RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,548
Posts: 5,422,001
Members: 24,804
Currently online: 411
Newest member: comicstar100

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10

Quinto In The Slap
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

Burton On Shatner’s Brown Bag Wine Tasting
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

New Trek Trading Card Series
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8

New Red Shirt Diaries Episode
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old January 13 2013, 11:24 PM   #121
RPJOB
Commander
 
RPJOB's Avatar
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
Nu-trek can still be "more realistic" without being "real-world realistic". It is simply a more realistic slant on THE FAMILIAR STAR TREK UNIVERSE.

For example, Casino Royale (2006) was certainly more realistic in tone than, say, A View to Kill, but it was still far from being a realistic representation of the actual world. Casino Royale was 'realistic' only within the framework of the James Bond world.
If you want a "realistic" Trek then you'd better get rid of Spock (human/alien hybrid), warp drive, phasers, transporters and all the rest of the trappings. If you make it realistic it won't be Star Trek any longer. If that's what you want then we need something to take the place of Trek, to update it.

YARN wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
1) I like that Star Trek used to strive to tell the best story possible, despite what came before.
What is the best story? If it is the one which is the most realistic, then Trek has always been in trouble (which is why quoting Orci doing his best to justify Trek in terms of quantum physics is preposterous). If it is to tell a story which is most coherent, then Orci would have been better served by a hard reboot. Just start over and perhaps never even raise the prospect of backward time travel.

If you're going to boldly go in a new direction, then just boldly go, and leave old Trek behind without a passing of the torch narrative.

BillJ wrote: View Post
2) That's not Spock Prime's mother. His mother and father lived and died in another timeline.
And yet Old Spock still reported that he was emotionally compromised. And this means he still had motivation as well as justification.
What's the best story? Since Trek became a franchise the best story is the one that makes the most money. Period. You could make a movie that would win the Oscar, Hugo and Nebula awards but if it flopped at the box office then it's reboot time.

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post
Franklin wrote: View Post
M'Sharak also pointed this out to you in a post. These were the rules Orci and Kurtzman operated by. In this universe, you can't do what you're asking for.
This has been dealt with upthread too.
If "dealt with" means the same thing to you as does "skipped over without acknowledging," then yes, granted. But, to spell it out more fully than I did upthread:
Orci-Kurtzman Q&A session at TrekMovie wrote:
Dan:
Spock Prime could go back in time and stop Nero, like all the other ways they have done before in movies and TV shows in the past Trek lore, he doesn’t need Red Matter to only go back in time to stop Nero. It’s lame for Bob to say that Prime Spok can’t do time travel without Red Matter. When they could just fly around the Sun like he did in Star Trek IV, or Picard did in First Contact.

BobOrci:
In our Universe, as long as I am here, you can’t just slingshot around the sun and linear time is a misconception from the middle part of the 20th century.. A good analogy for what we have done here would be to imagine we were rebooting the modern adventures of a sailor, who at the time that his stories were told, it was believed the earth was flat. Now, years later, here in the re-whatever, we know the world is round. So our story exists in a world where the world is now round, despite that being a “canon” violation.
Slingshotting is not an available option. Period. The (then-current) model upon which the idea was based is effectively obsolete, and has been replaced (for purposes of this incarnation of Trek, at the very least) with a different model - one which does not allow closed-loop time travel. In practical terms, that mode of time travel never existed. To insist that it still does exist is to wilfully ignore The Way Things Are Now (according to the guys who are telling the stories).


YARN wrote: View Post
...

The list of informal fallacies in this thread is staggering.
If you're interested in participating in discussion, then you're welcome to do so. However, the recurrent cataloguing of fallacies in which you've been engaging has the effect, more and more, of making it look as if this really is the "gotcha" topic you've insisted it is not. If the responses you're getting don't fit the answers you had already written on your checklist, it does not automatically render them invalid or fallacious; it only means that it would probably have been more realistic for you to be expecting those other answers and not now be trying to force them to fit into your predetermined "right answer" checklist boxes.
That's all well and good but I don't recall anyone in the movie actually mentioning slingshot around the sun as a means of time travel. Orci can claim what does and doesn't work all he likes but until they come right out and say you can't time travel that way then, seeing as it's branched off a universe where you could do that then his opinion is just that, his opinion. He's also said in an interview that Delta Vega is the same planet in WNMHGB and ST09. Doesn't mean that it is. It just happens to have the same name.

