Plot hole city: Part 3!

[William Wallace]

OldSpock trusting that NuKirk could live up to the potential that his counterpart had in the alternate reality is displaying common sense and logic. I don't think it is logical for OldSpock to think that just because NuKirk was attacked by a snow monster and had to be rescued he should be disqualified from future leadership.

NuKirk, unlike oldKirk, grew up without a father. It is therefore logical to assume that he's a completely person than the one Spock knew. At the very least, it's logical to question whether he's the same "great leader".

The first time oldSpock meets him, he almost dies. In fact, if he didn't coincidentally run into Spock at that exact moment, he'd certainly be dead. With no evidence to support the idea that Kirk will somehow find a way to defeat Nero, it seems like Spock doesn't send Kirk alone because it's logical, but because it's in the script.

Following your logic in the Original Series after Kirk was attacked and almost killed by the Mugato he should have been stripped of command?

Assuming you're referring to "A Private Little War", didn't Kirk have a compelling reason to be down there, namely to investigate a serious violation of the prime directive, and a corruption of a developing culture? And wasn't he also armed with a phaser at the time? Just because something bad happens on a mission doesn't mean it was a poor decision (see also: calculated risk).

 

[F. King Daniel]

Spock mind-melded with both Kirks. Thus, surely, he knows exactly what they're both capable of. I'm sure he would have formulated a Plan B should nuKirk have turned out like Shinzon.

Ugh, I posted in this ridiculous farce thread again. I feel all dirty.....

 

[number6]

You should.

 

[Gojira]

OldSpock trusting that NuKirk could live up to the potential that his counterpart had in the alternate reality is displaying common sense and logic. I don't think it is logical for OldSpock to think that just because NuKirk was attacked by a snow monster and had to be rescued he should be disqualified from future leadership.

NuKirk, unlike oldKirk, grew up without a father. It is therefore logical to assume that he's a completely person than the one Spock knew. At the very least, it's logical to question whether he's the same "great leader".

The first time oldSpock meets him, he almost dies. In fact, if he didn't coincidentally run into Spock at that exact moment, he'd certainly be dead. With no evidence to support the idea that Kirk will somehow find a way to defeat Nero, it seems like Spock doesn't send Kirk alone because it's logical, but because it's in the script.

Following your logic in the Original Series after Kirk was attacked and almost killed by the Mugato he should have been stripped of command?

Assuming you're referring to "A Private Little War", didn't Kirk have a compelling reason to be down there, namely to investigate a serious violation of the prime directive, and a corruption of a developing culture? And wasn't he also armed with a phaser at the time? Just because something bad happens on a mission doesn't mean it was a poor decision (see also: calculated risk).

If NuKirk isn't going to turn into a great Captain like OldKirk why have him in the movie?

I just don't think the fact that OldSpock had to rescue NuKirk would suddenly justify OldSpock questioning everything he knew about Jame T. Kirk.

 

[William Wallace]

Spock mind-melded with both Kirks. Thus, surely, he knows exactly what they're both capable of. I'm sure he would have formulated a Plan B should nuKirk have turned out like Shinzon.

So wouldn't oldSpock have seen all the foolish, reckless things Kirk has done? Just which of Kirk's accomplishments convinces oldSpock that Kirk is the man for the job?

If NuKirk isn't going to turn into a great Captain like OldKirk why have him in the movie?

But you see, that's my point. When convenient things start happening because "that's how the movie's supposed to go", the feeling of authenticity takes a dive.

I just don't think the fact that OldSpock had to rescue NuKirk would suddenly justify OldSpock questioning everything he knew about Jame T. Kirk.

How about the fact that Kirk grew up without a father? Or the fact that, as explained later by nuSpock, everything is completely different than it was in oldTrek, due to Nero's appearance and contamination of the timeline? Shouldn't oldSpock at least try to assertain how qualified nuKirk is to be a leader, instead of just assuming that's true just because they're both named "Kirk"? Spock doesn't seem to have any evidence to support his assumption, but he sends Kirk off anyway because "that's how the movie's supposed to go".

 

[Gojira]

But you see, that's my point. When convenient things start happening because "that's how the movie's supposed to go", the feeling of authenticity takes a dive.

Did you think that Kirk would somehow not end up being the Captain? A very large percentage of the time people do know how things "are supposed to go" in movies such as this.

The joy is in the journey or in other words watching them arrive where they're supposed to be.

How about the fact that Kirk grew up without a father? Or the fact that, as explained later by nuSpock, everything is completely different than it was in oldTrek, due to Nero's appearance and contamination of the timeline? Shouldn't oldSpock at least try to assertain how qualified nuKirk is to be a leader, instead of just assuming that's true just because they're both named "Kirk"? Spock doesn't seem to have any evidence to support his assumption, but he sends Kirk off anyway because "that's how the movie's supposed to go".

