… but I simply meant to point out that there is nothing in the history of James T. Kirk that would suggest he is incapable of vengeful wrath for its own sake.
Hmmm, you mean except the history of James T Kirk? Is he capable of pressing an advantage in battle to a deadly conclusion? Yes certainly. Is he capable of executing defenceless opponents (that are or can be rendered "harmless") in a pretty cold and calculating way? That we have yet to establish. I don’t think we should lump both of those character traits together and pretend they are the same either.
It's hardly beyond possibility that a younger version of Kirk with a considerably more volatile childhood might secretly look for an excuse to blow away the Romulan psychopath who murdered his father 25 years ago.
That of course is the issue. No excuse is presented.
That's all, really. Even Prime Kirk could harbor seething irrational hatred for years--at an ENTIRE RACE, no less--for the murder of his son. Why is it so hard to believe that NuKirk might be just as pissed at one particular Romulan for the murder of his father?
Its not,* from our point of view, but it represents a breakdown of 23rd century socialisation. What I and perhaps others are saying is that combined with other moral issues in the film, NuTrek no longer embodies the moral and social standards of the Prime universe and some of us see that as a bad thing. What’s important about the Kirk/NuKirk debate is that it is part of an attempt to pretend there is no real difference, when in fact NuTrek is now based on roughly 20th rather than 23rd century values (not even 21st in military terms I believe).
* But his decision doesn’t seem to be made in the heat of the moment/blind fury. He seemed more in control than Spock at that point. It is also disappointing that 23rd century social services were apparently ineffective in helping Kirk get back on track, so to speak, after his "driving lesson". Maybe that can happen in Kirk’s case but was the Narada sufficient to explain a broad social regression of over two hundred years?
Yes, as others have suggested, this might be the writers of that movie making a point at Kirk's expense. Compare it to STXI where they don’t even seem to realise there are moral issues let-alone resolve them.
An issue you're going to have to take up with the writers, though. The point remains, though, that seething murderous rage is hardly out of character for Prime Kirk, let alone the AU Kirk who is demonstrated as being somewhat less virtuous and somewhat more impulsive than his older Prime Universe counterpart.
Well Kirk is human like the rest of us, so I can understand him saying something like "let them die" in the heat of the moment. It is rather a different thing to be the kind of person who would actually kill them. Our so-called "corrections" budget would go though the roof if not. I think that's a distinction that's worth coming to grips with. You cannot conclude Kirk felt "seething murderous rage" from what he said. He would have had to at least actually intended or tried to kill them for that to be the case. But as mentioned above, the attitude of the movie is in question. If you want to change that attitude, you can’t rely on fans to assume there’s an admiral somewhere, you have to show that admiral doing something.
Of course, youth alone suffices for an explanation, as in Jean Luc Picard picking a fight with a trio of surly Nausicans (behaviors one can hardly imagine from CAPTAIN Picard).
Indeed. But if you mean who provoked it, I think you will find the Nausicaans did that. Picard may have thrown the first punch (I can’t remember) but he felt he was morally obliged to support his friends I believe (for some reason I also can't remember). Don’t make me rewatch it. I will if I have too!
So you are arguing that NuKirk is too young to have the responsibility of commanding a flagship? I can’t help but agree.
Edit: Sorry. Looks like you are right about Picard provoking the fight. Hard to believe as you say.
UFO said:
No, Nero was finished as a threat to the Enterprise.
And Enterprise' weapons made sure of that.
I believe the black hole made sure of that. With the Earth at stake, if Kirk and co. had any doubts about Nero’s threat level (I believe there are sensors for that sort of thing), they would have shot first and asked if Nero wanted help later (if there was a later!). Further, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because that would have been justified.
There is precedent for taking such things into account of course, but stealing a ship is not quite the same as murder. And the Federation just might take that particular form of lack of discipline more seriously than we do (not in the AU obviously). If they let him off, it might not be so bright to pop him straight back on the horse. Maybe allow for the fact he is so young and let him get a bit more experience first (before the next movie!).
