RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 146,368
Posts: 5,767,804
Members: 25,936
Currently online: 509
Newest member: kkhgrteoo

TrekToday headlines

Trekonomics Book
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3

Shore Leave 37 Convention
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3

Two New ThinkGeek Trek-themed Items
By: T'Bonz on Jul 2

July-August 2015 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Jul 2

Pegg: Star Trek Beyond Scary
By: T'Bonz on Jul 2

San Diego Comic-Con Guide
By: T'Bonz on Jul 1

Nimoy Memories From Friends and Family
By: T'Bonz on Jul 1

Stewart: It’s in My Genes
By: T'Bonz on Jun 30

Star Trek Beyond
By: T'Bonz on Jun 30

Trek-themed Car Accessories
By: T'Bonz on Jun 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 XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 28 2014, 02:27 PM   #151
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
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.
I'm anti-death penalty and probably about as non-violent person as there is. But there are some special circumstances where I'd pull the trigger myself.

There are simply some people who have earned their fate. In universe, Nero earned those photon torpedoes Kirk lobbed at him.
__________________
Self-appointed Knight of the Abrams Table! - Thanks Marsden!
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 02:47 PM   #152
Commishsleer
Fleet Captain
 
Commishsleer's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View Commishsleer's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
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.
Spock needs to stop Khan. He's not berserk. He had a job to save Federation lives.

Khan has feinted before.
He has pretended to be unconscious and then straight away broke Carol's leg and Marcus' neck.

If Spock let up on Khan and then Khan overwhelmed him, I'd be complaining about Spock being so stupid to fall for his tricks again.

And you know if he took some personal satisfaction from beating in Khan's face after Khan tried to kill him then - bonus. IMO Spock did nothing morally or legally wrong.

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
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.
Nope I'm not rationalising and genuinely believed that Nero was still a threat.

I don't support the death penalty but I wouldn't hesitate in shooting a killer who was escaping if I were a policeman/military. Once the person is rendered safe then its not necessary to kill them IMO no matter what they've done.

This is not the case with Nero as he was in a superior ship with unknown weapons who had killed many times before, vowed to kill again and was basically insane. To let him escape would be a crime.

Plenty of times Prime Kirk, Picard, Archer, Janeway, Sisko killed for the greater good. They acted as judge, jury and executioner. And killing is evil but they did it because that's their job.
Commishsleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 02:59 PM   #153
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
Nope I'm not rationalising and genuinely believed that Nero was still a threat.
Well, Nero wasn't a threat because he's not a real person.

The question is rather whether Abrams intended to still make him look like a threat that moment.
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 03:12 PM   #154
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Nero never got what he wanted, which was Romulus and his wife back.
That was not the point, it was about how Nero was still in control of the situation - not Kirk - to either chose imprisonment or death by provoking Kirk.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
So, we can disavail ourselves of the notion that the destruction of the Narada was any sort of victory for Nero.
That wasn't the point either.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
He simply chose the manner of his own defeat. That can't be twisted into Kirk losing.
Kirk may have won the battle, but ultimately Nero decided whether he was going to die or live - and not Kirk, who apparently hadn't really made up his mind before whether he wanted to save Nero or not.

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, 03:19 PM   #155
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: A boat on a river
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
CommishSleer wrote: View Post
Nope I'm not rationalising and genuinely believed that Nero was still a threat.
Well, Nero wasn't a threat because he's not a real person.

The question is rather whether Abrams intended to still make him look like a threat that moment.
Not a real person? Are you saying these historical documents are flawed?

He was a threat. The whole movie shows he was a threat, even at that moment.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 04:38 PM   #156
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
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.


nope,not at all, totally off base


I'm against the death penalty, but the situation in STXI wasn't criminal justice it was battle. Also, Arguing that actual reasons are just "rationalizations" isn't an argument. Either Nero was escaping and WAS a threat, or he was dying and what Kirk did didn't matter.

I'm not uncomfortable with the question at all-I don't even think it was a big dilemma.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 05:01 PM   #157
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: North America
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
That was not the point, it was about how Nero was still in control of the situation - not Kirk - to either chose imprisonment or death by provoking Kirk.
It doesn't change who won or lost, and I was very specific about why. All it changes is the natures of Kirk's victory and of Nero's defeat.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Who won?
Kirk.

Wouldn't this mean that Kirk lost because he allowed himself to be manipulated to do the thing Nero wanted?
No.

The victory, IMHO, would have been Kirk replying "No, you bastard. You don't die, yet. You are coming with me!"
That's the victory that evidently you would have preferred. That's not the one they chose to put in the film.
__________________
“A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP” — Leonard Nimoy (1931-2015)
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 05:25 PM   #158
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Does anyone here think that in STID Kirk should have just fired the torpedos at Khan on Kronos?

