Well that's "Court Martial" and "Obsession" gone then (SPOILERS)

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Because the James Dean Kirk that jumps out of a car just before it plummets off of a cliff, and is doing nothing but rebelling everywhere including happily climbing onto ships he's not supposed to be on, is not a stack of books teacher that needs help becoming the James T. Kirk we all know by having a blond lab assistant sent his way.

So? Could you point me to the episode where we learn that Kirk never drove a car over a cliff? Or the one where he recalls his blissful childhood? I think I missed those.

Uh... which part of what I wrote don't you get, the English, or... the English?

You didn't answer his question. How does being a rebelious child preclude Kirk from becoming a "stack of books with legs" as an instructor at the Academy? When did Star Trek ever say that young Kirk was always a good student and happy teenager?

We don't know when Kirk was Mitchell's instructor. Mitchell could have been in Command School when Lieutenant Kirk was his instructor. Kirk may have matured and "settled down" by that time. Perhaps this film documents that "maturity process".

...and, like Franklin and others have said, this is perhaps all happening in an altered timeline and thus things are different (but I hope this isn't the case.)

EDIT TO ADD:
I never took Mitchell's line about the blonde lab technician to mean that Kirk needed help with women...Just because Mitchell set Kirk up with this woman doesn't mean that Kirk "Needed help" in getting women to date him.

I suppose this goes to show how different people can translate what they see on screen in different ways.

 

[Mordock]

Has anyone noticed a single person who's positive about this film being talked into being negative about it by a poster here?

Has anyone noticed a single person who's negative about this film being talked into being positive by a poster here?

Didn't think so.

So you're saying that we're trapped in a perfect equilibrium of unending struggle, like in "The Alternative Factor"? Of all the episodes to get stuck in...

 

[Red Ranger]

People,

I have to agree with the posters who've said that the movie hasn't come out yet, and those overreacting to little tid-bits about the story are taking it just a little too far.

It's obvious that not every little bit of the old ST is going to fit in this new version of ST. No Gary Mitchell? Oh, well. We did only see him in one ep, albeit a good one.

Let me offer a kind of wild thought, and it's helping me cope with the seeming inconsistencies. Maybe the timeline, or in this case, canon, we've all seen is the wrong tmeline! We've been fooled into believing the familiar timeline, the one where Gary Mitchell is Kirk's good friend, and the one where Kirk served with an officer named Garrovick from the time he graduated from Starfleet Academy, is the fake timeline!

Now, I said all that with tongue firmly implanted in cheek, but as this is obviously a reboot, despite Abrams' protestations that it wasn't, people here should just chill out about it.

Also, just because there've been alterations in the 23rd century doesn't mean the 24th century will be completely altered. As far as I know, all the events on Kirk's Enterprise in TOS had only a tangential impact on Picard's Enterprise, or Sisko's Deep Space Nine, or Janeway's Voyager.

In other words, how could changes in Kirk's career actually change Picard's career 80 years later? It's like in the TNG ep Tapestry, when Picard changes his date with a Nausicaan blade, there is only one change: a different person replaces Picard as captain of the Enterprise, and that was that. I don't think you can make a compelling case for minor changes to Kirk's backstory altering all of Starfleet, frankly.

Let's also take the possibility that Nero alters the whole "We've never seen a Romulan till Balance of Terror," argument. Seems like a big deal, but not really. It would have very little impact decades later if the first time Kirk and Co. see a Romulan is a few years before it happened in the old timeline.

And certainly, that change wouldn't impact any of Picard's dealings with the Romulans, or Sisko's dealings with Vreenak. He'd still see through the fake transmission and yell, "It's a FAAAKKKEE!"

Red Ranger

P.S.: I know ST has a much firmer sense of continuity than some other fictional properties, but do you all realize how many times Batman, Superman, and James Bond have had their backstories changed? And even in recent years, Marvel Comics, which had a much better sense of making their characters' continuity consistent, have reimagined their characters, most notably in the Ultimates versions of their characters? Not crazy about that crap, but hey, it means Samuel L. Jackson can be Nick Fury. Big deal!

 

[M'Sharak]

Because the James Dean Kirk that jumps out of a car just before it plummets off of a cliff, and is doing nothing but rebelling everywhere including happily climbing onto ships he's not supposed to be on, is not a stack of books teacher that needs help becoming the James T. Kirk we all know by having a blond lab assistant sent his way.

So? Could you point me to the episode where we learn that Kirk never drove a car over a cliff? Or the one where he recalls his blissful childhood? I think I missed those.

Uh... which part of what I wrote don't you get, the English, or... the English?

