RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,388
Posts: 5,447,299
Members: 24,973
Currently online: 473
Newest member: turndizy

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Treachery, Faith and the Great River
By: Michelle on Nov 1

Crowded Coop Trek-Themed Bags and Wallets
By: T'Bonz on Oct 31

Original Series Hoodies
By: T'Bonz on Oct 31

Star Trek-Planet Of The Apes Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Oct 31

November-December 2014 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Oct 31

Kruge Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Oct 30

Two Trek Actors In Green Room
By: T'Bonz on Oct 30

Trek UglyDolls First Look
By: T'Bonz on Oct 29

New Star Trek Select Action Figure
By: T'Bonz on Oct 29

Trek Actors In Elsa & Fred
By: T'Bonz on Oct 29


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 I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 10 2013, 12:16 PM   #91
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Carcazoid wrote: View Post
Jon1701 wrote: View Post
People seem to mistake a plot contrivance for a plot hole. If there were no plot contrivances these movies would be documentaries.

Every movie or tv show ever made contains numerous plot contrivances.

A plot hole is in Generations where Soren blows up entire planets to get into the nexus when he could just "fly into it in a ship"...
That was addressed in the movie. Ships that get too close are destroyed. Soran couldn't get to the Nexus, so he found a way to bring it to him.


Nah, Its a hole.

Kirk got in that way, so did Guinan (sort of).

It doesn't matter whether your ship gets destroyed or not, you still end up in the nexus it would seem. Maybe with a bit more dialogue they could have explained things better but thats what the movie clearly shows.

I always remember a review from 94 for Generations that descibed that plot as having "more holes than a golf course"...
That's a valid point. Not that I agree completely, as I assume that as Soran had studied the Nexus for decades, he'd know more about the nature of it than an audience member possibly would in ninety minutes.

A simple two-line exchange, where Picard suggests he try flying into it with a ship, but Soran confirms that it was highly probable that any ship may not survive long enough to guarantee his entry, would have sufficed.

Most plot-holes in all movies, not only Trek, can be explained with dialogue, but scriptwriters tend to think that their intent and meaning is obvious, so don't explain every little detail, which sometimes leads the audience going "Say, what?"

Of course, if they did spell out every little thing, then the running time of movies would probably double!
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien
solariabsg25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 12:18 PM   #92
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Kirk got in that way, so did Guinan (sort of).
I like the theory that the Kirk which Picard meets in the Nexus is just another "echo" like Guinan. If returning to Veridian III and saving the day is truly Picard's most heart felt desire at that point in time, then maybe the Nexus provided it... along with an ally to help fight (and make a heroic sacrifice) on his behalf. Picard's evidently still in the Nexus even now, living out some deluded fantasy life where he's an action movie hero (cf. First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis), while Kirk really did die saving the Enterprise B.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 04:17 PM   #93
Jon1701
Rear Admiral
 
Jon1701's Avatar
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Lance wrote: View Post
Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Kirk got in that way, so did Guinan (sort of).
I like the theory that the Kirk which Picard meets in the Nexus is just another "echo" like Guinan. If returning to Veridian III and saving the day is truly Picard's most heart felt desire at that point in time, then maybe the Nexus provided it... along with an ally to help fight (and make a heroic sacrifice) on his behalf. Picard's evidently still in the Nexus even now, living out some deluded fantasy life where he's an action movie hero (cf. First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis), while Kirk really did die saving the Enterprise B.
It also begs the questions as to whether Picard and the crew of the Enterprise died along with everyone else in the Veridian system meaning that all Trek post '94 has taken place in an alternate universe.

Which, depending on your point of view means that Star Trek 09 takes place in an alternate, alternate universe.
__________________
www.moviebreadbin.com
Movie reviews sponsored by that toupee that Patrick Stewart had sent over from London that time.
Jon1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 04:27 PM   #94
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
It also begs the questions as to whether Picard and the crew of the Enterprise died along with everyone else in the Veridian system meaning that all Trek post '94 has taken place in an alternate universe.

