NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

How would that be explained in detail in a movie to your satisfaction given the long list of expectations you've given here without running down a sixty point checklist, with Spock explaining why they can't do each one, right in the middle of the action? Can't we just assume that they know the strengths and weaknesses of the ship without verbally spelling it out for the audience?

 

Heh, to me that really slowed down the ship battle in Generations. Sure, we get that the Enterprise is clearly superior to the dinky, rickety BOP. Yes, we understand that the Duras sisters used Geordi to get the upper hand. And frankly, that's all we needed*. No need to spend 2 minutes of having a defective plasma coil to trigger their cloaking device and ruin the pacing of the fight, so therefore no need to waste dialogue on lengthy exposition. The Enterprise should have shot her down with all weapons blazing but still have the BOP hit the Galaxy's equivalent of a major artery before going down. As it was, all that technobabble and exposition during battle was enough to rob the scene of a lot of tension. Show, don't tell.

*Now, if it was a more unique ship than the BOP used in the previous 4 movies, but that's for another thread

 

That scene drives me crazy every time I see it. Riker and Worf stop everything for a damn history lesson on Birds of Prey and fire off a shot once a minute. Did they forget the Enterprise could do this (the beginning part, not the rest)?

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJilKdc6RIA[/yt]

How awesome would that have been fully realized on the big screen with quality FX?

Even with the shields being ineffective, the Enterprise should have been able to unleash a barrage on that BoP and destroy it in a minute without any silly Death Star exhaust port trickery needed.

I don't have a problem with the BoP using surprise, superior maneuverability, and the shield advantage to stay alive longer than normal, or with them getting a targeted shot in that eventually will destroy the Enterprise, but having Riker, Data, and Worf carry on a conversation like that in the middle of battle while barely returning fire made them look grossly incompetent, when Riker is supposed to be a tactical genius.

Hell, even when he asked Worf to fire a spread of torpedoes, he fires a single torpedo, and it's apparently set to Rascal Scooter speed for dramatic purposes, because it was the slowest thing ever. In reality the BoP would have already been able to cloak and move before the damn torpedo even got near it.

Sorry for the rant, but that whole scene just bugs me. I'm fine with the Enterprise-D going down. But it shouldn't go down like a punk.

 

Having only just finished watching Generations for the first time in a long while, that bit niggled me too

 

I think the idea was that they were on Rura Penthe the whole time - though since those scenes were deleted, it's commonly assumed that no longer holds. However, the whole idea behind the transmission about Rura Penthe intercepted by Uhura is just that.

Well, Nero didn't have the red matter yet, though once he had captured the Jellyfish I guess he could have gone back to Rura Penthe and given it the Vulcan treatment. Maybe he thought destroying the Klingon armada was good enough...

 

The Enterprise-D was a punk! Yeah, I said it! Wanna fight about it?

 

It's a valid point and I'm sure there has to be some kind of balance and I applaud the way they tried to minimise technobable (even if I despair at the way they mangled real world physics to the point where my friend's 8-year old son could pick holes in it).

Maybe something along the lines of:

'Transporters?'

'Ineffective. Gravitational distortion has increased beyond tolerance. If we stay here any longer, the Enterprise will not be able to escape.'

'Sulu, pull us out - now. Arm weapons - full power - and target that ship.'

Captain?

'I don't see any way that Nero's crew can possibly survive this kind of gravitational stress, but if any of them or that technology winds up back in the past... let's just say I'm starting to like my life just the way it is.'

'Open fire.'

 

But why do you need everything spelled out to you?

 

To nitpick, if the red-matter-black-hole-time-travel operated in the 'usual' way it wouldn't have affected nuKirk's life in the Abramsverse, but instead would have ended up in the past in yet another new timeline.

 

This is what I don't understand. In real life, things aren't all neat and tidy and able to be wrapped up with a couple of lines of dialogue. Real life is messy, and full of holes and contradictions.

It's the messy stuff that makes things interesting, and by the way, gives people on these forums stuff to talk about.

 

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.

I want to thank everyone, btw, for making this such a lively and thought-provoking debate. Sonak in particular got me thinking with his "poor form" observation. I still hold my original position but not as strongly as when I threw this out there.

 

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.

 

^ 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.

 

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.

 

Nah, Spock merely turned the tables; he was beating Khan 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.