What you're getting into is the Nature and Nurture debate. It is very possible that NuKirk's leadership qualities are an innate part of his personality (in other words genetically hard wired into his persona and not a learned trait) and just because he grew up without a father doesn't mean he doesn't have these qualities it means they lie dormant and need specific circumstances to bring them out.

Answer this one question: WHY should OldSpock doubt that NuKirk is not fit for command?

You have stated that OldSpock should question NuKirk's ability to command based on the fact that he had to rescue nuKirk from the snow monster.

Please demonstrate WHY OldSpock should question NuKirk's ability to command based on the fact that he had to rescue nuKirk from the snow monster.

 

[William Wallace]

But you see, that's my point. When convenient things start happening because "that's how the movie's supposed to go", the feeling of authenticity takes a dive.

Did you think that Kirk would somehow not end up being the Captain? A very large percentage of the time people do know how things "are supposed to go" in movies such as this.

Just because we know what's going to happen doesn't mean we can't expect the filmmakers to give us a plausible explanation of how it happens. When the villain captures James Bond and puts him in some sort of slow, over-the-top death trap, we know Bond isn't going to get killed, but that doesn't make up for the fact that the villain should have just shot him right away and gotten it over with.

The joy is in the journey or in other words watching them arrive where they're supposed to be.

Is it the journey or the destination that's important? If it's just about them arriving where they're supposed to be, then it's the destination. If it's about how they get there, then it's the journey.

What you're getting into is the Nature and Nurture debate. It is very possible that NuKirk's leadership qualities are an innate part of his personality (in other words genetically hard wired into his persona and not a learned trait) and just because he grew up without a father doesn't mean he doesn't have these qualities it means they lie dormant and need specific circumstances to bring them out.

Answer this one question: WHY should OldSpock doubt that NuKirk is not fit for command?

You have stated that OldSpock should question NuKirk's ability to command based on the fact that he had to rescue nuKirk from the snow monster.

Please demonstrate WHY OldSpock should question NuKirk's ability to command based on the fact that he had to rescue nuKirk from the snow monster.

The only think nuKirk really has in common with oldKirk is they have the same DNA. Do you think if Spock came across Kirk's long lost twin brother, that he would just assumed that twinKirk is every bit as capable and qualified as oldKirk? That's silly. When the fate of the entire federation is at stake Spock betting everything on his optimistic assumption makes no sense at all.

Spock should base at least some of the decision on his observations of nuKirk, and how they compare to oldKirk. The first thing nuKirk does is almost get himself killed by the snow monster. That's evidence of how reckless and foolish nuKirk is, which should cast doubt on Spock's entire "Kirk is great" assumption. But instead, Spock conveniently ignores this evidence so that the movie can end the way it's "supposed to".

 

[F. King Daniel]

Again: Mind meld. Having melded with both, Spock had the most direct Kirk comparison possible. It's not observation, the meld is first hand knowledge of what he is capable of. Of his potential.

But, of course, you're just gonna dismiss this like you have everything that everyone else has posted.... because it's not the way you imagine Star Trek should be.... *yawn*

 

[Gojira]

Just because we know what's going to happen doesn't mean we can't expect the filmmakers to give us a plausible explanation of how it happens. When the villain captures James Bond and puts him in some sort of slow, over-the-top death trap, we know Bond isn't going to get killed, but that doesn't make up for the fact that the villain should have just shot him right away and gotten it over with.

Plausibility is in the eye of the beholder.

Is it the journey or the destination that's important? If it's just about them arriving where they're supposed to be, then it's the destination. If it's about how they get there, then it's the journey.

Well since we know how it is supposed to be the joy is in the journey. Using your analogy it is fun to watch Bond get out of situations that he is in. It was fun watching Kirk become Captain.

The only think nuKirk really has in common with oldKirk is they have the same DNA. Do you think if Spock came across Kirk's long lost twin brother, that he would just assumed that twinKirk is every bit as capable and qualified as oldKirk? That's silly. When the fate of the entire federation is at stake Spock betting everything on his optimistic assumption makes no sense at all.

So are or are not Kirk's leadership qualities part of his personality or is leadership a learned trait? Can we take a shy insecure person and make them a leader?

Spock should base at least some of the decision on his observations of nuKirk, and how they compare to oldKirk. The first thing nuKirk does is almost get himself killed by the snow monster. That's evidence of how reckless and foolish nuKirk is, which should cast doubt on Spock's entire "Kirk is great" assumption. But instead, Spock conveniently ignores this evidence so that the movie can end the way it's "supposed to".

