StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I meant that Abrams' explanation is stupid.

Oh, lord. They're going with fate being a tangible thing in this reboot? Jesus fuck, why even do a reboot then if the universe is just going to try to correct itself back to what it was in the original timeline? That's just ... painful.

This giant thread is renewing my cynicism regarding the new film. From everything I'm reading, it sounds like they took a bog-standard Hollywood 'sci-fi' action film, replete with the enormous middle-finger to science, a plot with more holes in it than an empty beer-can at an impromptu redneck shooting range, stuck the Star Trek name on it, gave Leonard Nimoy a paycheck to legitimize it for the fans, threw in enough sparkly CGI BLAM! to excite The ADHD Generation, and called it a day. It sounds very much like a popcorn film that requires turning off your brain to properly enjoy.

Not that prior Star Trek didn't sodomize science at every opportunity, and didn't pitch to us some lazy, flat plots (Whales . . . IN SPAAAAAACE,) and some truly appalling plots (Nemesis, a.k.a. TWoK Mk. II, only written by retards.)

Oh well, as long as this film is better than Nemesis, which I found to be among the worst films I have ever seen, I'll still consider going to see it.

Fortunately their explanation was cut from the movie and all we're left with is a large coincidence, so as long as that idea doesn't manifest itself in a sequel it can just stay happily on the side as writers intent.

Honestly, the idea that Old Spock even comes from the TNG/VOY 'future' is also writer's intent. Nero's 'Romulan' ship looks like nothing of the sort, his 'Romulans' are tattooed pirates, his ship is invincible but has pretty rubbish weapons, and Spock's ship looks NOTHING like a 'traditional' 24th ST ship.

I choose to believe that he isn't from the TNG future unless someone proves otherwise. Nothing anyone even SAYS suggests the E-E, Borg, Dominion, Jean-Luc Picard, or anything exists in the future. Future Spock could be ANY alternate-universe Future Spock, and if you figure he and Nero are in the past of their own (non-TNG) timeline, the nonsense about the Kelvin being the change point makes more sense (since the whole timeline has bigger ships, different uniforms, etc).

Really this whole thing reminds me why I hate when writers want to be witty or knowledgeable and fail.

WHY TIME TRAVEL?

Many (including myself) have wondered what the point was of going to such great lengths to reconcile existing Star Trek cannon with a new story. Why bother with all this alternate-timeline hooey? If you’re rebooting the franchise and starting over, then just start over! The problem with that, according to Kurtzman & Orci, is that audiences might have assumed this new movie was simply an attempt to tell a story about Kirk & Spock from back before the original series, and everything that happened in Trek lore is still destined to happen. Where’s the fun in watching this crew take on the galaxy if we know Kirk will eventually be killed by Soren, Spock will become an ambassador to Romulus and everyone else lives? By history being altered, nothing has yet been written – Kirk really could die on the next mission and Khan might end up selling shoes. With a whole new timeline, stories are no longer beholden to “established” history and while everything we know and love is still there, how it plays out is no longer written. If you’ll pardon the cliche, essentially it means that everything old is new again!

AKA audience is too stupid, we need to make it as easy as possible.

THE CORVETTE

A deleted scene established that Kirk’s stepdad is a real bad mofo, and he forces young Kirk to wax & polish the car. He threatens that if he finds even one spec of dirt, he’s going to beat the kid senseless (I still think it’s a dumb scene, but at least this provides a lot more motivation for it). Other tidbits about this scene: The Beastie Boys song may be a blatant attempt to make Star Trek seem more hip, but if you look closely at the dashboard, the station playing it is listed as ”oldies.” Also, what the hell is a cliff like this doing in famously flat Iowa? Again, close eyes will see that the sign Kirk blows through reads “quarry” (i.e. a man-made pit). Another scene of 10 year old Kirk that didn’t make the final cut (I’m not sure if it was filmed or not) also involved a young Carol Marcus! Props to the boys for diving so deeply into the Trek mythos (they both admit to being Wrath of Khan junkies).

Oh thank fucking god, no Carol Marcus. Spock was fucking bad enough...not future Kirk lay to produce Kirk spawn chick. This combined with Kirk's da coming off as an abusive fuck was not needed.

25 YEAR WAIT

After the incident with the USS Kelvin, did Nero and his crew really just hang around the black hole for 25 years, playing Fizbin and waiting for Spock to emerge? Couldn’t they have used that time to, say, help Romulus avert eventual disaster? Turns out a major cut scene explains what happened during that time frame. After being rammed by the Kelvin, Nero’s ship was crippled; a convoy of Klingon Warbirds captured the crew and held them in a prison camp for all those years. Eventually the Romulans escaped, reclaimed their ship, blew up 47 Klingon vessels and returned to their mission (some of this is discussed in dialog which remains in the film). The good news is that these scenes were completed and there is hope they may surface on the DVD.

This should've been put in there because it does give at least an explaination. Sure it's ship wank, but there needed to be something other then off screen reference.

COINCIDENCE ON HOTH

The motherlode of the film’s many handy coincidences involves the banished Kirk conveniently running into Spock Prime (as the writers coined him early on) in his cave on Delta Vega. Much to my surprise and delight, even this jaw-dropping moment has an explanation! In the minds of the creators, the focus of the plot is that Nero’s destruction of the timeline has altered history to the point that the all important friendship of Kirk and Spock is now threatened. If these two don’t come together, the fabric of space and time itself is endangered (as we have witnessed by the universe itself being saved countless times over the last 40 years). Kirk “coincidentally” running into Spock Prime is an example of fate itself trying to bring these two together. That’s how important it is. In fact a line about this was included during Spock Prime’s mind-meld speech, but was removed at the last minute (the writers said this particular was labored over more than any other section of the script and they now regret not including the line about fate). While this doesn’t completely forgive a very hackneyed sequence, it does address the most egregious moment in the film and I appreciate that an attempt was made to address it. In the wake of criticism over this scene, perhaps the line will be restored for the DVD release. It would make a world of difference.

