RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,547
Posts: 5,513,394
Members: 25,143
Currently online: 520
Newest member: ShadowL

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 144 19.20%
A 161 21.47%
A- 101 13.47%
B+ 83 11.07%
B 59 7.87%
B- 27 3.60%
C+ 40 5.33%
C 38 5.07%
C- 25 3.33%
D+ 11 1.47%
D 13 1.73%
D- 10 1.33%
F 38 5.07%
Voters: 750. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 5 2013, 01:48 AM   #4051
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I am prepared to be lambasted for this question.

When I saw the explosion, I thought the death toll would be greater than 42. I mean this explosion tore through several underground levels and caused damage at street level. Why weren't more people killed?
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 01:55 AM   #4052
SantaSpock
Fleet Captain
 
SantaSpock's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View SantaSpock's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
I am prepared to be lambasted for this question.

When I saw the explosion, I thought the death toll would be greater than 42. I mean this explosion tore through several underground levels and caused damage at street level. Why weren't more people killed?
I'll be mean here - perhaps they were only talking about Starfleet deaths.
Maybe there were a lot of injuries and with 23rd century medicine they could save them.
SantaSpock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 01:59 AM   #4053
The Festivus Awakens
Airing Grievouses
 
The Festivus Awakens's Avatar
 
Location: Locutus of Bored
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
There are many historical examples of coup d'etats where terrorism wasn't used.
Yes, I know. I didn't say he used terrorism for sure, I said it wasn't specifically ruled out and could have possibly been used. Plus, there's no coup that gained control of a quarter of the surface of the Earth in a couple years, so it's not really comparable to any real historical situations.

Khan wasn't depicted as a lovable dictator.
That was just a joke about how some of the Enterprise crew sort of admired Khan and viewed his rule through rose tinted glasses of history.

Space Seed is quite clear on Khan not being a murderous dictator when Scotty said:

There were no massacres under his rule.
That makes it clear that he didn't massacre his own people once he consolidated power. It doesn't say anything about what he did to his enemies and populations that wouldn't submit to his rule.

Belz... wrote: View Post
First off, Khan wasn't a terrorist. His target was a military installation both times.
It's been a while since I read the novels, but this is what it says on Memory Beta:

On August 29, 1994 Hunyadi addressed the United Nations in defiance against the economic sanctions and the NATO peacekeeping presence to declare that Serbia had nothing to apologize for. During his speech, members of the Army of Eternal Vigilance (AEV) released sarin gas, a nerve toxin, into the council chambers, suffocating to death many ambassadors and tourists and also Vasily Hunyadi. The AEV was an anti-government militia based in Cochise County, Arizona. It was commanded by an Augment named Hawkeye Morrison. Morrison had teamed up with Khan to eliminate Hunyadi.

On March 17 of 1995, Khan acquired over 200 bio-warheads from the former Soviet Union. Eventually, after learning the secrets of the Chrysalis Project, Khan redeveloped the flesh eating streptococcus that his mother developed and prepared to devastate the planet with its presence.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Eugenics_Wars
So, like I said, an ally of his used nerve gas on the UN to kill an enemy (I don't recall if Khan was aware that he would do this or not) and Khan tried to use biological weapons against the people of Earth. Neither of which are military targets.

[edit] It occurred to me that you weren't talking about the EW novels or the 9-11/War on Terror allegory and are talking about the crash in San Francisco in the film instead. In which case, targeting Starfleet HQ in the middle of San Francisco with a ship a quarter of the size of the peninsula (exaggeration, don't look it up) is hardly an indiscriminate act. Thousands of innocent civilians both on the Starfleet HQ campus (if it's anything like real military installations where it's a mix of military and civilians) and in the surrounding city would be killed.

Besides that, when the computer told him that he couldn't reach Starfleet HQ, he had no problem taking out a huge chunk of San Francisco instead.