Which, depending on your point of view means that Star Trek 09 takes place in an alternate, alternate universe.
What, we're STILL in the Nexus ? Shit.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 05:18 PM   #95
Kevman7987
Commander
 
Kevman7987's Avatar
 
Location: Erie, PA, USA
View Kevman7987's Twitter Profile
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Jon1701 wrote: View Post
It also begs the questions as to whether Picard and the crew of the Enterprise died along with everyone else in the Veridian system meaning that all Trek post '94 has taken place in an alternate universe.

Which, depending on your point of view means that Star Trek 09 takes place in an alternate, alternate universe.
What, we're STILL in the Nexus ? Shit.
That itself is a problem in Generations. The story has the Nexus be some sort of fantasy ribbon while at the same time involve time-travel. The writers used a big no-no in that film, changing the rules midway through.
Kevman7987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 06:13 PM   #96
Jon1701
Rear Admiral
 
Jon1701's Avatar
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Jon1701 wrote: View Post
It also begs the questions as to whether Picard and the crew of the Enterprise died along with everyone else in the Veridian system meaning that all Trek post '94 has taken place in an alternate universe.

Which, depending on your point of view means that Star Trek 09 takes place in an alternate, alternate universe.
What, we're STILL in the Nexus ? Shit.
If you add up all the alternate universes in Star Trek it would be a very long list.

Everything past The city on the edge of forever is an alternate universe of sorts, as is Star Trek IV, as is Yesterday's Enterprise, as is Past tense, as is The trouble with tribbles, as is.......

The list goes on and on...

I don't know why everyone complained so much when Trek09 came out
__________________
www.moviebreadbin.com
Movie reviews sponsored by that toupee that Patrick Stewart had sent over from London that time.
Jon1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 07:07 PM   #97
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post

What if chose not to because it didn't want to know? To wipe the muck away and reveal its full name would be to acknowledge that it was once just a lowly space probe and not born a sentient being endowed with a sacred mission from its creator. It turns what was divine into the mundane from its perspective. Sure, it's just deluding itself and being petulant, but like Spock said, that was essentially what V'Ger was, a child. Even with all the remarkable things it could do, it still asked questions like "Is this all that I am?" Just like many humans do, it wants to think of itself as unique and special; the child of a higher being, not a simple machine built by unworthy carbon units.
In that case, the probe wouldn't have been following it's programming to learn all it could.
That was my point about it deluding itself and not acknowledging its true origins, though. Somewhere, it's aware of what it truly is but won't admit it to itself, which is why it doesn't clean the muck away. It's living in a state of denial, and cleaning the nameplate would mean acceptance of its humble beginnings.

V'ger cut the communications cable when it was supposed to receive the signal to return its knowledge to the creator, because it wanted to bring the creator to join with it, so it's not as if it doesn't occasionally stray from its programming to suit its own needs.
Having mulled this over now, because it is an intriguing idea, I don't believe the idea of V'Ger living in denial can be supported by the film.

Assuming we are meant to interpret Spock's descriptions of V'Ger's nature as true (which admittedly might not be fully warranted, since Spock has been known to fall in love with machines, as McCoy might put it), V'Ger is an entity with exactingly perfect thought patterns that, by the time of Spock's mind-meld with it, still can't answer the questions it's asking. If its inability to find answers is really genuine, then V'Ger cannot have been living in denial. Perhaps the assumption that the carbon units aren't true lifeforms causes V'Ger to reject the otherwise indicated notion that carbon units created it, but perplexion resulting from that would not really be the same as denial. For, one of the central ideas in the climax of the film is that V'Ger needs human qualities, in order to be able to leap beyond its present way of viewing the universe. I submit that V'Ger's growth as a being would include unlearning false assumptions that had been programmed into it, including the idea of what constitutes a true life-form.

Here's a different idea. Maybe when establishing the "translation matrix" to turn the Ilia probe into its mouthpiece, V'Ger could only run glimpses of what it knew through Ilia's brain, much like as the speed of the images flashing on the screen during Spock's mind meld (one of which was the original Voyager VI spacecraft) went by almost too fast to see at all. Maybe V'Ger couldn't do any better, because this was all it knew how to do. So, the image of the original spacecraft flashes through Ilia's brain, she sees the letters V-G-E-R, and she recognizes them, so the machine is satisfied that a term, for its enshrined inner self, has been expressed. It's a little wonky, but I suppose it could work.