No line can make a world of difference for how fucking cheesy that explaination is. Unless that line is topping Vader's revelation, it is going to sound hackneyed given the whole premise is FATE HAPPENED, which is fucking absurd for a reboot.

NEXT ON JERRY SPRINGER

A lot of people found themselves scratching their heads over the unlikely romantic pairing of Spock and Uhura. The inspiration for this came from the original series, where apparently there are scenes of these two flirting (if anyone reading this remembers which episodes they’re talking about, please fill us in). Since the rough-and-tumble badboy is always the one to get the girl, the writers wanted to pair Uhura up with the less obvious choice. Besides, since Uhura is a smart, mature woman, they felt that she would probably gravitate towards the more interesting, intellectually mature man.

So instead of the psychopathic hero, they chose the emotional wreck? Just hook her up with Sulu or Scotty.

GREEN GIRL BLUES

There was a lot more material further explaining Kirk’s relationship with the hot green chick. Since she worked in the computer lab, Kirk was essentially sleeping with her to gain access to the simulation computer so he could cheat on the Kobyashi Maru. In a cut scene, Kirk tells her that if she gets an email from him while he’s taking the test, she should open it; she does, and it launches a virus which installs his cheat-patch.

Ugh...just ugh. I really hate this brainbug and the level of complete stupidity this requires. Whatever happened to brains.

SPOCK, MEET SPOCK

Why didn’t the universe explode when Spock Prime met New Spock? What about all the time-honored SF theories that going back in time and meeting yourself will lead to anti matter explosions, tears in the fabric of space/time and dogs and cats living together? In doing their research on the latest fringe science theories, the current thinking is that events which create huge paradoxes (like going back in time and killing your grandfather) no longer will result in cataclysm, but the instant creation of an alternate universe which allows for the new reality (and I’ll back them up on this, since I’ve read material on the subject that basically says the same thing).

Okay, what the fuck?! To defend one's asinine bullshit, they are citing fringe science theories. Just stop, and no. Fucking idiots masturbating to shit they don't understand because it using large words to sound cool.

ALL BLOWED UP

Why did Kirk feel the need to fire all weapons at a doomed ship? After all, Nero’s vessel was mere seconds away from being crushed inside the black hole. Not true, said the Trek scribes – Nero’s ship was built to travel through black holes, so if Kirk hadn’t done anything, the bad guys would have slipped away and emerged god knows where (and when) ready to do more evil.

Then....no. Just no. This is literally too stupid for words. The whole statement is hurting my head.

LENS FLARES: THE MOVIE

Why on Earth did JJ Abrams turn Star Trek into a two-hour commercial for lens flare plugins? I have to admit, upon my second viewing of the film I found this visual motif to be highly distracting and irritating. Flares, reflections and luminous ghosts simply appear everywhere, even without any obvious sources. The reason? JJ wanted a visual metaphor that stated “we have a bright future ahead of us.” No, I’m not making this up.

And I thought the last statement was fucking dumb.

EXPLOSION SURFING

Would creating a big explosion on the event horizon of a black hole really create a shockwave that the Enterprise could surf to safety? No. But the explosion would alter the nature of the event horizon and create a space-time ripple that would… do something. Ok, my memory of this answer is a little shaky, but the pair did impress the crowd with a well researched solution that did make sense – you’ll have to listen to the podcast for the details.

And lo, a crack on the event horizon has met it's match!

The movie has a lot of chasing/running in it.

• Shuttles running away from the Narada
• Kirk running from the police in a completely over-indulgent anachronism Corvette
• Ships running to Vulcan
• People running through ship corridors
• People flying down to the convenient mining platform to have a hand-to-hand fight scene
• Kirk flying after Sulu to try and rescue him
• Chekov running through corridors
• Enterprise running back to Earth
• Kirk running from monsters in a terrible chase scene (he looked like he should have been caught by that fucking thing five times over
• Kirk chasing Scotty as he's flushed towards the NSCA Protector's Dice-o-Matic "turbine"
• People running through corridors... "again... and again and again! From multiple angles!"
• Nero's ship chasing the (snicker) "Spockmobile" (I know that's not the real name but it's still funny, that's even better than "Whomobile")

Not that it necessarily breaks the movie, but it still sort of stood out for me that it seemed like whenever they felt it was time for an action beat, we got more people running/chasing/whatever, possibly with twisty-cam angles.

I could go through and nitpick all of the various things which did not suit my own personal aesthetic, but I really don't feel like getting into a huge free-for-all over stupid shit nobody cares about. Similarly, other people are probably much better at spotting and pointing out (and rationalizing) plot holes and genuinely bad writing than I am.

The biggest stumbling block for me is that I did not like the new Kirk. If I actually liked him, I would probably have enjoyed this film despite my other quibbles, but I think the new Kirk is a totally insufferable d-bag. I also think "hey we need to do an origin story" seems like the lazy and over-used way to re-introduce audiences to franchises (and left a big "comic-book movie" impression on me) but a sequel seems pretty likely so maybe the plot will be better next time around, now that they don't have to waste time on a bunch of bullshit about how everyone became BFF from the very beginning.



