The New Movies Yea or Nay

[Kor]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

^ It was a subspace shockwave... and we don't know how subspace works "in real life."

The Genesis device created the planet out of all of the matter that was in the area.. notice that the whole nebula cloud was gone once the planet was formed.

And again, subspace. Subspace explains everything.

Kor

 

[Kemaiku]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

So, magic.

 

[Kor]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C. Clarke.

Kor

 

[Smellmet]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

So, magic.

Technically, from the 20th/21st century audiences point of view, yes. In universe, no.

 

[Kemaiku]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Subspace is a complete handwaving plot device that makes no sense and has little or no actual meaning. It's become the crutch of Star Trek's storytelling, even in TOS.

Stargate "borrowed" it and promptly began it's own nosedive when it tried to be Treklite.

All of Trek has abused that little convenience, but "instant planet just add handwavium" and a shockwave made by drilling into a large rock creating something more obsurd than the Hobus nova are two of the biggest movie facepalms in all Trek.

 

[martok2112]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Science advisors in a sci-fi show are like military advisors in a military show:

They offer their words, and maybe their wisdoms, but they are ignored for the sake of plot, and dramatic purpose. They're paid to be ignored.

Understand this simple fact, and much beyond it will be understood.

"Logic and physics will always yield to the needs of dramatic storytelling." -Martok2112's Law of Storytelling. (really more of a guideline, than a law. Argghhh. )

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Ok, so we've established that we all generally like our mother's cooking...unless there's something better you can get with better ingredients and then amazingly we like that.

Good talk. I'm glad this place exists.

Amy's does a good Vegan mac-and-cheese . . .

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Almost everything we see in the new film is off, in one way or another, if you really examine it. The black-holes don't work like real black-holes but, what's more, they don't even follow any consistent pattern of fictional logic.

There are theories that involve black holes and time travel. So that part isn't beyond the recent thinking on what black holes do.

At first, we're told they're time-travelling portals (Jellyfish and Narada), then we're told that they're weapons of mass destruction (Vulcan) and, then, we're told (or shown, rather) that they collapse in on themselves once it's inconvenient for them to stick around (Vulcan, again and Delta Vega), then they're back to weapons of mass destruction but, wait, you can escape from them (end of the film)

Why can't they do all of those under the right circumstances? Why would they have to only do one? The Narada and the Jellyfish flew into the black hole created to stop the super nova. Vulcan was turned into a black hole. As was the Jellyfish.

Did the black hole where Vulcan was disappear? And what does Delta Vega have to do with that? Delta Vega isn't going to be sucked into the Vulcan black hole.

HubbleSite

Is a black hole a giant cosmic vacuum cleaner?
The answer to this question is "not really."
The gravity around a black hole remains normal unless you get extremely close. If the Sun suddenly became a black hole (which isn't actually possible), the Earth and all the other planets would continue to orbit it just as though nothing had changed.
The behavior of gravity doesn't change until an object approaches to the point where it's within a few times the radius of the event horizon, the boundary marking the region around a black hole from which not even light can escape. At that point, objects begin to lose the ability to maintain stable orbits, and inevitably spiral into the black hole.
So to return to our theoretical example, if the Sun became a black hole, objects would have to be as close as about 6.2 miles (10 km) to the black hole's center before they began spiraling in.

The life of the black hole would depend on it's mass

Not sure where the Narada falls on the blue whale scale. But a Narada sized black hole wouldn't last too long. Probably longer than what was shown in ST09 but not forever.

As for escaping a black hole

Stephen Hawking's new theory offers black hole escape

Wait a minute… does that mean you could actually escape from a black hole?
Potentially, although you would probably need to be travelling at the speed of light. "The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes – in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity," writes Hawking in his new paper, which he posted online earlier this week. Instead, black holes have "apparent horizons", surfaces which trap light but can also vary in shape due to quantum fluctuations, leaving the potential for light to escape.

 

[Kor]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Will nuTrek ever be about exploration? I doubt it. It's action, with a pinch of space fantasy.

