• 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!

The Kobayashi Maru Solution.

If you'd like to start a new thread I won't object, but you might need to explicitly point me to it. :)

This may not be a great example, especially since I think Kirk was rather deliberately giving off attitude at the time, but when we see Kirk taking the KM scenario he's being highly belligerent. Really, how much more disrespectful can you get than obnoxiously eating an apple while sitting in the center seat and scolding your communications officer for not saying "Sir"? Granted Uhura erred there, but Kirk's retort was hardly professional either. He also not only renders the Klingon ships helpless but proceeds to blow them out of the stars. Satisfying for his fellow test-takers perhaps, and granted we don't know the status of relations with the Klingons at this point, but gunning down helpless ships doesn't exactly seem to reflect Starfleet ideals. He could have hailed them, could have ignored them, etc...especially given that he programmed the alterations to the test. It's entirely possible that PrimeKirk handled his third round of the simulator the same way...but I doubt it.

At the end of the film Nero's ship is in much of a similar situation to the Klingon ships in the KM scenario, but Kirk reaches out, even considering that doing so could lead to stronger relations with the Romulan empire (and maybe in the end heal Nero's psychological trauma to some degree). The ship itself needs to be destroyed so as to eliminate any possibility of further disruption to the timeline (arguments as to whether this is in fact Kirk's reasoning notwithstanding), but there's no reason to kill the crew with it.
In any event, Kirk goes somewhat (granted not tremendously, but he's under a bit of a time crunch and probably not very favorably disposed towards Nero) out of his way to offer Nero assistance, and it's the logical, pacifistic Spock who disagrees and says Kirk should kill the Romulans in cold blood.

I won't deny that this is not the strongest of examples, but it does illustrate Kirk facing a similar situation - a helpless enemy vessel - and showing some character growth.

Other possible examples-
Proceeding the mind-meld, Kirk may not exactly -like- Spock, but no longer seems as inclined to antagonize him on general principle. I don't think he took any particular joy from proving that Spock was emotionally compromised...and that's before he got thrown over the helm. It's safe to assume they aren't friends by the end of the film either, but Kirk's learned to respect the guy at least. No matter what Old Spock told Kirk, I don't think Kirk would have bought into it if Young Spock hadn't shown some growth himself.

While Kirk clearly gets off to a rocky start with Uhura, he seems to have moderated his antagonism towards her as well by the end of the film.

I haven't looked at the film specifically for this, but it may be a valid argument that by the end Kirk seems more willing to form plans with others' input and feedback, rather than acting on his own initiative and without asking for (or listening to) what others have to say.
 
Kirk does make the offer to allow Nero to surrender. However, when Spock disagrees, he gets this cocky smile on his face that show that he's glad. He then orders the weapon fire.

Compare with Kirk at the end of Balance of Terror. Kirk took no pleasure in the death of an enemy.

Kirk has less of a problem with Spock because he now out ranks him. He knows that Spcok will respect the chain of command so he doesn't view him as an obstacle any longer.
 
I haven't watched the movie in awhile now, so consequently can't comment on Kirk's expression at that point. The thought running through my head is that what you perceive as a cocky smile others might perceive as a grim smile. But again, I can't qualify that.

I haven't seen BoT in even longer, so...there's that.

"Kirk has less of a problem with Spock because he now out ranks him. He knows that Spcok will respect the chain of command so he doesn't view him as an obstacle any longer. "

Not exactly giving Kirk a lot of credit there, are you?
 
Kirk is the biggest problem I have with the new movie. I know that it's a different universe but he's supposed to be the same person in different circumstances. But he doesn't come across as charming or dashing or as a leader. He comes across as a self absorbed prick who lucks into command.
 
That's a thought-provoking example about Kirk offering surrender. I have no recollection about what his facial expression was at the time, but I may have just been distracted at the time by (as you say) the logical, pacifist Spock telling Kirk to kill them in cold blood.

