View Single Post
Old June 8 2013, 11:47 PM   #62
CorporalClegg's Avatar
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Wrath of Khan's entire "two dimensional thinking" thing made zero sense, especially if Khan is the genius he's repeatedly said to be.
Being a genius does not make one a master of space battle strategy.
It does imply one has the common sense to know space has an up and down. Six-year-olds know that. And, as I posted up-thread: "space" is defined by "three-dimensions."

Also, three-dimensions are not something unique to space combat. Both the maritime and aerial warfare of the 1990s persisted in a three-dimensional environment.

But humans have always accounted for three-dimensions in combat going back to early human hunters seeking the high-ground over their prey. And Rudimentary Chinese topography started as a strategic military tool.

Whether you're climbing ladders and jumping down holes in a FPS, a longbowman entrenched above the Dover Cliffs waiting for Norman invaders, dropping depth charges on Sean Connery's head, pulling Immelmen turns in an F-18, or hunting Starfleet battle cruisers in purple nebulae, three-dimensions are a part of warfare. Unless you're playing Atari Combat on the 2600, there is no such thing as "two-dimensional thinking."

It was a throw-away line inserted to create the contrivance that gave Kirk the upper hand. *coughdeusexmachinacough* It completely defies logic.

It's a plot hole.

When was the last time Starfleet was in the area--or paid attention to every natural event? From "Space Seed," we get the impression the system is remote, hence the reason Kirk used it as the location to deposit Khan and his followers.
It wasn't so much a plot hole as it was just plain-old silly and stupid.

For the sake of argument, let's assume CA5 was ~1AU from it's sun--a little closer since it was tropical. Maybe CA6 was a little further away--say Marsish--so 1.5 AU. CA6 explodes pushing CA5 closer to the sun and thus making the planet too hot to sustain life. Aside from positioning it far away from where CA6 should be, wouldn't that also automatically omit it from the list of Genesis candidates?

In celestial terms, the time between "Space Seed" and TWOK is a micro second. So even if the only information of the system is from the Enterprise's original visit, the data should be accurate.

Mental masturbation aside, the sequence of events went something like this:

--Kirk puts Khan on planet. It's safe to assume the Enterprise crew recorded and cataloged the system since it's, you know, their job. Thus Starfleet has an accurate record of all the planets in the system.

--One of the planets magically explodes (Because they're so prone to doing so.) drastically altering the solar orbit of at least one of the adjacent planets.

--Despite prior evidence, it is later confirmed Chekov did interact with Khan when he was aboard the Enterprise, and if Greg Cox is to be believed (Dubious, I know.), Chekov played a vital role in Khan's relocation. Yet, in the interim between events, Chekov seems to conveniently forget all about what would be, for most people, a significant life event.

--Anyhoo, Reliant comes to town and some how ends up on the wrong planet. The only ways this could happen are:

Reliant fails to make new charts of the system because the crew didn't know how or they couldn't be bothered.

Reliant does make new charts but fails to compare them to Enterprise's because the crew couldn't work the computer archive or they couldn't be bothered.

Reliant does make new charts, does compare them to Enterprise's, goes strait for the one in furthest orbit (assuming there were only ever six), and fails to realize it's neither where it should be, nor in a suitable orbit to sustain life because either the crew can't read scale or they couldn't be bothered.

Reliant does make new charts, does compare them to Enterprise's, does realize there's malfeasance, but decides to investigate anyway to be thorough but the crew can't count to six because either they all failed grammar school or they couldn't be bothered.

All in all this, at best, makes Terrell look lazy and inept and, at worse, a complete tool.

This whole mess of contrivances, is not really a plot hole, no. But it is really poor writing. And should have probably been looked at.

For one thing, slightly altering the narrative to show that Chekov was fully aware of the situation, but the crew decides to check it out anyway--fully armed landing party in hand--and ultimately over powered by Khan & CO, adds a badly needed element to the story.

Magical? We have no idea how a terraforming technology will operate in the late 23rd century, so the Genesis device falls under the description of projection, if anything.
It was specifically stated on screen that Genesis turns something into something else. In the end, it created something out of nothing. This contradiction is the definition of plot hole.
If you can read this signature, you're dying.
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote