The dialogue doesn't say that, though. And I've explained why it makes no sense. You can't suck radiation back in once it's already expanding outward at the speed of light. That's like thinking that if someone claps their hands, you can stop the sound from spreading by grabbing their wrists. It only works if you do it before they clap.
You can't suck radiation back in once it's already expanding outward at the speed of light.
Is there something destructive resulting from the explosion which would propagate at a speed lower than the speed of light and could be legitimately sucked in by the Thingamajig?
Ok. I thought it was noted somewhere in the film that the supernova was a threat to the galaxy at large, but maybe I'm thinking of the Countdown comics.
I meant that it did not explain the benefit of setting off the Red Matter after the supernova happened -- which is tantamount to trying to defuse a bomb after it's exploded.
But it still fails to explain why Spock still set the RM off anyway, if it was already too late.
Is there any other trek novel, outside of ones in the middle of a multi part series, that ended on a depressing note? Even Destiny, with so much death and destruction felt hopeful at the end.
But the point is, the movie never said it wasn't the Romulan sun. So there is no actual contradiction between the movie version and the Picard version. It's merely a clarification. Contradicting what tie-ins have claimed or what people have assumed is not a continuity error. All that matters is the exact letter of the text. The Romulan sun is "a star" as much as any other star is. Lack of specificity is not a contradiction.
The planet as a physical entity is irrelevant. It's just a hunk of rock. What matters is the people, the civilization. "Save their planet" could mean "allow the people to survive long enough to evacuate."
Nero was not a rational actor. He was crazed with grief and looking for someone to blame. Scapegoating is rarely sensible.
Although if anything, Picard makes Nero's resentment of the Federation more reasonable. It's not very rational to blame Spock or the Federation for being unable to predict the exact moment of the supernova; nobody could do that. But it's entirely rational to blame the Federation for abandoning the evacuation effort after the synth attack and thereby leaving more Romulans to die when the supernova came.
Of course it doesn't, but that's irrelevant. There are lots of things in Trek that don't fit with a precisely literal reading of earlier installments. "Mudd's Women" had Harry Mudd recognize Spock as "half-Vulcanian" on sight, implying that full Vulcans looked less human than Spock did. That was contradicted when we finally met other Vulcans. Data originally said he was "class of '78" at the Academy, then we learned the current calendar year was 2364. Trill hosts were portrayed in TNG as contributing nothing to the joined personality, but DS9 retconned it so that both personalities contributed (as well as abandoning the Trill's inability to be transported safely and redesigning their makeup). And so on. It's the prerogative of a work of fiction to tweak, refine, and improve its ideas.
Especially if those ideas are bad and stupid, like "The Alternative Factor" saying that a matter-antimatter reaction would destroy the universe, or ST V saying you could get to the center of the galaxy in 20 minutes, or "Threshold" saying that transwarp would turn people into salamanders. All those things were blatantly, repeatedly contradicted by later Trek because they were stupid and didn't deserve to be acknowledged. And the same goes for the 2009 movie's sloppy, ludicrous, nonsensical account of the Romulan supernova. The version in Picard is a thousand times better. Quality is a higher priority than continuity. Fiction is an imperfect human creation, and its creators have the same right as any other humans to fix their past mistakes, or to try to undo the damage caused by their predecessors' mistakes.
Because that bit was also incredibly stupid and it deserved to be ignored.
Anyway, I figure all the nonsense in the movie's mind meld scene can be handwaved because it was just a mind meld. We were seeing Kirk's interpretation of Spock's thoughts through the meld. A brain is not a tape recorder storing information precisely; everything is filtered and interpreted and stored through a web of associations and symbols. Filtering one mind's thoughts through a second mind's perceptions would add a second layer of filtering and symbols, so what came through would be just general impressions, feelings, idioms, metaphors. An experienced melder like Spock could probably filter that out and distinguish the solid information from the chaff, but Kirk's mind was more inexperienced, so his interpretation of Spock's thoughts was probably quite flawed. Maybe he heard "a star" because he missed the bit specifying it was Romulus's star. Maybe he heard "threatened to destroy the Galaxy" because he caught a conceptual whiff of widespread danger and his mind read too much into it.
As you've pointed out before, we don't get to decide what's ignored and what's not. Maybe Horbus destroying the whole Galaxy is "stupid" and should be ignored, but the fact remains that that is as much a fact about the Star Trek universe as is tribbles and whatnot.
It's kind of questionable if they'd really qualify as novels, but she does have the Janeway autobiography coming out on October 6 of this year, and the Spock autobiography coming out September 7 of next year.A few months after finishing both the book and the 1st season of the series, I have to say the series feels like a companion piece to the book. I really hope we get more Picard-related books, and I'm eagerly awaiting news about Ms. McCormack being contracted for another ST novel...
Not at all. It was a single throwaway line. Many other throwaway references in Trek have been ignored or contradicted. Even much larger things have been ignored, like the treatment of antimatter in "The Alternative Factor" or of transwarp in "Threshold."
It's irrational to talk about "facts" in this context. It's fiction. Every last word of it is made up. We're all just pretending. And the advantage of pretending is that you can change your mind if nobody likes what you pretended the first time.
It's kind of questionable if they'd really qualify as novels, but she does have the Janeway autobiography coming out on October 6 of this year, and the Spock autobiography coming out September 7 of next year.
Hard to write a book when you're dead.Do you know why they gave Janeway first a autobiography instead of Sisko?
Hard to write a book when you're dead.
Hard to write a book when you're dead.
By what metric is Sisko dead? He's living in the wormhole. And he said he would definitely come back (and did so long ago in the novels).
They did do stuff like that for characters who's deaths were established. Kirk's biography ended shortly before he was presumed dead on the Enterprise-B, with others adding an epilogue to fill in the gaps.Jake Sisko could posthumously publish his father's memoirs.
Hard to write a book when you're dead.
By what metric is Sisko dead? He's living in the wormhole. And he said he would definitely come back (and did so long ago in the novels).
They did do stuff like that for characters who's deaths were established. Kirk's biography ended shortly before he was presumed dead on the Enterprise-B, with others adding an epilogue to fill in the gaps.
I guess he could have returned as in the novels and written it years later. But I doubt he'd have had any time to write his memoirs during the Dominion War.Well Kirk and Spock are also dead so?
And Sisko is living in the wormhole so he is not dead
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.