Nutrek lit vs Primetrek lit

[seigezunt]

I enjoyed the movie. Is it the Star Trek I grew up with? No. That doesn't mean I didn't have fun at the theater. I HAD FUN. The movie entertained me, something I've not been able to say about a Star Trek movie for two or three presidential administrations, with the laudable exception of Galaxy Quest.

That's right. I said it.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

So did Terri - I was hoping for a duel with Lirpas, set to the "fight music"...

Okay, I've got five quid on Terri.

Against Dayton? In HTH CQC? I'll take that action...

Why'd I take Terri over Dayton? Three words.

Terri's. French. Fries.

'Nuff said.

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ The decision to leave Terri's fries unmolested was made not from fear, but simple respect. I don't scrounge food from a lady's plate.

But Keith? Pfft. Easy pickin's.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I enjoyed the movie. Is it the Star Trek I grew up with? No. That doesn't mean I didn't have fun at the theater. I HAD FUN. The movie entertained me, something I've not been able to say about a Star Trek movie for two or three presidential administrations, with the laudable exception of Galaxy Quest.

That's right. I said it.

Honestly, while I did have fun in the theater, to me the movie came off more of a parody of Trek, or a movie based on Trek, than an actual Trek offerering. GalaxyQuest and Master and Commander were both better "Trek" movies that this one.

Some of the "humor" (Kirk's swollen hands, Scotty's "Jar-Jar Binks"-esque sidekick and Scotty's ride through the water system to name a few) was painfully unfunny to me. The product placement (Nokia, Budweiser, Jack Daniels) was annoying (as is such placement in any movie, but especialy a Trek movie), but what forced my hand to give the movie a "thumbs-down" was the ridiculous notion that Kirk gets a promotion to Captain straight out of the academy. Any credibility that the movie may have had up till that point went straight out the airlock never to return.

All of this is IMHO, naturally.

 

[Christopher]

...but what forced my hand to give the movie a "thumbs-down" was the ridiculous notion that Kirk gets a promotion to Captain straight out of the academy. Any credibility that the movie may have had up till that point went straight out the airlock never to return.

Okay... here is a list of events:

A space probe falls through a black hole, gets turned into a superpowered artificial intelligence the size of Maui, and comes home looking for Mommy.

A torpedo is invented which can create inhabited planets in minutes.

Someone dies of radiation poisoning, but his body is regenerated, his mind is stored in someone else's head, and he comes back to life.

A group of people go back in time, introduce anachronistic technology, and abduct a biologist into the future, yet cause no changes in history.

Three people survive an antimatter explosion less than 30 meters away from them, after previously ascending a turboshaft of more than 100 decks within a ship of only 26 decks.

A highly trained communications officer with decades of experience turns out to have absolutely no familiarity with the language of her nation's principal adversary. Meanwhile, a starship captain is taken prisoner and his jailers not only let him keep his clothes, but somehow fail to notice that he's wearing a transmitter powerful enough to be detected from parsecs away.

The effects of a supernova are experienced instantaneously at great distances with no regard for the speed of light.

The worst enemy of the human race makes one attempt to travel back in time and destroy humanity, fails... and never tries again.

Radiation from a planet's rings is discovered to reverse the aging process, unlike most radiation, which causes mutations and deadly diseases.

Scientists develop a teleportation device which is hundreds of times smaller than any previous teleportation device and is miraculously able to function while it is itself in a dematerialized state.

A recent Academy graduate is rapidly promoted to captain after an act of great heroism.


Now, tell me... of all those, is the last one really the most implausible?

 

[Dayton Ward]

I'm reminded of the time my wife and I went to see the premiere of Terminator 2. We've got time traveling cyborgs from the future, other time traveling cyborgs that can assume any shape or identity, and the part the guy in front of me takes issue with? The moment he can contain his fanboy rage no longer? When the T-1000 drives the semi tractor off the overpass into the viaduct, and the truck is able to keep moving after slamming into the concrete. I quote: "That's bullshit!"

I'll never forget that as long as I live.