Even for people who absolutely detest every single thing about this movie, there's a silver lining: the financial success of this movie makes it more likely that we may see a resurgence of space opera in the near future. There might even be a real gem in the mix, like another Fifth Element. (no, not an actual sequel, just another movie that is as fun or moreso than Fifth Element was)

Stark wrote:I'm glad someone else noticed Kirk's 'command potential' 'adptitude scores' 'out of the box' 'breaking the rules' hero-ness boiled down to 'let's chase Nero and be utterly destroyed'. He had NO PLAN. His plan was FIGHT THE BADGUY. His plan was DOOMED and everyone on the ship was DOOMED and his incompetence was astonishing. His father was a far greater man; personally skilled, actually heroic, concerned with others.

If this had been intentional, it would have been great writing. It isn't; the message of the movie is that Kirk is a Great Man even though he's saved only by the astonishing plot coincidence of being kicked off the ship right next to Future Spock and not eaten.

Under the circumstances, Kirk's decision to engage Nero may have been something of a "lesser of two evils" choice. I've only seen the film once, and I may be wrong in this particular recolection, but didn't Kirk say that the fleet couldn't get their in time? If that was indeed the case, then the most logical choice may indeed have been to engage Nero with just the Enterprise. Consider: if they do nothing, Nero procedes with his plan to destroy Earth. If they do something, they have at least a slight chance of stopping him. If they fail, a few hundred to a few thousand extra lives may be lost. If they succede, billions may be saved.

As for Kirk's plan, it wasn't all that bad for something devised on short notice by a man who was really a cadet (even if he was about to graduate, he'd still be a mere Ensign most likely under normal circumstances). They approached in such a way that the Enterprise was undetected, then used their new knowledge of long range beaming to do the unexpected: board the enemy ship and attack it from the inside. I would criticize Kirk's plan on only two points: risking the two top officers on board rather than sending redshirts, and sending only two men. The first was probably just an act of foolish bravado. The second, however, may be justified to a point by the need for stealth and surprise. Depending on how large Nero's crew was, taking the ship in an all-out boarding action might not have been possible, in which case, stealth would be prefferable.

Granted, the whole plan would probably have been impossible without the long range beaming capability provided by the other Spock, so that was a lucky coincidence. Nonetheless, under the circumstances Kirk might have been right to engage Nero, since some chance of saving the Earth is better than none. The film could have done a better job of explaining his reasons, but provided he could arrive before the fleet, its far from the biggest problem with the film.

Which leads me to my dislike of the writing. Nero's ship is depicted as totally invincible; it's weapons really aren't that great (it took some long time to destroy Kelvin) and the ram didn't do shit (whereas Spockmobile just pew-pewed and drove through the same structure). It annihilated the Fedder fleet in minutes at most and took no damage. This means that when Spock says 'meet the fleet, bash Nero', the viewers KNOW he's obviously wrong; Earth will likely be destroyed and the fleet still has no chance. If Nero's ship was even SLIGHTLY damaged, the viewer could actually see the difference between these men; Kirk, insistent on taking the glory, unable to let go, unable to accept failure or loss, narrow-minded, obsessed with rescuing Pike etc, and Spock bent on the safer, more sensible course, ready to let Earth be destroyed, playing the odds.

Wait, are you praising Spock for being willing to let Earth be destroyed? Not that I think for a second that this was the case.

Earth is a heavily populated planet, site of Starfleet Academy, and unless this has also changed in this timeline (I don't believe it was explicitely confirmed), the Federation capital planet. If it had been destroyed, it would have been a major blow to moral and confidence in the Federation, would probably have caused the deaths of billions, and would have been another major kick in the nuts for Starfleet after their losses at Vulcan.

"Acceptable losses," it is not.

What we got was too clear; without Plot Magic there was no right answer. Kirk is a hero and Spock is a coward. Thrilling.

I don't think the film was protraying Spock as a coward, but rather as an (under the circumstances) emotionally unstable, and perhaps somewhat "by the book" officer. Under most circumstances his plan would have been the better one: join up with the fleet before engaging Nero (and you yourself seem to recognize this above). In any case, how can anyone think the film portrays Spock as a coward after he:

a) Beams down to a planet being consumed by a black hole to rescue his family and government.

b) Beams almost alone aboard an enemy warship who's captain has a personal grudge against him.

c) Steals a vessel he's never flown before and flies it into the enemy ship in a kamikazi attack which would presumably have killed him without the Enterprise's last moment beam out.

Given that, how the fuck can anyone say that the film portrays Spock as a coward? God knows it has a lot of problems with character and plot development, but this is not one of them.

The Romulan Republic wrote: Under the circumstances, Kirk's plan may have been something of a "lesser of two evils" choice. I've only seen the film once, and I may be wrong in this particular recolection, but didn't Kirk say that the fleet couldn't get their in time? If that was indeed the case, then the most logical choice may indeed have been to engage Nero with just the Enterprise. Consider: if they do nothing, Nero procedes with his plan to destroy Earth. If they do something, they have at least a slight chance of stopping him. If they fail, a few hundred to a few thousand extra lives may be lost. If they succede, billions may be saved.

As for Kirk's plan, it wasn't all that bad for something devised on short notice by a man who was really a cadet (even if he was about to graduate, he'd still be a mere Ensign most likely under normal circumstances). They approached in such a way that the Enterprise was undetected, then used their new knowledge of long range beaming to do the unexpected: board the enemy ship and attack it from the inside. I would criticize Kirk's plan on only two points: risking the two top officers on board rather than sending redshirts, and sending only two men. The first was probably just an act of foolish bravado. The second, however, may be justified to a point by the need for stealth and surprise. Depending on how large Nero's crew was, taking the ship in an all-out boarding action might not have been possible, in which case, stealth would be prefferable.