For the Trek fans, this film includes many little references. For example you have Kirk dropped off on the planet Delta Vega, which was seen in second Star Trek pilot. It is a cool reference, but didn’t you also fudge canon by ignoring that Delta Vega was way out next to the galactic barrier.


Orci: True. Yeah we did. We moved the planet to suit our purposes. The familiarity of the name seemed more important as an Easter egg, than a new name with no importance.

http://trekmovie.com/2009/04/30/inte...alex-kurtzman/
__________________
We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill - today! - Kirk - A Taste of Armageddon
RPJOB is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 11:24 PM   #122
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
If he goes back pre-Narada, he changes the course of the universe for billions of beings. He eliminates twenty-five years of existence.
Let's think about that for a moment.

City on the Edge of Forever. Deranged McCoy goes back in time. Edith Keeler lives. The Nazis win WWII. The Enterprise disappears from existence. Our heroes propose to fix the timeline. Spock, in fact, restrains Kirk from saving Edith Keeler, he does his part to sacrifice her life to restore the timeline.

In doing so, they changed 200 years of history which followed McCoy's intevention. Remember, the crew was informed that the Enterprise no longer existed, those changes happened, those 200 years were real. There are, no doubt, many nice people who lived in the Keeler timeline who no longer exist because the Enterprise crew insisted on fixing things. What right did they have to prefer their timeline to that of Keeler's pacifist timeline? Well, (1) the Keeler timeline was the result of a temporal intervention and can be regarded as a mistake and (2) in the Keeler timeline the Nazis win WWII, so theirs is a world with presumably more loss of life and pain than the original timeline.

Compare this to your question. Yes, those people who lived during those 25 years were awfully nice, but they only existed as an anomaly caused by a temporal intervention and a universe with Vulcan still in it is a world with BILLIONS more people still alive and contributing to the noble cause of the federation. The original timeline is a better possible world. Finally, this story shows us that Spock feels it is logical and right to intervene so as to repair timelines.

Moreover, most of the people who lived during that timeline would still be alive, they're only 25 years older. Kirk is older than Checkov and Sulu, which means they were conceived after Nero's intervention, which means they were going to be born anyway! Logically, Spock know his intervention will not be ending live, but merely changing lives.

And even if a few people would not be born because of restoring the timeline, these lives divide out by the comparable children born in their stead, and is overwhelmed by billions of Vulcans saved by saving Vulcan.

BillJ wrote: View Post
If he goes back to just before the destruction of Vulcan, Jim Kirk never makes it to the captains chair.
You don't know that. Neither would Spock.

Kirk was willing risk his career for Spock (Amok Time). Spock was willing to risk the death penalty for Pike (Menagerie). Kirk was willing to risk Spock's life for the greater good (Operation: Annihilate, Galileo 7). Why wouldn't Spock risk Kirk's seat to save the entire planet?

Moreover, Spock can intervene in a way that does not risk Kirk's captaincy. He could go back in time and even enlist Kirk's help, or send him off on an errand that kept him out of risk.
YARN is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 11:38 PM   #123
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

*sigh*

Kirk went back and fixed the corrupt timeline because it was his fault in the first place. Doesn't really make it right, but I wouldn't expect Kirk not to take responsibility for it.

In the movie, right before the Vulcan crisis, Kirk is getting ready to get drummed out of the service. Without the crisis, Kirk is a civilian and not there to stop the Doomsday Machine, the Space Amoeba and V'ger among others.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline  
Old January 13 2013, 11:52 PM   #124
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Kirk went back and fixed the corrupt timeline because it was his fault in the first place.
How was it his fault? McCoy accidentally injects himself with cordrazine and has a freak out. Not Kirk's fault.

He is no more at fault than Spock is for the nu-Trek timeline. On the other hand, Spock blames himself for failing to save Romulus, so if he is right, we could say that he also had a personal responsibility to fix it. What matters more, however, is fixing the problem not the blame. Problem: Vulcan has been destroyed.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Doesn't really make it right, but I wouldn't expect Kirk not to take responsibility for it.
Kirk initially tries to save Keeler and Spock stops him. Spock took responsibility there and would here too.

BillJ wrote: View Post
In the movie, right before the Vulcan crisis, Kirk is getting ready to get drummed out of the service.
How do you know he is about to be drummed out of the service? He cheated on the simulation the prime universe too. Eventually he got a commendation for original thinking. It is only when the Narada attacks Vulcan that Kirk gets really insubordinate.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Without the crisis, Kirk is a civilian and not there to stop the Doomsday Machine, the Space Amoeba and V'ger among others.
Again, this is not an either/or situation. He can intervene to preserve Kirk's career if it matters that much.

