Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

PST: discuss Star Trek without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
Havok
Miscreant
Posts: 13016
Joined: 2005-07-02 10:41pm
Location: Oakland CA
Contact:

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Havok »

TithonusSyndrome wrote:
Havok wrote:
TithonusSyndrome wrote: As fucking goofy as that sounds, if Delta Vega is indeed M-class and in the Vulcan system, it seems to lack a lot of settlement for a habitable planet in their backyard.
Or maybe we saw all of about 14 kilometers of it and have no idea what population it may sustain. By your logic, if all we saw was Iowa in the movie, you would think there was a lack of settlement on Earth.
I'm fairly certain there were no lights or other signs of settlement visible from orbit when Kirk's pod fell to the planet. Either way, a distant, obscure planet with a projector set up for Spock's benefit is more consistent with the amount of time that passed with the Enterprise in warp than a planet close enough to see Vulcan collapse with the naked eye on the ground.
Occam's Razor springs to mind. He could have just given Spock a view screen. And the Enterprise I don't believe went to warp yet and was still in system trying to figure out what to do. Also, if he could just set up a holographic projector why bother dropping off Spock anywhere remotely close to Vulcan where the chance of warning could be given. No, Nero wanted Spock to witness his home world's destruction first hand, not via satellite.
Bounty wrote:Not to mention it makes no sense for Scotty to go on about sandwiches if the planet next door just got sucked inside out.
Well Kirk and Spock weren't exactly going on about it either. The site Scotty was at was punishment and with the way things looked, it didn't seem at all advanced. He apparently didn't even know Kirk had landed even though the pod was sending out a locator signal. I would imagine having a station with advanced sensors and whatever would be pretty redundant within sight of Vulcan, hence why it is a punishment posting.
Image
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it.
Blank Yellow (NSFW)
"Mostly Harmless Nutcase"
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Stofsk »

tim31 wrote:Also, bringing cadets aboard on shuttles rather than transporter: most efficient way for the sheer numbers needed to be moved? Shuttles had to go up anyway? Tradition?
Those shuttles may have been due to be embarked on their respective ships. The ships in orbit of Earth may have been there to be refitted and recrewed, hence why a lot of the crew are cadets.

I quite like the idea that transporters may be energy intensive, and they can only transport half a dozen guys at once anyway. Assuming it takes 1 minute to beam half a dozen people at a time, that's only 360 people max per hour. A shuttle, travelling at 1-G, from planet to orbit, would take half that time, and may well be able to carry dozens of personnel plus equipment. (and that's assuming the shuttle's maximum acceleration is 1-G, when it likely is much higher)
Image
User avatar
Havok
Miscreant
Posts: 13016
Joined: 2005-07-02 10:41pm
Location: Oakland CA
Contact:

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Havok »

Prannon wrote:Does anyone think that maybe the view of Vulcan collapsing from Delta Vega was an "artistic embellishment" given by Spock-prime through his mind meld with Kirk? Perhaps he really didn't see it collapse like that, but for the sake of the flashback Spock was giving it was adequate. Plus, out of universe, it's cool to watch a planet get sucked in like that. Why not show it twice?
Possibly, but Spock states that he just saw his planet die. It also doesn't make any sense for him to create a false memory for himself and all the visual evidence suggests the meld went one way only as far as memory transfer.
Bounty wrote:and during the first engagement with the Narada Pike orders power drawn from that nacelle to the weapons;
I'm pretty sure that he says to move power from the nacelle deflectors to the forward deflectors.
Image
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it.
Blank Yellow (NSFW)
"Mostly Harmless Nutcase"
User avatar
Prannon
Jedi Knight
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-03-25 07:39am
Location: Ontario

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Prannon »

