RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,375
Posts: 5,504,299
Members: 25,126
Currently online: 511
Newest member: Ted Dave

TrekToday headlines

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 25 2014, 04:48 AM   #31
SantaSpock
Fleet Captain
 
SantaSpock's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View SantaSpock's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

The Stig wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

But do you want to chance that part of the Narada and her crew survives the fall through the black hole to wreck havoc on some other part of the timeline?
That makes sense, of course, but he film does a piss-poor job of telling us why Kirk decides to flat-out murder Nero and his crew. It's a clear symptom of the writers strike and the filmmakers have mentioned more than once that they would have gone back to tweak that scene, if they could.
Jeyl wrote: View Post
I always felt cheated when Kirk ordered all weapons to be fired on the Narada. Kirk actually wants to help, telling Spock that he figured this all out logically (Even though we never established that we weren't at peace with Romulus), yet Spock isn't down with that. And this is the actual end to Spock's development ark. He decides that he doesn't want to follow logic and instead chooses to murder Nero and his crew while they're defenseless and on the brink of destruction!
Kirk did not 'murder' Nero anymore than a policeman who fires a gun to stop a fleeing killer is a murderer.

Nero destroyed a planet.

He intended to destroy more.

He had the means to do it.

It would have been highly irresponsible for Kirk and crew to let him have a fraction of a chance of surviving. The Enterprise and all her sister ships and their crews are the law put there to save the Federation from people like Nero.
If Nero survived and then escaped, Kirk would have been blamed and rightly so.
I wouldn't have even given Nero the chance of surrender. You can't take a risk like that.
And I know Kirk tried to save Kruge after he had ordered his son killed in TSFS but Kruge didn't have Genesis and Kruge didn't have a powerful ship that could take out 12 Federation starships and he wasn't yet near threatening to wipe out every Federation world.

Franklin wrote: View Post
The problem I had with the scene in question in ST09 was Spock's response to Kirk's offer to Nero. As emotionally compromised as Spock was, and staring the butcher of his mother and almost his entire race in the face, imagine how "Trek-like" it would've been if Spock had agreed with Kirk that something should be done to try to rescue Nero and his men. I'm sorry, I can't give Spock a pass on that no matter what he'd been through. Allowing what amounted to cold-blooded vengeance wasn't going to bring anyone back, and I doubt it made Spock feel any better. Indeed, I'd be bothered if it did. It was the sentiment of a thug, not a Starfleet officer. It was a low point for the character of Spock.

As far as STID goes, I didn't have a problem with what Uhura said. That wasn't the time nor place for long explanations. She also seemed genuinely shocked at Spock's cruelty and just wanted it to stop.
IMO Uhuru didn't believe people think Spock was 'cruel'. Did you see Khan break Marcus neck, break Carol's leg? That was cruel. Spock was trying to stop Khan from more killing and more havoc but Khan could have won without killing Marcus or hurting Carol.
Spock was trying to stop a murderer, an elitist who thought most people were beneath him and would not hesitate to kill in his effort to control and wreak vengeance.
Spock was fighting for his life. Phasers on stun had no effect on Khan. Was he supposed to maybe let Khan get the upper hand and escape?
SantaSpock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 05:01 AM   #32
iguana_tonante
Admiral
 
iguana_tonante's Avatar
 
Location: Italy, EU
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Rory1080p wrote: View Post
iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
It's funny when people take their own lack of analysis and insight as a proof of the movies's faults.

