Why would he be nuanced? He clearly is succeeding despite the odds, or doing "ok" enough to get by.
Kirk drift—misremembering a character…
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
- Status
I meant a more nuanced portrayal in terms of characterisation - more thoughtful, less arrogant, more willing to consider advice, less likely to shoot first. Pine's Kirk was on a journey (I'm not sure if that was intentional when they made the first one of it they just felt, with hindsight, they had to reign him in a bit) and eventually gained a bit more depth, but Kirk in his first appearance feels far more believable as a qualified, responsible leader. NuKirk was more like Riley locked in engineering.
He is on a journey, and it's clearly set out. And very well done.
The conclusion was well done but not the first two. He wasn't the Messiah he was a very naughty boy. The adulation was not warranted by what we saw on screen.
Disagree, strongly.
The adulation might have been misplaced, but I see that in reality too. He wasn't messiah but he wasn't garbage either. He was given responsibility, failed, learned and grew.
Yeah, I'll applaud such people. That's real life for me.
Mileage, etc.
The trouble I have with Kirk-2009 is:
• His car theft scene as a snot-ass ten year old shows us the most insufferable little piece of sh-- I can ever recall in a movie. Yes, people in real life are stupid at that age, but choosing to show it in the film makes his snot-assery deliberate and significant. I hate it, and that's not young Kirk to me, whatsoever. That was his no-good neighbor, giving a false name to the cops.
• When he joins Starfleet, he does irresponsible things, and yet somehow flies up the ladder so fast that they give him command of a capital ship, fresh out of the academy. It defies belief.
It's not so much Kirk's character as the reaction of others to Kirk's character for me, I suppose. I don't mind him being a nob, I mind Pike and the Admiralty giving him a captaincy despite very obviously being a nob. Maybe that does happen in real life but that doesn't feel like a worthy premise for Star Trek. It's no worse than putting Sylvia Tilly in charge of Discovery because she has heart but that was pretty bad too. Kirk's terrible plan succeeding is also no worse than Kirk's terrible plan succeeding in the Enterprise Incident. It succeeds not because it's clever but because the antagonists forget, for no particular reason, that they have basic everyday technology that can thwart plans like this. It's enjoyable but...
So yeah, I would have preferred to see more of a Corbomite Manoeuvre Kirk at play. It was interesting to see one of Kirk's classic bluffs backfire in SNW though.
The first part: that was the point - he wasn't our young Kirk he was the young Kirk who grew up without a dad and a shitty step father with a mom who was off-world a lot. I was fine with that.
The second point, I agree with you but I give them credit for addressing that in the next film.
It being a part of the human experience makes it worthy.
Yup. Also part of the human story.
For some. If 09 was the end of the story I might even agree. But it's not. He was a lieutenant, got promoted too fast and busted for it.
As stories go it's pretty damn believable.
He was a cadet on academic suspension who got a command at the end of the film. It really wasn't believable at all. He would, at best, be on the fast track to promotion and get a commendation on his record.
However, they went back and addressed it in the follow up movie so the point is pretty much mooted.
As soon as Pike made him first officer he was inserted in to the chain of command and eligible to move up it as needed.
Yes, a commendation would have sufficed. Yes it's neopitism but it's as believable as other Trek stories. I'm sure I could find military history stories similar to his rise.
Again, my opinion.
Not in the least. It was all caricature of what many think they “know” about the character.
I never cared about VOY and ENT, but 2009 was a milestone in the infantalization of Trek and it’s been nonstop since. SNW doesn’t even do strange new worlds science fiction. They mine past Trek for references and write juvenile melodrama and angst. They don’t respect or even know the original source material. They just regurgitate and think it’s clever.
They should be fucking embarrassed. But they aren’t because they think what they’re doing is what Star Trek is. They haven’t a fucking clue.
Not even close.
No they shouldn't. People should not be Shaheed for writing stories. That's bullshit.
09 was a 2000s action/adventure, framed the same way TOS was in the 60s. It showed conflict, struggle, cooperation and relationship building. I've used it more in teaching psychology and counseling than most Berman era Trek.
As a story it's damn relatable to me and the people I serve. I'll take it and no I won't be embarrassed for it.
Nope. If you embrace this pap then the gap is too wide for us to reach an understanding.
My biggest problem with it was my impression that the film was on the kid's side, like, "This defiant, take-charge kid is hot stuff!" If that is not what JJ-Trek meant by it, then the little bastard should have had a comeuppance and suffered consequences as part of his growth arc. But he didn't, and the movie treated him like a hero.
That's how I took it, as something worse than a story for kids. It was more like a story by kids, and not even good kids.
We all saw our own interpretations, apparently.
Apologies. This was overreach. Suffice we must agree to disagree.
That's certainly true in my case. As a kid I found "The Corbomite Maneuver" rather dull because it was mostly talking on the bridge. Now I like it a lot more. "Balance of Terror" has grown on me a lot, too.
Yeah if Pike had said something like you'll get a commendation. In a few years a command of your own and Kirk had said, I'll do it in two and then the final scene said two years later, I would have at least chuckled and the added side effect would have been that the Captain with 6 months experience would not have promoted the 18 year old with 6 months experience to be chief engineer.
It was a fun romp and hugely popular but it was sexist, it normalised and rewarded rule breaking wish fulfilment, had such idiotic scientific premises that my friend's 8 year old was pointing out scientific errors, and even had Spock of all people questioning the rescue of people from a doomed ship as if it was unusual. The movie was looking to draw in a wider audience but I don't think it had to sell out Star Trek's heart quite so much to do it.
It shouldn't come as a surprise that people like it. It pandered hard to popular tropes. I think it needed some Trek experts to go over it and bring some elements more in line.
Nobody deserved death more than skydiving adrenaline junkie Logan though. All that scene needed was a yeoman recording it on a tricorder.
In terms of Kirk drift this was the ultimate!
Last edited:
I just don't see that.
Except, from a psychological perspective it made perfect sense.
Last edited:
I very much doubt that. If Star Trek is about diversity then there is room for multiple stories and appreciation of such.
There is more depth to it than people give it credit for. There's zero shame in liking it.
Last edited:
- Status