To me it seemed like STID wastrying to rectify some of the mistakes of ST09, and I think that the morality aspect was one of them. Kirk wasn't going to just engage in an execution of Khan, but he was going to bring him to trial because he was able. And that felt good to me, despite all the Kirk-Khan punching.

For ST09, I'm left wondering what purpose the scene with the discussion of what to do with Nero serves. Is it to show that new Spock has a bloodlust? Is it to show that Kirk is willing to entertain alternatives? Is it to show that Nero is an asshole? Is it to show that they even have time to entertain such decisions? I think it's primarily to make the audience feel good by toppling the bad guy they so easily built up. Everyone loves to see the bully get his comeuppance in a movie, and this is just playing to that trope.

I just think that the way they handled the scene didn't work out. Kirk was realistically going to offer assistance when they could barely escape themselves? Why even offer such a thing if it's truly just a battle situation? That the alternative is even raised is why this is an issue. It implies there is actually time or ability to do something. If it had cut from the Jellyfish colliding to the Enterprise opening fire, I don't think I would have a had a problem with it.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 06:27 PM   #159
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

BillJ wrote: View Post
Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
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.
I'm anti-death penalty and probably about as non-violent person as there is. But there are some special circumstances where I'd pull the trigger myself.

There are simply some people who have earned their fate. In universe, Nero earned those photon torpedoes Kirk lobbed at him.
Right. That's one of the major reasons against capital punishment -- the routine and institutionally sanctioned execution that's theoretically supposed to be applied equally on paper but is disastrously unequal in reality. Special circumstances are one thing, but if you have "special circumstances" twice a week, that's not special anymore.

Which is all the more reason why it's significant when Kirk Prime does it. Over how many episodes and how many movies does he actually kill in passing judgement? Very rarely. He didn't even do that in STID (I think), and anyone that he did fight was out of self-defense.


Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
Does anyone here think that in STID Kirk should have just fired the torpedos at Khan on Kronos?

To me it seemed like STID wastrying to rectify some of the mistakes of ST09, and I think that the morality aspect was one of them. Kirk wasn't going to just engage in an execution of Khan, but he was going to bring him to trial because he was able. And that felt good to me, despite all the Kirk-Khan punching.
While I've come to think that ST09 is the stronger of the two, I don't think that scene in STID was meant to "correct" anything outside of it. There's a difference between correction and character development after all -- Kirk was eventually persuaded by his crew and Pike's memory to take the somewhat more legal route -- but both Nero and Khan had Kirk making a judgment call where he gave the choice to his opponent. One took him up on his offer, the other didn't. Not coincidentally, one is alive and the other isn't.

But also, when Kirk offered his assistance to the Narada, at that point they didn't know that they were going to have trouble escaping; after they blast the Narada into the hole, Kirk commands Sulu to take them home, and Sulu treats it as a routine command. When the ship goes to warp but they find that they're stuck, THEN they find out that they can barely escape. So 20/20 hindsight might be clouding some analysis. EDIT: Also, even in the modern day, a battle can cease, with that ceasefire called by either side, in order to surrender. After all, this is the primary way that non-civilian military prisoners are apprehended. So why offer such help if it was a battle situation? Well, first off, there's historical precedence and tradition; and besides, if you've realized that you've beaten your foe enough, it's logical to cease further action unless provoked.

Lastly, one vital thing I've learned on these boards: no matter who the captain is, there will always be a number of posters who disagree with that captain's decisions. I certainly have on a number of episodes. And that's totally fine, but what we see on screen is the decision that matters, and it's a decision that's obviously made for story reasons.
__________________
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy

Last edited by Cyke101; January 28 2014 at 08:20 PM.
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 06:41 PM   #160
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Cyke101 wrote: View Post

Which is all the more reason why it's significant when Kirk Prime does it. Over how many episodes and how many movies does he actually kill in passing judgement?
Which is the difference between TV and Movies. I doubt we would have Kirk passing judgement in such a manner every week. I think it sticks out more here because we only have four hours of material to analyze over the last five years.

People would probably be far more scrutinizing of Kirk's actions in "Where No Man...", if they didn't have another seventy-eight episodes to compare the characters actions with.
__________________
Self-appointed Knight of the Abrams Table! - Thanks Marsden!
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 08:11 PM   #161
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
For ST09, I'm left wondering what purpose the scene with the discussion of what to do with Nero serves. Is it to show that new Spock has a bloodlust? Is it to show that Kirk is willing to entertain alternatives? Is it to show that Nero is an asshole? Is it to show that they even have time to entertain such decisions? I think it's primarily to make the audience feel good by toppling the bad guy they so easily built up. Everyone loves to see the bully get his comeuppance in a movie, and this is just playing to that trope.

