RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,242
Posts: 5,438,841
Members: 24,958
Currently online: 472
Newest member: greatmovies

TrekToday headlines

Cumberbatch In Wax
By: T'Bonz on Oct 24

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 28 2014, 06:55 AM   #136
I Am Groot
I Am Groot
 
I Am Groot's Avatar
 
Location: I Am Groot
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Maybe it just comes down to Pine's take on Kirk: he seemed too blase about it. Shatner's Kirk (especially in his first season prime) could have sold the grim necessity of it.
In fairness to Pine, he was given the task of playing Kirk on his first space assignment, cocky and untempered by experience, whereas Shatner's Kirk was played as an experienced veteran who had seen the wonders and horrors of space up close for years.
On that first day Kirk had to deal with an enemy/threat who:

Was from 129 years in the future.

Had advanced weaponry and technology.

Had already destroyed a plant and killed it's 6 billion inhabitants.

Had destroyed 5 starfleet ships.

I don't think Shatner Kirk had to deal with anything matching such scope and magnitude. The closest things I can think of would be The Doomsday Machine, and the events of TUC.

Pine Kirk made a judgment call to permanently end the threat Nero posed. That's his responsibility as a captain. Pine Kirk did extend an olive branch before destroying the Narada and Nero smacked his hand away. Despite all Nero had done; including kill his (James T. Kirk's) father. Pine Kirk was attempting to find peace with the Romulans.

Shatner Kirk had no qualms about firing on General Chang's ship in TUC. He didn't treat Khan and his people on the Reliant with kid gloves either. All the shots to area surrounding Reliant's bridge affirm that. Then there are all the Klingons Kirk killed in TSFS. By self-destruct of the Enterprise and by kicking them off a cliff in to a river of lava.

No matter the universe.
KIRK GIVES NO QUARTER TO THOSE WHO CROSS HIM.
I'm not sure what that has to do with my post about how Pine was told to play the character; dealing with this all for the first time. Just because he had a really bad day doesn't mean he's instantly acquired years worth of experience in processing those thoughts and emotions. What comes off as a blase aloofness could simply be a lack of knowing the seriousness of what's to come and understanding the consequences of your decisions based on years of processing past actions.

Plus, I'm on the same side of the issue as you are about not having any problem with Kirk's decision to destroy the Narada, so I'm not sure what the point of reiterating all of that was.
__________________
We are Groot and Locutus of Bored.
I Am Groot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 07:16 AM   #137
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

^ I was agreeing with you. I added the detailed account to give a more focused context of the discussion. Laying out all the pieces, we can see the whole picture clearly. So people can reflect on everything that led up to Kirk's decision to fire on the Narada. The fact that it was Kirk's first day was not all that led up to his decision. Nero's actions drove Kirk to a reaction. Which the OP found "petty and vicious". Kirk killing Nero can be descirbed as Justifiable Homicide: a homicide (as by accident, by misadventure, in self-defense, in performing a legal duty like quelling a mob or carrying out a death sentence, in preventing a felony involving great bodily harm, or in defense of one's home or members of one's family) justified or excused by law for which no criminal punishment is imposed. Justified since Kirk did it in the defense of Earth, and the Federation planets.


**It's similar to the controversy surround MOS, with Superman killing Zod. With everything we saw in the film up to that point where Superman has Zod in a headlock. A lot of people feel Supes crossed the line by breaking Zod's neck. Here again you can call it Justifiable Homicide by Superman in the defense of Earth.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 07:35 AM   #138
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Into Darkness has the same problem. Spock, pushed past his breaking point, is clearly trying to murder Khan, not apprehend him. That makes sense, actually, and it's a reminder of the pre-Surakian savagery that lurks in all Vulcans, not just he half-human ones. It also underscores just how deep his brotherly love for Kirk runs and just how fragile watching his mother and his home planet die has left him, a year or so on. And then, before he can take it too far and cross a line he would have a tough time living with himself for crossing, Uhura stops him. Again, so far so good.

