A certain destruction: necessary or gratuitous?

[Darth_Pazuzu]

The one thing I was the most freaked out about while walking out of the theater after watching the new Star Trek is that Vulcan has been freaking destroyed!! Wiped out by an artificial singularity that's sucked it into complete nothingness!!! And that now we're all stuck with a new and alternate timeline/reality in which VULCAN IS NO MORE!!!

[*pauses and takes several...deep...breaths*]

[*pauses again and takes several...more...deep...breaths*]

[*pauses yet again...*]

Okay, I'm good...for now anyway. Sorry folks, just a little Stereotypical Disgruntled Fanboy Conniption Fit. It happens, y'know! So where was I? Oh yeah! The destruction of Vulcan.

Listen, I understand perfectly well that J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman want to shake up the status quo a little and not have to worry about fact-checking every single little detail regarding what actually happened or did not happen within already established canon, and that they'd want to have a clean slate. In principle, I'm actually down with that! It's actually quite audacious and clever how they use the time-honored Trek tradition of time travel as a means to achieve that. (Just so long as you can reconcile the idea of two discrete Star Trek universes.)

I just have a little bit of a problem with how they did it! If you will permit me to digress...

I remember way back in 1997 when I first saw the movie Independence Day during its theatrical run. I remember being vaguely disturbed by it for some reason that I couldn't at first pin down. Then I realized that it was because you had all these cities and buildings being destroyed...wiped out...freaking obliterated...by the aliens, and overall it didn't seem to carry all that much dramatic weight or gravity! I seemed to be upset over the fact that you had the onscreen destruction of hundreds...thousands...millions...of human lives, and that it seemed to all be in the service of a razzle-dazzle popcorn entertainment spectacular. I mean, yeah sure, it was only a stupid movie, but come on. When you're dealing in a fictional context with the life and death of people on such a grand scale, you need to show some sort of sensitivity to the fact that one's fellow living beings have perished! (I mean, yeah, there's the first Star Wars and the whole issue of the destruction of Alderaan, but I guess I felt it because Obi-Wan felt it! )

When the planet of Vulcan was obliterated by Nero in the newStar Trek and millions upon billions of lives were lost, I felt disturbed by the fact that there didn't seem to be the appropriate dramatic weight or gravity that it truly deserved! I mean, what's going on here? Are Hollywood writers and filmmakers more comfortable dealing with filmmaking and storytelling more as a technical exercise, just the manufacture of razzle-dazzle popcorn entertainment, than as a vehicle for human (or otherwise) drama? I think that Star Trek ultimately deserves better than that.

 

[Borgminister]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

Neither.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

At least Vulcan had a reason to be destroyed.

Ceti Alpha 6 has no excuse.

 

[davejames]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

I love it. For one thing, it adds an interesting and very tragic dimension to Spock's character. And for another, Vulcan has already been explored to death in Trek.

For that matter, I'd be perfectly happy if they did away with the Klingon homeworld too. That's one more planet I don't really need to see ever again. lol

 

[Closet Trekkie]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

Neither.

 

[cubbie]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

It was neither. It wasn't gratuitous, it wasn't necessary, but it was handled sympathetically.

 

[miraclefan]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

It was BRASS BALLSY!

 

[Darth_Pazuzu]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

I love it. For one thing, it adds an interesting and very tragic dimension to Spock's character. And for another, Vulcan has already been explored to death in Trek.

Yeah, I guess I kind of get what you're saying. That thought occurred to me as well. But I still think it's a little too extreme. And it points to another problem: That in order to create a dramatic interest around the character of Spock, and to delve into his divided nature, they found it necessary to blow up his home planet!! If someone really find it necessary to resort to those kinds of blatant extremes, I question that person's qualifications as any sort of dramatist whatsoever. (I'm not necessarily calling Orci and Kurtzman outright hacks, but y'know, come to think of it I wasn't all that crazy about Transformers, either... )

If I seem to be overly hung up on the fact of Vulcan's destruction in the new movie, then I guess that's just the Stereotypical Disgruntled Fanboy in me. At least give me credit for copping to it and calling it what it is, at least!

 

[Iasius]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

That was the one scene in the movie where my physicist-brain intervened and told me that the scene was completely ridiculous for a variety of reasons.
For example, I suppose it's one of those rare occasions where a huge explosion would have made sense but the writers/CGI guys went for the quiet implosion only. After all, the "Oh-My-God particle" (I love that name ) is commonly assumed to have been accelerated to its speed/energy through a process involving matter falling into a black hole.

As for the question posed in the OT: I think the destruction of Vulcan opens up good story lines in the future with the ancient knowledgeable race of the Vulcans having to depend on "younger" races due to their circumstances. It also made the thread to Earth seem a lot more believable since there wasn't a reset button waiting in the wings.

 

[Base_Delta_Zero]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

(Didn't vote because the options were too limited.)