Why do you have to stick with a brown-skinned villain when Khan has already been played by a white man of European descent and was shown with his natural white skin (sans skin darkening makeup) in TWoK? Why do you have to stick with a brown-skinned terrorist when no actual historical terrorist incident is being depicted?
Woah, I didn't say any of that.
Nor did I accuse you of saying any of that. It was a general you.
__________________
'First Contact' is the tale of a man who just wants to cash in on his creation so he can get wasted on an island full of naked women, but his fans keep insisting that he's a saintly visionary who has profoundly altered the world. AKA - 'I Don't Want to be a Statue: The Gene Roddenberry Story.'

Last edited by The Festivus Awakens; June 5 2013 at 02:13 AM.
The Festivus Awakens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 02:30 AM   #4054
AnnLouise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Wisconsin
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

The "drone strike" was ordered to punish that alleged crime, which was in fact a false charge, because the building attacked wasn't really an archive.
Pardon the question, but since I've only seen the movie once, it still puzzles me on the sequence things
1-Nutjob Admiral discovers/finds out about 20th century supermen in cyrofreeze
2-NA thaws out Top Superman, begins using him as evil-weapons brain trust. So Far I understand.
But was the attack set on the "archives" set up by Marcus with Khan executing the plan? The bomber did send a message to Marcus. When did Marcus and Khan stop working together to start a war? Again, questions of a single-viewing.
Thanks
__________________
(it is) in the denial of moral choices that we commit our worst offences.
Matthew Scully
AnnLouise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 02:32 AM   #4055
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Khan overrode the computer. If the Vengeance had not come in low, it would have hit Starfleet Headquarters.

Now, Khan is a murderous bastard. He could have ordered the ship to self-destruct, thus incinerating San Francisco. What are the lives of a city to a man who murdered millions? Or was that a line that the writers weren't willing to cross?
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 04:33 AM   #4056
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Why is it that so often when it's suggested that people treat others with respect or stop some bigoted behavior someone starts denouncing "PC?"

They really give the impression that political correctness might have some virtues when they behave that way.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 09:43 AM   #4057
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
I am prepared to be lambasted for this question.

When I saw the explosion, I thought the death toll would be greater than 42. I mean this explosion tore through several underground levels and caused damage at street level. Why weren't more people killed?
Admiral Nutjob announced the death toll at 42 before privately letting Kirk in on the target having been a secret Section 31 base below. I suspect 42 people died in and around the Kelvin Memorial Archive, not counting those beneath.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 10:22 AM   #4058
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
That doesn't, in and of itself, exclude him from being considered a terrorist.
Well no, but my point is that in actuality he didn't specifically target civilians.

And even then, can the nuclear bombings of Japan be considered terrorism ? I think it's a bit more complex than that.

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
It's been a while since I read the novels, but this is what it says on Memory Beta:
No, I meant in the official Trek stuff. TOS, TWOK, STID.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 10:24 AM   #4059
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

AnnLouise wrote: View Post
But was the attack set on the "archives" set up by Marcus with Khan executing the plan?
No. They talk about that. Khan was hurting Marcus for, in his mind, killing his family.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 12:51 PM   #4060
The Festivus Awakens
Airing Grievouses
 
The Festivus Awakens's Avatar
 
Location: Locutus of Bored
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Belz... wrote: View Post
And even then, can the nuclear bombings of Japan be considered terrorism?
Not to start a whole tangent on that can of worms, but yes, I think they were the very definition of terrorism (going by the definition: "the use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of inspiring terror and intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons"), regardless of whether one thinks their use was justified or not in that context and era. Of course, many of the same actions that would be considered terrorism if perpetrated by a rogue group would be considered legal by the UN if perpetrated by the armed forces of a recognized state during an armed conflict, so yeah, like you said, it's a gray area.