Say what you will about its quality (there is no accounting for taste), but you can't ignore it tackles very current issues like the lawfulness of preemptive strikes, drone warfare, state-sponsored terrorism, etc.
as opposed to your analysis which is clearly that of someone who did a degree in the film? arrogance does not equate superiority my friend.

like I said I think the films are good if you take them in their own right, but within Trek? they just aren't anything like as deep or meaningful to me, maybe it's because I grew up with the original Trek and TNG, but it just doesn't make me think or feel in the same way when I watch the new films, as action sci-fi? they are among the best out there for sure. thats just the thing though, they don't really tackle those issues, the issues are there yes but there is no in depth discussion about them, no exploration of what they mean, no wider debate within the film about them being right or wrong...in old Trek films and series there would have been, for me that's the key difference, the older Trek would go deeper, it would explore issues not just have them there to give reason to the special effects, the new films are more about the action and are very light on the deeper meanings of the issues at play.

you are entitled to disagree of course, but this is how I feel about the new films, like I said taking them for what they are they are great, but as what sci-fi does at its best or what Trek is about? they can't hold a candle to the older stuff.
Arrogance does not equate to superiority, but ignorance does not equate to observation either. You are obviously entitled to your own opinion, but it's still wrong.

I know the explosions were kinda loud and the lens flares kinda distracting, but if you got out of the cinema not knowing if the narrative condemned or condoned preemptive strikes and drone warfare, you simply weren't paying attention. Kirk went along with that plan, and almost lost his soul for it (and he did lost his life, magic blood notwithstanding).

Of course old Trek would have handled thing differently: they would have briefings, and stuffy discussions, maybe an impassioned speech or two. People would talk and time will pass. Don't get me wrong, I love TNG and TOS, but this is a different product. You don't like it, that's fine. But you can't condemn it because it's different. Beside, it's not like TOS was a hugely cerebral show: it just looks like that compared with the dreadful landscape that was TV in that period.

Also, funny how you assume people who like the new movies didn't "grew up" with TOS and TNG. Because of course a "real fan" can't like the new movies. We must all be whippersnappers and hipster punks.
__________________
Scientist. Gentleman. Teacher. Fighter. Lover. Father.
iguana_tonante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 05:08 AM   #33
Rory1080p
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Somerset, England
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
Rory1080p wrote: View Post
iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
It's funny when people take their own lack of analysis and insight as a proof of the movies's faults.

Say what you will about its quality (there is no accounting for taste), but you can't ignore it tackles very current issues like the lawfulness of preemptive strikes, drone warfare, state-sponsored terrorism, etc.
as opposed to your analysis which is clearly that of someone who did a degree in the film? arrogance does not equate superiority my friend.

like I said I think the films are good if you take them in their own right, but within Trek? they just aren't anything like as deep or meaningful to me, maybe it's because I grew up with the original Trek and TNG, but it just doesn't make me think or feel in the same way when I watch the new films, as action sci-fi? they are among the best out there for sure. thats just the thing though, they don't really tackle those issues, the issues are there yes but there is no in depth discussion about them, no exploration of what they mean, no wider debate within the film about them being right or wrong...in old Trek films and series there would have been, for me that's the key difference, the older Trek would go deeper, it would explore issues not just have them there to give reason to the special effects, the new films are more about the action and are very light on the deeper meanings of the issues at play.

you are entitled to disagree of course, but this is how I feel about the new films, like I said taking them for what they are they are great, but as what sci-fi does at its best or what Trek is about? they can't hold a candle to the older stuff.
Arrogance does not equate to superiority, but ignorance does not equate to observation either. You are obviously entitled to your own opinion, but it's still wrong.

I know the explosions were kinda loud and the lens flares kinda distracting, but if you got out of the cinema not knowing if the narrative condemned or condoned preemptive strikes and drone warfare, you simply weren't paying attention. Kirk went along with that plan, and almost lost his soul for it (and he did lost his life, magic blood notwithstanding).

Of course old Trek would have handled thing differently: they would have briefings, and stuffy discussions, maybe an impassioned speech or two. People would talk and time will pass. Don't get me wrong, I love TNG and TOS, but this is a different product. You don't like it, that's fine. But you can't condemn it because it's different. Beside, it's not like TOS was a hugely cerebral show: it just looks like that compared with the dreadful landscape that was TV in that period.

Also, funny how you assume people who like the new movies didn't "grew up" with TOS and TNG. Because of course a "real fan" can't like the new movies. We must all be whippersnappers and hipster punks.
way to ignore of half of what I said, who were you calling ignorant?

