Alternate universe idea dilutes the drama of film?

[Destructor]

I know what you mean in that my investment in Trek is in the 'Prime' timeline. I subsequently have much, much less investment in the alternate timeline (in much the same way that I don't really care what happens in the Mirror Universe, beyond it's application to the Prime timeline).

That said, alternate universe theory is a recognized theory in physics, and Trek has often dabbled its toes in alternate timelines before, so I don't think it lessens the drama of the Prime timeline, and it was a mildly clever, Trekkian way to reboot the franchise, and we'll see where it goes, dramatically.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Why even bother destroying Romulus? To give Nero a motivation? Khan was a more effective villain and he was mad at Kirk for standing him on a planet that turned dangerous and for the death of his wife. We saw the after effects of that. We knew where he was coming from. For Nero's motivation we caught glimpses in a mind meld. It was a rather weak end to a planet that was a large part of the Trek mythos. Either give it a big send off or come up with another motivation for Nero.

 

[Devon]

Why even bother destroying Romulus? To give Nero a motivation?

Yes....

It was a rather weak end to a planet that was a large part of the Trek mythos.

It wasn't.

 

[UFO]

But you are also in the universe because someone in another universe made a different decision.

An excellent point. Many worlds theory highlights the point that our actions are determined by physics in exactly the same way everything else is. But that is not telling us anything we don’t already know.

Again: Why should I care about anything that happens in an alternate universe? I will never see it. Nothing that happens in it can possibly affect me in any way. For all I know, it may not even exist. It certainly does not, and CANnot, affect any decision I make.

Well if "NuYou" is now in a universe that branched off from one where "You Prime" made a decision to do X, then that choice forced NuYou to do Y. So there is at least one of your decisions that was effected by an "alternative" universe I guess.

To suggest that there is no such thing as real life free-will just because alternate universes MIGHT exist is rather futile.

Oh certainly. We don’t need alternative universes to help us realise that traditional free will doesn’t exist. But as a thought experiment they do make it more obvious.

Whether the drama works depends on whether the writers and actors make you care about the characters. They accomplished that, I cared, the drama works. That's true in any universe.

Yeah, what a dirty trick! They stuff everything else up and get that right! Well, for most people. Despicable, just despicable!

The fact that the characters are so sure of something they couldn't possibly know is an indication that the writers are telling the audience their intent.

If you can’t convey everything you need to as a natural and/or necessary part of the story, that’s called bad writing. But "we" don’t care about such things any more because "we" care about the characters. See how insidious it is?!

Why even bother destroying Romulus? To give Nero a motivation? Khan was a more effective villain and he was mad at Kirk for standing him on a planet that turned dangerous and for the death of his wife. We saw the after effects of that. We knew where he was coming from. For Nero's motivation we caught glimpses in a mind meld. It was a rather weak end to a planet that was a large part of the Trek mythos. Either give it a big send off or come up with another motivation for Nero.

Yes, less is more. Subtle this movie is not. In fact at the risk of a knee-jerk reaction, I propose a law that you should only be allowed to blow up one planet per film. No, not one per universe! Well, unless you blow them all up at the same time of course. Destroying a whole galaxy in one go, for example, would be fine.

 

[Pauln6]

Why even bother destroying Romulus? To give Nero a motivation?

Yes....

It was a rather weak end to a planet that was a large part of the Trek mythos.

It wasn't.

Nero would get the same motivation if a Romulan colony had been destroyed or even a science vessel carrying his wife - in fact the latter would have made loads more sense because one could assume that Spock might have had a personal culpability for the activities of a science vessel. They didn't need to destroy the iconic Romulan homeworlds (since we have to assume that Remus bit the dust too). Even if Romulus had to be ravaged by solar winds, they need not have destroyed it completely - an allegory for disaster-ridden third world countries has more story-telling potential than outright obliteration. It did seem like a way to stamp the new team's authority on both universes aggressively and it was unnecessary.

Now if Romulans are related to Vulcans then they may be capable of incredibly strong, illogical, violent emotions. That might work as an explanation for Nero's crazy actions but works less well as a motivation for his entire crew - even though they may have lost loved ones, it doesn't follow that they would all be on board with the active destruction of trillions of innocent lives on multiple homeworlds. They're not members of the Senate or Tal Shi'ar, they're simple miners in just one ship who collectively decide to become war criminals. This falls back into Trek's tendency to define an entire species with a single trait - in the face of adversity, all Romulans become war criminals. It's easy to see why Muslims can all be tarred with the same brush with this simplistic approach and it isn't in step with modern, intelligent storytelling.

I'd have been happier if Nero had accumulated like-minded mercenaries of many other races in his 25 years of waiting, possibly some of whom were manipulating his grief, and perhaps featured some of his original crew disagreeing with his actions.

 

[Devon]

Nero would get the same motivation if a Romulan colony had been destroyed or even a science vessel carrying his wife - in fact the latter would have made loads more sense because one could assume that Spock might have had a personal culpability for the activities of a science vessel.