Havok wrote:
Prannon wrote:Does anyone think that maybe the view of Vulcan collapsing from Delta Vega was an "artistic embellishment" given by Spock-prime through his mind meld with Kirk? Perhaps he really didn't see it collapse like that, but for the sake of the flashback Spock was giving it was adequate. Plus, out of universe, it's cool to watch a planet get sucked in like that. Why not show it twice?
Possibly, but Spock states that he just saw his planet die. It also doesn't make any sense for him to create a false memory for himself and all the visual evidence suggests the meld went one way only as far as memory transfer.
That's true, but if, say, Dela Vega were as far from Vulcan as Earth is from Venus, he still would have been able to see Vulcan's light wink out in the proper conditions. That's stretching it a bit, but it certainly puts it in the realm of possibility. Also, I'm no psychologist so forgive me for any blatant errors I make, but hasn't the human mind been known to fabricate/twist/embellish memories in the event of enormous emotional stress? It would make sense to me that even if Spock only saw Vulcan's pin point wink out in the sky, he would still feel so much anguish that the event would be embellished to appear all that more horrifying in his mind's eye.

However, it should be said that the whole scene is a gigantic stretch in itself. Considering that Spock talks about supernovas destroying galaxies and it shows Vulcan's destruction from the surface of another planet, efforts to try and make sense of it are probably going to be fruitless.
User avatar
Bladed_Crescent
Jedi Knight
Posts: 639
Joined: 2006-08-26 10:57am

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bladed_Crescent »

The appearence of Vulcan's destruction was probably a bleed-through of Spock's emotions - I'm pretty sure that in other mind-melds, the transferrence of thought and emotion is referred to - there's Sarek's meld with Picard, Tuvok's meld with Suder and later, his meld with the emotion-trafficer on the planet of telepaths; original Spock pointedly mentions that he (and by extension, new Spock) is emotionally comprised as a result. As well, in 'The Immunity Syndrome' Spock felt the Intrepid and its crew of Vulcans perish at the hands pseudopods of the Space Amoeba from light-years away; it's not inconceivable that the deaths of 6 billion Vulcans from a good deal closer had a greater impact; he wouldn't necessarily need to see the planet's graphic destruction - just be close enough for its light to vanish (as others have pointed out) and to experience the deaths of his people.

The way Vulcan's destruction is presented in the meld was probably the way Kirk's mind translated the emotions and sensation of the event, since he'd seen it firsthand.

At least, that's how I saw it.
Image
Sugar, snips, spice and screams: What are little girls made of, made of? What are little boys made of, made of?

"...even posthuman tattooed pigmentless sexy killing machines can be vulnerable and need cuddling." - Shroom Man 777
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bounty »

I'm pretty sure that he says to move power from the nacelle deflectors to the forward deflectors.
"Divert auxiliary power from port nacelle to forward weapons"

The line jumped out to me because in TOS, it was implied from time to time that the nacelles were power generators themselves. I'm 90% certain he didn't mention a nacelle shield at all.
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11948
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Crazedwraith »

The idea that Vulcan and Delta Vega could be close enough for Vulcan to be that larger in the sky and yet one of them is an ice planet and the other a desert planet seems rather improbable.
User avatar
open_sketchbook
Jedi Master
Posts: 1145
Joined: 2008-11-03 05:43pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by open_sketchbook »

Distance from a star isn't the only factor in determining a planet's environment. Atmosphere is a huge factor, as could be any number of other things. Delta Vega might have an unusual tilt that makes the habitable portion very cold, for example. We didn't exactly see the whole planet from orbit, we don't have to assume the whole thing is a frozen wasteland, especially when large predators are present.
1980s Rock is to music what Giant Robot shows are to anime
Think about it.

Cruising low in my N-1 blasting phat beats,
showin' off my chrome on them Coruscant streets
Got my 'saber on my belt and my gat by side,
this here yellow plane makes for a sick ride
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Knife »

Bounty wrote:
I'm pretty sure that he says to move power from the nacelle deflectors to the forward deflectors.
"Divert auxiliary power from port nacelle to forward weapons"

The line jumped out to me because in TOS, it was implied from time to time that the nacelles were power generators themselves. I'm 90% certain he didn't mention a nacelle shield at all.

There is a glowy thing in the back of the nacells that would indicate a thruster or engine of some sort besides a warp engine. diverting power from that engine to deflectors shouldn't be that surprising nor should it indicate that the engines themselves are producing power rather than using power from somewhere else.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bounty »

Knife wrote:
Bounty wrote:
I'm pretty sure that he says to move power from the nacelle deflectors to the forward deflectors.
"Divert auxiliary power from port nacelle to forward weapons"

The line jumped out to me because in TOS, it was implied from time to time that the nacelles were power generators themselves. I'm 90% certain he didn't mention a nacelle shield at all.