I don't think it's because they couldn't find any other way to jazz up Spock's character or they didn't know how to write him, it was simply a way to give the character something new to deal with. Similarly, all the characters are essentially the same, but clearly different than their Prime timeline, old-timey Trek counterparts since the temporal incursion. The Federation as whole is different, too. It allows for familiar stories to be told in new ways.

We've seen or read pretty much all the highlights of Prime Spock's entire life. Instead of trying to jam more completely new facets to an already fully established character, it makes sense to take that template and tweek it just to see what'll happen.

There wouldn't be much point to a complete retread of TOS. We already have TOS. Ever see the remake of Psycho? It was awful. Shot for shot, line for line, with only the actors and sets necessarily different and all it did was highlight how much it wasn't as good as the original.

New Trek can now do its own thing with TOS's setup without the weight of TOS overwhelming it.

I've already seen the Trek where Vulcan wasn't destroyed through ten movies and five series and Spock didn't have to deal with it. If they're starting over, I'd like to see something different this time around. I really liked the Infinities Star Wars trilogy. Now I get Infinities Trek. Sweet!

----

Completely off-topic, but this is my birthyear post: 1,980. That'll only happen once. Kinda neat - for me, anyway.

 

[Unicron]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

At least Vulcan had a reason to be destroyed.

Ceti Alpha 6 has no excuse.

Unless you read the TWOK novelization...

 

[Peter the Younger]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

I seem to be alone in this opinion, but I think it wasn't just to shake up the continuity, it served a purpose: to align the world of Star Trek with the zeitgeist of the 21st century. A savage attack by a small rogue group led by an angry zealot, loved ones lost... I dunno, sounds a lot like a certain recent historical event to me.

And usually I'm not a fan of these sorts of heavy handed allegories, but 1960's Cold War/Civil Rights Era Trek wasn't known for its subtlety, either. And I thought it was handled with the appropriate amount of gravity, considering this is after all a space adventure. In the next film, if we see elements of continuing grief or survivor's guilt in Spock, this generation will know where he's coming from.

Some people seem to think the destruction of Vulcan is a betrayal of Trek's vision of a hopeful future. I think this is where we separate the notion of hopeful future from utopia. Hope isn't about living in a world where horrible things don't happen, it's about making it through horrible events and not giving up.

 

[T'Bonz]

Darth_Pazuzu, don't put spoilers in TITLES, please.

Some have still not seen the movie.

Thanks.

 

[Squiggy]

Lets go back and think of allllllll the episodes that couldn't take place without Vulcan.

2 episodes and a movie.


Ooooooooooh.

 

[Feofilakt]

Re: The destruction of Vulcan: necessary or gratuitous?

I seem to be alone in this opinion, but I think it wasn't just to shake up the continuity, it served a purpose: to align the world of Star Trek with the zeitgeist of the 21st century. A savage attack by a small rogue group led by an angry zealot, loved ones lost... I dunno, sounds a lot like a certain recent historical event to me.

And usually I'm not a fan of these sorts of heavy handed allegories, but 1960's Cold War/Civil Rights Era Trek wasn't known for its subtlety, either. And I thought it was handled with the appropriate amount of gravity, considering this is after all a space adventure. In the next film, if we see elements of continuing grief or survivor's guilt in Spock, this generation will know where he's coming from.

Some people seem to think the destruction of Vulcan is a betrayal of Trek's vision of a hopeful future. I think this is where we separate the notion of hopeful future from utopia. Hope isn't about living in a world where horrible things don't happen, it's about making it through horrible events and not giving up.

I point to my historical observations in the "Federation is screwed" thread. People overestimate micro and macro constitutions, actual observation and research would indicate things are far more fragile than we like to think. The destruction of Vulcan and most of the Vulcans is a long term death blow. The federation will survive, obviously, but surviving is -not- flourishing. Of course they will write things as they please, but it sure will seem contrived

 

[seigezunt]

It was neither gratuitous nor necessary. But made for a good movie.

 

[Iasius]

Darth_Pazuzu, don't put spoilers in TITLES, please.

Some have still not seen the movie.

Thanks.

Heh. Amusing anecdote (for me anyway):

A few days ago, someone entered the trekirc chat and started talking to himself (he entered the chat twice) and mentioned that Vulcan gets destroyed.
I actually didn't believe him, so when it happened, I was even more surprised.