So what? Nero got the same motivation from his homeworld being destroyed, that's what happened, so discuss that.

They didn't need to destroy the iconic Romulan homeworlds (since we have to assume that Remus bit the dust too).

Iconic? Gimme a break.

Even if Romulus had to be ravaged by solar winds, they need not have destroyed it completely - an allegory for disaster-ridden third world countries has more story-telling potential than outright obliteration. It did seem like a way to stamp the new team's authority on both universes aggressively and it was unnecessary.

It was necessary to the story, only unnecessary to those who put unnecessary stock into fictional planets.

Now if Romulans are related to Vulcans then they may be capable of incredibly strong, illogical, violent emotions. That might work as an explanation for Nero's crazy actions but works less well as a motivation for his entire crew - even though they may have lost loved ones, it doesn't follow that they would all be on board with the active destruction of trillions of innocent lives on multiple homeworlds.

How do you know all are?

They're not members of the Senate or Tal Shi'ar, they're simple miners in just one ship who collectively decide to become war criminals.

Assumption.

This falls back into Trek's tendency to define an entire species with a single trait - in the face of adversity, all Romulans become war criminals.

Assumption in this case.

I'd have been happier if Nero had accumulated like-minded mercenaries of many other races in his 25 years of waiting, possibly some of whom were manipulating his grief, and perhaps featured some of his original crew disagreeing with his actions.

In the original script, Ayel did and was killed, just for trivia purposes.

 

[Pauln6]

So what? Nero got the same motivation from his homeworld being destroyed, that's what happened, so discuss that.

Assumption.

If you enjoy simplistic motivations in your movie characters I'm not going to point the finger and suggest that your views are childish, less valid, or less intelligent than mine. I just prefer more complex characters. In that respect, NuKirk is shaping up very nicely - as long as they resist the temptation to make him the caricature he became in the later TOS movies.

However, your argument cuts both ways. If Romulus isn't iconic, if new fans have never heard of it, the only reason to put it in the movie at all is as a red rag to those fans that DO care about it. It was obviously calculated to get fans worked up. Personally, I have no strong feelings about it either way but I can see that it wasn't necessary to destroy that particular planet to give Nero his motivation.

Assumptions cut both ways. I assume that Nero's crew were all miners because he states that it was a simple mining vessel and there is no evidence on screen to suggest that his crew consists of anything other than the crew of a mining vessel. There is more on-screen evidence to support that than not. I assume that they agree with his motivations because we do not see any dissent (not even uncomfortable stances or furtive glances that I recall). I'm glad they cut the scene of him killing a disagreeable crewman - that would have been a terrible cliche. I might have preferred it if a couple of Romulans had decided to help Kirk and Spock at the end though e.g. a Romulan saving Kirk instead of that cheesey moment with Pike.

 

[JarodRussell]

It was a rather weak end to a planet that was a large part of the Trek mythos.

It wasn't.

It was!

 

[kkozoriz1]

If I don't have a reason to care about Romulus, why should I care if Nero did? You have to be able to put yourself in the villains shoes, to see things from his point of view. If the destruction of Romulus is no big deal, why should I care what Nero thinks about it?

And what does that do about the motivation of the "villain" in the next movie? Unless he loses his home planet AND his summer home planet, his motivation is going to pale next to Nero's.

 

[Pauln6]

Yeah Hollywood's obsession with bigger being better. Khan lost his wife and suffered for 15 years so Kirk has to die and/or be marooned.

Nero loses his wife and planet so Spock has to lose his Mum and planet.

The motivations still work if we're dealing just with the wife and mum with oodles of collateral damage. Raising the bar to a planetary scale was probably done to bring 'Earth in Peril' to the mix to 'justify' Kirk's insta-promotion at the end. Can't blame NuTrek for that though - Earth in Peril was used in 2 out of 6 TOS movies too.

 

[ST-One]

If I don't have a reason to care about Romulus, why should I care if Nero did? You have to be able to put yourself in the villains shoes, to see things from his point of view.

Yes, and that is why the Nero character works; not perfectly, but given the limited screen time quite successfully.

If the destruction of Romulus is no big deal, why should I care what Nero thinks about it?

Would it be a big deal to you if the Earth would be destroyed?
Yes.
Then you know what Nero thinks.

Yeah Hollywood's obsession with bigger being better. Khan lost his wife and suffered for 15 years so Kirk has to die and/or be marooned.

What does he want Genesis for?

Nero loses his wife and planet so Spock has to lose his Mum and planet.

The motivations still work if we're dealing just with the wife and mum with oodles of collateral damage. Raising the bar to a planetary scale was probably done to bring 'Earth in Peril' to the mix to 'justify' Kirk's insta-promotion at the end. Can't blame NuTrek for that though - Earth in Peril was used in 2 out of 6 TOS movies too.

Then why do you complain about it?

