Biggest single contrivances that make stories "work"?

[YARN]

This line never bothered me at all for the simple fact that this was stated/felt/shared during a mind-meld and is most likely hyperbole.

It's a mind-meld, not a hyperbole-meld.

Spock mind-melds Valeris in ST-VI precisely because he wants to cut through the BS and know precisely what she knows.

In this scene, Spock is telling Kirk (directly) what he needs him to know so that he can understand why old-Spock is there and why Nero wants revenge.

Of course, I also don't buy the argument from some that Spock would not use hyperbole. Even by STVI Spock specifically stated that logic was only the beginning of wisdom and the older Spock got, the more he seemed to embrace both his logic and his more emotional, human side.

Dude, the narrative point of the scene is exposition. It's a way to clue the audience in on the action. The destruction of the whole galaxy is a way to establish the stakes motivating Starfleet and the Vulcan Science Academy.

And why would he be "using" hyperbole on Kirk with regard to this particular point? If there were some "twist" at the end of the film, we might re-evaluate Spock to be a variety of "unreliable narrator" in this scene. But there isn't.

Destroying Romulus could indeed have galaxy wide, or at least Alpha Quadrant wide ramifications. Plus, being in a mind meld, Spock may not have all of his emotional "filters" up.

This is unadulterated horseshit.

The filmmakers wanted us to believe that the galaxy in the future time-line was in direct jeopardy from the supernova (and that globs of magic red goo create black holes). Mission accomplished. They successfully communicated what they intended to communicate.

If you want to speculate wildly beyond what we are shown on the screen, feel free -- but this is still apologetic nonsense to cover what you realize is a rather glaring science gaff on the part of the writers.

 

[BillJ]

If you want to speculate wildly beyond what we are shown on the screen, feel free...

We're all Star Trek fans... it's what we do.

 

[T'Girl]

Okay, so they view Earth and the Federation as a threat to the Collective and go back in time to prevent its formation?

Why would the (supposed) clear thinking Borg view the federation as a threat? The federation is (Picard) 8,000 light year long, the galaxy is 100,000 light years in diameter, they're separated by 50,000 to 60,000 light years ... how is the federartion even remotely a "threat?"

How's that for a contrivance? There are vast area of the delta quadrant for the Borg to concern themselves with.
-----
Red matter making things into black hole? If the red matter collapsed a large enough star, sure a black hole, but how can collapsing a planet the size of Vulcan result in a black hole? There isn't enough mass to start with, the red matter could reduce the planet's diameter, I can buy that, maybe into a ball a couple of hundred miles across.

But a black hole?

 

[sojourner]

If you want to speculate wildly beyond what we are shown on the screen, feel free

That's the thing. We weren't shown on screen the supernova endangering the universe. we were told by a character it would have this effect. There is no evidence either way to prove if it was literal or hyperbole.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

That's the thing. We weren't shown on screen the supernova endangering the universe. we were told by a character it would have this effect. There is no evidence either way to prove if it was literal or hyperbole.

Any attempt to rationalise trek XI's supernova or black holes will inevitably involve words such as 'subspace', 'anomaly' aka magic.
Spock making a hyperbole is the least important concession to 'this interpretation is far-fetched' the movie requires.

the entire crew of the Reliant not being able to count.

That's only one of many offenders from 'The Wrath of Khan':

A starfleet ship's crew not knowing to count, Chekov losing a supposedly deadly parasite just because, Kirk proving he's a crappy captain who can't recornize an obvious trap, Khan being stupider than Forrest Gump in not knowing space has 3 dimensions, etc, etc.

 

[YARN]

If you want to speculate wildly beyond what we are shown on the screen, feel free

That's the thing. We weren't shown on screen the supernova endangering the universe. we were told by a character it would have this effect. There is no evidence either way to prove if it was literal or hyperbole.

Pine says to Kirk that he is a repeat offender with a genius-level I.Q. - this might only be hyperbole... Maybe Kirk is only a one-time offender or "occasional" offender who is a little smarter than average.

