Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by James T. Vader, Mar 9, 2013.
The fans. Or some fans. A lot of the perceptions of rules have always come from fans.
Well, Roddenberry did lay down starship design rules when it came to how many nacelles a ship can have, but that's not the issue here.
I want to know what practical purpose a second deflector dish can serve? Especially since there are at least three starship designs which don't have one at all, why the hell does this one need two? I can't see any. Either Bad Robot is just trying to be kewl by adding a bunch of unnecessary shit, or whoever designed the ship is insecure about something.
To compensate for the missing deflectors from the other ships. Balance must be restored. Plus, the damn things were taking up valuable space in the warehouse.
For effectively ruining my argument, this idea is best left ignored.
^Let's just forget about it then and carry on...
I think I might just boycott if no one comes up with a valid explanation for this deflector travesty.
There's no doubt he stretched rules but none of the cultures below were pristine. The natural development of all of them had been compromised long before Kirk showed up.
-- "Return of the Archons": The culture had already been polluted by the Archons 100 years earlier. Arguably, how can you interfer in the "natural" development of a culture that's already been compromised?
-- "The Apple": The argument was Vaal was stifling the natural development of the culture. It's unlikely that these people created Vaal. So this culture was probably already contaminated in the past.
-- "A Private Little War": The Klingons were already there.
-- "A Piece of the Action": Again, a culture that was previously contaminated by an earlier Federation ship.
-- "The Search for Spock": Yes, here he blatantly broke rules, because he felt a stronger obligation to Spock than he did Starfleet orders in that case. And in TVH he was willing to go back to Earth to face punishment. He stood up and pled guilty to all charges without a defense.
I think part of the leeway Kirk was given in the show to make largely autonomous decisions and interpret things for himself centered around the implicit idea of being in deep space, and not always in a position to consult "Starfleet lawyers" or poll the admiralty for a consensus about how to proceed in every crisis. As I said before, for Kirk, it was easier to apologize than to get permission.
Spoiler: Kirk and the volcano
But here's the most important part to me, and the thing I have the most trouble believing is in Kirk's character. In the real world, a captain who falsifies entries in his log can be charged with committing fraud. The log is considered the ship's history. It's often used in legal disputes as a record of events. In this case Kirk must've known, or at least thought he violated the Prime Directive, and falsified his log entry in order to avoid punishment. That coverup is more serious than the the mistake. That's what should've cost him his command.
Exactly! This calls for nothing less that for fans to boycott the movie and a petition to Paramount to remove Abrams and his ass clowns from authority over Trek. They no longer deserve the privelege of making Trek. The purity and sanctity of Star Trek is at risk. A True Fan know what I'm talking about.
But, I may be lenient if someone from Bad Robot takes the time to offer an explanation, provided it's perfectly canonically sound and doesn't rape my childhood.
Good points. I can't wait to deal with more than rumors to more fully flesh out an example. I do like that the movie has us talking about this already.
And maybe this instance where Kirk lies and gets the book thrown at him is one where he grows as a commander and a leader? Maybe Kirk was elevated to command far too quickly and still has a lot left to learn? I have no problem with Kirk still finding his legs as a commander, he's still very new to the job.
I guess we've seen the first glimpse of the starship that appears to crash in San Francisco.
The flat nacelles seems to match up.
That's the most logical place to take the character. You have to remember he went from Cadet to Captain overnight because of Nero. I think the case could be made that Kirk is changed by not having a strong father figure, or really have anyone to respect in the chain of command, the way he was made Captain. He was facing penalty because of the Kobiashi Maru, bursts onto the bridge to tell Pike they are headed into a trap, gets promoted to First officer, beats up some security officers when he's told to leave the bridge, provokes Spock into getting the Captain's chair, and nowhere in there does he have to say "Sir." It felt cheap in the first film, at least it did to me. Remember, he's still the kid who races a car off the side of a canyon and takes on 4 guys in a barfight (which he loses). Prime Spock and Nero are telling him he will become a great Captain, and that he should have the Enterprise, without checking the stardate to see where he should be as a commander. That's feeding his arrogance that he's doing nothing wrong, needs no tempering of his character, the "leap without looking." Imagine if this were First Contact, and we gave Zephram Cochrane the warp engine without checking to see if he had the technical know-how to build it. Prime Spock pollutes the timeline to get all the people on the Enterprise that were there in his timeline. "Trans-warp beaming," etc.
I don't understand why Prime Spock didn't make the calculations to slingshot around the sun and fix the mistake he made, giving Nero no reason to go on his revenge tour, but c'est la vie. Star Trek 2009 has plot holes. The sky is blue. Rain is wet.
Use spoiler tags, please. We haven't all read about the 40-minute preview.
Nothing I said was a spoiler in any way. Kirk's clearly being reprimanded in the trailer that is the subject of this thread.
The stuff about Kirk lying about something?
I didn't say anything about that directly. Relax, already.
I've put spoiler tags around what I can. I'm sorry if the conversation assumed certain things. Won't happen again.
Thanks. I realize it wasn't done deliberately, and I'm know I'm asking for trouble looking in these threads so close to release as more and more detailed info comes out.
I stared at the 38-minute preview thread for 5 minutes before I decided to go in and get the information. I remember going into Insurrection blind, knowing nothing except it was about a "fountain of youth." That was satisfying because I wasn't looking for any plot points, everything surprised me. Contrast that to hearing that Vulcan had been destroyed in the last film and I wasn't shocked at all, the suspense didn't build. Still, I couldn't help myself and I had to get the skinny. I went against everything I have experienced. Maybe I will be more disciplined during the making of the third movie.
I'm not gonna read anything else, I promise.
I'll get it.
The registry is NCC-0718
(the Kelvin was NCC-0514)
Separate names with a comma.