Did JJ ruin Kirk?

[Pauln6]

For me, one of the appealing aspects of the TOS characters was that they were always front and center. Kirk and Spock didn't pass the danger onto lesser subordinates.

One of the big things I've used as a parent over the years, I'm not going to ask my kids to do anything I'm not willing to do myself.

Yeah, I think the way Trek is set up leads to that dynamic but it's also a dynamic that should have some limitations or it starts to look silly, like sending yeomen (admin staff) on planetary exploration missions instead of botanists, ecologists, zoologists, or anthropologists.

 

[BillJ]

Yeah, I think the way Trek is set up leads to that dynamic but it's also a dynamic that should have some limitations or it starts to look silly...

Star Trek has been silly to a degree for near fifty years. I don't see any reason to stop now. It's part of its charm.

 

[Pauln6]

Star Trek has been silly to a degree for near fifty years. I don't see any reason to stop now. It's part of its charm.

Stop - no. Think more carefully about where to draw the line - yes. There is a lot of smart sci fi out there and a lot of dumb sci fi. I'd rather Star Trek tried to be smarter.

 

[BillJ]

I'd rather Star Trek tried to be smarter.

You can be silly and be smart. I think TOS proved this to a large degree. What I dislike is when Star Trek takes itself too seriously. One of the reasons the spinoffs don't speak to me the same way as the original.

 

[Jeyl]

Depends on the person. The fact is, Kirk made the decision with no expectation of surviving. The lesson of the sacrifice was learned.

And like I said before, it takes more to being a good Captain than simply sacrificing yourself. I quote a scene from Deep Space Nine's "The Siege".

Li Nalas: I've done everything I can to help. I'd die for my people, but...
Commander Sisko: Sure you would. Dying gets you off the hook. Question is, are you willing to live for your people, live the role they want you to play? That's what they need from you right now.
​

If it's just the thought that counts, anyone who's willing to sacrifice themselves should be given the rank of Captain. This is how the writers thought they could convince everyone that Kirk had finally earned the Captain's chair. It may work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

 

[Pauln6]

This is how the writers thought they could convince everyone that Kirk had finally earned the Captain's chair. It may work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

I'm not convinced either, although I think my issue is more how clumsily they try to convince me that Kirk's decision-making is good just because he succeeds. While I agree that JJ brought a sense of fun back to the franchise, I lament some of the things he jettisoned. I want to see humble people do amazing things, not arrogant, careless, rule-breaking numpties succeed in spite of their stupid decisions. I'm sure there is some middle ground, obviously. They should have had more faith in their ability to sustain our interest at a more realistic pace of development IMO.

And more women.

 

[Kemaiku]

You can be silly and be smart. I think TOS proved this to a large degree. What I dislike is when Star Trek takes itself too seriously. One of the reasons the spinoffs don't speak to me the same way as the original.

Yup, TNG onwards sucked the life out of the franchise rather quickly. And TOS was silly and camp as hell, to some absurd degrees that even other 60's TV would have cringed at.

Lets not pretend it was that serious a show from the beginning.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

not arrogant, careless, rule-breaking numpties succeed in spite of their stupid decisions.

Star Trek has always had the characters willing to break the rules, he's not that arrogant seeing as he actually works with the damned system, and I don't like it =/= stupid decision.

 

[M'Sharak]

And like I said before, it takes more to being a good Captain than simply sacrificing yourself. I quote a scene from Deep Space Nine's "The Siege".

Li Nalas: I've done everything I can to help. I'd die for my people, but...
Commander Sisko: Sure you would. Dying gets you off the hook. Question is, are you willing to live for your people, live the role they want you to play? That's what they need from you right now.
​

If it's just the thought that counts, anyone who's willing to sacrifice themselves should be given the rank of Captain. This is how the writers thought they could convince everyone that Kirk had finally earned the Captain's chair. It may work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

Ultimately, if you'll recall, it didn't work for Li Nalas, either.

 

[CorporalClegg]

So what we can all come away with here is that Orci's duology is the story WOK should have been.

 

[Trekfan12]

I have very much enjoyed this video and his analysis. I agree with it 100 percent, as I think Kirk is going through a powerful growth and change in the films.

I agree with you. We can clearly see Kirk's growth and maturity through this process.

 

[BillJ]

I'm not convinced either, although I think my issue is more how clumsily they try to convince me that Kirk's decision-making is good just because he succeeds.

Missed that whole scene with Pike?

 

[Cyke101]

Missed that whole scene with Pike?

The old adage in storytelling is to make sure that your protagonist at the end becomes a different person from the protagonist in the beginning. I really liked Kirk's journey, starting from Pike's speech about his confusing luck with skill, to the end where Kirk gives the ultimate sacrifice for his crew. He went from arrogant showboat to responsible captain within the course of a single movie.

That doesn't mean he can't be smug or cocky at times, but Shatner's Kirk was often smug AND skilled. He was also intelligent, wise, funny, serious, arrogant, vain, haughty, cheeky, compassionate, logical, immature, etc. In other words, his character traits were never "either/or." And real humans are wired that way.

 

[Jeyl]

Ultimately, if you'll recall, it didn't work for Li Nalas, either.