NuTrek doesn't really show exploration, and the Dark Knight Trilogy never shows Batman being "the world's greatest detective."

I enjoy the stories, so these things don't bother me too much.

Kor

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

The Enterprise travels beyond the speed of light, so there is no doubt it can escape a blackhole even when inside it. Since the black hole was sufficiently small, the wild discrepancy in gravity pulling the ship with different forces should explain why parts of the ship was cracking, and I am sure the warp drive bending space inside the black hole didn't help.

My real problem with the blackholes in ST09 is twofold: 1) A black hole that had already consumed the entirety of Vulcan was expanding and was also threatening the Enterprise. That's even weirder when a Narada-sized one (evaporating faster) didn't seem to bother anyone when they were inside of it. 2) A Narada-sized black hole sucking the Enterprise in? Wouldn't the event horizon be like.. smaller than the ship? The same also applies to Spock's black hole sucking the supernova in – won't happen.

However, both are easily explainable: Red matter creates mass. That's beautiful, because if the entirety of red matter got ignited it might create a black hole bigger than Vulcan's when Narada blew up. It also happens to explain why Spock was carrying so much of it – he wouldn't stop the supernova with a black hole that wasn't expanding, so if he continuously dropped red matter to speed that up, the event horizon might eventually encompass the supernova. Somehow. It also might explain why the Enterprise didn't immediately realize they had to retreat faster, and makes Sabrina Morris' character more thoughtful than the rest of the bunch of inexperienced cadets.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Fancy technology doesn't really need to be explained or accurate. You have to accept that there will be transporters, warp drive, red matter, etc. But sloppy existing science (such as the black holes, supernova, cold fusion, etc) is something that can be easily avoided without bogging down the plot. The movies aren't the first time there's been bad science in Trek, but they're very unabashed about it, and it happens with more frequency.

Kind of like Praxis blowing up and sending a shockwave through light years of space in STVI?

Or a bomb the size of my desk at work creating an entire Class-M planet?

How about having to whisper on the bridge so the enemy starship can't hear you across thousands of kilometers of space?

The first two are examples of the aforementioned fanciful stuff you have to accept. I don't know what the third has to do with.

I don't know why some people can't grasp this concept. Yes, there is stuff that's crazy. Genesis is insane, and could never make sense scientifically. But they lay it out as fictional mumbo jumbo so that you don't look at it too closely. Just like red matter. You have to accept it. What you don't have to accept is when they take existing concepts and labels, and royally screw them up.

One solution to the supernova thing? Do it just like Star Trek VI and invoke subspace. Don't call it a supernova, a known thing with all sorts of limits. Call it something else. Same with some of the black hole stuff. And certainly, don't toss in "cold fusion" just because it sounds right. At that point they're better off sticking to the fantasy babble.

 

[Cyke101]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Will nuTrek ever be about exploration? I doubt it. It's action, with a pinch of space fantasy.

NuTrek doesn't really show exploration, and the Dark Knight Trilogy never shows Batman being "the world's greatest detective."

I enjoy the stories, so these things don't bother me too much.

Kor

Most of the older movies weren't about exploration, either. And even when they were, it was either because they did it at gunpoint (Sybok) or things came to them (V'Ger, the whale probe).

Even the new threats they faced were already discovered by someone else.

 

[Amaris]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Fancy technology doesn't really need to be explained or accurate. You have to accept that there will be transporters, warp drive, red matter, etc. But sloppy existing science (such as the black holes, supernova, cold fusion, etc) is something that can be easily avoided without bogging down the plot. The movies aren't the first time there's been bad science in Trek, but they're very unabashed about it, and it happens with more frequency.

Kind of like Praxis blowing up and sending a shockwave through light years of space in STVI?

Or a bomb the size of my desk at work creating an entire Class-M planet?

How about having to whisper on the bridge so the enemy starship can't hear you across thousands of kilometers of space?

The first two are examples of the aforementioned fanciful stuff you have to accept. I don't know what the third has to do with.

The original series episode "Balance of Terror" has the respective crews talking softly and whispering to one another. Think submarines.