Or he can simply warn starfleet of major threats like the Doomsday Machine and V'Ger and save even more lives than the Enterprise crew did in the prime universe. What matters is not that Kirk is there to meet the threat, but that someone is there to meet the threat. You know there are other good, even great, captains in the universe.
YARN is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 12:00 AM   #125
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

We will simply have to agree to disagree...
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 12:17 AM   #126
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

YARN wrote: View Post
M'Sharak wrote: View Post
If "dealt with" means the same thing to you as does "skipped over without acknowledging," then yes, granted.
I'd rather not repeat answers and analysis that are already freely available in this thread. If you really did not catch the response, ask the question again, and I'll cut-and-paste the response.
But I asked no question.

YARN wrote: View Post
<sniiiiip>

It's not that I object to an Ad Hominem because I'd rather hear agreement, but because an Ad Hominem is so often a weak argument.
If you'd prefer to approve or disapprove of the quality (or lack thereof) which you perceive in those answers, perhaps you ought to consider posting a journal entry instead, over the Comment thread of which you might then preside, dismissing from your place in the Very Important Chair that which does not meet with your approval. This is a discussion forum, not a formal or academic debate; the answers you get are the answers you get, and no one is obligated to satisfy any particular criteria of yours in giving those answers, especially when none were stipulated up front. The insistence on issuing "fallacy report cards" is simply boring and a bit pompous. Why would I wish to put up with that for very long? Why would anyone?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
M'Sharak wrote: View Post
...
So if it turns out warp speed and beaming is impossible...
No, those still work just fine, thanks, but good of you to stop by.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 12:20 AM   #127
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
We will simply have to agree to disagree...
Thank you for a very enjoyable game, Bill. I enjoy posting with people.

M'Sharak wrote:
If you'd prefer to approve or disapprove of the quality (or lack thereof) which you perceive in those answers, perhaps you ought to consider posting a journal entry instead, over the Comment thread of which you might then preside, dismissing from your place in the Very Important Chair that which does not meet with your approval.
No, I think I'll keep posting right here.

And is not your chair more important than my own that you can instruct me where to post?

M'Sharak wrote:
This is a discussion forum, not a formal or academic debate; the answers you get are the answers you get, and no one is obligated to satisfy any particular criteria of yours in giving those answers, especially when none were stipulated up front.
You underestimate both the potential for reasoned discussion which a message board is capable of sustaining and also the responsibilities of interlocutors in casual discussions.

The mere fact that one is having a discussion outside of a debate or formal discussion does not, therefore, give one license to perform every crime against reason imaginable.

Marital Dispute: Husband: "I can use all the fallacies I like, this is not an academic debate. Now get back in the kitchen before I smack you!" (Ad Baculum).

Sports Conversation: Fan: "So what if association does not equal causality? This ain't some fancy pants logic class! Every time we order a meat lover's pizza, the home team loses! NO MORE MEAT LOVER'S PIZZA!"

Music Conversation: Cinephile: "Oh yeah, well Hans Zimmer has one awards for his motion picture soundtracks! Why don't you win an award or two and then you can criticize his overuse of the 'danger theme.'" (Ad Verecundiam)

Book Discussion: Bookworm: "Stephen King intended Tommyknockers to be his greatest work, therefore, it is!" (Intentional Fallacy).

Moves like these are not acceptable in any discussion, save for parodies and other non-literal uses. It's not just academics who have to play by the basic rules of reason.

M'Sharak wrote:
The insistence on issuing "fallacy report cards" is simply boring and a bit pompous. Why would I wish to put up with that for very long? Why would anyone?
I am doing you a service, pointing out errors in reasoning and inviting you to improve your answers. At the very least, I am entitled to defend my perspective by showing how attacks against it are defective. Demonstrating the presence of fallacies is a common method of defense.

Last edited by YARN; January 14 2013 at 12:39 AM.
YARN is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 12:24 AM   #128
Awesome Possum
I've Rebooted Myself
 
Awesome Possum's Avatar
 
Location: Someplace Shiny
View Awesome Possum's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Awesome Possum Send a message via AIM to Awesome Possum
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Wouldn't saving Vulcan just create a new universe which is similar to the JJverse but with a Vulcan? At least if we're going by the rules that were set up in the last movie.
__________________
Space Dandy! He's a dandy guy...in space.
He combs the galaxy like his pompadour on the hunt for aliens.
Planet after planet he searches, discovering new creatures both friendly and not.
These are the spectacular adventures of Space Dandy and his brave space crew. In space.
Awesome Possum is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 12:43 AM   #129
Jackson_Roykirk
Commodore
 
Jackson_Roykirk's Avatar
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Awesome Possum wrote: View Post
Wouldn't saving Vulcan just create a new universe which is similar to the JJverse but with a Vulcan? At least if we're going by the rules that were set up in the last movie.
In fact, there probably is a universe in which Spock saves Vulcan.