It may not have worked out for him, but that's kind of the point. This was not a senseless sacrifice for his people that he had bragged about to Sisko earlier on.

 

[Pauln6]

Missed that whole scene with Pike?

Oh yes, the whole section with Pike in STiD was very well done, and probably one of STiD's best arcs. I did feel his death for sure.

You can be silly and be smart.

You can. But NuTrek isn't.

I suppose I struggle to get over the fact that NOBODY should have EVER thought that a freshly qualified Lieutenant who was on a disciplinary just before graduation, should have been promoted to captain and placed in charge of the Federation flagship in the first place. Kirk deserved his demotion but so did every single member of Starfleet who endorsed his promotion directly out of the Academy. It was as daft as promoting Ensign Chekov, a navigator with some engineering skill, one year post-graduation, who has spent a few months shadowing the chief engineer, to be the new chief engineer on a ship that should have at least a dozen more senior, more experienced engineers who have already been deputising for Scotty when he's not on duty.

If they could just have reigned in the silliness they would have won me over. Move the timeline on 2 years in ST09, for example and then promote Kirk. Promote Kirk to command of a smaller vessel, like the Stargazer. You could even have finished with them giving Kirk his commendation and Pike saying, "You keep this up and you could be in charge of the Enterprise in five years." To which Kirk replies, "I'll do it in two." Then Start STiD in exactly the same way but with the timeline 3 years later on. That papers over a lot of cracks.

Transfer Chekov to engineering, sure but let's have Lt-Cmdr Ann Mulhall officially in charge instead and just have Chekov being the mouth-piece to the bridge. A few relatively minor tweaks would have reduced the silly quotient while retaining the sense of fun.

I read and enjoy the IDW comics so it's not as if I don't enjoy the concept of NuTrek, just some of its sloppier implementation.

 

[BillJ]

I suppose I struggle to get over the fact that NOBODY should have EVER thought that a freshly qualified Lieutenant who was on a disciplinary just before graduation, should have been promoted to captain and placed in charge of the Federation flagship in the first place.

Could've been that they put Kirk in a place where they felt they could keep the best eye on him. A ship on a shakedown cruise.

Inane decisions are par for the course for Starfleet, regardless of timeline or universe.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Could've been that they put Kirk in a place where they felt they could keep the best eye on him. A ship on a shakedown cruise.

Inane decisions are par for the course for Starfleet, regardless of timeline or universe.

I'd be more worried about the amount of crazy admirals running around.

 

[Kemaiku]

Don't worry, Starfleet at least has some semblance of sanity left to never let a Admiral command a ship. They demoted Kirk before giving him a new ship.

And he'd broken so many laws at that point, destroyed Starfleet property, and they essentially went "Nah, you're too nice to keep being an Admiral.", makes you wonder what the rest of them are like.

 

[Pauln6]

I'd be more worried about the amount of crazy admirals running around.

That's just reflective of current US politics.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh yes, the whole section with Pike in STiD was very well done, and probably one of STiD's best arcs. I did feel his death for sure.



You can. But NuTrek isn't.

I suppose I struggle to get over the fact that NOBODY should have EVER thought that a freshly qualified Lieutenant who was on a disciplinary just before graduation, should have been promoted to captain and placed in charge of the Federation flagship in the first place. Kirk deserved his demotion but so did every single member of Starfleet who endorsed his promotion directly out of the Academy. It was as daft as promoting Ensign Chekov, a navigator with some engineering skill, one year post-graduation, who has spent a few months shadowing the chief engineer, to be the new chief engineer on a ship that should have at least a dozen more senior, more experienced engineers who have already been deputising for Scotty when he's not on duty.

If they could just have reigned in the silliness they would have won me over. Move the timeline on 2 years in ST09, for example and then promote Kirk. Promote Kirk to command of a smaller vessel, like the Stargazer. You could even have finished with them giving Kirk his commendation and Pike saying, "You keep this up and you could be in charge of the Enterprise in five years." To which Kirk replies, "I'll do it in two." Then Start STiD in exactly the same way but with the timeline 3 years later on. That papers over a lot of cracks.

Transfer Chekov to engineering, sure but let's have Lt-Cmdr Ann Mulhall officially in charge instead and just have Chekov being the mouth-piece to the bridge. A few relatively minor tweaks would have reduced the silly quotient while retaining the sense of fun.

I read and enjoy the IDW comics so it's not as if I don't enjoy the concept of NuTrek, just some of its sloppier implementation.

Sure, Star Trek is both silly and smart. Nu-Trek had its moments to. Whether they work seems to largely depend on the audience member. And no, that's not a dig at anyone. Some things land, and some don't.

Personally, I think that Abrams Trek suffered from needing some polish. Things that sounded good on paper didn't play out well on the screen or needed to be thought out more. But, overall, none of those things are a deal break for me. The characters and their arcs are far more interesting to me than any plot holes can take away.

Again, one of my biggest praises for STID is the fact that they looked at Kirk's promotion and said "Is he ready?" and the film actually answers "No." Kirk actually has to prove himself that he is willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, and put himself in harms way for his crew. How often does Prime Kirk do that? I'll give you a hint-it's in the first episode.