But her rationale? "He's our only chance to save Kirk!" (And why couldn't any of the other superpopsicles--products of the same gene manipulation and selective breeding--have done the same?) Pretty selfish, you ask me.
I think your argument would be stronger if Spock himself had not spent much of the film's second act talking about how a mission to assassinate Khan would be a clear violation of the law and basic morality. The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 07:50 AM   #139
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Sci wrote: View Post
The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
Nah, Spock merely turned the tables; he was beating Khan over the head with it.
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 08:34 AM   #140
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

Sci wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Into Darkness has the same problem. Spock, pushed past his breaking point, is clearly trying to murder Khan, not apprehend him. That makes sense, actually, and it's a reminder of the pre-Surakian savagery that lurks in all Vulcans, not just he half-human ones. It also underscores just how deep his brotherly love for Kirk runs and just how fragile watching his mother and his home planet die has left him, a year or so on. And then, before he can take it too far and cross a line he would have a tough time living with himself for crossing, Uhura stops him. Again, so far so good.

But her rationale? "He's our only chance to save Kirk!" (And why couldn't any of the other superpopsicles--products of the same gene manipulation and selective breeding--have done the same?) Pretty selfish, you ask me.
I think your argument would be stronger if Spock himself had not spent much of the film's second act talking about how a mission to assassinate Khan would be a clear violation of the law and basic morality. The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
I'm sorry, but you (and the movie) seem to be missing something. Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live. If Kirk's resurrection wasn't on the table, would Spock then have a motive not to kill Khan?

That is my entire point: the film ultimately lack the courage of its convictions. And yes, in this age of water boarding and drone strikes, the audience does need to be bearen over the head, as unfortunate a turn of phrae that may be.
__________________
Once every lifetime, we're swallowed by the whale.
Brutal Strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 09:20 AM   #141
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post

In fairness to Pine, he was given the task of playing Kirk on his first space assignment, cocky and untempered by experience, whereas Shatner's Kirk was played as an experienced veteran who had seen the wonders and horrors of space up close for years.
On that first day Kirk had to deal with an enemy/threat who:

Was from 129 years in the future.

Had advanced weaponry and technology.

Had already destroyed a plant and killed it's 6 billion inhabitants.

Had destroyed 5 starfleet ships.

I don't think Shatner Kirk had to deal with anything matching such scope and magnitude. The closest things I can think of would be The Doomsday Machine, and the events of TUC.

Pine Kirk made a judgment call to permanently end the threat Nero posed. That's his responsibility as a captain. Pine Kirk did extend an olive branch before destroying the Narada and Nero smacked his hand away. Despite all Nero had done; including kill his (James T. Kirk's) father. Pine Kirk was attempting to find peace with the Romulans.

Shatner Kirk had no qualms about firing on General Chang's ship in TUC. He didn't treat Khan and his people on the Reliant with kid gloves either. All the shots to area surrounding Reliant's bridge affirm that. Then there are all the Klingons Kirk killed in TSFS. By self-destruct of the Enterprise and by kicking them off a cliff in to a river of lava.

No matter the universe.
KIRK GIVES NO QUARTER TO THOSE WHO CROSS HIM.
I'm not sure what that has to do with my post about how Pine was told to play the character; dealing with this all for the first time. Just because he had a really bad day doesn't mean he's instantly acquired years worth of experience in processing those thoughts and emotions. What comes off as a blase aloofness could simply be a lack of knowing the seriousness of what's to come and understanding the consequences of your decisions based on years of processing past actions.
The strength of the new movie franchise is in its characterisation (except Scotty IMO because he is just to much of a departure). I could give a pass to Kirk on your analysis if there was some indication that it was a brutal decision based emotion and inexperience except that Spock is baying for blood up there with him and he gets a massive reward for his actions. They both have reasons to want to kill but Spectre of the Gun rears its head again. They failed the test.

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Into Darkness has the same problem. Spock, pushed past his breaking point, is clearly trying to murder Khan, not apprehend him. That makes sense, actually, and it's a reminder of the pre-Surakian savagery that lurks in all Vulcans, not just he half-human ones. It also underscores just how deep his brotherly love for Kirk runs and just how fragile watching his mother and his home planet die has left him, a year or so on. And then, before he can take it too far and cross a line he would have a tough time living with himself for crossing, Uhura stops him. Again, so far so good.

But her rationale? "He's our only chance to save Kirk!" (And why couldn't any of the other superpopsicles--products of the same gene manipulation and selective breeding--have done the same?) Pretty selfish, you ask me.
I think your argument would be stronger if Spock himself had not spent much of the film's second act talking about how a mission to assassinate Khan would be a clear violation of the law and basic morality. The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
I'm sorry, but you (and the movie) seem to be missing something. Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live. If Kirk's resurrection wasn't on the table, would Spock then have a motive not to kill Khan?