To me, that really typifies the movie. "Pew, pew," and blow them all to kingdom come. Sorry, I don't mean to be negative again, I'm trying to be open-minded. In all honesty, I never gave a rip about all that "optimistic future, mankind uniting for a common good, etc," that so many other people say is the reason they like Star Trek. But it just feels like there's a lot of belligerence here, as especially personified by Kirk, and typified (getting back to the original topic) not only in Kirk's cocky manner during the KM scenario, but also in his method of making the Klingon ships weaker so he can just blow them out of space. I do think it says something that the consensus non-canon version of Prime Kirk's solution was something that ended up being completely non-violent. I guess that's just not what people want to see anymore. Is it that people perceive a hero like that to be too soft?

Sorry if I'm being a downer; I'm not trying to just bash the movie. But I'm continually trying to understand the reactions of other people as compared to my own very different ones. Maybe it's just out of my reach.
 
Pike said Kirk was a genius but we didn't get to see him actually use his brains. He got where he was by luck. He just happened to be on board the Enterprise because McCy brought him along. He just happened to hear mention of a "lightning storm in space". He just happened to land on Delta Vega near Spcok Prime. It just happened to be near a Star Fleet station where Scott was working. It just happened that Scott was the one that came up with warp beaming (with help from Spock). The list goes on. He just didn't come across as someone particularly heroic.
 
That's a thought-provoking example about Kirk offering surrender. I have no recollection about what his facial expression was at the time, but I may have just been distracted at the time by (as you say) the logical, pacifist Spock telling Kirk to kill them in cold blood.

To me, that really typifies the movie. "Pew, pew," and blow them all to kingdom come. Sorry, I don't mean to be negative again, I'm trying to be open-minded. In all honesty, I never gave a rip about all that "optimistic future, mankind uniting for a common good, etc," that so many other people say is the reason they like Star Trek. But it just feels like there's a lot of belligerence here, as especially personified by Kirk, and typified (getting back to the original topic) not only in Kirk's cocky manner during the KM scenario, but also in his method of making the Klingon ships weaker so he can just blow them out of space. I do think it says something that the consensus non-canon version of Prime Kirk's solution was something that ended up being completely non-violent. I guess that's just not what people want to see anymore. Is it that people perceive a hero like that to be too soft?

Sorry if I'm being a downer; I'm not trying to just bash the movie. But I'm continually trying to understand the reactions of other people as compared to my own very different ones. Maybe it's just out of my reach.

It was thought-provoking? Yay! :)

I'm tempted to either rewatch that part of the film or dig up screencaps, now.

Of all the various people who I've heard from who dislike the film, I have to say you're among the most level-headed. That someone doesn't like the film is fine with me, but I get bothered when they express their opinion venomously, or come across as judgmental of those who liked the film, or just can't seem to stop talking about their dislike. We get it, move on, y'know?
I've had the same problem with a few Janeway fans who, even when I grant that they may have the right idea and I may be wrong, won't grant me the same concession. One claimed that they've come to feel so persecuted that they're unwilling to yield at this point...but to me that just damages their credibility.
I'm learning not to talk to the board members who refuse to compromise even when they acknowledge that they probably should.

Frankly I'm sorry you didn't like the film more. I hope you're at least open to the possibility that the sequel may be more to your tastes.

I'll freely admit that for the bulk of the film Kirk comes across as a belligerent ass, though not completely without reason. Happily I find it amusingly snarky rather than utterly annoying and irredeemable.

If the consensus is that PrimeKirk's resolution of the KM scenario was non-violent...I'm not sure I would concur. I don't think he would have fired on (even simulations of) defenseless ships, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have altered the scenario in another manner in which violence still ensued.
I doubt the average viewer (or me, really) thought too much about NuKirk's blowing up of the ships, because in the end they are just simulations, Kirk's contempt of the entire situation is obvious, and...his actions just don't seem meant to be taken very seriously here, or be indicative of how he'd act if the scenario was real. Remember at the time under ordinary circumstances he'd still be years away from sitting in that chair.

Anywho, you're not being a downer and I greatly appreciate your curiosity. It's a hell of a lot better than some of the single-minded negativity and apparent unwillingness to moderate their opinions that some users have exhibited.
 