I mean we weren't "shown", but only "told" by a character. We cannot be sure - it could be hyperbole.

 

[sojourner]

Pine? Isn't he an actor? not a character?

 

[YARN]

Pine? Isn't he an actor? not a character?

Typo: I meant Pike - or perhaps I am being wacky and non-literal (e.g., satire, irony, hyperbole).

 

[You_Will_Fail]

I think its safe to say anything associated with the Borg is unrealistic (in universe unrealistic), Star Trek XI too.

 

[The Wormhole]

^Enterprise followed them through the time-wormhole and destroyed them before they could destroy/assimilate earth. It was a pretty big part of the plot.

Presumably in the timeline in which they did assimilate Earth the Enterprise did not follow them back, and therefore did not destroy the sphere. The sphere would therefore have launched its attack on the Phoenix and then assimilated Earth. Even though, there should be nothing of value to them on the planet. Hell, they just destroyed the single most advanced piece of technology on the planet, and even that was pretty damn primitive by comparison. Hell, I jst realized they wouldn't even have to obliterate the planet, just make sure Cochrane was dead and they would have effectively prevented the Federation from forming.

Okay, so they view Earth and the Federation as a threat to the Collective and go back in time to prevent its formation?

Why would the (supposed) clear thinking Borg view the federation as a threat? The federation is (Picard) 8,000 light year long, the galaxy is 100,000 light years in diameter, they're separated by 50,000 to 60,000 light years ... how is the federartion even remotely a "threat?"

How's that for a contrivance? There are vast area of the delta quadrant for the Borg to concern themselves with.

I've always speculated that Q pulling the Enterprise away just as the Borg were really kicking its ass may have given the Borg the impression that the Federation is really powerful and therfore categorized them as a priority threat.

Yeah, it's a weak rationalization, but its the best I got. The problem with the Borg is the more you use them, the more contrived the stories have to get.

Wait, that's it. The Borg are Star Trek's biggest contrivance.

 

[T'Girl]

Khan being stupider than Forrest Gump in not knowing space has 3 dimensions

According to Spock, Khan wasn't so much "stupider" as he was simply inexperienced. Khan previous military experiences were likely maneuvering land and naval forces. Two dimensional. Probiliy not much military experience even in that form of warfare, Space Seed suggested that Khan and the other supermen simply seized political power (maybe through simultaneous coups) as opposed to fighting existing governments and taking over after a war.

 

[Ghel]

This line never bothered me at all for the simple fact that this was stated/felt/shared during a mind-meld and is most likely hyperbole.

It's a mind-meld, not a hyperbole-meld.

Spock mind-melds Valeris in ST-VI precisely because he wants to cut through the BS and know precisely what she knows.

In this scene, Spock is telling Kirk (directly) what he needs him to know so that he can understand why old-Spock is there and why Nero wants revenge.

Of course, I also don't buy the argument from some that Spock would not use hyperbole. Even by STVI Spock specifically stated that logic was only the beginning of wisdom and the older Spock got, the more he seemed to embrace both his logic and his more emotional, human side.

Dude, the narrative point of the scene is exposition. It's a way to clue the audience in on the action. The destruction of the whole galaxy is a way to establish the stakes motivating Starfleet and the Vulcan Science Academy.

And why would he be "using" hyperbole on Kirk with regard to this particular point? If there were some "twist" at the end of the film, we might re-evaluate Spock to be a variety of "unreliable narrator" in this scene. But there isn't.

Destroying Romulus could indeed have galaxy wide, or at least Alpha Quadrant wide ramifications. Plus, being in a mind meld, Spock may not have all of his emotional "filters" up.

This is unadulterated horseshit.

The filmmakers wanted us to believe that the galaxy in the future time-line was in direct jeopardy from the supernova (and that globs of magic red goo create black holes). Mission accomplished. They successfully communicated what they intended to communicate.