Spoiler: conversation as it happened

[04:36:01/11.05] * Modedus (majest@4bbef1d4.hsd1.co.5aa6454b.net.hmsk) has joined #trekirc
[04:36:12/11.05] <Modedus> hello
[04:36:32/11.05] * Anon804 (Anonymous@4bbef1d4.hsd1.co.5aa6454b.net.hmsk) has joined #trekirc
[04:37:01/11.05] <Anon804> hello
[04:37:25/11.05] <Modedus> hi anon804
[04:37:40/11.05] <Anon804> so have you seen that new movie
[04:37:49/11.05] <Modedus> yes of corse
[04:38:17/11.05] <Anon804> dont you hate it when the planet vulcon gets distroyed
[04:38:21/11.05] <Modedus> yea
[04:38:54/11.05] <Modedus> but i herd they are comming out with another movie at the end of 2010 to explain it
[04:45:37/11.05] <Modedus> so how old are you
[04:45:48/11.05] <Anon804> I'm 79
[04:45:58/11.05] <Modedus> wow
[04:46:24/11.05] <Anon804> yea i remember when star treck first appeared
[04:47:07/11.05] <Anon804> did the klingons really take over the romulins
[04:47:23/11.05] <Modedus> yes they did in the future
[04:48:05/11.05] <Iasius> doesn't it get boring to talk to yourself while a couple of people idle away in the channel?
[04:49:37/11.05] <Modedus> not as boring as nobody listening
[04:50:23/11.05] * Toresica (toresica@cdc5aa40.dsl.282eb7d8.ca.hmsk) Quit (gondor.hub.sorcery.net ironforge.sorcery.net)
[04:50:44/11.05] <Modedus> so anon what do you do now that you are out
[04:50:56/11.05] <Anon804> well i just take it easy
[04:51:00/11.05] <Anon804> nowadays
[04:51:51/11.05] * Modedus (majest@4bbef1d4.hsd1.co.5aa6454b.net.hmsk) Quit
[04:52:11/11.05] <Anon804> where did he go
[04:54:20/11.05] * Toresica (toresica@cdc5aa40.dsl.282eb7d8.ca.hmsk) has joined #trekirc
[04:56:50/11.05] <Anon804> hello toresica
[04:58:12/11.05] * Toresica (toresica@cdc5aa40.dsl.282eb7d8.ca.hmsk) Quit (rivendell.hub.sorcery.net ironforge.sorcery.net)
[04:58:58/11.05] * Toresica|afk (toresica@cdc5aa40.dsl.282eb7d8.ca.hmsk) has joined #trekirc
[05:24:18/11.05] * Anon804 (Anonymous@4bbef1d4.hsd1.co.5aa6454b.net.hmsk) Quit (Quit: Live Long, And Prosper)

As for the poll, I can't vote in that one because while I don't think it was a necessary decision, it does open up a lot of new story materials for this incarnation of Star Trek.

 

[startrekwatcher]

I'll just post what I did a few days ago in the grading thread since I don't want to type up something all over again:

The writers did something pretty bold and destroyed Vulcan yet it didn't emotionally register. It wasn't carrying the kind of shock and impact it really should have viscerally. This is afterall a founding member of the Federation and a world that has been part of Trek since the beginning yet its destruction carried about as much resonance as a nameless planet of the week or destroying a planet in a video game. It wasn't a grim sequence a la ENT's "Twilight". It seemed the writers wanted to do something big and decided to destroy Vulcan but they didn't do enough to do the idea the justice it deserved. Heck, DS9 manged to generate more reaction from me with just hearing that Betazed was occupied by the Dominion on DS9. As I was trying to figure out why it donned on me that there was so much else going on around it got lost in the mix--it was just one of a thousand plot points. I think they crammed too much material into these two hours. By trying to do so many things none of them really receive the kind of development they deserved.

Yes, they tried to capture the loss with Spock in his scenes with Uhura and with Sarek but they didn't succeed for me. Not enough had been done to give those scenes the kind of richness demanded of them. And for a long time fan such as myself feeling this way I can only imagine the lack of resonance by the uninitiated who are just introduced to this race and its world. Same with Amanda's death, you really have to earn those emotional payoffs and just destroying a planet or killing off Spock's mother, which was a little iffy in its execution, doesn't automatically guarantee those expected responses especially since Amanda had sum total of about a minute of screentime and comes off no better than a redshirt. We had no reason to invest in it.

If you want to do something big or epic it needs an emotional context. If you want to see it done right look at Deep Impact, Independence Day or or TVH or the Xindi arc on Enterprise. B&B managed to generate some emotion with the attack on Earth by the probe in "The Expanse" or with the destruction of Earth in "Twilight".

I had no problem with them doing something so bold and unpredictable but its execution was lacking.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

It was necessary in order to truly make this a new timeline, we now know anything is possible.

Before the movie came out I knew they were destroying Vulcan with the blackhole but I honestly expected them to do some kind of time travel to prevent it, when the movie ended and Vulcan was still destroyed I was pretty shocked by it but immediately realised it was the right thing to do to usher in a new era and timeline of Trek.

In my mind Vulcan still exists in the original timeline, the fact it's gone in the new timeline doesn't bother me so long as I know it still exists in the original.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I remember how shocking it was to see the Breen attack on San Franciso in DS9 and that was watching it via a small viewscreen as I recall. The destruction of Vucan didn't have much impact on me when I first watched it because I was still expecting a reset button. I was in shock as I left the cinema and that has only deepened.

Some other planet would not have really meant anything to the characters in this film. It would have meant something to the baddie, he's baaaaad enough to blow up a planet. But once the movie was over that planet death would be over. This way, it's never over. We get Spock angst and potentially LOTS of Vulcan stuff in the next film.

They couldn't blow up Earth because that would be too nuBSG.