Yes, the new Trek movie has its share of "WTF?!?" moments, but so do the other Trek flicks. Star Trek II only works because nobody on the Reliant can (apparently) count to six, or employ the 23rd century version of Wikipedia, but we forgive such transgressions because we were being entertained. So it was with me and Trek '09. I could write an essay on the science, plot, and Trek continuity problem the film presents, but at the end of the two hours, I was entertained and felt I got my money's worth.

(And I'm not just saying that because I saw it the first three of five times for free ).

I have high hopes for the next film that -- with all the introductory stuff out of the way and The Magnificent Seven now in their familiar places -- we will be treated to a true Trek adventure.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Now, tell me... of all those, is the last one really the most implausible?

Yup. To me, anyway. I can accept outlandish situations and events in a sci-fi setting, but the Kirk promotion was just a little too "real-world" ridiculous to be taken seriously.

I have high hopes for the next film that -- with all the introductory stuff out of the way and The Magnificent Seven now in their familiar places -- we will be treated to a true Trek adventure.

I am in full agreement.

 

[Christopher]

Now, tell me... of all those, is the last one really the most implausible?

Yup. To me, anyway. I can accept outlandish situations and events in a sci-fi setting, but the Kirk promotion was just a little too "real-world" ridiculous to be taken seriously.

But at least it doesn't violate the laws of nature if it happens. It's just a strange personnel decision by an organization, and organizations make strange decisions sometimes. Sometimes people get high-ranking or high-paying jobs by virtue of being related to someone, or sleeping with someone, or being famous. The normal process of advancement is bypassed as a reward, sometimes for trivial things like that. In Kirk's case, it was a reward for saving the world. Is that so much more absurd?

 

[Turtletrekker]

I wonder what Q would say regarding the laws of nature.

Honestly, that stuff doesn't bother me. I expect Trek to violate the laws of nature. If one didn't expect such, one wouldn't make very far past Where No Man Has Gone Before, now would they?

But the human stuff, that is what I expect to ring true in a Trek story, and Kirk's promotion just didn't ring true to me at all.

In fact, it seemed to me like a tacked on and contrived Hollywood "happy ending" for a movie whose events really didn't call for a happy ending at all.

All in my opinion and YMMV, of course.

 

[Broccoli]

If I can buy the McCoy cameo in Encounter at Farpoint I can accept Cap'n Archer surviving to be 146. 23rd century medical technology is pretty good.

But it would've been 24th-century medical technology that let McCoy live that long, since it's later in life that that becomes important to longevity. Archer was born more than a century before McCoy, so the medical science available to him would've been a century less advanced, relative to his age. Thus, his life expectancy would be lower. Someone born in 2112 living to the age of 146 might be theoretically possible, but it would probably be exceedingly rare, and it's therefore very unlikely that Jonathan Archer, on top of all his other achievements, would just happen to set new records in longevity as well.

Besides, "The Deadly Years" implied that longevity in the 23rd century wasn't that much greater than in our own time. If not worse; when the computer estimated Kirk's effective age as between 60 and 72, Kirk was in considerably more decrepit condition, physically and mentally, than the 78-year-old William Shatner is today. (On the other hand, Spock said they had less than a week to live when aging at nearly 30 years per day, which, given that they were in their 30s to begin with, implies a life expectancy of 180 or better. But maybe he was referring to his own longevity there.)

Alternate timeline. New meds. Nero's fault. Yada, yada, yada.

I guess you could use the same reasoning that made the NuEnt over twice the size of Ent-Prime.

 

[Lonemagpie]

So did Terri - I was hoping for a duel with Lirpas, set to the "fight music"...

Okay, I've got five quid on Terri.

Against Dayton? In HTH CQC? I'll take that action...

you'd be surprised how often the reluctance to hit a woman (despite all we see in the crime news) will give a guy that hesitation that she needs...

Or she could always pick a champion - is that Kirk bloke available?

 

[Sxottlan]

I just get their comments via my editor.

Whomever that will be.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I wonder what Q would say regarding the laws of nature.

Honestly, that stuff doesn't bother me. I expect Trek to violate the laws of nature. If one didn't expect such, one wouldn't make very far past Where No Man Has Gone Before, now would they?

But the human stuff, that is what I expect to ring true in a Trek story, and Kirk's promotion just didn't ring true to me at all.