There is a glowy thing in the back of the nacells that would indicate a thruster or engine of some sort besides a warp engine. diverting power from that engine to deflectors shouldn't be that surprising nor should it indicate that the engines themselves are producing power rather than using power from somewhere else.
Oh, I'm not saying that they are generators, just that that was the reason the line jumped out to me.
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Knife »

Bounty wrote:
Oh, I'm not saying that they are generators, just that that was the reason the line jumped out to me.
True, I guess my point is, is that if they are sublight engines on the nacelle, then they are probably powered by non-warp core power like the impulse engines and thus are more than up for grabs for power redistribution.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Oskuro
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2698
Joined: 2005-05-25 06:10am
Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Oskuro »

Going on a tangent here after all the power diverting talk but, wasn't there a lack of shields in the movie? I don't remember a single instance of projectiles interacting with the shields in a visible fashion, and that irked me when the nacelle was scratched, since the freaking navigational deflectors (those laser-immune things) should provide some defense aganist space debries.

(I know the shields were present and mentioned in dialogue, I just mean there was no visible shield FX anywhere, and I'm a bit of a fan of starship energy shielding)
unsigned
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Stofsk »

Perhaps Nero's torpedoes effectively bypassed the shields? That would explain why his one ship dispatched numerous opponents.
Image
User avatar
CaptainChewbacca
Browncoat Wookiee
Posts: 15746
Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by CaptainChewbacca »

Stofsk wrote:Perhaps Nero's torpedoes effectively bypassed the shields? That would explain why his one ship dispatched numerous opponents.
I thought I recalled someone saying 'Are our shields even up?!' Could be wrong, though.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
ImageImage
Worlds Spanner
Jedi Knight
Posts: 542
Joined: 2003-04-30 03:51pm

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Worlds Spanner »

Bounty wrote:
So let's get there at warp 4? Having not seen any of TOS except for the movies, I have to ask if they didn't break those speeds until TMP.
She was faster in TOS. However, we did see one nacelle getting bumped pretty bad in the debris field, and during the first engagement with the Narada Pike orders power drawn from that nacelle to the weapons; it's very much possible the Enterprise wasn't running at full power between the Vulcan scenes and Scotty's arrival.

I agree on the embellishment theory; in fact, I'm pretty sure more than one person already posted something similar :)
Very good points, and that also makes the line "if Scotty can get us to Warp 4" make sense - they're talking about repairs, not about crazy modifications. It also addresses the fact that NX-01 had a "Warp 5 engine," which I was nervous about. It doesn't address the fact that there seemed to be some really short travel times compared to previous Trek.
If you don't ask, how will you know?
J Ryan
Youngling
Posts: 140
Joined: 2005-05-17 02:27pm
Location: Somewhere out there

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by J Ryan »

CaptainChewbacca wrote:
Stofsk wrote:Perhaps Nero's torpedoes effectively bypassed the shields? That would explain why his one ship dispatched numerous opponents.
I thought I recalled someone saying 'Are our shields even up?!' Could be wrong, though.
Your right thats in the USS Kelvin Fight. Think it goes something along the line of after the first barrage "Our shields are at 38%"
"Are our are shields even up?"
User avatar
Skylon
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1657
Joined: 2005-01-12 04:55pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Skylon »

J Ryan wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:
Stofsk wrote:Perhaps Nero's torpedoes effectively bypassed the shields? That would explain why his one ship dispatched numerous opponents.
I thought I recalled someone saying 'Are our shields even up?!' Could be wrong, though.
Your right thats in the USS Kelvin Fight. Think it goes something along the line of after the first barrage "Our shields are at 38%"
"Are our are shields even up?"
I took that line to mean they were hit with such force that to whoever said it, they may as well have not even had shields.
-A.L.
"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence...Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'press on' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." - Calvin Coolidge

"If you're falling off a cliff you may as well try to fly, you've got nothing to lose." - John Sheridan (Babylon 5)

"Sometimes you got to roll the hard six." - William Adama (Battlestar Galactica)
User avatar
Imperial Overlord
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11978
Joined: 2004-08-19 04:30am
Location: The Tower at Charm

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Imperial Overlord »

Shields were present, although we didn't see any visual effects for them, probably because Nero's weapons brute strengthed their way through them. We've had high powered weapons only partially stopped by shields before (Star Trek VI for example). The Kelvin was at something like 9% after Nero's volley and the Enterprise was something like 39% with Sulu saying "we can't take a hit like that again."

