Spock's mission makes sense in the context of a galaxy-spanning catastrophe (magical as it may be) as described in ST'09. It's the Picard retcon that screws it up. Although it does give Nero's "the Federation stood by and did nothing!" into something much more than the ravings of a lunatic. I think it's kinda fitting that after all the wait, we never get a novelverse supernova. We're getting something much bigger, really. A full-on apocalypse!
That has nothing to do with it. For one thing, a supernova would endanger neighboring systems for dozens of light-years around, so even if Romulus itself would be doomed either way, sucking the sun into a black hole before it blew up would save all its neighboring worlds. So it still makes perfect sense in the context of the Picard version, about a zillion times more sense than the movie's "threatened to destroy the galaxy" gibberish. And for another thing, as we've discussed, the timing of Spock's action as presented in the movie is completely nonsensical if taken literally. No matter how big the catastrophe is, you can't prevent it after the explosion has already happened, any more than you can disarm a bomb that's already blown up. That's not Picard's fault, because Picard doesn't even mention that part of it.
Your unacceptable gibberish is my perfectly acceptable fantasy. And in that fantasy, the red matter somehow sucks the deadly fireball and radiation away even post-detonation so everyone is saved.
Suspending disbelief about fantasy is one thing. What I can't understand is looking at Picard's far clearer and more logical version and thinking it's somehow less believable. And I certainly don't understand blaming it for the parts about Spock's actions when it doesn't even mention them.
I think sometimes people assumed that the comic series Countdown should count for something in the story. Perhaps they don't like that Picard didn't use Countdown as the basis for the Romulan supernova. But at the end of the day, there's nothing really in Picard that contradicts Star Trek (2009). It was mostly what happened after the supernova anyway, with little information in the series itself about the lead up and actual supernova itself. And it hasn't covered the Spock or red matter angle at all. Perhaps that will still come up, but as of now it hasn't, so nothing in Picard contradicts anything in Star Trek (2009). And I doubt it will. Either it won't come up at all, or they'll find a way to explain that element of the story without major contradictions.
I mean, surely streaming-era Trek will override the Caeliar origin of the Borg. And make the Omega Continuum implausible. And probably at some point, go into detail about the Iconians. Justify that as you will.
Spock's actions are the fundamental narrative purpose for the destruction of Romulus. It'd be like retconning the Genesis Effect as a revolutionary new form of crop rotation. It may make more sense scientifically, but then why was Reliant hunting for barren planets? Why did Khan and the Klingons want it so bad? And then answering, "Oh, that doesn't matter, the retcon doesn't even mention Khan or the Klingons, we're just concerned with the story implications of increasing the galactic food supply which TWOK glossed over."
So what? That's not what Picard is about. It's not the responsibility of a new story to slavishly restrict itself to the needs of a different story. Its job is to use whatever story points it draws upon to serve its own story. And Picard's story was not about Spock, so it was under no obligation to fix the movie's illogic concerning Spock. Telling stories is not done for the exclusive purpose of sorting out continuity. Continuity exists to serve stories, not the other way around. It's unreasonable to expect a story set in the Prime Timeline to address Spock's actions in the movie, because all they know in the Prime Timeline is that Spock disappeared trying and failing to save Romulus. That's it. There's no story to tell there, no followup, because nobody in that universe has the means to answer the question. It's not relevant to the timeline anymore. Plus we already know how it turned out thanks to Kelvin, and thus there's no narrative reason to revisit it. The remaining logic gap is a matter of trivia. It's a niggling side detail that isn't important except as a matter of incidental bookkeeping. Nobody's under any obligation to tell a story about it just for the sake of satisfying nitpickers like us. And again: The problem making sense of Spock Prime's actions is inherent in the movie's version. How the hell does it make sense to attack Picard simply for not addressing it? Place the blame where it belongs, on the movie.
