StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Havok wrote:Why why why can't it just be that in this ALTERNATE universe, Delta Vega is just that close to Vulcan. (You know, what we see on screen) The WHOLE movie is replete with changes that can't just be explained by "Kelvin go boom!". How long is it going to take before YOU (Yes you Bounty ) Star Trek geeks just accept that it is not the same universe as TOS and if there is a change, it DOES NOT have to be shoehorned into the TOS universe or explained with context in the TOSU in mind.

WHEN GOD WHEN?!?! WHEN WILL I SEE THE FUCKING SAIL BOAT?!?!?!

Havok wrote:I said this earlier about the outpost.
It is within spitting distance of Vulcan... why would it be advanced or have sensors or anything when VULCAN is right there?

TithonusSyndrome wrote:

Havok wrote:I said this earlier about the outpost.
It is within spitting distance of Vulcan... why would it be advanced or have sensors or anything when VULCAN is right there?

Don't you think that it would have been one of Vulcan's oldest and most established colonies from their earliest spacefaring days when they were just setting out, if that were the case? It's not as if early spacefaring civilizations can pick and choose where they want to colonize, or would just pass over a perfectly suitable M-class world.

Bounty wrote:... It's not the planet being called Delta Vega I have a problem with, it's that Scotty was sitting on Vulcan's doorstep with Spock in his front yard, with the former not noticing the planet blowing up above him and the latter not even trying to use Scotty's radio or shuttle to get back home. The entire DV sequence sorta hinges on the planet being a - remote and b - cut off from the Federation which doesn't really work if it's Vulcan's neighbour.

And Spock marooning Kirk on a planet that was about to be severely fucked by Vulcan disappearing. That tends to mess up orbits and, you know, habitability.

LMSx wrote:

Patrick Degan wrote:On the matter of Starfleet's rather nebulous rank/seniority structure: I've spoken in other threads about the "Age of Sail" metaphor which was the underlying premise for the Enterprise's voyages in the original series. If you take that concept and apply it to nST's version of Starfleet, it becomes a bit more acceptable to swallow the idea of Kirk's swift rise to command given how Age of Sail navies often had midshipmen as young as 15, junior lieutenants as young as 20 or 21, and full post-Captains as young as 26 or 27. Lack of seniority was not a bar to rapid promotion especially in a time when navies were starved for command personnel and were on war-footings. The future Lord Nelson won promotion to the rank of post-Captain in the Royal Navy at age 21 in 1780, and was 47 when he died at Trafalgar in command of the British fleet.

Now, the movie handles Kirk's rise to the eventual captaincy of the Enterprise somewhat clumsily. But the combination of daring action in the field, exhibition of initiative and courage, saving an entire world, and connections (re: Admiral Pike) in combination with a Starfleet which is clearly trawling for officers and fodder in large numbers to man its ships opens up pathways for success which were not available in the TOS reality.

I feel like even if Kirk had been "merely" been granted a commendation and a promotion to a midlevel position, absolutely no one in the audience would have blinked if Kirk starts the sequel as a Captain, considering this movie's basically about his awesome potential. So considering he could plausibly be a captain either way, the route the writers chose seems to have very little payoff for the implausibility they add.

Crazedwraith wrote:It occurred to me that Spock running the Kobayashi Maru simulation is pretty neat. In that it explains why he never actually took himself because He wrote the damn thing.

Androsphinx wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:It occurred to me that Spock running the Kobayashi Maru simulation is pretty neat. In that it explains why he never actually took himself because He wrote the damn thing.

I don't think he designed it himself, but rather had overseen (& tweaked) it for the last four years.

Patrick Degan wrote:
The problem is how the movie depicts the young James Kirk as a fuckup half the time instead of Mr. Midshipman/Lt. Hornblower Kirk, as would have made more sense, which is why the resolution of his winding up captain feels so clumsy. The thing of it is that it was inevitable that Kirk would wind up with the Enterprise by the end of the movie and there is zero chance there will be a next film depicting his demotion to lieutenant and having to work his way back into the centre seat.

Androsphinx wrote:I should just note that I -hated- that scene. Kirk was asking like a child, not taking the thing at all seriously and certainly not looking like someone trying to make a genuine point about a "no win scenario".

And doing something as unsubtle as having the simulation crash and reboot with the Klingon's shields down? I'm not enough of a continuity whore to insist that it has to follow Kirk's description from tWoK:

"I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship... I changed the conditions of the test. I received a commendation for original thinking."

But it should have been something more that Kirk installing "God mode".

Havok wrote:Out of curiosity... Couldn't Kirk be the "Captain", but still be just an Lt.?

Havok wrote:

Androsphinx wrote:I should just note that I -hated- that scene. Kirk was asking like a child, not taking the thing at all seriously and certainly not looking like someone trying to make a genuine point about a "no win scenario".

And doing something as unsubtle as having the simulation crash and reboot with the Klingon's shields down? I'm not enough of a continuity whore to insist that it has to follow Kirk's description from tWoK:

"I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship... I changed the conditions of the test. I received a commendation for original thinking."

But it should have been something more that Kirk installing "God mode".

Keep in mind that that is the THIRD time Kirk took the test. For all we know he was intensely serious about it the first two times.

Also, he may have received a commendation for original thinking HAD the board been allowed to actually deliberate on his case. Also note that Spock would not have had the "your father died in action" argument to make against him. (Not that I'm sure that would have made a difference.)

So the scene falls in line with what Kirk would have done in the TOS timeline. And keep in mind that Kirk in both nST and TOS realizes that he cheated, and he has the same justification as well, "I don't believe in the "No Win Scenario"."

Patrick Degan wrote:

Havok wrote:Out of curiosity... Couldn't Kirk be the "Captain", but still be just an Lt.?

Usually, lieutenants who are posted to their own commands get something like a patrol boat or a chaser of some sort. Not anything like a ship of the line.

Havok wrote:

Androsphinx wrote:I should just note that I -hated- that scene. Kirk was asking like a child, not taking the thing at all seriously and certainly not looking like someone trying to make a genuine point about a "no win scenario".

And doing something as unsubtle as having the simulation crash and reboot with the Klingon's shields down? I'm not enough of a continuity whore to insist that it has to follow Kirk's description from tWoK:

"I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship... I changed the conditions of the test. I received a commendation for original thinking."

But it should have been something more that Kirk installing "God mode".

Keep in mind that that is the THIRD time Kirk took the test. For all we know he was intensely serious about it the first two times.

Androsphinx wrote:The test is a test of character. You really think that dicking around munching on an apple demonstrates the sort of character Starfleet would like?

Androsphinx wrote:The test is a test of character. You really think that dicking around munching on an apple demonstrates the sort of character Starfleet would like?