Brute strength>>technobabble.
The Excellent Prismatic Spray. For when you absolutely, positively must kill a motherfucker. Accept no substitutions. Contact a magician of the later Aeons for details. Some conditions may apply.
User avatar
NecronLord
Harbinger of Doom
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 27384
Joined: 2002-07-07 06:30am
Location: The Lost City

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by NecronLord »

CaptainChewbacca wrote:
Stofsk wrote:Perhaps Nero's torpedoes effectively bypassed the shields? That would explain why his one ship dispatched numerous opponents.
I thought I recalled someone saying 'Are our shields even up?!' Could be wrong, though.
Yeah.

Amusingly, someone behind me in the theatre had just loudly said 'where are the shields' :lol:
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
User avatar
CaptainChewbacca
Browncoat Wookiee
Posts: 15746
Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by CaptainChewbacca »

Has it ever been established how far it is from Earth to Vulcan? It seemed like at most a half-hour trip.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
ImageImage
User avatar
TithonusSyndrome
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2569
Joined: 2006-10-10 08:15pm
Location: The Money Store

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by TithonusSyndrome »

Another possibility is Borg technovoodoo, which I suppose would be the best bet short of the already-demonstrated Dominion if you want to bypass the shields of hundred year old starships.
Image
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bounty »

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Has it ever been established how far it is from Earth to Vulcan? It seemed like at most a half-hour trip.
16.5 light years
Worlds Spanner
Jedi Knight
Posts: 542
Joined: 2003-04-30 03:51pm

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Worlds Spanner »

Bounty wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:Has it ever been established how far it is from Earth to Vulcan? It seemed like at most a half-hour trip.
16.5 light years
So going off of "Star Wars vs. Star Trek in five minutes," for the E-D at maximum warp (12 hours per 3 light years) that would be 2.5 days +, and well over a day and a half even with the theorized Voyager speed of 3000c.

Of course, speed has always been secondary to plot in Star Trek.

(Quick math using the half hour guess gives a speed of somewhere near 216,000c. Which I have to admit, I kind of like for a range. We're still something like 1/40th of the lower estimates for Star Wars speeds, so the galaxy is still plenty big and unknown, but it does create a sense of getting somewhere. Of course, I'm not 100% convinced that scenes that seemed to take half an hour actually took half an hour. On the way to Vulcan there could have been a gap before the mission briefing, and then it probably took longer for Kirk to shout and fight his way to the bridge than we actually saw on screen. On the return trip, oh, wait, the return trip was via a diversion towards the Laurentian system, I forgot about that.)
If you don't ask, how will you know?
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bounty »

On the way to Vulcan there could have been a gap before the mission briefing, and then it probably took longer for Kirk to should and fight his way to the bridge than we actually saw on screen.
The briefing starts right after the ship jumps to warp - it's even the same shot, the camera pans from Sulu saying they're at full speed to Chekov getting his orders. The only 'gaps' can be the time it takes for Kirk to race through the ship and up to the bridge, and any time that passes after he convinces Pike - I'd say the total trip duration, assuming Sulu didn't wait half an hour to accelerate to maximum warp, would be around half an hour on the outside.
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Re: Differences Between TOS and Abrams Version (SPOILERS)

Post by Bounty »

Another random bit: in the final shot of the Enterprise warping off after Spock's monologue, I'm pretty sure you can see the centre of the deflector go from pure-blue to... either folding out some sort of conical antenna, or parts of it going dark. It could have been weird lighting but it looked too symmetrical for that.
Post Reply