But none of this invalidates what I read King Daniel as saying. To come to a place where everything "makes sense", we have to, so to speak, take an inkblot and recognize it as a bat. We may explain the misspelling, but, in my opinion, there is nothing in the film that implies any particular consistent explanation. On the other hand, there is good reason to suppose that the misspelling is there merely as something overt to illustrate how people are needed to correct broken machines, to hammer the point home to the audience. Now, the presence of something so heavy-handed is a clue that we really are watching Star Trek; even if the movie is not in on the joke, because of its high-brow aspirations, it's presence is nevertheless a relief.

Really, I think we're discussing various ways that TMP might have been improved, here. I see no evidence that the authors had a completely clear understanding of V'Ger's motivations, as a personality, cf. HAL 9000. The screenplay really needed at least one more revision, but unfortunately the production could not afford that. As it stands, the audience has to do some of the heavy lifting to make the film work, while Roddenberry et al. aspired to, but fell short of, the class of science fiction film that 2001 belongs to. However, even as it stands, I find that TMP still gives me a lot to chew on, especially compared to other Trek films. This topic here is an example.

---

This is as good a place to mention something that actually bothers me a little more.

When the first plasma sphere hits the Enterprise, it should have digitized it and all our heroes, full stop. Sulu's bullshit line, "The new screens held," was bullshit. The line was cut for the DE, but even without it, the fundamental problem of the Enterprise not being digitized in the first place remained as an elephant in the room. V'Ger scanned the ship and had plenty of experience digitizing things in the Milky Way, not to mention experience digitizing whole other galaxies. That it should need to hit the Enterprise again is just plain absurd.

But, on the plus side, that our heroes should be inexplicably immune to dangers that everyone else in the universe faces is more proof that we're actually watching a Star Trek film.

---

Another weakness in the film is it's unclear why V'Ger should spit Spock out of the orifice after the mind meld. Whatever reason there might be for that doesn't seem to have been fully absorbed by the plot. In a recent thread on the cut "Memory Wall" sequence, I said this:
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Well, the only way I was able to accept how Spock ends up back at the Enterprise was that V'Ger tossed him back.

V'Ger doing that indicates yet another weakness in the story, not really just because he sends Spock back, if that's what happened, but because we never get a direct sense of why V'Ger would do that. The implication would be that V'Ger got something from Spock, as similarly Spock got something from V'Ger. Spock realized that purging his emotions was not the right path for him; I can only deduce that V'Ger must have perceived that Spock was more than simply a carbon unit, and that returning Spock to the ship must have somehow been essential to finding the Creator. Unfortunately, none of that dealt with explicitly in the film, and the fact that Kirk must use his argue-with-the-machine superpowers, to bargain a way deeper inside V'Ger, while the threat of digitizing Earth looms, all supports the idea that V'Ger made no connection with Spock at all. Maybe it was only an infinitesimal connection?
Perhaps, by this point in the movie, V'Ger realizes that it might have been created by carbon units, but isn't really sure what to do. The mind meld as the turning point, not only for Spock, but also for V'Ger, might make sense. However, some reason for Spock being spit out, beyond Spock's immunity from danger as one of the main characters, was, I think, explicitly needed here, because, despite Spock's matter-of-fact attitude, the spacewalk was really executed as a suicide mission.
__________________
CorporalCaptain

Last edited by Creepy Critter; June 11 2013 at 12:09 PM. Reason: clarification
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 07:46 PM   #98
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Belz... wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
Moreover, V'Ger seems to be totally unaware of the aliens' role in transforming him from a primitive computer to a living machine, even though there is a digital image of their alien homeworld.
What makes you say that ? There's nothing in the movie that implies that V'Ger is unaware of them.
There's nothing in the movie that implies that V'Ger is aware of them. The image of the alien world is just one of many, and even Spock hasn't figured it entirely out by the time of the mind-meld.

If you were to judge the two objectively, the parts the aliens gave him are far more representative of who he is as a living entity than the Voyager core, so since he's journeying to earth, he thinks we should take credit for creating the whole thing, not just the core. This implies that he doesn't realize that he really owes his consciousness not to us but to the mysterious aliens. I mean, the Voyager core is probably about the level of sophistication of an Apple II. Hardly a Turing-complete AI.