I have seen no evidence of problems with reading comprehension on Butters' part. He responded to your assertion, asking you to provide support for the assumptions you made.

If you are unable to answer it civilly and without a surly attempt to insult his intelligence, then don't answer at all.

 

[number6]

^^ Agreed. there is absolutely nothing shown or implied in what little we've seen of this film that would negate any established backstory for Kirk. I'm going to wait and actually see the film before deciding to condemn it for changing the backstory of the characters.

Further.. There is nothing shown on screen that establishes how any of these characters met of grew up. I think that any story told in that regard should be fair game.

Anything that is ignored could actually be part of the story. I think Abrams and the writers have hinted as much about this being true within the framework of the upcoming film.

 

[cooleddie74]

Any leaked script spoilers so far mentioning Gary Mitchell at the Academy? 43-year-old TOS lore and canon has Mitchell being a very close friend of Kirk's at the Academy and even setting him up with a woman he almost married(Carol Marcus?)...to not even mention Gary in passing would be a real travesty considering how well-known the second TOS pilot is even in some non-fan circles.

 

[Ovation]

Any leaked script spoilers so far mentioning Gary Mitchell at the Academy? 43-year-old TOS lore and canon has Mitchell being a very close friend of Kirk's at the Academy and even setting him up with a woman he almost married(Carol Marcus?)...to not even mention Gary in passing would be a real travesty considering how well-known the second TOS pilot is even in some non-fan circles.

I don't mean any sarcasm or disrespect here, but how large do you think such a group truly is?

 

[M'Sharak]

I have my doubts about how well-known WNMHGB is in non-fan circles (personally, I'd bet hardly at all) and to my knowledge, the only script spoilers are those which have been given by Abrams & Co. at the press screenings and those found in the movie trailers.

Also, to my knowledge, we have no information at all one way or the other as to whether Gary Mitchell will be name-checked in the movie. He may very well be, as may Carol Marcus, Robert April, Rose, Finnegan, Captain Garrovick, Ben Finney and a number of other characters, but no one has been reported as having been cast for any of those roles, so it's reasonable to presume that we won't actually see any of them. Which is fine by me.

 

[3D Master]

So? Could you point me to the episode where we learn that Kirk never drove a car over a cliff? Or the one where he recalls his blissful childhood? I think I missed those.

Uh... which part of what I wrote don't you get, the English, or... the English?

You didn't answer his question. How does being a rebelious child preclude Kirk from becoming a "stack of books with legs" as an instructor at the Academy? When did Star Trek ever say that young Kirk was always a good student and happy teenager?

We don't know when Kirk was Mitchell's instructor. Mitchell could have been in Command School when Lieutenant Kirk was his instructor. Kirk may have matured and "settled down" by that time. Perhaps this film documents that "maturity process".

...and, like Franklin and others have said, this is perhaps all happening in an altered timeline and thus things are different (but I hope this isn't the case.)

EDIT TO ADD:
I never took Mitchell's line about the blonde lab technician to mean that Kirk needed help with women...Just because Mitchell set Kirk up with this woman doesn't mean that Kirk "Needed help" in getting women to date him.

I suppose this goes to show how different people can translate what they see on screen in different ways.

So, we have James Dean Kirk, James Dean Kirk in the academy much later then everyone else, got a name for himself and pretty much became legendary, somehow he stopped being James Dean Kirk and instead became a wimp who lets himself get bullied by Finnegan, and a walking book stack, and then he REGRESSES his "growth" by becoming James Dean Kirk again, with just a little less Dean, and a bit more Tiberius?

That does not compute, pal.

So? Could you point me to the episode where we learn that Kirk never drove a car over a cliff? Or the one where he recalls his blissful childhood? I think I missed those.

Uh... which part of what I wrote don't you get, the English, or... the English?

I have seen no evidence of problems with reading comprehension on Butters' part. He responded to your assertion, asking you to provide support for the assumptions you made.

If you are unable to answer it civilly and without a surly attempt to insult his intelligence, then don't answer at all.

I don't need to answer him, my post already answered him. My post CONTAINS the support for the cold hard fact, that James Dean Kirk could never be a walking stack of books, the last comes from Gary Mitchell, not to mention a nerd that lets himself get bullied.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^ well, I'm not sure that the young Kirk in the car is a "James Dean-type". It's a little hard to tell from the two things we see in the trailer:

1. He's a young boy driving a vette.
and
2. He seems to have an attitude when he tells the cop his name.

You may be right that this young Kirk seems to be acting like James Dean, but that is still an assumption you are making based on limited information. I will wait to see what happens in the film instead of making assumptions.

And even then, if young Kirk DOES turn out to be akin to a "James Dean Rebel", I will wait to see if this makes sense within the context of the rest of the film.