Granted, the whole plan would probably have been impossible without the long range beaming capability provided by the other Spock, so that was a lucky coincidence. Nonetheless, under the circumstances Kirk might have been right to engage Nero, since some chance of saving the Earth is better than none. The film could have done a better job of explaining his reasons, but provided he could arrive before the fleet, its far from the biggest problem with the film.

His plan didn't EXIST. When he had a shitfight and got kicked off the ship his plan was 'fight Nero and die'. They had no FTL teleport, no Spock, no chance in combat, nothing. They would have been destroyed as surely as the fleet at Vulcan.

Wait, are you praising Spock for being willing to let Earth be destroyed? Not that I think for a second that this was the case.

It's called 'drama'. If he's distraught, responding emotionally and such, it's interesting and dramatic that his priorities would be different. It's better than 'lol run away so we can die in one big lump'.

Earth is a heavily populated planet, site of Starfleet Academy, and unless this has also changed in this timeline (I don't believe it was explicitely confirmed), the Federation capital planet. If it had been destroyed, it would have been a major blow to moral and confidence in the Federation, would probably have caused the deaths of billions, and would have been another major kick in the nuts for Starfleet after their losses at Vulcan.

"Acceptable losses," it is not.

All meaningless nerd triva. My point was purely dramatic, and you TOTALLY MISSED IT. In the movie they're both wrong and saved by Plot Magic. If the Fed fleet actually had a chance against Nero, it would be showing Kirk as obsessed with victory, needing to save Pike and Earth, while Spock is distraught, coldly interested in victory ('tip the field at our next engagement') and playing the logical odds. That's interesting and showing a dramatic contrast, instead of showing Kirk as a retarded petulant moron and Spock as bland.

I don't think the film was protraying Spock as a coward, but rather as an (under the circumstances) emotionally unstable, and perhaps somewhat "by the book" officer. Under most circumstances his plan would have been the better one: join up with the fleet before engaging Nero (and you yourself seem to recognize this above). In any case, how can anyone think the film portrays Spock as a coward after he:

a) Beams down to a planet being consumed by a black hole to rescue his family and government.

b) Beams almost alone aboard an enemy warship who's captain has a personal grudge against him.

c) Steals a vessel he's never flown before and flies it into the enemy ship in a kamikazi attack which would presumably have killed him without the Enterprise's last moment beam out.

Given that, how the fuck can anyone say that the film portrays Spock as a coward? God knows it has a lot of problems with character and plot development, but this is not one of them.

You really are dumb. I was talking about ONE SCENE and what people might take away from it. Kirk wants to hunt the dragon (and die because he has no plan and no chance) and Spock wants to get together with everyone else to increase the odds of success (which are still zero). The intent was to show that Kirk is A BIG HERO and Spock is RATIONAL AND WRONG. That's stupid.

I'm enjoying your obvious knee-jerk defence of the movie, however. Talking about writing decisions = OMG GET AWAY FROM MY BABY.

I didn't entirely dislike this movie. I came away with a positive feeling overall, in spite of the massive flaws it had. There were scenes I really liked, like the opening scene (aside from the "James T. Kirk is BORN!" and "squid ship is obviously evil" parts), the scene where they warp into the debris field, and the character interactions (especially Karl Urban) were all pretty decent (except I detested Chekov's over-expressed "Russian"ness).

There were things I truly despised, though. The over-used lens flare (and subsequent stupid explanation) was just painful, as was the shakey-cam when it got really bad. The insufferable brightness of everything got to me after a while, and the monster effects on the ice-planet were cheesy as Hell.

Nero wasn't really bad (I thought the actor played him well enough), he just wasn't really there, like he was just an excuse to have conflict and to blow up Vulcan.

Quite a bit of the silliness (the chop-o-matic, the ice-monster, etc) kept making me flash back to Galaxy Quest. I half expected someone to shout "I'm going to kill whoever wrote this episode!" So, I hope, the cheese was intentional.

Flash and I noticed that the shakey-cam was doing the nBSG 'wobble when pointing at two men standing still who are talking' thing. Kirk is talking - whoops the camera slipped! Now Spock replies - and the camera fell again! At least it was still IN FOCUS, though.

Also, how the hell were they expected to win any engagement with Nero? He ripped through (with no apparent damage) 47 Klingon vessels and, last I knew, they weren't that substantially weaker than Starfleet ships. The small fleet assembled to assist Vulcan apparently died in minutes with, again, no apparent damage to Nero's ship.

Frankly, I agree with Stark with some caveats. If they demonstrated that the ship was stronger than ships of this era, but not magically invincible (it's a mining ship crewed by miners for crying out loud), and that it's main advantage was speed (weren't warp drives faster in it's time period?) than a "race against the clock" scenario would be more interesting and make Spock's decision to hook up with the fleet more rational (The Enterprise alone would be unlikely to stop Nero, but the fleet most definitely could), like Stark said.

Stark wrote:Flash and I noticed that the shakey-cam was doing the nBSG 'wobble when pointing at two men standing still who are talking' thing. Kirk is talking - whoops the camera slipped! Now Spock replies - and the camera fell again! At least it was still IN FOCUS, though.

Yeah, it was in focus, and every five seconds there was a lens flare. WITH THEM STANDING ON THE BRIDGE TALKING. How the Hell was that bridge lit? Big honking lights at every possible angle?

I know, shakey-cam is supposed to make you feel there, but when you're standing around watching people talk how often does your head rock back and forth?