Pike said Kirk was a genius but we didn't get to see him actually use his brains. He got where he was by luck. He just happened to be on board the Enterprise because McCy brought him along. He just happened to hear mention of a "lightning storm in space". He just happened to land on Delta Vega near Spcok Prime. It just happened to be near a Star Fleet station where Scott was working. It just happened that Scott was the one that came up with warp beaming (with help from Spock). The list goes on. He just didn't come across as someone particularly heroic.
I kick at ST Eleven where I think they got it wrong, but I also acknowledge where TPTB got it right. What made Kirk the hero of the Federation was that he took charge in a time of crisis. He was in the right place at the right time. When both Pike and Spock were removed from the Enterprise's command structure, Kirk basically stepped up and said "follow me," and people did. Even though the were people on the bridge and on the ship who definitely out ranked him (Lt. Sulu for one), he exercised both authority and leadership. For all the unorthodoxy of the way he "seized power," Kirk the usurper performed all the classic actions of a hero.

Doesn't hurt that he was successful too.

:)
 
Well, he didn't actually usurp power, since Pike appointed him to First Officer under Spock. When Spock stepped down Kirk was The Man.
 
And Spock stepped down due to Kirk's verbal attack on him. Rather than remove him via the regulations as had been down many times before, he essentially put Spock in a situation where he was under stress from a member of his own crew.

Imagine Spock pulling the same thing on Kirk at the end of City on the Edge of Forever. You think Kirk would have had an emotional reaction to that? Do you think Spock would be he right person to take command after removing the commanding officer in that way?

Of course Kirk stepped up and took command. Pike had made him First Officer. That was his job. Pike put a cadet in the position of First Officer ahead of more experienced officers but he was still second in command.

Kirk didn't have to work to advance at all. He had Pike paving the way for him. Getting him into the Academy. Naming him First Officer even though he wasn't even supposed to be on the ship. He was legally a stowaway. He was also AWOL from the Academy.

In this movie the moral is, it doesn't matter if you work hard and bring people together as a team. The only one that matters is James T. Kirk. He who doesn't have to follow any rules at all.

That's the big problem with the characterization of Kirk. The writers seized upon what are considered to be his defining characteristics, being a rule breaker and an interstellar Romeo, even though they were at best a minor part of his personality. And that's all that he had. How many women did he meet that had speaking roles? How many did he try to sleep with? It wouldn't have surprised me if they showed him sleeping with one of his instructors at the Academy.

Kirk's supposed to be a leader. An origin movie like this is supposed to show you why people would follow him and why they would be so loyal. We saw none of that.
 
Pike and Spock Prime paved the way for Kirk, and young Spock didn't even want to go back to the Enterprise and work with Kirk again, until Spock Prime told him to.

So essentially, none of the things Kirk and Spock do are their own achievements and decisions.
 
Spock stepped down because he was totally unhinged by the destruction of his world and the murder of his mother, not because Kirk said nasty things to him. Spock had already sent Kirk to possibly die on Delta Vega - not what a sane commander does. Kirk made him realize just how much he'd been compromised and he stepped down. Time was of the essence so Kirk made sure Spock was removed from command ASAP, without confrences and hearings.
 
Re: You did WHAT in Public?

Time was of the essence so Kirk made sure Spock was removed from command ASAP, without confrences and hearings.

That's called mutiny.

And making Spock do stupid things so Kirk can shine doesn't make Kirk look any better.

It's not mutiny. It's regulation 619, that a commanding officer emotionally compromised must resign their command. Had Kirk followed protocol and done the TOS-style hearing, the Enterprise would have remained on course and Nero would have destroyed Earth.

Those "stupid things" Spock did were not becuase he was written stupidly. His world, where he was born and raised was destroyed. His mother, the only person who showed him love for most of his life, was killed. His people, who's way of life he aspired to, were virtually wiped out. Spock knew how to supress emotion, he barely showed it, but he was deeply, deeply messed up by all this.
 
