Canon

Who is the FUTURE GUY in Star Trek Enterprise? – Star

Who is the FUTURE GUY in Star Trek Enterprise? – Star Trek Explained

#FUTURE #GUY #Star #Trek #Enterprise #Star

“Trek Central”

Star Trek Enterprise answered a lot of questions during it’s short-lived four season, but one question remains unanswered to this …

source

 

To see the full content, share this page by clicking one of the buttons below

Related Articles

37 Comments

  1. My (long held) belief was that he was a Romulan, part of a future Romulan program using time travel to alter the past to make their (then) present more in their favor. This thought was actually confirmed (somewhat) by the Strange New Worlds 2nd season episode of "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow".

    Then, factor in that the Romulan home-system star went surprisingly nova in the late 24th century, an event that shouldn't have happened for hundreds of millions of years if not even later…. Could it be that their methods of the 'experiment' had unforeseen consequences? (To quote a certain Doctor, one shouldn't go mucking about with time if you don't know what you're doing.) Thus causing the future of their star to come about considerably earlier than it should have done?

    It would explain a lot of things.

  2. No thats horrible, fighting his past self, leading to killing trips sister leading to what happend to trip, I like enterprise but just no they had no idea where they were going with the show and thats why it was canceled. Archer would never do that to his own crew. NEVER

  3. It was going to be future Archer? Ugh, yeah that would've been stupid. I always assumed it was a Romulan since it was 10 years before the Earth-Romulus war. Knowing who it was planned to be I'm grateful now the series was cut short so a dumb reveal like that never made it on screen.

  4. I'm not saying that "Future guy" should or should not be Archer, but… I'm going to assume it is for a moment.

    Every one seems to forget that there was more then just one timeline in the temporal cold war, even if most of them were over lapping timelines fighting for dominations. The key words here being "a corrupt future". So even if "future Archer" may have been a part of the same timeline as the Enterprise series at one point, in the future there could have been a manger split in the timeline. And in that branching timeline there is no way of knowing what might of happened to "future Archer".

    In a way it could have been a form of irony in the way that we create are own demons, with "future Archer" being Archer's and agent Daniel's demon in a way. it would also go along with the fact that the federation seemed to be the one who (Indirectly) started the temporal cold war, but with out it almost nothing in the galaxy would be the way we know it.

    Also if the war with the Iconians, and the hole time travel paradox with that still happens in canon, witch the events of would not happen without the temporal war, then the earlies know point of change in the timeline would be at least 10,000 years in the past. (or is it 100,000 years? I don't remember)

  5. Given what Braga said, I am glad Enterprise didn't get a 5th season as Archer being Future Guy would have been their worst misstep of all. It just wouldn't have worked. Firstly, it was already established that even by the late 24th century they didn't have the technology to communicate with the past, so how could a future Archer do that in the late 22nd/early 23rd century? Secondly, he was clearly working against the Federation and United Earth, so suddenly saying he was trying to influence his young self would have contradicted what we had already seen of his actions.

  6. If I recall, Star Trek Online also had a take on Future Guy, portraying him as a Krenim soldier gone rogue after a failed plan against the Iconians left his wife and child removed from the timeline. I do enjoy that version, but the implications of future Archer are pretty fun as well, though not sure how he would have gotten the technology to do that much temporal stuff.

Leave a Reply