If you want to speculate wildly beyond what we are shown on the screen, feel free -- but this is still apologetic nonsense to cover what you realize is a rather glaring science gaff on the part of the writers.

--In response to "hyperbole-meld, Spocks mind meld in ST VI is entirely different from the one in the new film. In VI, Spock was forcibly extracting information from an unwilling participant. In the new film, Spock is presenting Kirk with a narrative of events. Telling someone a story, even an autobiographical one, requires far different rhetorical strategies than forcing someone to provide information they do not wish to share.

--On the idea that just because the meld is exposition for the film, this still does not rule out hyperbole. Remember, most film viewers are not hard core Star Trek fans. Hence, having Spock wax on about how the supernova is going to destabalize the alpha quadrant and how the klingons, Federation, Cardassians, Ferengi et al are all going to react is silly, when the exposition can be shortened to "it could destroy the galaxy." Even in the directors commentary, Abrams mentioned he wanted to keep the info vague because he felt getting into too much detail would only serve to confuse causal viewers.

--One of my personal favorites "If there were some "twist" at the end of the film, we might re-evaluate Spock to be a variety of "unreliable narrator" in this scene. But there isn't. [emphasis mine]"
Except of course for the whole bit of dialogue between young and old Spock (paraphrased) "You let Kirk believe that universe ending consequences could happen if you and I were to meet. . . so you lied!"
"I exaggerated."
Of course, this does take place at the end of the film and references the dialogue that took place directly after the mind-meld scene. It would certainly seem to imply to me that Spock was willing to bend the truth a bit to get this universe to turn out as Spock believes that it should . . .

Hence, I would hardly call what I am doing wild speculation since there is clear supporting evidence and dialogue that Spock is being liberal with the truth when it suits his purposes in this film!

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Khan being stupider than Forrest Gump in not knowing space has 3 dimensions

According to Spock, Khan wasn't so much "stupider" as he was simply inexperienced. Khan previous military experiences were likely maneuvering land and naval forces. Two dimensional. Probiliy not much military experience even in that form of warfare, Space Seed suggested that Khan and the other supermen simply seized political power (maybe through simultaneous coups) as opposed to fighting existing governments and taking over after a war.

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

 

[BillJ]

Khan being stupider than Forrest Gump in not knowing space has 3 dimensions

According to Spock, Khan wasn't so much "stupider" as he was simply inexperienced. Khan previous military experiences were likely maneuvering land and naval forces. Two dimensional. Probiliy not much military experience even in that form of warfare, Space Seed suggested that Khan and the other supermen simply seized political power (maybe through simultaneous coups) as opposed to fighting existing governments and taking over after a war.

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

Of course Khan knows space is three dimensional. But he has only waged war on a two dimensional scale, unless he was a fighter pilot.

Tim Tebow knows his delivery takes too long. But when he's under pressure he reverts to what has worked for him in the past. That long, slow delivery.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

According to Spock, Khan wasn't so much "stupider" as he was simply inexperienced. Khan previous military experiences were likely maneuvering land and naval forces. Two dimensional. Probiliy not much military experience even in that form of warfare, Space Seed suggested that Khan and the other supermen simply seized political power (maybe through simultaneous coups) as opposed to fighting existing governments and taking over after a war.

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

Of course Khan knows space is three dimensional. But he has only waged war on a two dimensional scale, unless he was a fighter pilot.

You don't need to be a fighter pilot (I'm not a fighter pilot and, almost certainly, neither are you) to know that in 3 dimensional space, a starship can move in 3 dimensions - as in attack you from above and below (a direct and simple deduction).
No reaonably intelligent human could fail to notice this VERY OBVIOUS fact.

Khan, a so-called 'genius' (a transparent informed attribute), was depicted as a moron, plain and simple.

 

[BillJ]

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

Of course Khan knows space is three dimensional. But he has only waged war on a two dimensional scale, unless he was a fighter pilot.