That's true enough. I just hope someday along the line either Picard or some future novel tackles that part of the story, and maybe goes a little deeper into the supernova event itself. The novels have hinted at a possible attack. I have to admit I'd love to see that covered more at some point. And yeah, I'd love to see a story that fills in the details of Spock's involvement before he was lost. But yeah, I don't consider anyone obligated. I mean, no one is obligated to do anything story wise when it comes to entertainment. The only real power the people watching (or reading) have is the obvious. If not enough people watch it (or read it) then it gets cancelled. But that's usually because not enough people are interested, not because some story detail didn't get covered. Yeah, it's not Picard's fault. At least for me it's just the most reasonable place for it to be covered in more detail. But they're not obligated to fix it. It's just something for the 'it would be nice' column. I do think there's probably enough interest that if the show never does get into it, that maybe some future novel may dive into that part of the story. But I wouldn't expect to see that at least until the show has run its course.
Does anyone know if Christopher has ever had any issues with Star Trek 2009's Romulan supernova? Not sure he's ever had a platform to explain it before.
At the moment, I'm more concerned about the strange tendency to blame Picard for the movie's problems. Especially when it did such a great job fixing most of them, it's strange and unfair to blame it for the one remaining problem it didn't even address. Unfairness upsets me far more than plot problems in a story.
ST'09: A supernova "threatened to destroy the galaxy". Spock stopped it (as implausible as the supernova and Red Matter are) after Romulus was destroyed. This sequence was edited, chopped and changed until two weeks prior to the movie's release, and differs greatly from the script floating about, where Spock's reset was a deliberate attempt to save Romulus. PIC: The Romulan sun blew up, and had a defined "blast zone" which the Federation were helping to evacuate until the Synth uprising. In the former, Spock is a hero, saving the galaxy even though Romulus was lost. In the latter, his plan makes no sense since destroying the Romulan sun would doom the Romulans just as surely as the nova would. Considering the reverence modern Trek has for Spock, it's something of an oversight. Remember, early plans for Countdown (presumably to be mirrored in the '09 movie) were wholesale destruction. Earth, Kronos and other worlds were destroyed, Spock's reset was a deliberate one of necessity, and it was intervention by Star Trek Online devs that got it scaled down to "just" Romulus being destroyed.
No. The problem with Spock's action is exactly the same in both versions -- that using the Red Matter after the explosion already happened would do nothing to prevent the damage, no matter how big the scope of the damage. You're claiming a distinction that doesn't exist, or rather, that has no relevance to the specific problem. In both versions, by the time he arrives, it's already too late to prevent it. One more time: A supernova endangers multiple star systems for dozens of light years around, not just one. Spock could not save Romulus, but he could save the neighboring worlds the supernova would have subsequently destroyed. This is the same in both versions. He's too late to save Romulus itself, but releases the Red Matter anyway to save the other systems it endangers. Whether that's a dozen neighboring systems or the entire galaxy is irrelevant; the logic is exactly the same. And the problem is exactly the same, that releasing the Red Matter too late shouldn't be able to do anything about the radiation that's already out of range of its gravity.
You're trying to apply real-life science to a fantasy situation again. Accept that in the Star Trek universe, where ships fly around like they're in atmosphere and there's sound in space, Red Matter can "absorb the exploding star" (and accompanying radiation) effectively, and go from there.
Which is exactly what Gene Roddenberry wanted Star Trek to do, which is why he was one of the first SFTV producers in history to actually consult with scientists and engineers and think tanks when building his show. So you don't get to tell me I'm wrong to apply the same standard. I've made a pretty good career out of doing that for better than 15 years now. Besides, even fantasy should be consistent within itself, as I already said. The movie explicitly showed, twice, that a Red Matter black hole only affected things within a certain radius of it. It contradicts itself by saying it could magically suck in an explosion that already happened. Fantasy that contradicts itself is badly written fantasy, because it's badly written fiction. Saying that a story doesn't have to be held to any standards of competence just because it's fantasy is an insult to the creators who do build their fantasy worlds with care.
I did, but then Daniel said exactly what I was going to say anyway about PIC contradicting literally the only two things established about the destruction of Romulus (1, Spock could've prevented it, 2, Spock prevented further destruction even though he was too late to save Romulus itself).