As others have said: in the Mind meld OldSpock knew the consciousness of NuKirk and realized that NuKirk did have what it takes to be the Captain.

Plus, it is well known that OldKirk disobeyed orders when he felt it was right. Did you think NuKirk was just supposed to wait patiently in his escape pod? I don't think so. Kirk, old and new, are risk takers and that is pretty consistent with his character.

The fact YOU see his behavior as reckless and foolish is your assumption and you're just upest that OldSpock doesn't see it that way...and neither do I.

I don't think it was reckless for Kirk to walk away from the escape pod. Heck, a space monster could have killed him while he was waiting at or in his escape pod. Leaving it was the wise choice and very plausible. To see and do nothing but wait would have been out of character for Kirk...and a boring movie.

 

[beamMe]

And why wouldn't he leave the pod - he knows there is an outpost relatively close by.

 

[number6]

I don't think Mr Wallace ever watched an episode of Star Trek. He has little to no understanding of it whatsoever.

His posts clearly demonstrate a lack of fundamental understanding of the character and the mechanics of their relationships.

 

[William Wallace]

Again: Mind meld. Having melded with both, Spock had the most direct Kirk comparison possible. It's not observation, the meld is first hand knowledge of what he is capable of. Of his potential.

But, of course, you're just gonna dismiss this like you have everything that everyone else has posted.... because it's not the way you imagine Star Trek should be.... *yawn*

As I said last time, if he melded with Kirk, what heroic traits does he see in him? He's portrayed throughout the movie as a reckless fool, so shouldn't that be what Spock sees during the meld?

Plausibility is in the eye of the beholder.

Then we'll just have to agree to disagree on what constitutes plausibility

Well since we know how it is supposed to be the joy is in the journey. Using your analogy it is fun to watch Bond get out of situations that he is in. It was fun watching Kirk become Captain.

I didn't say it wasn't fun, but the fun is reduced by having to force myself to ignore the implausible and all-too-convenient way he got there. Bond films aren't as bad, simply because they don't take themselves too seriously. This movie tries to take itself somewhat seriously, and often fails due to things like this.

So are or are not Kirk's leadership qualities part of his personality or is leadership a learned trait? Can we take a shy insecure person and make them a leader?

Well it's probably a combination of both, yet Spock just assumes that it's all due to genetics, and sends Kirk off on his merry way. Yeah, the mind meld would have given him insight into Kirk's mind, but like I said, what is there to see? Kirk constantly gets himself into trouble and nearly gets himself killed on several occasions. To me, that would make someone a horribly dangerous leader, and the last person whose hands you'd want to put the fate of Earth in. What exactly would make Spock think otherwise?

As others have said: in the Mind meld OldSpock knew the consciousness of NuKirk and realized that NuKirk did have what it takes to be the Captain.

Plus, it is well known that OldKirk disobeyed orders when he felt it was right. Did you think NuKirk was just supposed to wait patiently in his escape pod? I don't think so. Kirk, old and new, are risk takers and that is pretty consistent with his character.

The fact YOU see his behavior as reckless and foolish is your assumption and you're just upest that OldSpock doesn't see it that way...and neither do I.

I don't think it was reckless for Kirk to walk away from the escape pod. Heck, a space monster could have killed him while he was waiting at or in his escape pod. Leaving it was the wise choice and very plausible. To see and do nothing but wait would have been out of character for Kirk...and a boring movie.

If it were really that dangerous, nuSpock wouldn't have sent him down to the planet in the first place (see also: murder). Did I think Kirk was going to just wait in his pod? No. But I didn't expect nearly getting eaten by the snow monster to convince me that he's a fearless leader worth of putting the fate of the Federation in his hands, either.

 

[Set Harth]

Why can't we see any evidence of T'Kuht in STXI?

 

[Broccoli]

I don't think Mr Wallace ever watched an episode of Star Trek. He has little to no understanding of it whatsoever.

Of course he has an understanding of it. His understanding. Of course, it's likely misguided. But, if he keeps repeating it enough times, it might - just might - become true.

 

[Cyke101]

Again: Mind meld. Having melded with both, Spock had the most direct Kirk comparison possible. It's not observation, the meld is first hand knowledge of what he is capable of. Of his potential.

But, of course, you're just gonna dismiss this like you have everything that everyone else has posted.... because it's not the way you imagine Star Trek should be.... *yawn*

As I said last time, if he melded with Kirk, what heroic traits does he see in him? He's portrayed throughout the movie as a reckless fool, so shouldn't that be what Spock sees during the meld?

