• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

TOS rethunk...

Look like people in their late 20s to me.

Right. Which is far too young for command of a starship, or to be established in most any other line. It's more of this juvenilization of Hollywood, where little boys play spies and soldiers. Hell, the only adults in Hollywood who come to mind right off the bat are George Clooney and Denzel Washington.

In the real military people with the ranks these characters have just ARE that young.
 
It isn't the design of the ship that would keep me from seeing this film. It's that I haven't read or seen anything else to interest me sufficiently. My impression of their take on continuity (where all the characters seem to hook up at a younger age and later fulfill their "destiny"), a storyline that blows and their apparent take on the characters themselves all turn me off.

The ship's design is just the final straw.

In one small respect, though, I applaud what they're doing because it definitively cuts this loose from any connection whatsoever with TOS. This is its own thing.
 
It isn't the design of the ship that would keep me from seeing this film. It's that I haven't read or seen anything else to interest me sufficiently. My impression of their take on continuity (where all the characters seem to hook up at a younger age and later fulfill their "destiny"), a storyline that blows and their apparent take on the characters themselves all turn me off.


Kinda like those "X-Men babies" (for example) cartoons that have the characters all together and running around in costume as little children, completely ignoring their established history for the sake of cute.
 
It isn't the design of the ship that would keep me from seeing this film. It's that I haven't read or seen anything else to interest me sufficiently. My impression of their take on continuity (where all the characters seem to hook up at a younger age and later fulfill their "destiny"), a storyline that blows and their apparent take on the characters themselves all turn me off.


Kinda like those "X-Men babies" (for example) cartoons that have the characters all together and running around in costume as little children, completely ignoring their established history for the sake of cute.

But sometimes it works as in the case of Jill Thompson's Lil' Death and Lil' Dream (and Lil' Endless with Lil' Cain and Lil' Abel) for Sandman.
 
Look like people in their late 20s to me.

Right. Which is far too young for command of a starship, or to be established in most any other line. It's more of this juvenilization of Hollywood, where little boys play spies and soldiers. Hell, the only adults in Hollywood who come to mind right off the bat are George Clooney and Denzel Washington.

Wasn't Kirk 29 when he gained command? The youngest Captain in the fleet? Chris Pine is currently 28.

This isn't TOS Season 4. The character of Kirk is actually younger than he was in TOS.
 
^^ Kirk was 29 in the Vonda McIntyre novel Enterprise, which of course isn't official. By analyzing the anecdotal evidence in TOS itself I think Kirk was closer to 32-34 when he got command.
 
^^ Kirk was 29 in the Vonda McIntyre novel Enterprise, which of course isn't official. By analyzing the anecdotal evidence in TOS itself I think Kirk was closer to 32-34 when he got command.
Kirk was 34 in "The Deadly Years", a Season 2 episode. Which would make him 32 at the beginning of Season 1. How long before that he was promoted to Captain is unknown.

We do know that Spock served with Pike for 11 years and the events of the Cage took place 13 years prior to Season 1. If, as is often theorized, Kirk took over command from Pike, then it would have been two years prior to Season 1. Making Kirk around 30 when he took command.
 
Last edited:
Look like people in their late 20s to me.

Right. Which is far too young for command of a starship, or to be established in most any other line. It's more of this juvenilization of Hollywood, where little boys play spies and soldiers. Hell, the only adults in Hollywood who come to mind right off the bat are George Clooney and Denzel Washington.

In the real military people with the ranks these characters have just ARE that young.


Yeah, no kidding. There's even been full ship captains in the US and British Royal Navies that were in their mid and late 20s, although that's fairly rare. It's happened, though.

Go hang out on a carrier sometime! You'll get a fun response from the crew when you complain about having to watch the "little boys play spies and soldiers". :techman:
 
I'm no longer looking forward to ST XI. A combination of more photos and reading the first four scenes have led me to realize this is not my type of movie and I'm fine with that. I'm sorry to disappoint people would expect some more dramatic flare to come out of this realization but there we are and that's all there is to it. My life will go on just fine.