And Kirk pushed the situation to his advantage. He deliberately provoked the commanding officer of his vessel. Kirk should have had McCoy declare Spock unfit for duty under 619 if he felt he was unable to command. No hearing necessary at that time. That would come later.

Putting Kirk off the ship in an escape pod onto a planet with a hostile environment and dangerous animals isn't acting stupid? Why did he do it? Because that's there Spock Prime and Scotty were and Kirk had to meet them. Spock was apparently just hanging out in a cave until Kirk showed up for some reason. He knew about the Starfleet base. he just waited until Kirk showed up to go there.

And why was Spock surprised that Kirk wasn't Captain of the Enterprise? Kirk was a lieutenant in 2255 and had just commanded his first planetary survey (A Private Little War). Two years later, still a year before the latest movie was set, he was still a lieutenant, this time on the Farragut. Why would Spock assume that Kirk should be the Captain of a starship a year later? Because the plot of the movie required it. It didn't make sense for Spock to make that assumption.

People were required to act badly to make NuKirk look good.
 
Kirk needed Spock out of command now, not after time-wasting discussions with McCoy. He didn't do it for his own ego, he did it to stop Nero and save lives.

I've said before I don't have any trouble suspending my disbelief and accepting the coincidences. To me it's just the same as the TOS, DS9 and ENT mirror crews all getting together somehow or any other Trek silliness. We obviously disagree there.

Saying Spock Prime should have been able to tell the 25 year old Kirk from the 30 year old one is weak. People often look the same between ages 25 and 30.

A character acting weak to make Kirk look good? Harriman in Generations.

Watch TMP. Kirk's a selfish jerk in that, with far less immediate danger driving his actions. He gets his ship back, demoting her captain because he can (despite his massive unfamiliarity with the rebuild), he gets McCoy forcably re-enlisted because he can when Dr. Chapel could do everything Bones does in that movie...
 
He didn't have to know how old he was. He knew what year it was.

Yes, Kirk started out as a jerk in TMP but he backed off when McCoy called him on it. "You're pushing. Your people know their jobs."

Kirk wasn't looking for a doctor, he was looking for McCoy. He needed his friend back. His conscience. Spock was his head. McCoy was his heart.

NuKirk doesn't need anyone since he can do it all himself or get Pike to do it for him.
 
And Kirk pushed the situation to his advantage. He deliberately provoked the commanding officer of his vessel. Kirk should have had McCoy declare Spock unfit for duty under 619 if he felt he was unable to command. No hearing necessary at that time. That would come later.

Putting Kirk off the ship in an escape pod onto a planet with a hostile environment and dangerous animals isn't acting stupid? Why did he do it? Because that's there Spock Prime and Scotty were and Kirk had to meet them. Spock was apparently just hanging out in a cave until Kirk showed up for some reason. He knew about the Starfleet base. he just waited until Kirk showed up to go there.

That's right. If anything, McCoy should have invoked regulation 619 the moment Spock marooned Kirk instead of throwing him in the brig for a court martial on the charge of Mutiny. And like you said, the hearing would have come later.

However, I do understand why Spock Prime didn't go to the star base right away. If he had, then Scotty would have thought that Spock was his relief. Pay careful attention on his reaction the next time you see the movie again.
 
How did Spock Prime know what year it was? Either Nero told him, which is unlikely, or Kirk did in the ice cave off-camera after Spock has assumed he was captain but before the mind-meld began. I pick the latter, since we don't see every millisecond of these people's lives.

There's a bit in STXI after Kirk is marooned where Spock tells McCoy, "I recognize that supporting me as you did must have been difficult.", implying something unseen went on between Spock saying "Get him off my ship!" and Kirk finding Spock on Delta Vega.

Any hearing would not have come later - watch "The Enterprise Incident".

Likely a situation would have arisen the second Spock's command was questioned where the crew would have had to pick sides, which would have been a mutiny and would have wasted time they didn't have. Kirk got unstable commander Spock out of the way as quickly as possible in a time of crisis.

Also, Kirk needed all of his crew's help to defeat Nero. He didn't do it "by himself" at all.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top