Erik von Nein wrote:Also, how the hell were they expected to win any engagement with Nero? He ripped through (with no apparent damage) 47 Klingon vessels and, last I knew, they weren't that substantially weaker than Starfleet ships. The small fleet assembled to assist Vulcan apparently died in minutes with, again, no apparent damage to Nero's ship.

Frankly, I agree with Stark with some caveats. If they demonstrated that the ship was stronger than ships of this era, but not magically invincible (it's a mining ship crewed by miners for crying out loud), and that it's main advantage was speed (weren't warp drives faster in it's time period?) than a "race against the clock" scenario would be more interesting and make Spock's decision to hook up with the fleet more rational (The Enterprise alone would be unlikely to stop Nero, but the fleet most definitely could), like Stark said.

The cut stuff with Kelvin crippling the ship is really good in this respect - Kirk could have dreamed of replicating his father's act - destroying his ship and crew in an attempt to use his larger ship to destroy the Narada and live up to his father's sacrifice.

Oops, scene not relevant, cut it.

That said, a Starfleet ship cripples an unknown ship, with survivors, at a known location... and not only does Starfleet not capture it, the KLINGONS do (I guess investigating the anomaly) and Starfleet DOESN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT. Every Kelvin survivor could tell Starfleet what happened - there were 800 of them! What the christ?

From everything I'm reading, it sounds like they took a bog-standard Hollywood 'sci-fi' action film, replete with the enormous middle-finger to science, a plot with more holes in it than an empty beer-can at an impromptu redneck shooting range, stuck the Star Trek name on it, gave Leonard Nimoy a paycheck to legitimize it for the fans, threw in enough sparkly CGI BLAM! to excite The ADHD Generation, and called it a day.

In other words, the film is comparable to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (which abuses science FAR more) and Star Trek: First Contact (which abuses science only as much as a typical NextGen ep, but they cut in a bunch of scenes from Aliens to ramp up the tension).

All three of these films are decent, enjoyable films. If you hate all three, fine, if you wank to all three, fine. But please, Internet, don't hate on one and wank the other two. They all have the same fucking flaws.

(Nimoy said "Fuck you" to a paycheck for Generations, incidentally. Criticize his taste, not his greed. )

His plan didn't EXIST. When he had a shitfight and got kicked off the ship his plan was 'fight Nero and die'. They had no FTL teleport, no Spock, no chance in combat, nothing. They would have been destroyed as surely as the fleet at Vulcan.

I have to disagree with your assessment here. Mind you, I agree that Kirk comes off as an idiot in the film because he's just yelling about how they have to stop Nero, so this is an example of poor screenwriting and/or editing. However, I do believe that Kirk has a stronger case than Spock.
-The seven-ship fleet was destroyed because they were taken completely by surprise. They probably didn't even get their shields up. Enterprise took serious damage from one hit, but they decided to take the hit on their shields rather than using point-defense like the Kelvin. So a straight-up fight is suicide, but getting a ship out there that can probably last a few minutes toe-to-toe does give them options. (The 47 dead Klingon ships is a bad sign, but we don't know about their dispositions in the combat either. If they are BoP-like fighter-ships it's not all that surprising.)
-Earth WILL be destroyed if they rendezvous with the fleet. Kirk should have pointed this out calmly. (By all rights every human on that ship should have been "emotionally compromised." The credibility and strength of the story would have been stronger if he had won some of the Enterprise crew over with his argument, thus giving an actual threat to Spock's command.)
-Starfleet, as usual, has an identity crisis as far as "is it a military"? However, it is clear that a soldier's duty is to sacrifice the 1000-odd people on the Enterprise to give the billions on Earth a fighting chance. Kirk and Pike KNOW that Nero was unable to stop George Kirk from crippling his ship years ago. The Enterprise would have a better chance at this.

Better writing would have made the logic here stronger. As it is, it appears patently ridiculous that Kirk picks a fight on the bridge and then wins command by goading Spock into doing the same thing. The whole middle sequence is the weakest part of the film.

Oh, but you know what was really important? Seeing Kirk in bed with a green chick. Yeah, screw plot important things like establishing where the Hell Nero went or that his ship isn't invincible! We need more winking references to the original series!

This just reminds me of what happening with other movies and this whole push for multi-media "tell the rest of the story" nonsense going on. Excising important plot points and shunting them off into comic books makes the movie itself weaker, or makes it not work at all. I don't read comic books, let alone comic book tie-ins. The only way I knew anything about the story leading up to what happened is because I read this thread.

It just reminds me of a bunch of friends seeing The Revenge of the Sith. They had no idea who this coughing robot was or why the heck the movie was starting with a battle over some planet. They don't watch TV, so the movie was made worse by them not having seen The Clone Wars miniseries.


EDIT

Kirk and Pike KNOW that Nero was unable to stop George Kirk from crippling his ship years ago. The Enterprise would have a better chance at this.

They do? When was that established? All that was shown were the shuttles flying away from Nero's ship and that's it. The incident was barely even talked about, let alone given detail like they know ramming it worked.

Anguirus wrote: I have to disagree with your assessment here. Mind you, I agree that Kirk comes off as an idiot in the film because he's just yelling about how they have to stop Nero, so this is an example of poor screenwriting and/or editing. However, I do believe that Kirk has a stronger case than Spock.
-The seven-ship fleet was destroyed because they were taken completely by surprise. They probably didn't even get their shields up. Enterprise took serious damage from one hit, but they decided to take the hit on their shields rather than using point-defense like the Kelvin. So a straight-up fight is suicide, but getting a ship out there that can probably last a few minutes toe-to-toe does give them options. (The 47 dead Klingon ships is a bad sign, but we don't know about their dispositions in the combat either. If they are BoP-like fighter-ships it's not all that surprising.)
-Earth WILL be destroyed if they rendezvous with the fleet. Kirk should have pointed this out calmly. (By all rights every human on that ship should have been "emotionally compromised." The credibility and strength of the story would have been stronger if he had won some of the Enterprise crew over with his argument, thus giving an actual threat to Spock's command.)
-Starfleet, as usual, has an identity crisis as far as "is it a military"? However, it is clear that a soldier's duty is to sacrifice the 1000-odd people on the Enterprise to give the billions on Earth a fighting chance. Kirk and Pike KNOW that Nero was unable to stop George Kirk from crippling his ship years ago. The Enterprise would have a better chance at this.