I just think that the way they handled the scene didn't work out. Kirk was realistically going to offer assistance when they could barely escape themselves? Why even offer such a thing if it's truly just a battle situation? That the alternative is even raised is why this is an issue. It implies there is actually time or ability to do something. If it had cut from the Jellyfish colliding to the Enterprise opening fire, I don't think I would have a had a problem with it.
Yeah I think this probably sums it up. It was the tone of the scene that was wrong for me. But it is a trope that crops up in many movies because movie-goers love to see villains get their cumuppance. It should come as no surprise that many people have no problem with the scene - they are the audience for whom it was intended.
__________________
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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 09:33 PM   #162
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
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.
Which is why, in my version, Uhura breaks through his Vulcan rage by invoking Kirk--the Kirk who listened to Spock and decided not to summarily execute the man who killed the closest thing Kirk ever had to a father.
__________________
Once every lifetime, we're swallowed by the whale.
Brutal Strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 09:35 PM   #163
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
For ST09, I'm left wondering what purpose the scene with the discussion of what to do with Nero serves. Is it to show that new Spock has a bloodlust? Is it to show that Kirk is willing to entertain alternatives? Is it to show that Nero is an asshole? Is it to show that they even have time to entertain such decisions? I think it's primarily to make the audience feel good by toppling the bad guy they so easily built up. Everyone loves to see the bully get his comeuppance in a movie, and this is just playing to that trope.

I just think that the way they handled the scene didn't work out. Kirk was realistically going to offer assistance when they could barely escape themselves? Why even offer such a thing if it's truly just a battle situation? That the alternative is even raised is why this is an issue. It implies there is actually time or ability to do something. If it had cut from the Jellyfish colliding to the Enterprise opening fire, I don't think I would have a had a problem with it.
Yeah I think this probably sums it up. It was the tone of the scene that was wrong for me. But it is a trope that crops up in many movies because movie-goers love to see villains get their cumuppance. It should come as no surprise that many people have no problem with the scene - they are the audience for whom it was intended.

In other words, if we disagree with you about the scenario, we're the type of audience that cheers at kewl 'splosions and wets our pants with laughter when someone farts on screen.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 10:05 PM   #164
J. Allen
Love For All
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
View J. Allen's Twitter Profile
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

sonak wrote: View Post
Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
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.


nope,not at all, totally off base


I'm against the death penalty, but the situation in STXI wasn't criminal justice it was battle. Also, Arguing that actual reasons are just "rationalizations" isn't an argument. Either Nero was escaping and WAS a threat, or he was dying and what Kirk did didn't matter.

I'm not uncomfortable with the question at all-I don't even think it was a big dilemma.
This exactly.
__________________

Like My Little Pony? Join us at Brony Kingdom!

-= St. John of Trenton, Patron Saint of Cute Ponies =-
Bestowed upon me by Pondwater
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2014, 10:21 PM   #165
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass

sonak wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
For ST09, I'm left wondering what purpose the scene with the discussion of what to do with Nero serves. Is it to show that new Spock has a bloodlust? Is it to show that Kirk is willing to entertain alternatives? Is it to show that Nero is an asshole? Is it to show that they even have time to entertain such decisions? I think it's primarily to make the audience feel good by toppling the bad guy they so easily built up. Everyone loves to see the bully get his comeuppance in a movie, and this is just playing to that trope.

I just think that the way they handled the scene didn't work out. Kirk was realistically going to offer assistance when they could barely escape themselves? Why even offer such a thing if it's truly just a battle situation? That the alternative is even raised is why this is an issue. It implies there is actually time or ability to do something. If it had cut from the Jellyfish colliding to the Enterprise opening fire, I don't think I would have a had a problem with it.
Yeah I think this probably sums it up. It was the tone of the scene that was wrong for me. But it is a trope that crops up in many movies because movie-goers love to see villains get their [comeuppance]. It should come as no surprise that many people have no problem with the scene - they are the audience for whom it was intended.

In other words, if we disagree with you about the scenario, we're the type of audience that cheers at kewl 'splosions and wets our pants with laughter when someone farts on screen.
Okay, while Pauln6's comment might be read as condescending generally, an exaggerated response of this sort really isn't very helpful. There had to be a better way to make that point.
__________________
One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie
is that a cat has only nine lives.
— 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 06:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.