I don't need to answer him, my post already answered him. My post CONTAINS the support for the cold hard fact, that James Dean Kirk could never be a walking stack of books, the last comes from Gary Mitchell, not to mention a nerd that lets himself get bullied.

Again, the fact that you think Kirk was a nerd because Finnegan tormented him is YOUR assumption and YOUR pre-conceived notion.

I would say that the way Kirk handles himself with a bully would be the determining factor as to whether he was a "nerd" or not, and Shore Leave never specified how Kirk in fact DID handle himself back in the Academy days.


MORE TO THE POINT:

I don't know why you think it is out of character for Kirk's progression as a Starfleet Officer to have occured thusly:

1. Young Kirk is immature and is a risk-taker who gets into a lot of fights.
2. Kirk goes to the Academy where he gains maturity and self-control (resists solving problems with his fists) and is an excellent student/instructor who immerses himself into learning about being the best Officer he can be (but still retains some of that that risk-taking mentality.)
3. Kirk takes that maturity, intelligence, and risk-taking personality with him to become the Capatin Kirk we all know from TOS -- the mature, intelligent, and self-controlled Captain who excels at taking risks and winning.

That works for me, and seems to be consistent with what we know about Kirk.

 

[3D Master]

^
^^ well, I'm not sure that the young Kirk in the car is a "James Dean-type". It's a little hard to tell from the two things we see in the trailer:

1. He's a young boy driving a vette.
and
2. He seems to have an attitude when he tells the cop his name.

You may be right that this young Kirk seems to be acting like James Dean, but that is still an assumption you are making based on limited information. I will wait to see what happens in the film instead of making assumptions.

And even then, if young Kirk DOES turn out to be akin to a "James Dean Rebel", I will wait to see if this makes sense within the context of the rest of the film.

I don't need to answer him, my post already answered him. My post CONTAINS the support for the cold hard fact, that James Dean Kirk could never be a walking stack of books, the last comes from Gary Mitchell, not to mention a nerd that lets himself get bullied.

Again, the fact that you think Kirk was a nerd because Finnegan tormented him is YOUR assumption and YOUR pre-conceived notion.

I would say that the way Kirk handles himself with a bully would be the determining factor as to whether he was a "nerd" or not, and Shore Leave never specified how Kirk in fact DID handle himself back in the Academy days.


MORE TO THE POINT:

I don't know why you think it is out of character for Kirk's progression as a Starfleet Officer to have occured thusly:

1. Young Kirk is immature and is a risk-taker who gets into a lot of fights.
2. Kirk goes to the Academy where he gains maturity and self-control (resists solving problems with his fists) and is an excellent student/instructor who immerses himself into learning about being the best Officer he can be (but still retains some of that that risk-taking mentality.)
3. Kirk takes that maturity, intelligence, and risk-taking personality with him to become the Capatin Kirk we all know from TOS -- the mature, intelligent, and self-controlled Captain who excels at taking risks and winning.

That works for me, and seems to be consistent with what we know about Kirk.

Of course, he gets bullied AND he's a stack of books, but nope, nerd would not be what to call him.

But again - sighing heavily here - you're EVADING THE FFING POINT! Whether or not Kirk is specifically a nerd, DOES NOT MATTER!!

What matters, is that Kirk didn't have the backbone to stand up to a bully! THAT is what matters. And Mr. "jump out of car about to fall to its destruction and his death" would never NOT have the backbone to get rid of Finnegan in no time flat - if Finnegan would even bother bullying him in the first place. You see, that's not about "maturity" at all, like Captain James T. Kirk would know; when you come across a person who understands only the language of fists, you use your fists to get through to him.

 

[SalvorHardin]

But again - sighing heavily here - you're EVADING THE FFING POINT!

You should definitely see a doctor...
All that heavy sighing you've been doing constantly for a couple of months now can't be a good sign.

 

[Kelso]

Kirk should have been played by Michael Cera.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Kirk should have been played by Michael Cera.

That dude is ugly...no way

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

What matters, is that Kirk didn't have the backbone to stand up to a bully! THAT is what matters. And Mr. "jump out of car about to fall to its destruction and his death" would never NOT have the backbone to get rid of Finnegan in no time flat - if Finnegan would even bother bullying him in the first place. You see, that's not about "maturity" at all, like Captain James T. Kirk would know; when you come across a person who understands only the language of fists, you use your fists to get through to him.