How about three of the freshest things in Kirk's memory at the time:
-the fact that he basically saved the Enterprise from the fate of the rescue fleet by disobeying orders? That's pretty heroic, and it was enough for Pike to rescind his punishment
-subsequently, Pike assigns him to the mission that successfully disables Nero's drill
-...and in the process, dove after Sulu to try and save him

Those are *three* heroic deeds that happened right before Kirk was marooned on the planet, nevermind any other deeds Kirk might have accomplished at the Academy. Let's recall that even before the Vulcan crisis, he was speeding through his courses (3 years rather than 4), and anyone that goes through an accelerated pace can tell you that it's an arduous process. And it often involves teamwork, too.

No heroic traits? He pulled off three feats right before meeting Spock Prime. And for most people, accomplishing even *one* of those feats would be at the forefront of someone's mind.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I love how William Wallace knows Kirk's heroic traits and potental (emphasis on potential) better than the guy who shared minds with both his TOS and STXI incarnations.

Spock got the most direct comparison possible. It's NOT about genetics, not about DNA, it's that he saw in Kirk's mind - that he had the potential to be the James T. Kirk that Spock knew. That maybe he already was.

(of note, William Shatner's 2007 young Kirk novel Star Trek Academy: Collision Course portrays Kirk almost exactly the way Chris Pine would a few years later. But what does Shatner know, eh? William Wallace should be writing these things!)

 

[Gojira]

Again: Mind meld. Having melded with both, Spock had the most direct Kirk comparison possible. It's not observation, the meld is first hand knowledge of what he is capable of. Of his potential.

But, of course, you're just gonna dismiss this like you have everything that everyone else has posted.... because it's not the way you imagine Star Trek should be.... *yawn*

As I said last time, if he melded with Kirk, what heroic traits does he see in him? He's portrayed throughout the movie as a reckless fool, so shouldn't that be what Spock sees during the meld?

Plausibility is in the eye of the beholder.

Then we'll just have to agree to disagree on what constitutes plausibility



I didn't say it wasn't fun, but the fun is reduced by having to force myself to ignore the implausible and all-too-convenient way he got there. Bond films aren't as bad, simply because they don't take themselves too seriously. This movie tries to take itself somewhat seriously, and often fails due to things like this.

So are or are not Kirk's leadership qualities part of his personality or is leadership a learned trait? Can we take a shy insecure person and make them a leader?

Well it's probably a combination of both, yet Spock just assumes that it's all due to genetics, and sends Kirk off on his merry way. Yeah, the mind meld would have given him insight into Kirk's mind, but like I said, what is there to see? Kirk constantly gets himself into trouble and nearly gets himself killed on several occasions. To me, that would make someone a horribly dangerous leader, and the last person whose hands you'd want to put the fate of Earth in. What exactly would make Spock think otherwise?

As others have said: in the Mind meld OldSpock knew the consciousness of NuKirk and realized that NuKirk did have what it takes to be the Captain.

Plus, it is well known that OldKirk disobeyed orders when he felt it was right. Did you think NuKirk was just supposed to wait patiently in his escape pod? I don't think so. Kirk, old and new, are risk takers and that is pretty consistent with his character.

The fact YOU see his behavior as reckless and foolish is your assumption and you're just upest that OldSpock doesn't see it that way...and neither do I.

I don't think it was reckless for Kirk to walk away from the escape pod. Heck, a space monster could have killed him while he was waiting at or in his escape pod. Leaving it was the wise choice and very plausible. To see and do nothing but wait would have been out of character for Kirk...and a boring movie.

If it were really that dangerous, nuSpock wouldn't have sent him down to the planet in the first place (see also: murder). Did I think Kirk was going to just wait in his pod? No. But I didn't expect nearly getting eaten by the snow monster to convince me that he's a fearless leader worth of putting the fate of the Federation in his hands, either.

What did Spock see in young Kirk during the mindmeld? That he is a genius and his knowledge of Nero enabled the Enterprise to save as many people as they could.

I think the Federation would want leaders that are fearless.

 

[Broccoli]

I think the Federation would want leaders that are fearless.

If Green Lantern mated with Star Trek, would that mean the resulting movie would break even?

 

[number6]

If the Green Lantern had tits Kirk would try to fuck him!!

 

[DrBashir]

Spock has already met another alternate Kirk in Mirror Mirror. I'd hardly want that guy in charge of saving the Earth.

What Spock did was essentially the Valaris mind rape all over again, seeing as Kirk had no idea what Spock was doing and didn't know he was actually from another universe and not just some nut job Vulcan hanging out in a cave?

Please, allow me.


Spock - It will be easier.
Kirk - Whoa, whoa, what are you doing?
Spock - Our minds, one and together.

Doesn't seem like Kirk agreed to having someone poke around in his mind.