It falls upon Decker to deliver all that exposition about Voyager falling into a black-hole. V'Ger simply has an incomplete sense of self. He is, as the film explains, like a child. Once Decker merges with Ilia, assimilating Decker's humanity and his knowledge, V'Ger can fit all the pieces together.

There is a lot of irony in having a computer so omniscient and yet with such a gaping blind-spot. But then, cognitive dissonance is a quality us humans are all too guilty of as well. And as a child, you start by thinking of your parents as perfect and godlike, and then you eventually realize they are all flawed like us all, and we're all just fumbling around in the dark.

The only thing that makes me cringe every time is that they made up four more Voyager probes that never happened.
Blame NASA.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 08:05 PM   #99
Creepy Critter
Admiral
 
Creepy Critter's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

^ As an aside, the fact that V'Ger has an image of the machine planet implies that V'Ger digitized and destroyed it.
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Creepy Critter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 08:05 PM   #100
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

mos6507 wrote: View Post
There's nothing in the movie that implies that V'Ger is aware of them.
Right. But my point is that there is nothing to indicate that your speculation is correct. I just don't think V'Ger cares about the stuff he already knows.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 08:13 PM   #101
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

In TMP it should have been either Voyager 1 or Voyager 2 and not a fictional Voyager number.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 08:14 PM   #102
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

Galileo7 wrote: View Post
In TMP it should have been either Voyager 1 or Voyager 2 and not a fictional Voyager number.
When TMP was made, they expected the Voyager program to continue.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 08:18 PM   #103
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Galileo7 wrote: View Post
In TMP it should have been either Voyager 1 or Voyager 2 and not a fictional Voyager number.
When TMP was made, they expected the Voyager program to continue.
Thanks. That explains that.
However, to play it safe they still should have used 1 or 2.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 09:08 PM   #104
TREK_GOD_1
Fleet Captain
 
TREK_GOD_1's Avatar
 
Location: Escaped from Delta Vega
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Kirk simply broke Vulcan tradition by a) shooting Spock's dead body into space and b) not returning his katra. Sarek wanted to bury Spock at home and store his katra somewhere.

They never intended to put Spock's katra back into his body.
The intended to get Spock's dead body (the USS Grissom had reported the finding of the torpedo) and then get McCoy to Vulcan. They were just really lucky that they found Spock alive, and then attempted a different Vulcan procedure that hadn't been performed for centuries.

Ah, but the "different Vulcan procedure" existed, so Kirk simply took Sarek's information--and based on his belief that Spock might be revived (strngly implied in his TWOK log), it was no great leap to assume Spock's living soul could have its physical home again.




Kirk also never thought Genesis would revive Spock. He simply started to think positively. Spock died, and an entire new world was born at the same time. He was just being sentimental in his log entry.

There's nothing in that final scene suggesting sentimentality or anything else--other than a belief that Genesis might restore spock--particulalry since a conscious choice was made to send Spock's tube there, instead of space. Further, Kirk just witnessed the effect of Genesis literally creating life from a lifeless world, so his log entry reads as acknowledging the technology's potential--that Spock might benefit from the Genesis effect.
__________________
"...to be like God, you have the power to make the world anything you want it to be."
TREK_GOD_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2013, 09:11 PM   #105
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

TREK_GOD_1 wrote: View Post
There's nothing in that final scene suggesting sentimentality or anything else--other than a belief that Genesis might restore spock--particulalry since a conscious choice was made to send Spock's tube there, instead of space. Further, Kirk just witnessed the effect of Genesis literally creating life from a lifeless world, so his log entry reads as acknowledging the technology's potential--that Spock might benefit from the Genesis effect.
He simply assumed that Spock (or rather Spock's body's matter) would be a seed for new life. As they discussed before they were attacked by the Reliant, Genesis would erase existing life and reorganize it (that was Spock's own comment that got McCoy pretty upset).


Had Nimoy never returned to the franchise, Kirk's log entry would still be the same, but Spock would have stayed dead.
JarodRussell 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 07:19 AM.

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