Why do you automatically think he should use his fists against Finnegan? Perhaps he was trying to prove to himself and others that he was a serious student that didn't need to resort to his old ways to solve a problem. Perhaps he became too much the "kinder, gentler Kirk" during his Academy years and had to learn again to be more agressive (The USS Farragut Tycho IV incident anyone?). Perhaps sometime AFTER the Academy he leard to balance the "always serious Kirk" from the Academy with the "fists first Kirk" from his youth.

...I'm saying "perhaps" continually because I just don't know that much about a pre-TOS kirk -- and that's my point: nobody knows -- not even you.

My pre-conceived notions are just as valid as your pre-conceived notions. The only difference is, I'm not letting my pre-conceived notions of what I think young Kirk should be like ruin my experience with this film.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

But again - sighing heavily here - you're EVADING THE FFING POINT!

You should definitely see a doctor...
All that heavy sighing you've been doing constantly for a couple of months now can't be a good sign.

 

[3D Master]

What matters, is that Kirk didn't have the backbone to stand up to a bully! THAT is what matters. And Mr. "jump out of car about to fall to its destruction and his death" would never NOT have the backbone to get rid of Finnegan in no time flat - if Finnegan would even bother bullying him in the first place. You see, that's not about "maturity" at all, like Captain James T. Kirk would know; when you come across a person who understands only the language of fists, you use your fists to get through to him.

Why do you automatically think he use his fists against Finnegan? Perhaps he was trying to prove to himself and others that he was a serious student that didn't need to resort to his old ways to solve a problem. Perhaps he became too much the "kinder, gentler Kirk" during his Academy years and had to learn again to be more agressive (The USS Farragut Tycho IV incident anyone?). Perhaps sometime AFTER the Academy he leard to balance the "always serious Kirk" from the Academy with the "fists first Kirk" from his youth.

...I'm saying "perhaps" continually because I just don't know that much about a pre-TOS kirk -- and that's my point: nobody knows -- not even you.

My pre-conceived notions are just as valid as your pre-conceived notions. The only difference is, I'm not letting my pre-conceived notions of what I think young Kirk should be like ruin my experience with this film.

Do you see a change anywhere in Kirk's attitude in the trailer? From little car-crashing Kirk, to brash take no attitude cadet Kirk?

No, there is no difference, anywhere; he's always James Dean Kirk.

And that's where it breaks any and all semblance of character.

 

[SalvorHardin]

What matters, is that Kirk didn't have the backbone to stand up to a bully! THAT is what matters. And Mr. "jump out of car about to fall to its destruction and his death" would never NOT have the backbone to get rid of Finnegan in no time flat - if Finnegan would even bother bullying him in the first place. You see, that's not about "maturity" at all, like Captain James T. Kirk would know; when you come across a person who understands only the language of fists, you use your fists to get through to him.

Why do you automatically think he use his fists against Finnegan? Perhaps he was trying to prove to himself and others that he was a serious student that didn't need to resort to his old ways to solve a problem. Perhaps he became too much the "kinder, gentler Kirk" during his Academy years and had to learn again to be more agressive (The USS Farragut Tycho IV incident anyone?). Perhaps sometime AFTER the Academy he leard to balance the "always serious Kirk" from the Academy with the "fists first Kirk" from his youth.

...I'm saying "perhaps" continually because I just don't know that much about a pre-TOS kirk -- and that's my point: nobody knows -- not even you.

My pre-conceived notions are just as valid as your pre-conceived notions. The only difference is, I'm not letting my pre-conceived notions of what I think young Kirk should be like ruin my experience with this film.

Do you see a change anywhere in Kirk's attitude in the trailer? From little car-crashing Kirk, to brash take no attitude cadet Kirk?

No, there is no difference, anywhere; he's always James Dean Kirk.

And that's where it breaks any and all semblance of character.

It's a fucking 2 minute trailer and we see the kid for 10 seconds for fuck's sake....
What character development do you want to see in a damn trailer.

i'm out of here before I start sighing heavily too

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Do you see a change anywhere in Kirk's attitude in the trailer? From little car-crashing Kirk, to brash take no attitude cadet Kirk?

No, there is no difference, anywhere; he's always James Dean Kirk.

And that's where it breaks any and all semblance of character.

Ha! Gotcha now...
...near the end of the trailer, Kirk says "Buckle up". If James Dean would have been mature enough to "buckle up", he may have still been alive today.

Goodnight all.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Do you see a change anywhere in Kirk's attitude in the trailer? From little car-crashing Kirk, to brash take no attitude cadet Kirk?

No, there is no difference, anywhere; he's always James Dean Kirk.

And that's where it breaks any and all semblance of character.

Ha! Gotcha now...
...near the end of the trailer, Kirk says "Buckle up". If James Dean would have been mature enough to "buckle up", he may have still been alive today.

Goodnight all.

THE END