You don't need to be a fighter pilot (I'm not a fighter pilot and, almost certainly, neither are you) to know that in 3 dimensional space, a starship can move in 3 dimensions - as in attack you from above and below (a direct and simple deduction).
No reaonably intelligent human could fail to notice this VERY OBVIOUS fact.

Khan, a so-called 'genius' (a transparent informed attribute), was depicted as a moron, plain and simple.

Way to ignore the second part of the post.

 

[The Wormhole]

Khan being stupider than Forrest Gump in not knowing space has 3 dimensions

According to Spock, Khan wasn't so much "stupider" as he was simply inexperienced. Khan previous military experiences were likely maneuvering land and naval forces. Two dimensional. Probiliy not much military experience even in that form of warfare, Space Seed suggested that Khan and the other supermen simply seized political power (maybe through simultaneous coups) as opposed to fighting existing governments and taking over after a war.

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

Actually, it's standard fare in sci-fi. Most space battles, be they Star Trek, Star Wars, or whatever are fought two-dimensionally. TWOK is one of the few times three-dimensional tactics were even mentioned. Hell, the battle in Star Wars Episode 3 was so two-dimensional that General Grevious's flagship actually "sinks" when its taken out.

In fact, I remember Stargate SG-1's tenth season premiere made fun of this cliche by having the Jaffa defend themselves against the Ori two-dimesionally, only to have the Ori defeat them three-dimensionally. All previous space battles on SG-1 were two-dimensional.

 

[Gojira]

red goo that can turn a suupernova into a black hole

The technobabble in all of the Star Trek franchise can be very contrived so for me red matter is no different from many other questionable scientific inventions they have used over the years.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

[...]

T'Girl - I know that outer space is 3-dimensional and a starship can maneouver in 3 dimensions. You know that. 6 year olds know that. None of us has any experience whatsoever regarding outer space.

NOT knowing that space is 3 dimensional goes beyond 'inexperience'. It's pure idiocy.

Actually, it's standard fare in sci-fi. Most space battles, be they Star Trek, Star Wars, or whatever are fought two-dimensionally. TWOK is one of the few times three-dimensional tactics were even mentioned. Hell, the battle in Star Wars Episode 3 was so two-dimensional that General Grevious's flagship actually "sinks" when its taken out.

In fact, I remember Stargate SG-1's tenth season premiere made fun of this cliche by having the Jaffa defend themselves against the Ori two-dimesionally, only to have the Ori defeat them three-dimensionally. All previous space battles on SG-1 were two-dimensional.

Yes - in older sci-fi productions (primarily) the spaceships seem to fight in the same plane (due to the limited FX available, mostly).

Of course, if you are fond of rationalising this, you could always say this is due to unspecified tactical reasoning and, of course, an attack from above or below would not succeed simply because the crews (being reasonably intelligent) know space is 3 dimensional and would be prepared for such an attack.

In TWOK, you can not use this rationalisation.
Why?
Because it is directly established that Khan was idiotic enough NOT to realise that space has 3 dimensions and a starship can actually fly up or down.

Of course Khan knows space is three dimensional. But he has only waged war on a two dimensional scale, unless he was a fighter pilot.

You don't need to be a fighter pilot (I'm not a fighter pilot and, almost certainly, neither are you) to know that in 3 dimensional space, a starship can move in 3 dimensions - as in attack you from above and below (a direct and simple deduction).
No reaonably intelligent human could fail to notice this VERY OBVIOUS fact.

Khan, a so-called 'genius' (a transparent informed attribute), was depicted as a moron, plain and simple.

Way to ignore the second part of the post.

Tim Tebow's reasons are irrelevant.
Why?
Because they don't change in the least the fact that Khan was depicted as mentally challenged - a glaring inconsistency which, along with others, severely decreases the value of TWOK.

 

[sojourner]

^I think of it more that Khan was extremely stressed by his vendetta and it lead to his tactical error.