 

[F. King Daniel]

The planet Romulus was an important bit of Star Trek for me. While TV/film Romulans were usually bland generic villains (with disgusting bowl cuts and shoulder pads), the novels, especially the Rihannsu ones by Diane Duane, gave them a rich backstory, culture and even a language. However I wasn't upset by the planet's destruction. Why? Well, I liked STXI, I liked Nero (even if it never occurred to him to shoot Red Matter into the Hobus star) and thought Romulus' destruction made a pretty strong motivation on a general and personal (his expectant wife) level.

Also, I can't think of any Romulan stories left to be told, except to conclude the current divided empire novel storyline, which has 5 years until the supernova to be resolved. Between the episodes and the novels, pretty much everything's been covered, bar unification, which I see as something else Nero forever took from Spock.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Having just read the novelization it's actually explained why Nero didn't shoot the Red Matter into the Hobus star, in the book Spock Prime explains to Kirk that Nero was so blinded by his rage and anger over the loss of his wife, unborn son, and planet that he no longer cared about saving Romulus that way. Indeed Jim declares that's irrational to which Spock agrees with him. I liked Nero as well along with Eric Bana's portrayal of him.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Also, I can't think of any Romulan stories left to be told, except to conclude the current divided empire novel storyline, which has 5 years until the supernova to be resolved. Between the episodes and the novels, pretty much everything's been covered, bar unification, which I see as something else Nero forever took from Spock.

Wow. Just wow. No more Romulan stories to tell? Really? An entire planet of violent Vulcans and there's not one more story to tell?

Yeah, best thing it was blown up then....

 

[Pauln6]

Yeah Hollywood's obsession with bigger being better. Khan lost his wife and suffered for 15 years so Kirk has to die and/or be marooned.

What does he want Genesis for?

Nero loses his wife and planet so Spock has to lose his Mum and planet.

The motivations still work if we're dealing just with the wife and mum with oodles of collateral damage. Raising the bar to a planetary scale was probably done to bring 'Earth in Peril' to the mix to 'justify' Kirk's insta-promotion at the end. Can't blame NuTrek for that though - Earth in Peril was used in 2 out of 6 TOS movies too.

Then why do you complain about it?

Khan is an empire builder and he wants to re-establish a power base. Genesis might let him do that. His revenge against Kirk was as much because Kirk was called in by Carol. He didn't go looking for him.

I wasn't complaining about the destruction of Romulus or Earth in Peril per se. I was simply agreeing with those that were unhappy at Romulus' destruction that it wasn't necessary to go that far to retain Nero's motivation.

I will admit, V'Ger felt more of a credible threat to me. The Whale Probe was ludicrous but the movie was great fun. I enjoyed NuTrek too but in its case it's the accumulation of silliness that becomes irksome. Nero could only remain a defeatable threat because he drove his mining ship through some very large plot holes.

 

[JarodRussell]

Also, I can't think of any Romulan stories left to be told, except to conclude the current divided empire novel storyline, which has 5 years until the supernova to be resolved. Between the episodes and the novels, pretty much everything's been covered, bar unification, which I see as something else Nero forever took from Spock.

I also can't think of any more TOS stories to be told, yet they seem to be doing another remake.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Also, I can't think of any Romulan stories left to be told, except to conclude the current divided empire novel storyline, which has 5 years until the supernova to be resolved. Between the episodes and the novels, pretty much everything's been covered, bar unification, which I see as something else Nero forever took from Spock.

Wow. Just wow. No more Romulan stories to tell? Really? An entire planet of violent Vulcans and there's not one more story to tell?

Yeah, best thing it was blown up then....

If someone thinks of a great Romulan story they can still tell it. There's alternate Romulus for the films, and in the books they can go back and forth and tell stories set whenever they want.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Let's see, I have this great follow up to Nemesis. Whoops! No Romulus here. Oh well, I'll just pop over the the NuUniverse. Hey, where's Vulcan?

Oh well, so much for wrapping up the unification storyline.

 

[Pauln6]

Let's see, I have this great follow up to Nemesis. Whoops! No Romulus here. Oh well, I'll just pop over the the NuUniverse. Hey, where's Vulcan?

Oh well, so much for wrapping up the unification storyline.

Don't think so small. With an infinite number of alternate universes you can mix and match to your heart's content. I'm doing a story that mixes Trek with B5, Alien, and Solaris. You can pick Sapphire & Steel, I Dream of Jeannie, and Worzel Gummidge. Let's see Nero take on Aunt Sally!

 

[Admiral_Young]

Yeah just because Romulus has been destroyed in the Prime universe and Vulcan destroyed in the reboot universe doesn't mean there aren't still stories one can tell if one really thinks about it. In fact I would do a follow up story about Ambassador Spock taking on an alias as his helps to rebuild his world in the alternate timeline and establish the colony while also continuing to deal with the fallout of his actions. Spock now has an enormous burden on his shoulders that he will have to struggle with, not only the loss of Romulus but being responsible for his part in the destruction of Vulcan. As Spock himself would say "There are always possibilities."