In fact, it seemed to me like a tacked on and contrived Hollywood "happy ending" for a movie whose events really didn't call for a happy ending at all.

It annoyed me too. But I got over it in, like, 5 seconds.

 

[Steve Roby]

Some of the "humor" (Kirk's swollen hands, Scotty's "Jar-Jar Binks"-esque sidekick and Scotty's ride through the water system to name a few) was painfully unfunny to me.

Some of it didn't do much for me, either, but it wasn't as bad as all the "funny" bits in Star Trek V that mocked Scotty ("I know this ship like the back of my hand!" BONK), Uhura (suddenly in love with Scotty, doing a fandance), Chekov (the navigator can't find his way out of the woods), and Sulu (can't fly a shuttlecraft). Not to mention the way they all fall under Sybok's spell.

 

[Christopher]

Alternate timeline. New meds. Nero's fault. Yada, yada, yada.

I guess you could use the same reasoning that made the NuEnt over twice the size of Ent-Prime.

Doesn't follow. Archer would already have been 121 years old when Nero arrived. If new advances in longevity came as a result of that change (and I can't imagine why they would have), they probably wouldn't have come along for at least a couple of decades (enough time for developing and testing any new medical breakthroughs), and would've been too late to do any good for someone that elderly.

Besides, why the resistance to it being Archer's son or daughter or grandchild? Why couldn't Archer have a legacy, a line of descendants keeping the name alive in Starfleet? What could possibly be bad about that? Heck, I never heard anyone object to the notion that the Captain Sulu who sponsored Chakotay's entrance to the Academy was Demora or Hiromi Sulu rather than Hikaru. I never heard anyone complain about the Duras in ENT being an ancestor of the Duras in TNG rather than the same individual.

 

[Broccoli]

Alternate timeline. New meds. Nero's fault. Yada, yada, yada.

I guess you could use the same reasoning that made the NuEnt over twice the size of Ent-Prime.

Doesn't follow. Archer would already have been 121 years old when Nero arrived. If new advances in longevity came as a result of that change (and I can't imagine why they would have), they probably wouldn't have come along for at least a couple of decades (enough time for developing and testing any new medical breakthroughs), and would've been too late to do any good for someone that elderly.

While my response was purely tongue in cheek, lets face it, all of the changes made in the new movie make little sense if they somehow relate back to Nero. Suggesting new medical stuff would be, honestly, no different.

Besides, why the resistance to it being Archer's son or daughter or grandchild? Why couldn't Archer have a legacy, a line of descendants keeping the name alive in Starfleet? What could possibly be bad about that? Heck, I never heard anyone object to the notion that the Captain Sulu who sponsored Chakotay's entrance to the Academy was Demora or Hiromi Sulu rather than Hikaru. I never heard anyone complain about the Duras in ENT being an ancestor of the Duras in TNG rather than the same individual.

I think the reason fans get on the fact it was Jon Archer is due to, I think, the writers saying it was in an interview a while back. Personally, I don't care that much to go digging to find the quote.

 

[Christopher]

While my response was purely tongue in cheek, lets face it, all of the changes made in the new movie make little sense if they somehow relate back to Nero. Suggesting new medical stuff would be, honestly, no different.

I don't agree. Most of the changes are reasonable outgrowths of the attack on the Kelvin, if we assume that Starfleet studied its scans of the Narada and reverse-engineered the technology, that they went on a more defensive footing and built up the fleet as a response to a feared Romulan threat, that the Federation sought new allies and recruited more aliens into Starfleet, that the development of the Constitution class was delayed so it could be redesigned as a much larger, more advanced and powerful ship, that maybe the orbital shipyards were relocated to the surface of Earth out of security concerns, and so on. But it doesn't seem likely that any of that would've sparked miraculous advances in longevity. Nor, again, do I see anything wrong with the notion that Jonathan Archer has descendants, so I see no reason for making any such assumption.

 

[Broccoli]

While my response was purely tongue in cheek, lets face it, all of the changes made in the new movie make little sense if they somehow relate back to Nero. Suggesting new medical stuff would be, honestly, no different.