That is my entire point: the film ultimately lack the courage of its convictions. And yes, in this age of water boarding and drone strikes, the audience does need to be beaten over the head, as unfortunate a turn of phrase that may be.
I think they were trying to back-pedal after the first movie to try and underscore that Kirk's arrogance and self-belief are not always good things. The way you succeed is as important as the success.

I am perfectly happy with Spock losing it, since it is not portrayed in a positive light. I'm less happy with Kirk's brutality against his prisoner earlier in the movie while standing next to several other officers. Police officers would be prosecuted if one of their prisoners took a beating like that after surrendering.

However, I am willing to give Uhura some credit. She knows Spock. She knows why he's gone berserk and she knows that it will be hard to reason with him so she personalises her pitch to make it specific to the cause of his grief. It's smart and Uhura is smart. It also justifies sending her down instead of just a security team, although her AND a security team would have made more sense.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 09:28 AM   #142
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

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
except Scotty IMO because he is just to much of a departure...
A departure from the Scotty of "Tribbles", "Wolf in the Fold" and ST IV?
__________________
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 28 2014, 09:35 AM   #143
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
except Scotty IMO because he is just to much of a departure...
A departure from the Scotty of "Tribbles", "Wolf in the Fold" and ST IV?
Too much of a departure overall - yes. TOS Scotty was left in charge of the Enterprise on many occasions. NuSulu would make an excellent officer of the watch. NuScotty seems to lack the discipline and focus to carry that off. This plays into the fallacy that being a fabulous engineer means you should be chief engineer. Being a good officer means you should be chief engineer. You can use the brains of your more qualified sub-ordinates where necessary. TOS Scotty was both. NuScotty so far has only been a fabulous engineer.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 10:04 AM   #144
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
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. 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!"

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 10:44 AM   #145
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
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. 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!"

Bob
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.
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 11:07 AM   #146
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
Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live.
Welcome to modern cinema.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 12:23 PM   #147
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

Belz... wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live.
Welcome to modern cinema.
This guy gets it.
__________________
Once every lifetime, we're swallowed by the whale.
Brutal Strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 01:07 PM   #148
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Brutal Strudel wrote: View Post
Into Darkness has the same problem. Spock, pushed past his breaking point, is clearly trying to murder Khan, not apprehend him. That makes sense, actually, and it's a reminder of the pre-Surakian savagery that lurks in all Vulcans, not just he half-human ones. It also underscores just how deep his brotherly love for Kirk runs and just how fragile watching his mother and his home planet die has left him, a year or so on. And then, before he can take it too far and cross a line he would have a tough time living with himself for crossing, Uhura stops him. Again, so far so good.

But her rationale? "He's our only chance to save Kirk!" (And why couldn't any of the other superpopsicles--products of the same gene manipulation and selective breeding--have done the same?) Pretty selfish, you ask me.
I think your argument would be stronger if Spock himself had not spent much of the film's second act talking about how a mission to assassinate Khan would be a clear violation of the law and basic morality. The film had already established that killing Khan is a bad thing; it doesn't need to beat us over the head with it.
I'm sorry, but you (and the movie) seem to be missing something. Spock abandons his principles out of understandable but ultimately selfish reasons only to stop not because he remembers what he stands for but because he;s given an even better selfish reason to let Khan live. If Kirk's resurrection wasn't on the table, would Spock then have a motive not to kill Khan?
No, I understand what you're saying; it's not that I'm missing anything, it's that I think you are wrong. I do not think that the film is portraying Spock's loss of control as a good thing, nor do I think that acknowledging that doing the right thing (apprehending rather than murdering Khan) has both inherent moral benefits and practical benefits is a bad thing or something that undermines morality. And it makes perfect sense for Spock's character that the thing that would bring him back to sanity would be his brotherly love for Kirk.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 01:37 PM   #149
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

I think at the end of the day the basic justification for killing Nero is "he's an evil man who did evil things and therefore he deserves to die".

In essence, it's the same question whether you support the death penalty or not. Is it justifiable to do to an "evil" man what he has done to others? Or is such an action also evil in itself?

And to say that Nero was maybe still a threat and therefore it was necessary to kill him is just a rationalization for those who are getting uncomfortable facing that question.
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 02:16 PM   #150
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

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
You can use the brains of your more qualified sub-ordinates where necessary. TOS Scotty was both. NuScotty so far has only been a fabulous engineer.
And a man of great principles, who challenged his captain not to take a particular risk in STiD, put his own position on the line, got dismissed for it, and helped save the day in ways that the Enterprise crew could not.
__________________
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
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 06:13 AM.

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