I see you are not worth trying to discuss anything with.
Rory1080p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 05:12 AM   #34
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Rory1080p wrote: View Post
iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
Rory1080p wrote: View Post
it doesn't really have one at all, it's basically just action sci-fi (shoot teh villains and beat them with cool special effects and dat)

the morality of such films is non existent sadly, but just take them as what they are and don't expect it and you can still enjoy them to an extent.
It's funny when people take their own lack of analysis and insight as a proof of the movies's faults.

Say what you will about its quality (there is no accounting for taste), but you can't ignore it tackles very current issues like the lawfulness of preemptive strikes, drone warfare, state-sponsored terrorism, etc.
as opposed to your analysis which is clearly that of someone who did a degree in the film? arrogance does not equate superiority my friend.

like I said I think the films are good if you take them in their own right, but within Trek? they just aren't anything like as deep or meaningful to me, maybe it's because I grew up with the original Trek and TNG, but it just doesn't make me think or feel in the same way when I watch the new films, as action sci-fi?
I don't know that any Star Trek film since TMP has ever been described as "deep and meaningful." Sure, they all had a theme and a message (STID had one too), but even the TNG movies ultimately degenerated into cookie-cutter sci-fi action flicks with a philosophical message slapped on top of it.

TNG itself had some deeper moments, but TNG was a television series with a lot more room to maneuver. TOS also had its thought-provoking moments (though also an abundance of cheesy moments), but has the same advantage: you can do more in 65 hours of television than you can in 99 minutes of feature film.

in old Trek films and series there would have been
Not in the films, I think. The only one that comes close is TUC, which "tackled the issue" through a series of Shatner monologs.

STID did basically the same thing with Kirk/Spock's discussion in the shuttlecraft , Kirk's change of heart vis a vis Khan's assassination and, finally, with Kirk's closing speech at the memorial event.

Basically: it's hardly a stirring treatise on the morality of preemptivism and/or counterterrorist policy or the inherent pitfalls of trying to play one evil bastard against another and hope for the best, but to say it doesn't address the issue AT ALL is far from the truth.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 11:51 AM   #35
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
That's not even remotely the same.
This isn't about science or natural laws, it's about consistency
Seems to me like they're pretty much the same, then: both techs aren't very consistent.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 11:55 AM   #36
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
It was right up until it wasn't and that was when Spock spares Khan not out of Vulcan respect for life, not out of Starfleet or Federation respect for the rule of law, not out of disgust at the wild savage he had reverted to but out of the emotionally resonant but ultimately selfish desire to bring Kirk back from the dead.
The issue there was time, as was said before.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Except that I'm pretty sure Khan exhausted their supply of moral enlightenment when he took over the Vengeance and tried to kill them all. This, after Kirk and crew had risked their lives coming down to apprehend him and make him stand trial instead of assassinating him outright, after they put themselves in harms way to serve justice instead of petty revenge. If there was any shred of forgiveness left on the Enterprise after Kirk died, Khan smashed it to a pulp when he intentionally crashed the Vengeance into San Francisco.
And they STILL manage to capture him and put him on ice rather than kill him. I'd say they're pretty moral.

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
He had the means to do it.
Slight correction: he didn't. He didn't have any red matter left at that point.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 01:19 PM   #37
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
In Star Trek, when Nero has been defeated and the Narada crippled, Kirk offers assistance, just as he would in TOS.
And as he did to Kruge in ST III - and then kicked him in the face, over and over and over, until he fell into the molten lava.

There was no guarantee that Nero's crippled ship wouldn't regenerate and start the whole mess all over again.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 01:35 PM   #38
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

It's worth pointing out that it was the second time Kirk asked Nero for his surrender - the first was at gunpoint on board the Narada.

