"I like the new movie better..."
- Thread starter darkshadow0001
- Start date
A
Amaris
Guest
You're right. Who in their right mind would do what Spock did for Uhura? I mean, that would be like hijacking a Federation Starship to return to a quarantined planet to bring your dead friend's body back, risking court martial, death and the peace of the entire quadrant. J.J. just went too far and made things too unrealistic.
It's sad that you see someone admitting a mistake and recifying it as a sign of a weak backbone.
Or better yet, it would be like risking your entire career and possibly being court-martialed (or worse) for sending false orders to your ship, then stealing said ship, and kidnapping a former captain, in order to take that captain to a forbidden planet, completely against Starfleet orders, just so that captain can live the remainder of his life in a fantasy. No, JJ Abrams's Spock is nothing like the TOS Spock
Methinks this whole "Uhura tells Spock what to do" thing is just the latest insignificant point that some haters are whinging about in a vain effort to put down an almost 18-month-old film.
Last edited:
But then, the TOS treatment of military law, discipline and regulation was complete fantasy.
Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way. In ST III, Kirk stole a goddamned starship and blew it up.
Everything that happens in JJTrek is completely within the traditional parameters of Trek. The haters got nuthin'.
Where in the parameters of past Trek were the following?.....
1. The ability of a first officer of just one of the many starships in the fleet, being able to change or override orders from command just because the junior officer "whined" about not getting the post he/she felt they deserved?
2. The Captain and/or acting Captain throwing a crewperson into a life pod just because you disagree with his opinion?
3. The fast promotion of a cadet (who has been basically thrown out of the Academy) to the rank of Captain of one of the most powerful ships in the fleet?
4. On the note before with rank,...posting a self proclaimed and convicted criminal to the position of Chief Engineer on said same ship.
So tell me Dennis, where in the "old" Star Trek did that ever fall into?
Omega_Glory
Commodore
Exactly.
The Saturday Night Live version of the Kobayashi Maru scenario certainly does not help. However it is the best produced Star Trek parody I've ever seen.
Although the X-rated versions (Sex Trek) were funnier.Yeah, this is why so many more people enjoy it than ever did the old version. Must be that Shatner was not enough of a ham.
A little group of people repeating that nonsense to one another doesn't make it so.
Omega_Glory
Commodore
Yeah, this is why so many more people enjoy it than ever did the old version. Must be that Shatner was not enough of a ham.
A little group of people repeating that nonsense to one another doesn't make it so.
The younger crowd obviously likes parodies more than us "old folks". Kinda like remaking True Grit with someone like Jeff Bridges...oh wait, the dumbshits did that too. Hollyweird is truly lost.
Yeah, this is why so many more people enjoy it than ever did the old version. Must be that Shatner was not enough of a ham.
A little group of people repeating that nonsense to one another doesn't make it so.
Well, we'll see if this nuTrek makes it 40 years before running out of steam and needing to get rebooted.
Dennis, your argumentation has basically reduced itself to "My new Trek is better than your old Trek, nanananana."
And you of all people should know that judging the quality of a show by its financial success or popularity is... unless you really think that Twilight: Eclipse is better than The Shawshank Redemption because it's more popular with people and made more money.
Last edited:
Is the original Jeyl not still around?
Where in the parameters of past Trek were the following?.....
1. The ability of a first officer of just one of the many starships in the fleet, being able to change or override orders from command just because the junior officer "whined" about not getting the post he/she felt they deserved?
2. The Captain and/or acting Captain throwing a crewperson into a life pod just because you disagree with his opinion?
3. The fast promotion of a cadet (who has been basically thrown out of the Academy) to the rank of Captain of one of the most powerful ships in the fleet?
4. On the note before with rank,...posting a self proclaimed and convicted criminal to the position of Chief Engineer on said same ship.
So tell me Dennis, where in the "old" Star Trek did that ever fall into?
While those specific things have not happened in other Trek shows/movies the spirit of those things are part of Trek tradition. In Voyager Tom Paris is court-martialed but ends up being Voyager's main pilot. In the Menagerie Spock lies and steals Captain Pike and the Enterprise and all is forgiven. Data is manipulated by a signal from his creator and steals the bridge and steals the Enterprise to get to the planet he maker is on. Then nothing happens to him. Kirk could go insane in one episode and be back in the Captains chair by the end of it.
This type of stuff runs through every series and I can cite many more instances of insubordination, mutiny, crew members putting the lives of their crew mates in jeopardy with no lasting disciplinary repercussions.
Sometimes I wonder if those people who complain about such implausibility of Trek XI have even watched any other episode or movie.
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
The point is that Spock is shown consistently as ineffective.
Uhura talks him into changing crew assignments for a temporary assignment.
He decides that the only way to handle Kirk is to jettison him onto a dangerous planet rather than putting him in the brig or beaming him to Scotty's outpost.
Kirk goads him into attacking him, albeit under stress.
He does not take back command after Kirk has usurped it. If he's back on duty he should be back where Pike left him, in command. He's a commander, Kirk is a cadet in command as First Officer. When his senior officer returns, he gos back to his assigned position.
He gives a direct order to Scott who had illegally boarded the ship and Scott tells him he doesn't want to get involved? You are involved, bucko.
Spock Prime tells him that he shouldn't help his people settle on a new planet. Why couldn't he do both, returning to duty after they are settled? He's got lots of time.
He doesn't become First Officer based on his value to Kirk. He becomes first officer because he asked to be.
Why would anyone follow his orders? He's spineless.
Uhura talks him into changing crew assignments for a temporary assignment.
He decides that the only way to handle Kirk is to jettison him onto a dangerous planet rather than putting him in the brig or beaming him to Scotty's outpost.
Kirk goads him into attacking him, albeit under stress.
He does not take back command after Kirk has usurped it. If he's back on duty he should be back where Pike left him, in command. He's a commander, Kirk is a cadet in command as First Officer. When his senior officer returns, he gos back to his assigned position.
He gives a direct order to Scott who had illegally boarded the ship and Scott tells him he doesn't want to get involved? You are involved, bucko.
Spock Prime tells him that he shouldn't help his people settle on a new planet. Why couldn't he do both, returning to duty after they are settled? He's got lots of time.
He doesn't become First Officer based on his value to Kirk. He becomes first officer because he asked to be.
Why would anyone follow his orders? He's spineless.
I was more wondering how Kirk knew Uhura was aboard the Enterprise, and what he would have done had she not been aboard the ship.
OK, fine, you win silly pointless argument. He's spineless. And yet he's still first officer. So what's the argument again?
I don't have a case, Jarod. At the end of the movie, Spock is first officer, despite whatever issues he had during the movie. Period. And in TOS, he still retained his rank and was not punished in any way after hijacking his ship, kidnapping his former captain and disobeying Starfleet's highest order. Period.
Dennis said: "Basically, the way it's always been in Star Trek is that if you're one of the heroes and you have a really, really good excuse you can do anything and Starfleet looks the other way." And he's right. So, again, what's the argument here?
I don't have a case, Jarod. At the end of the movie, Spock is first officer, despite whatever issues he had during the movie. Period.
And that's exactly what he's criticizing.
Though nobody knows what happened between the episodes, and (you're probably tired of hearing it) "two wrongs don't make a right."
And he's critcizing it by basically saying that in the real world, that would never happen. And he's right. But as has been pointed out, this isn't the real world.
If we're just going by "the real world," then Spock should have at least been stripped of his rank at the end of "The Menagerie." Was he stripped of his rank?
Similar threads