However, the goings-on in that universe are for some other guy's reboot. Abrams happens to be following this particular universe where Vulcan is destroyed.
__________________

...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes
With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...

Last edited by Jackson_Roykirk; January 14 2013 at 01:12 AM. Reason: grammar
Jackson_Roykirk is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 01:06 AM   #130
Awesome Possum
I've Rebooted Myself
 
Awesome Possum's Avatar
 
Location: Someplace Shiny
View Awesome Possum's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Awesome Possum Send a message via AIM to Awesome Possum
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
Awesome Possum wrote: View Post
Wouldn't saving Vulcan just create a new universe which is similar to the JJverse but with a Vulcan? At least if we're going by the rules that were set up in the last movie.
In fact, there probably is a universe in which Spock saves Vulcan.

However, the goings-on in that universe is for some other guy's reboot. Abrams happens to be following this particular universe where Vulcan is destroyed.
Based on that episode of TNG with Worf seeing a bunch of different timelines, there probably is.

Personally I like the idea of seeing how the Federation handles the loss of one of their founding planets. There are just so many possible storylines that could be developed from it.
__________________
Space Dandy! He's a dandy guy...in space.
He combs the galaxy like his pompadour on the hunt for aliens.
Planet after planet he searches, discovering new creatures both friendly and not.
These are the spectacular adventures of Space Dandy and his brave space crew. In space.
Awesome Possum is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 01:16 AM   #131
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

I'm hoping there's a timeline out there where Spock was smart enough to destroy the Jellyfish instead of handing it over to Nero.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 02:06 AM   #132
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

YARN wrote: View Post

And is not your chair more important than my own that you can instruct me where to post?
Instruct? I have but suggested a couple of possible modifications in approach.

YARN wrote: View Post

I am doing you a service, pointing out errors in reasoning and inviting you to improve your answers.
But it's not a service for which I have any recollection of registering. Perhaps it might be dialed back a little, or even provided only upon direct request. (I promise: I'll remember to call, should I in the future have any requirement of such service, and I will trust others to make their own requests, on an as-needed basis.)
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 02:10 AM   #133
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm hoping there's a timeline out there where Spock was smart enough to destroy the Jellyfish instead of handing it over to Nero.
Nero probably snagged it with a tractor beam before Spock could do anything.

As for Vulcan: A ship as small as the Jellyfish, powerful as it was, would probably not survive the stress of a slingshot effect. So Spock can't do anything to save Vulcan even if Nero hadn't captured him.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 02:12 AM   #134
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Nero probably snagged it with a tractor beam before Spock could do anything.
All Spock would need to do is rupture the tank holding the Red Matter. If the Jellyfish was in a tractor beam the resultant black hole should've destroyed the Narada as well.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline  
Old January 14 2013, 02:20 AM   #135
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: So why doesn't Spock save Vulcan?

Going by the novelverse's interpretation of time travel (where it's the method involved that causes either an overwrite of history or a split in the timeline), slingshotting and the Guardian and whatever else are still viable options for Old Spock. BUT I say the reason he wouldn't try to save Vulcan is the extreme risk factor in essentially resurrecting Nero and the Narada and hoping to stop them a little quicker this time.

Something that happened in the novelverse that's very relevant is the cataclysmic aftermath of "Endgame" - where Admiral Janeway's shortcut home using advanced Borg-busting technology caused the Borg to upgrade the Federation from "mildly resistant nothing" to "serious threat to the collective", and brought about the Destiny war that devastated the Alpha and Beta Quadrants and cost over a hundred planets and 63 billion lives. Janeway's quick fix led to disaster. And since STXI's timeline has been changing for 25 years when Vulcan dies, who knows what could spiral from another good-intentions meddling with history? I've posted numerous other examples of what happens in Trek when time travel goes wrong, whether a stupid accident ("Shockwave", "City on the Edge of Forever"), how it's use led to Starfleet becoming some bizarre dark thing without the values it was founded upon ("Future's End", "Relativity") and eventually a war throughout time (ENT's time war)

That's why they have Temporal Prime Directives, because screwing around with time, even with the best of intentions, can go hideously wrong.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.