But, anyway, I'm kind of curious about how beaker spent his 20s. Seriously.

I mean come on. If someone enlisted in the service at 18, then they have 11 years of service by 29. If they went to four years of college to be a teacher, then they've been teachers since 22. If they went to four years of college and three years of law school, they'd be lawyers (even if at a low level) from the age of 25.

Some people waste their 20s, a lot of people do, but they don't need to be "The Teenage Years, Part II" the way he makes them out to sound like.

Granted I'm biased since I just so happen to be 29, but my argument stands. I help teach students in a community college. Definitely not the job of an adolescent.

EDIT: Can't believe I didn't think to post this originally. I have a friend I've known since sixth grade, same age as me, and he's in the navy. The last I knew (about a year ago) he was a Lieutenant Commander. Is it command? No. Is it established? That rank sounds "established" to me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm no longer looking forward to ST XI. A combination of more photos and reading the first four scenes have led me to realize this is not my type of movie and I'm fine with that. I'm sorry to disappoint people would expect some more dramatic flare to come out of this realization but there we are and that's all there is to it. My life will go on just fine.

I really agree with the sentiments here. I'll still go just so I can bitch and moan about how bad it is. From an educated point of view. :devil:

I don't know where else I can get that type of entertainment for 10 dollars.
 
But, anyway, I'm kind of curious about how beaker spent his 20s. Seriously.

Me too.

I mean come on. If someone enlisted in the service at 18, then they have 11 years of service by 29.

But we're not talking about men here, we're talking about command officers. And we're not talking any old ship here, we're talking Starship class, pride and certerpiece of the fleet -- equivalent to WWII aircraft carriers.
Let's say 4 years the academy and one at command college. That leaves you at, say, LTJG at the age of 23 or so.
So, let's say you have a fairly meteoric rise and get your first command of a lesser ship as LT or LCDR at about 30. There's no way you're commanding an aircraft carrier before 40. Shatner's Kirk was damn young as it is, which is why all the fanon arose over his supposedly unprecedented rise to Starship command.

A related problem is that 30-year olds today simply look and act young. Shatner's Kirk (and all leading men at the time) acted and carried themselves like "grown-ups;" the way 50-year-olds do today. I haven't seen this Pine fellow act, so I can't judge that, but he looks like he's just out of school. They don't give aircraft carriers to kids just out of school.
 
If the real Navy can hand command to a fresh faced kid in his late 20s, why cant the fictional Starfleet?

From what I can tell Pine is playing Kirk over the course of several years. Seemingly starting at about 18. I think castinmg for that is a good idea.
 
So, let's say you have a fairly meteoric rise and get your first command of a lesser ship as LT or LCDR at about 30. There's no way you're commanding an aircraft carrier before 40.

Seven years in just Lt. J.G. and Lieutenant might sound okay for the typical officer but sounds like a bit much for someone on the fast track. Lt. Commander around 30 fits my friend's status and John McCain's when he ended up in Honoi. I don't think he was "fast track" though but, if not for his physical condition, he would've gotten a major command around 40. So I agree there's something to what you said but Kirk's an unusual case.

Shatner's Kirk was damn young as it is, which is why all the fanon arose over his supposedly unprecedented rise to Starship command.

Right. Not impossible but at least it's not as much of a double-standard that you're using then.

A related problem is that 30-year olds today simply look and act young. Shatner's Kirk (and all leading men at the time) acted and carried themselves like "grown-ups;"

Depends on the person. In a lot of cases I agree with you, and it goes into what I said earlier about the concept of adolescence getting out of control, but not everyone.

I think maturity has less to do with age than it does experience. It's not so much how long you've lived as it is what you've been through. Someone who's sheltered and lives the pampered life where everything is provided to them is never going to grow up. Someone who's been given the raw deal from Day One is going to have a very short childhood if they even have one at all. At least that's how I see it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top