I don't agree. Most of the changes are reasonable outgrowths of the attack on the Kelvin, if we assume that Starfleet studied its scans of the Narada and reverse-engineered the technology, that they went on a more defensive footing and built up the fleet as a response to a feared Romulan threat, that the Federation sought new allies and recruited more aliens into Starfleet, that the development of the Constitution class was delayed so it could be redesigned as a much larger, more advanced and powerful ship, that maybe the orbital shipyards were relocated to the surface of Earth out of security concerns, and so on. But it doesn't seem likely that any of that would've sparked miraculous advances in longevity. Nor, again, do I see anything wrong with the notion that Jonathan Archer has descendants, so I see no reason for making any such assumption.

So, Nero going back also caused Starfleet uniforms to get a snazzier look to them and moved Chekov's birthdate up by a few years?

See, the thing is that it hinges all on assumptions. Those same assumptions can be used to explain why Jon Archer (assuming it is him) is still around. Maybe some medical person on the Kelvin put a stop to some medical procedure that some other doctor came up with. With the Kelvin destroyed, this doctor's procedure went through.

I am not saying it is, but rather that it is possible.

In any event, it doesn't make any difference what Nero coming back changed. It is being used as a somewhat flimsy excuse to allow the filmmakers to do whatever they want, while still cherry picking stuff from Trek canon.

 

[Christopher]

So, Nero going back also caused Starfleet uniforms to get a snazzier look to them and moved Chekov's birthdate up by a few years?

Starfleet changes its uniforms every few years anyway, so there's hardly any need for any special explanation. All the other changes would've meant changes in personnel allocations, so it's entirely possible that a different person could've ended up in charge of Starfleet's uniform design in the 2250s. Similarly, a personnel reallocation could explain why Andrei Chekov and his wife were in a position to have a baby four years sooner. Neither change requires postulating miraculous medical advances out of nowhere.

I am not saying it is, but rather that it is possible.

"Possible" means nothing. A whole lot of crazy things are possible. What matters is how probable they are. And the probability of Jonathan Archer living to 146 is exceedingly low. It is immensely more probable that the Admiral Archer who's around in the late 2250s is a descendant of Jonathan Archer, and since there is absolutely nothing objectionable about the more probable scenario, I see no reason to waste mental energy contriving justifications for the far less probable scenario.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Now, tell me... of all those, is the last one really the most implausible?

Yup. To me, anyway. I can accept outlandish situations and events in a sci-fi setting, but the Kirk promotion was just a little too "real-world" ridiculous to be taken seriously.

But at least it doesn't violate the laws of nature if it happens. It's just a strange personnel decision by an organization, and organizations make strange decisions sometimes. Sometimes people get high-ranking or high-paying jobs by virtue of being related to someone, or sleeping with someone, or being famous. The normal process of advancement is bypassed as a reward, sometimes for trivial things like that. In Kirk's case, it was a reward for saving the world. Is that so much more absurd?

Re: Kirk's rise in rank.

It's happened in fiction as well--Midshipman's Hope.

Senior Midshipman Nicholas Seafort finds himself in command of the Hibernia after the entire line officer command structure is killed--from Captain to the third lieutenant. He is effectively the captain with all rank and privileges according to the United Nations Naval Service regulations. Unsure of himself and knowing he is inexperienced, Seafort tries to find a way around the regs and place one of the staff officers--or all of them as a command committee--in command. But he can't.

Upon arrival at Hope Nation colony, he hopes to be relieved by the senior officer. But tragedy has struck the colony and the command staff was also wiped out. The officer-in-charge, who was a retiree, had his rank of captain reinstated mere days after Seafort took command of Hibernia. This makes Seafort the most senior officer in the area, and in charge of both Hibernia and the colony.

By the end of the novel, Seafort is given his own command as a reward for his leadership. Although he is not made a full captain (rank not position) because of his age. Seafort is given the rank of commander, instead. Many of the brass are jealous of his accomplishments, which leads into the second novel of the series, Challanger's Hope.

Of course, a novel has a much greater space to build to such a reward and ending.

That being said, I don't have a big problem with Kirk's promotion. Trek, after all, has played fast and loose with "real world" military protocal. Picard leaving Crusher in command during a combat situation comes to mind.

Hopefully, the next movie will explore any jealousy that other officers might have over Kirk's rapid rise in command. Or maybe one of the upcoming novels will get into it as well.