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
It's been a while since I read the novels, but this is what it says on Memory Beta:
No, I meant in the official Trek stuff. TOS, TWOK, STID.
Yeah, I caught that after the fact and addressed it in my edit. It was a conflation of two different arguments about the events in the Eugenics Wars books vs. the events in the show/films.
__________________
'First Contact' is the tale of a man who just wants to cash in on his creation so he can get wasted on an island full of naked women, but his fans keep insisting that he's a saintly visionary who has profoundly altered the world. AKA - 'I Don't Want to be a Statue: The Gene Roddenberry Story.'
The Festivus Awakens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 01:05 PM   #4061
SantaSpock
Fleet Captain
 
SantaSpock's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View SantaSpock's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

IMO the Khan in TOS was a lot less dangerous than the Khan in nuTrek. In TOS in the byplay where the crew were teasing Spock about the great qualities of Khan, it was shown that he liked to control the 'sheep' not destroy them. In Space Seed it didn't sound like Khan was really out to destroy anything just gain power over the Earth from his 'brothers'.
I don't know what happened to this nuKhan, perhaps Marcus tortured him or perhaps it is just nuTrek making Khan 'up-to-date'. Do you think Kirk would have let Khan go in TOS if he thought Khan was out to destroy/subjugate the Earth, even in TWOK he didn't seem to have that agenda?
SantaSpock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 03:14 PM   #4062
TheMurph
Rear Admiral
 
TheMurph's Avatar
 
Location: TN
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I've only watched the movie once, so my rating may change, but I gave it a B -. For me it was a solid A till the last part following Kirk's death. It's hard to put my finger on it, but at that point it started sinking for me. It felt like it did not need the chase scene. I'm going to need to watch it again to nail it down.
__________________
Nope.
TheMurph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 03:28 PM   #4063
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

In this day and age there is an inflationary use of the word terrorism. For the media, as soon as a bomb is involved, it's terrorism. And that's really not the correct definition.


And morale is defined by the victor. We applaud everyone who deserted the German Army during World War II, but the USA is punishing the guy who leaked war crimes to Wikileaks. Same hypocrisy in the world of terrorists, or dare I say, freedom fighters? Some we want because they attack our enemies, some we don't want because they attack us. That both sides have the very same reasons doesn't matter. We are the good guys after all.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 03:46 PM   #4064
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
IMO the Khan in TOS was a lot less dangerous than the Khan in nuTrek. In TOS in the byplay where the crew were teasing Spock about the great qualities of Khan, it was shown that he liked to control the 'sheep' not destroy them. In Space Seed it didn't sound like Khan was really out to destroy anything just gain power over the Earth from his 'brothers'.
Except when Kirk defeats his attempt to take over Enterprise - at that point, Khan heads to Engineering and wires the ship to explode.

Just as, in TWOK, in his last moments he activates the Genesis Device to destroy Kirk.

Just as in STID, when defeated, he targets Starfleet with his disintegrating ship to cause as much damage as he can.

"I'll say one thing for him, he's consistent."
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 04:35 PM   #4065
Cookies and Cake
Admiral
 
Location: North America
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Belz... wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
That doesn't, in and of itself, exclude him from being considered a terrorist.
Well no, but my point is that in actuality he didn't specifically target civilians.
Yeah, but, let's not lose sight of the fact that, when the Enterprise was dispatched to go after Harrison, Kirk and crew did not know that.
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
However, and moreover, Khan [as Harrison] was purported to have been responsible for an attack on a branch of Federation Archives, supposedly not a military target. Khan was thereby accused of being a terrorist. The "drone strike" was ordered to punish that alleged crime, which was in fact a false charge, because the building attacked wasn't really an archive.
My point there was that, for a significant part of the movie, our heroes were regarding Harrison as a terrorist, and, to the best of their knowledge, it was correct for them to regard him that way. Contrary to the impression one might have from reading your assertion that Khan wasn't really a terrorist, the film's narrative hardly fails to associate Khan with terrorism.
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Cookies and Cake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
benedict cumberbatch, grading & discussion, jj abrams

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 03:46 PM.

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