I don't know why some people can't grasp this concept. Yes, there is stuff that's crazy. Genesis is insane, and could never make sense scientifically. But they lay it out as fictional mumbo jumbo so that you don't look at it too closely. Just like red matter. You have to accept it. What you don't have to accept is when they take existing concepts and labels, and royally screw them up.

One solution to the supernova thing? Do it just like Star Trek VI and invoke subspace. Don't call it a supernova, a known thing with all sorts of limits. Call it something else. Same with some of the black hole stuff. And certainly, don't toss in "cold fusion" just because it sounds right. At that point they're better off sticking to the fantasy babble.

Star Trek calls various technologies and phenomena all kinds of things, erroneously so at times. It's fake science set in a fantasy universe where people get turned into lizards and back again without dying. It's best to just accept that word definitions either change, or are adapted, which is what language does anyway.

 

[maneth]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Interesting thread...

I thought the movies were entertaining, and that's already half the battle. They had the sense of adventure of TOS, I'll grant you that. Some of the portrayals were very good, particularly McCoy. However, I admit I'm not a huge fan of super-villains out to destroy the universe as we know it.

Oddly enough, much as I count myself a fan of Trek in most of its incarnations (except Voyager), I really didn't like the fact that the villain in STID had to be Khan, Harrison could IMO have been an Augment with his own story just as well. I also didn't particularly care for the Kirk/Spock reversal or the completely unnecessary Carol Marcus bikini scene that didn't advance the story in any way. The Cadet to Captain in a few days thing made it very hard for me to suspend my disbelief.

I'll also admit that I frankly detest shakycam and lens flare gimmicks in cinematography.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

I'll also admit that I frankly detest shakycam and lens flare gimmicks in cinematography.

Now that's only a matter of taste!

 

[Brie]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Taste is subjective. That's the entire point of the analogy.

True, but all the same, I feel sorry for people who don't like mac n' cheese or bacon. (And, I don't trust them. )

I can understand the disappointment of some Trek fans who eagerly looked forward to the new movies and walked out of the theater unsatisfied. Nobody likes a big letdown. At the same time, plenty of fans like me were reinvigorated by the new movies and liked them just fine.

SO, CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

Yes we can! let's all hold hands and sing songs! I'm down!

 

[Franklin]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

Taste is subjective. That's the entire point of the analogy.

True, but all the same, I feel sorry for people who don't like mac n' cheese or bacon. (And, I don't trust them. )

I can understand the disappointment of some Trek fans who eagerly looked forward to the new movies and walked out of the theater unsatisfied. Nobody likes a big letdown. At the same time, plenty of fans like me were reinvigorated by the new movies and liked them just fine.

SO, CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

Yes we can! let's all hold hands and sing songs! I'm down!

Great idea! C'mon, everyone!

-- Moderators, get us started: "Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream...."
-- Rear admirals and higher, now: "Row, row row your boat, gently down the stream...."
-- Captains on up, this your cue: "Row, row, row your boat...."
-- Now, the rest of the officers join in.
-- Finally, cadets and ensigns. Let's go.

We'll follow the sing along up with tea and light refreshments.

These boards prove all Trek has at least some entertainment value: praising it or grousing about it.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

How can I get along with someone who likes that new James Riberius guy? Star Trek ended when Pike set foot on Talos IV!!

 

[Kemaiku]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

How can I get along with someone who likes that new James Riberius guy? Star Trek ended when Pike set foot on Talos IV!!

Pfft, everyone knows all of Star Trek is a comatose nightmare of poor Robert April who was tragically wounded on an away mission only a few weeks after the Enterprise launched.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: The New Movies Yay or Nay

How can I get along with someone who likes that new James Riberius guy? Star Trek ended when Pike set foot on Talos IV!!

Pfft, everyone knows all of Star Trek is a comatose nightmare of poor Robert April who was tragically wounded on an away mission only a few weeks after the Enterprise launched.

It's the comatose nightmare of Captain Winter, who's dreaming he's Captain April.