Better writing would have made the logic here stronger. As it is, it appears patently ridiculous that Kirk picks a fight on the bridge and then wins command by goading Spock into doing the same thing. The whole middle sequence is the weakest part of the film.

That's all very true - I've mentioned how it took them a fair while to kill the Kelvin myself, so they must have really kicked out to kill the Vulcan fleet so quickly (spam like at the end, perhaps, rather than the 'one or two shots ever 15 seconds' as against Kelvin). If they'd left the scene with Narada being crippled in, and Kirk had known this (which he would do), then it makes WAY more sense if he felt the number 1 priority was to die saving Earth, whereas the distraught Spock thought more 'conservatively'.

We still have the problem that one of those bus-shuttles with 2 guys in the open door would destroy the drill on Earth... but... hey.

The big problem is as you say, that Kirk is just blustering thoughtlessly in what we see, but it's clear he's supposed to be a big hero supercommander which is extremely annoying.

I actually found Kirk's actions to sieze command disgusting. Not only is it purely formal (ie there are plenty of superior officers, but Pike made him XO for... no reason) but he did it by publicly breaking and humiliating a superior officer by laughing about the genocide of his race and displaying Enterprise-style Vulcan racism. Yay, what a big hero! It made me sad nobody said 'hey Kirk? You're a fucking cocksnap and I hate you'. That Spock and Kirk are all buddy-buddy at the end is stunning. Spock is clearly the better man.

Stark wrote:His plan didn't EXIST. When he had a shitfight and got kicked off the ship his plan was 'fight Nero and die'. They had no FTL teleport, no Spock, no chance in combat, nothing. They would have been destroyed as surely as the fleet at Vulcan.

I'm not sure its fair to bash Kirk in particular on this point. You say that the film built up Kirk as intelligent and so on, and then it turned out he had no plan at all. But at the point you specify, he'd had little time to come up with a plan, and the same problems he had would have confronted any captain. Its not like Spock had a better plan either, though from your later comments you are apparently aware of this. Finally, Kirk is a cadet. He might be the best leader in the world in his age group, but he'll still be less experienced than every other captain and most of the other bridge officers in the entire fleet.

Also, did you completely miss the reasons why it might have been logical to engage Nero even with an almost non-existant chance at victory? At the very least, they could have tried the same thing Pike did at Vulcan and hoped to destroy the drill before it got very deep. Or they could have tried shooting down the red matter before it reached the surface, now that they knew what to expect. Or they could have tried ramming Nero at full impulse and hoped they damaged something critical. If nothing else, they could have provided point defense to protect any ships trying to flee Earth.

If he's distraught, responding emotionally and such, it's interesting and dramatic that his priorities would be different. It's better than 'lol run away so we can die in one big lump'.

Um, I thought the reason Spock was joining with the fleet was so they'd have a better chance of winning, not so they could "die in one big lump." Granted, it wasn't a great call if it meant writing off Earth.

All meaningless nerd triva. My point was purely dramatic, and you TOTALLY MISSED IT.

Perhaps you were being unclear?

And even if your point was about the drama and the characters, I believe you did describe "ready to let Earth be destroyed" as the "safer, more sensible course." Your words. It was to that peice of nonsense that I was responding. You point may have been something else, but it the course of making it you said a number of things that I feel needed to be adressed.

In the movie they're both wrong and saved by Plot Magic. If the Fed fleet actually had a chance against Nero, it would be showing Kirk as obsessed with victory, needing to save Pike and Earth, while Spock is distraught, coldly interested in victory ('tip the field at our next engagement') and playing the logical odds. That's interesting and showing a dramatic contrast, instead of showing Kirk as a retarded petulant moron and Spock as bland.

So your problem is with the Fed fleet having no chance? Making the disagreement between Spock and Kirk less dramatic? Ok, except that we have no knowledge of just how powerful the Fed fleet was. And if it couldn't arrive in time, would you suggest they simply write off Earth?

In any case, it would still have made one or both characters appear pretty bad if they did it your way. If Spock joins the fleet even though it has no chance of reaching Earth first, then it makes him look like an asshole for writing off a planet. If it does have a chance, then it makes Kirk look like a retard.

You really are dumb. I was talking about ONE SCENE and what people might take away from it. Kirk wants to hunt the dragon (and die because he has no plan and no chance) and Spock wants to get together with everyone else to increase the odds of success (which are still zero). The intent was to show that Kirk is A BIG HERO and Spock is RATIONAL AND WRONG. That's stupid.

First of all, why are you insisting the Fed fleet had no chance? As far as I can recall we were told nothing about their strength.

Secondly, I don't think the intent was to show that Spock was rational. If anything, he was being completely irrational. This is kind of a big plot point a few scenes later.

I don't know what the film maker intended, but I'd prefer to interperated it as Spock being emotionally devestated (as Kirk made abundently clear a few scenes later), unwilling to admit it or face it, and compensating by clinging to the book even when it wasn't the best choice. Kirk was taking the more emotional and impulsive choice, but also the one that was probably the best in the circumstances. Maybe "the right choice for the wrong reasons."

