Robert Comsol wrote:
Brutal Strudel wrote:
In Star Trek, when Nero has been defeated and the Narada crippled, Kirk offers assistance, just as he would in TOS. Nero, for obvious reasons, tells him to go fuck himself.
I have only seen the movie once, so my memory is flawed.
But the one thing that grew on my mind reading this discussion was this: Who won?
Kirk offered him a chance to live but obviously as a prisoner.
Nero didn't like this idea and rather wanted to die, thus replied in a fashion to Kirk that he knew would provoke Kirk to kill him.
Basically, the antagonist was in control of the "encounter" and manipulated the protagonist to do what Nero wanted.
Wouldn't this mean that Kirk lost because he allowed himself to be manipulated to do the thing Nero wanted?
The victory, IMHO, would have been Kirk replying "No, you bastard. You don't die, yet. You are coming with me!"
Nero never got what he wanted, which was Romulus and his wife back. So, we can disavail ourselves of the notion that the destruction of the Narada
was any sort of victory for Nero. He simply chose the manner of his own defeat. That can't be twisted into Kirk losing.
In chess, your opponent always has multiple
choices, right up until the game ends. (Even if there is only one move available among the pieces, there is still the choice to move or resign.) That fact of chess, that your opponent might choose to be checkmated by queen or rook, that doesn't rob victory from the winner.
Similarly, the point here, to the degree that there's any here at all, is simply that rescuing Nero and trying him (we don't know what the sentence would have been, by the way, it could have been life or death) would have been a different sort of victory than the one Kirk and company had.