about some parallel universe where THEY wear pants when composing messages on Internet websites. Of course you're not supposed to wear pants in this universe. Duh.

you are, however, supposed to wear a cowboy hat
posted by WolfDaddy at 9:48 AM on December 15, 2008

Bull shit, bull shit, bull shit, bull shit.

Damn.
posted by QIbHom at 10:10 AM on December 15, 2008

So, um, Star Trek vampires, right? Or, like, zombies?

Well, it worked for Marvel, so why the fuck not?
posted by Guy_Inamonkeysuit at 10:17 AM on December 15, 2008

That'd be the Borg wouldn't it?
posted by Artw at 10:20 AM on December 15, 2008

I don't count this episode because it also introduced the highly improbable relationship between Worf and Deanna Troi.

Oh man, I disagree. I mean, Worf/Dax was way more satisfying, but Worf/Troi seemed totally plausible. Like, sometimes you have some tight-knit group of friends or co-workers or whatever, and two of them start dating? And everyone's like, "What?" But it seems to be working out okay, and in retrospect, with all the time they spent together, it kinda looks like it had been inevitable? But it doesn't stop you from wondering all the time about whether they're really happy, or just too lazy to find anyone better for them? You got any friends like that? I got friends like that.

I don't know if that's the decidedly non-romantic tack the writers were going for, but yeah, that struck me as maybe the most plausible relationship in the whole canon.

I think if you ever use the word 'canon' in regards to a fictional franchise, then you're an irredeemable nerd.

JE NE REGRETTE RIEN
posted by Greg Nog at 10:23 AM on December 15, 2008 [3 favorites]

The Sappy–Worf–Troi hypothesis postulates that a particular alien species' racial stereotype accurately predicts their likely attraction to species with opposite stereotypes, such that opposite language patterns inevitably yield a complementary language of love. Troi, for example, as a sensitive, can't help but be constantly bombarded by the duplicitous nature of most of her companions. Worf, however, hiding nothing, and with the emotional depth of a hot baked potato, would surely be a relief to Troi. Like a super-max washer spin-cycle, white-noise machine of love.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:47 AM on December 15, 2008 [12 favorites]

Five years. It's a five year mission. Pfff.

The longest five years ever!

2151-2378

I think we can conclude that Star Fleet has no institutional memory, unless of course you ascribe to my primary theory.
posted by winna at 11:25 AM on December 15, 2008

One more thing, can we come up with another word besides 'rape' to talk about sequels you don't like?

George Lucas touched my childhood inappropriately.
posted by tkolar at 11:26 AM on December 15, 2008 [2 favorites]

Gene Roddenberry went where no man had gone before.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:30 AM on December 15, 2008

The most amazing thing about all this is that piratebowling and I share a birthday.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:37 AM on December 15, 2008

Kadir beneath Mo Moteh.
posted by bluesky43 at 1:12 PM on December 15, 2008

From the second link, it seems that the people behind this Star Trek movie, Orci and Kurtzman, are also responsible for the final script of the upcoming Watchmen movie. From what I've seen in the trailers and now, coupled with this revelation, I know for certain that the Watchmen movie is going to reach the same dizzying heights of LXG in suckitude.
posted by ooga_booga at 1:22 PM on December 15, 2008

Holy crap.

Last year at the Comicon, while I was waiting in line to get my copy of Johnny The Homicidal Maniac #1 signed by Jhonen Vasquez, there were two dudes in front of me arguing over the better captain, Kirk or Picard. I'd heard jokes before about people arguing about that but I couldn't imagine it happening in real life, and as I listened, I was astonished at how deep some peoples love for Star Trek goes and how scared that made me.
I just now realized that you guys are THOSE TWO DUDES. I don't know as much about anything as some of you appear to know about 'Star Trek cannon'. Unless you count Batman. Or Dragonlance. Or Zelda. Anyways, you're all a bunch of nerds, that's what I wanted to say.
posted by Bageena at 1:23 PM on December 15, 2008

As long as it doesn't suck, they can "explain" their continuity problems away any way they'd like.

TV Tropes calls this the Rule Of Cool.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:30 PM on December 15, 2008

He could turn it into a shitty tween drama that would become so far out there on its own narratives that it rapes the franchise a'la Smallville.

This is, in fact, the EXACT thing that Paramount asked for -- teen Kirk and teen Spock at Starfleet Academy, along with teen everybody-else-in-the-cast -- and all J.J. Abrams has done is hire a couple of Trekkies to write the script, and it's completely their nerdlove that has saved us all from "Star Trek Creek Hill 90210"
posted by briank at 1:53 PM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

Bageena - don't read the aliens thread.
posted by Artw at 1:57 PM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

Describing some relatively minor revisions to your favorite skiffy franchise as "rape" is the Godwin's Law of SF fandom.
posted by Halloween Jack at 2:09 PM on December 15, 2008

I think if you ever use the word 'canon' in regards to a fictional franchise, then you're an irredeemable nerd.
posted by empath at 8:52 PM on December 14 [2 favorites +] [!]

Also, and probably moreso: 'retcon'.
posted by empath at 8:53 PM on December 14 [+] [!]

It looks like I've finally nailed down my place on the nerd continuum... Time to go look up "retcon".

Ahhh, Halo, what have you done to me?
posted by Pantengliopoli at 2:14 PM on December 15, 2008

I don't know as much about anything as some of you appear to know about 'Star Trek cannon'. Unless you count Batman. Or Dragonlance. Or Zelda.

ONE OF US.
posted by adamdschneider at 2:32 PM on December 15, 2008

I dunno, “retcon” is a low level nerd term, it implies you know of the existence of fictional continuities and you are aware they get messed with occasionally to support whatever the story of the moment is. Having an interest in “canon” implies you know all of that, but also are deeply invested in what is or isn’t a part of that continuity, up to inclusing spin-off books, novelisations, off-hand mentions of things in interviews and artwork on novelty merchandising. To me that makes “canon” far more nerdy.

Also you forgot “reboot”.
posted by Artw at 3:59 PM on December 15, 2008

(Also: "The big reset button". Which is what gets pressed at the end of any word changing event where everything changes forever - ESPECIALY if time travel or other reality altering gimmicks are involved)
posted by Artw at 4:02 PM on December 15, 2008

Bageena: Holy crap. Last year at the Comicon, while I was waiting in line to get my copy of Johnny The Homicidal Maniac #1 signed by Jhonen Vasquez . . . Anyways, you're all a bunch of nerds, that's what I wanted to say.

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE, SQUEE!
posted by not_on_display at 4:15 PM on December 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

I'm a geek, and a Star Trek fan since the age of seven. I'm really looking forward to seeing this movie. I think it could be hugely entertaining. I'm also hoping any silly explanations as to how it fits into canon this and canon don't end up serving to make it a bad story. I don't care if there's a continuity error between this movie and an episode of the old show. ("What do yo mean, he goes right to the Enterprise?! He served on the Farragut first, everyone knows that!") I'm mostly concerned with, "Will this be a good story?"

That said, I'm also singing ...

"If you're wondering how Joel eats and breathes
And other science facts (la la la!)
Then repeat to yourself, 'It's just a show;
You really should relax ...'"
posted by chuq at 5:39 PM on December 15, 2008

I don't blame them for rebooting the series, after "Enterprise" basically nuked it from orbit.
posted by mek at 7:50 AM on December 16, 2008

The next Trek movie should just be whatever John de Lancie is working on, and claim it's Q on vacation.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:17 AM on December 16, 2008 [3 favorites]

John de Lancie is still working?
posted by crossoverman at 5:23 PM on December 16, 2008

You know, I definitely want to post here in order to give a shout out to my friend's latest blog, TREKKIESEX, but it's actually somewhat apropo- the latest entry details the worst Star Trek time travel stories.
posted by 235w103 at 5:53 PM on December 16, 2008

APROPOS
posted by 235w103 at 5:53 PM on December 16, 2008

the worst Star Trek time travel stories.

If by worst, you mean BEST. Which is what the blog entry is about - the best Trek stories in comparison to the Orci-led retcon of the entire universe.
posted by crossoverman at 9:05 PM on December 16, 2008

In September 2007, De Lancie provided dramatic narration to the Cleveland Orchestra's performance of Peer Gynt He performed this role again with the National Symphony Orchestra in June 2008, under the direction of Vladimir Ashkenazy.

Looks like he was also in 2 movies in 2007 and one in 2008.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 2:33 PM on December 17, 2008

I don't blame them for rebooting the series, after "Enterprise" basically nuked it from orbit.

Though to be fair, the time travel/Alternate universe story where evil mirror universe archer steals a time-displaced enterprise class ship from Tholians (the web dudes) and uses it to go on a rampage is strangely great.
posted by Artw at 3:25 PM on December 17, 2008

Ah hell, I mention Q and defend the multiple-Enterprise episode without going on to mention (and defend) the series finale? That was also excellent.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 4:36 PM on December 17, 2008

"Q is somehow involved in a hilarious holodeck mix-up" would be like the worst episode ever.
posted by Artw at 4:41 PM on December 17, 2008

Artw: Only if he's saved by Wesley....from an alternate timeline!
posted by nightchrome at 5:41 PM on December 17, 2008

You know what? I think I was wrong. Anything added to a holodeck episode actually makes the episode suck less, even if that thing sucks, since holodeck episodes suck more than anything ever.
posted by Artw at 6:38 PM on December 17, 2008

(Q and Wesley are joint tie for second most sucky thing though)
posted by Artw at 6:39 PM on December 17, 2008

R.I.P. Majel Barrett-Roddenberry
posted by Artw at 10:27 AM on December 19, 2008