That said, the scene in question, and the film as a whole, could have been written much better. I have not for a second tried to deny that. I can fully understand that it comes off as portraying Kirk's recklessness possitivley while attacking Spock's rationality.

I'm enjoying your obvious knee-jerk defence of the movie, however.

"Knee-jerk defense of the movie?" What the fuck are so smoking asshole? I have criticized the film on some points, and I would be happy to post a list of the twenty or so things I really didn't like about it, if I thought that would shut your mouth. I have disagreed with you on a few specific points, but maybe to you the world is divided into two groups of people: those who agree with you 100% and mindless fanboy wankers.

Talking about writing decisions = OMG GET AWAY FROM MY BABY.

I will give this the response that such a level of logic and thought deserves.

Stark wrote:I actually found Kirk's actions to sieze command disgusting. Not only is it purely formal (ie there are plenty of superior officers, but Pike made him XO for... no reason) but he did it by publicly breaking and humiliating a superior officer by laughing about the genocide of his race and displaying Enterprise-style Vulcan racism. Yay, what a big hero! It made me sad nobody said 'hey Kirk? You're a fucking cocksnap and I hate you'. That Spock and Kirk are all buddy-buddy at the end is stunning. Spock is clearly the better man.

Actually, you've hit on two of my issues with this film.

First, why the flying fuck did Pike make Kirk XO? Especially since he was planning to take Kirk on the away team, rather than leave him on the ship where he could take over if something happened to Spock. Pike was a decent captain for most of the film, so this stupidity on his part really stuck out.

Second, why did Spock end up as Kirk's XO? Even if they are friends at the end, Spock was a commander at the start of the mission, while Kirk was a cadet under investigation for cheating. Sure, Kirk saved Pike and Earth, but Spock helped, and it was Spock who actually blew the drill. Kirk gets jumped from cadet/ensign to captain, and of the fucking flagship to boot. Spock stays an XO. How is that right?

Maybe Old Spock told him to go with Kirk, but under normal circumstances I'd say Spock was cheated out of a command of his own.

The Romulan Republic wrote:

Stark wrote:His plan didn't EXIST. When he had a shitfight and got kicked off the ship his plan was 'fight Nero and die'. They had no FTL teleport, no Spock, no chance in combat, nothing. They would have been destroyed as surely as the fleet at Vulcan.

I'm not sure its fair to bash Kirk in particular on this point. You say that the film built up Kirk as intelligent and so on, and then it turned out he had no plan at all. But at the point you specify, he'd had little time to come up with a plan, and the same problems he had would have confronted any captain. Its not like Spock had a better plan either, though from your later comments you are apparently aware of this. Finally, Kirk is a cadet. He might be the best leader in the world in his age group, but he'll still be less experienced than every other captain and most of the other bridge officers in the entire fleet.

Also, did you completely miss the reasons why it might have been logical to engage Nero even with an almost non-existant chance at victory? At the very least, they could have tried the same thing Pike did at Vulcan and hoped to destroy the drill before it got very deep. Or they could have tried shooting down the red matter before it reached the surface, now that they knew what to expect. Or they could have tried ramming Nero at full impulse and hoped they damaged something critical. If nothing else, they could have provided point defense to protect any ships trying to flee Earth.

So... stop defending him? Ships fleeing Earth = lol. Stealing arguments from others made after I responded to you is pretty hilarious, though; Anguirius and Erik are able to discuss these plot elements without getting all butthurt like you. Poor widdle womulan!

Um, I thought the reason Spock was joining with the fleet was so they'd have a better chance of winning, not so they could "die in one big lump." Granted, it wasn't a great call if it meant writing off Earth.

You continue to miss the point that I'm talking about a scene written different to accentuate the reasons these two men made their decisions. It's not my fault they cut out the 'Narada crippled' thing from the movie so you lose.

Perhaps you were being unclear?

Everyone else knows what I'm talking about and can reply in a cogent fashion. maybe you're just dumb?

And even if your point was about the drama and the characters, I believe you did describe "ready to let Earth be destroyed" as the "safer, more sensible course." Your words. It was to that peice of nonsense that I was responding. You point may have been something else, but it the course of making it you said a number of things that I feel needed to be adressed.

Man, you really can't handle thought experiences or the language of drama, can you? Retreating IS more sensible in every way BUT saving Earth, and Spock is clearly in an emotional state where he may or may not care about Earth. Making this conflict explicit would have improved the scene. Neither of these men have to be right - indeed, that's the damn point - but their arguments need to make sense or they both look stupid.

So your problem is with the Fed fleet having no chance? Making the disagreement between Spock and Kirk less dramatic? Ok, except that we have no knowledge of just how powerful the Fed fleet was. And if it couldn't arrive in time, would you suggest they simply write off Earth?

In any case, it would still have made one or both characters appear pretty bad if they did it your way. If Spock joins the fleet even though it has no chance of reaching Earth first, then it makes him look like an asshole for writing off a planet. If it does have a chance, then it makes Kirk look like a retard.

My problem is they both look dumb and the scene is offensive, as everyone but you understands. If either of them had a more rational argument than 'chase him' or 'no run' the scene and drama would have been improved.

Sorry, coordinating with the fleet does indeed increase the chances of any plan working (aside from the Plot Magic plan Kirk didn't know about), so Spock is actually right. Even after you stole Anguirius's point, after the Kelvin Nero isn't going to hold back on crippled ships again and it's not necessary that it will work.

First of all, why are you insisting the Fed fleet had no chance? As far as I can recall we were told nothing about their strength.