As for Spock going into a primal Vulcan rage, right or wrong it's something (some) fans have wanted to see forever. I'm still surprised they had the balls to do it. The fight with Khan was epic, especially when Spock countered Khan's skull crushing finisher with a mind meld. Dirty Vulcan fighting!
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 03:46 PM   #39
Brutal Strudel
Rear Admiral
 
Brutal Strudel's Avatar
 
Location: Here, frozen between time and place, not even the brightest lights escape...
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

I had no problem with Spock losing his cool. I had a problem with how Uhura brings him out of his fugue.
__________________
Once every lifetime, we're swallowed by the whale.
Brutal Strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 04:56 PM   #40
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
I had no problem with Spock losing his cool. I had a problem with how Uhura brings him out of his fugue.
Come to think of it, it's amazing he even believed her.

What she said also has to be taken in the context of Spock starting out to take Khan alive. He was going to use his phaser, but lost it. He tried the Vulcan neck pinch, but it didn't work. It was Khan who was trying to kill him, and Spock was suddenly in a fight for his life. He was going to have to kill Khan or be killed by him. At that point, it seems almost anything one could say to stop the fighting would be morally acceptable.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 05:01 PM   #41
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

there's no faulty moral compass or meaningful debate here. Kirk was stopping a genocidal war criminal and acting to preserve innocent lives.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 06:51 PM   #42
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Rory1080p wrote: View Post
like I said I think the films are good if you take them in their own right, but within Trek? they just aren't anything like as deep or meaningful to me, maybe it's because I grew up with the original Trek and TNG, but it just doesn't make me think or feel in the same way when I watch the new films, as action sci-fi?
I grew up with Trek. Started watching TOS when I was 4, I was 16 when TNG premiered.

Honestly, I never found TOS nor TNG all that "deep" to begin with. Just think about this: while you're looking down your nose at those who like the Abrams films because they aren't as "deep" (in your opinion) as the shows you grew up with. There are people out there who read hard science-fiction novels who are looking down their noses at you because what you think is "deep" is laughable to them.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 07:12 PM   #43
Brutal Strudel
Rear Admiral
 
Brutal Strudel's Avatar
 
Location: Here, frozen between time and place, not even the brightest lights escape...
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

sonak wrote: View Post
there's no faulty moral compass or meaningful debate here. Kirk was stopping a genocidal war criminal and acting to preserve innocent lives.
Well, that settles that. Good thing the Metrons didn't have you fight the Gorn.
__________________
Once every lifetime, we're swallowed by the whale.
Brutal Strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 07:18 PM   #44
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
there's no faulty moral compass or meaningful debate here. Kirk was stopping a genocidal war criminal and acting to preserve innocent lives.
Well, that settles that. Good thing the Metrons didn't have you fight the Gorn.
Isn't that really comparing apples and oranges?

Kirk's offer of help is rebuffed, so he makes sure Nero is unable to trouble anyone else ever again. I've never seen the dispute here? He's rebuffed by Kruge, so he kicks him in the face several times until he falls to his death. Poor Chang never even got the offer of help as Kirk and Sulu poured it on until the Bird-of-Prey was dust. Yet I've never seen anyone complain about either action.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25 2014, 07:19 PM   #45
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

sonak wrote: View Post
there's no faulty moral compass or meaningful debate here.
Eh, I think the points Brutal Strudel raised were valid enough, and discussion so far indicates that opinions concerning them are hardly unanimous. Looks like room for debate to me.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Rory1080p wrote: View Post
[...]
I grew up with Trek. Started watching TOS when I was 4, I was 16 when TNG premiered.

Honestly, I never found TOS nor TNG all that "deep" to begin with. Just think about this: while you're looking down your nose at those who like the Abrams films because they aren't as "deep" (in your opinion) as the shows you grew up with. There are people out there who read hard science-fiction novels who are looking down their noses at you because what you think is "deep" is laughable to them.
Could be debated just as well on the merit or lack of merit of opinions offered, though, without looking down any noses at the persons who offer them. Yes, let's leave the nose-looking parts out; those add nothing useful to the conversation.
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:21 PM.

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