Movie shows everyone fighting Narada dying and never shows Narada damaged. The ship is depicted as nigh-invincible. Not my fault.

Secondly, I don't think the intent was to show that Spock was rational. If anything, he was being completely irrational. This is kind of a big plot point a few scenes later.

Oh jesus christ.

I don't know what the film maker intended, but I'd prefer to interperated it as Spock being emotionally devestated (as Kirk made abundently clear a few scenes later), unwilling to admit it or face it, and compensating by clinging to the book even when it wasn't the best choice. Kirk was taking the more emotional and impulsive choice, but also the one that was probably the best in the circumstances. Maybe "the right choice for the wrong reasons."

EXACTLY. The scene makes it clear that Kirk being a headstrong, no-plan cuntrag IS THE BEST CORRECT AWESOME LEADER and Spock playing the odds and hedging his bets for the best outcome IS A FILTHY EMOTIONAL HOBGOBLIN. That's why it fails. That's my whole damn point! By the book = LOL WRONG! Cheating = BEST EVA! Regualtions = BAD AND STIFLE COMMAND!! Jesus christ!

That said, the scene in question, and the film as a whole, could have been written much better. I have not for a second tried to deny that. I can fully understand that it comes off as portraying Kirk's recklessness possitivley while attacking Spock's rationality.

Thanks for admitting you're arguing with me, even though you agree with me, because you either don't understand what I'm saying or are irrational.

"Knee-jerk defense of the movie?" What the fuck are so smoking asshole? I have criticized the film on some points, and I would be happy to post a list of the twenty or so things I really didn't like about it, if I thought that would shut your mouth. I have disagreed with you on a few specific points, but maybe to you the world is divided into two groups of people: those who agree with you 100% and mindless fanboy wankers.

Sorry I hurt your feelings nerd. Thanks for the irrational personal attack proving your real agenda, though.

I will give this the response that such a level of logic and thought deserves.

Sorry I hurt your feelings nerd.

Stark wrote:That said, a Starfleet ship cripples an unknown ship, with survivors, at a known location... and not only does Starfleet not capture it, the KLINGONS do (I guess investigating the anomaly) and Starfleet DOESN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT. Every Kelvin survivor could tell Starfleet what happened - there were 800 of them! What the christ?

Let me play Devil’s advocate for a minute. The attack on the Kelvin seems to have taken place closet to Klingon space, and Captain Robau said that there would be no chance of assistance where they where. For the Klingons to have succeeded in capturing the Narada, they would’ve had to have gotten there pretty soon after it was all over. It doesn’t seem that far fetched that by the time Starfleet could’ve sent more ship there, the Narada and Klingons could be gone.

As for why the survivors of the Kelvin didn’t inform Starfleet about the Klingons taking the Narada I can think of two explanations of the top of my head: The shuttles had some limited warp capability and got the hell out of there as fast as they could and the Klingons got there after; or George Kirk crippled everything but the propulsion systems and the Narada left the system, to be ambushed by the Klingons as it did so. Either way the survivors of the Kelvin wouldn’t know what happened to it.

Jade Owl wrote:

Stark wrote:That said, a Starfleet ship cripples an unknown ship, with survivors, at a known location... and not only does Starfleet not capture it, the KLINGONS do (I guess investigating the anomaly) and Starfleet DOESN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT. Every Kelvin survivor could tell Starfleet what happened - there were 800 of them! What the christ?

Let me play Devil’s advocate for a minute. The attack on the Kelvin seems to have taken place closet to Klingon space, and Captain Robau said that there would be no chance of assistance where they where. For the Klingons to have succeeded in capturing the Narada, they would’ve had to have gotten there pretty soon after it was all over. It doesn’t seem that far fetched that by the time Starfleet could’ve sent more ship there, the Narada and Klingons could be gone.

As for why the survivors of the Kelvin didn’t inform Starfleet about the Klingons taking the Narada I can think of two explanations of the top of my head: The shuttles had some limited warp capability and got the hell out of there as fast as they could and the Klingons got there after; or George Kirk crippled everything but the propulsion systems and the Narada left the system, to be ambushed by the Klingons as it did so. Either way the survivors of the Kelvin wouldn’t know what happened to it.

But that creates the issue of why it took them over twenty years to rescue their valiant leader.

Movie shows everyone fighting Narada dying and never shows Narada damaged. The ship is depicted as nigh-invincible. Not my fault.

Minor quibble: Narada certainly appears to be adrift and throwing debris in all directions after George pwns it. It also stops shooting at the shuttles despite them still being in very close proximity.

Even with the cut plotline I understood the ship to be severely fucked over. I figured they could probably spend 25 years getting it back in fighting trim.

Hmmm. I took that as 'cold war hysteria', as they'd seen anew wierd thing and were suspciious of the Klingons. Saying no help could reach them is daft because it obviously did.

And if the ram did significant damage, the Klingons could have showed up days later and I'd expect her to still be there.

The no intel thing sucks anyway, yuo'd expect Momma Kirk to say AND THEN THE GIANT SPIDER SHIP ATE MY HUSBAND, so people being confused by it's existence is silly.

Anguirus wrote:Minor quibble: Narada certainly appears to be adrift and throwing debris in all directions after George pwns it. It also stops shooting at the shuttles despite them still being in very close proximity.

Even with the cut plotline I understood the ship to be severely fucked over. I figured they could probably spend 25 years getting it back in fighting trim.

I thought the debris field was just Kelvin's bits; he hit directly into the door structure that Spock used... so Nero woudl have died if the ship penetrated. Nobody ever mentioned any damage.

Stupid editors.