Payback for the Norman Conquest
I always figured that, in the future, England took over France and imposed their culture (and accents).
Antonia
- Thread starter EnriqueH
- Start date
Well, okay, but it's also quite easily explained away - Picard and Kirk made conscious decisions to leave the Nexus, whereas Guinan and Soran were ripped out, and the trauma of the latter method is incomparably worse than the former process. (But they wouldn't know that; they'd only know how awful it was for them.) One could, if one were so inclined, make a crude analogy to different forms of sex, which I won't spell out any further. Fan apologism? Sure, guilty as charged... and it's a finding I can live with.
And your explanation sounds acceptable...but the fact remains that in the film itself, this was not given in any way, shape, or form as the explanation as to why they so easily left the Nexus when Guinan said they'd never want to leave. It's just bad writing and makes no sense in the context of what we were told in the film. The cumulative effect is that it makes Guinan look like an idiot and diminishes Soran's motivation for wanting to return to the Nexus.
I can't see how using a familiar face - or even just a name - would've been any more trouble than bringing in a stranger. Non fans wouldn't have cared if it was someone else.
What the scene really needs is to make us care that Kirk is supposed to be happy there. I think having a child David with Carol, with the audience reminded of David's death would'v been really effective.
It's not a matter of other love interests for Kirk after Carol. There probably WERE, but that's not the point.
The point is the scene was not a dramatically powerful as it could've been because it did not loop in the character's history at his going away party, (as Greg put it).
No, it's not about appealing to just the fans, but if there's a reference to the character's history, you're rewarding the fans but not hurting casual viewers. So all you've really done is NOT hurt the casual viewer, but hurting the fans---who are DRIVING YOUR BOXOFFICE BUSINESS, I might add---by not making the movie as cohesive to your universe as it could've been.
I think the bigger issue is that the TNG staff didn't understand the TOS characters, nor could they write dialogue that sounded like it came from them. Aside from Spock in Unification, they ruined Scotty in Relics and Kirk, Scotty (again), and Chekov in Generations. Plus, as noted in this thread, they completely ignored the history of TOS (isn't it a big thing that Kirk retired from Starfleet at some point? Wouldn't this have been discussed sometime during the movies, particularly TWOK, before which is was supposed to have happened?).
Maybe they were confusing it with Spock leaving SF after TOS....
I don't see Carol, Janet or Rand as Kirk's great loves while I could see him having one in the long time between TMP and TWoK; Edith would have been but it's a good point that her having lived was connected to catastrophe otherwise and it's unlikely Kirk would have been able to just ignore that connection and all it would imply.
Similarly, Picard would quickly realize that Beverly his fantasy wife wouldn't quite act like the real Beverly Crusher had or would and therefore wasn't real - but this wouldn't have been worse than the filmed version as in that one he gives up the fantasy really quickly and easily.
Similarly, Picard would quickly realize that Beverly his fantasy wife wouldn't quite act like the real Beverly Crusher had or would and therefore wasn't real - but this wouldn't have been worse than the filmed version as in that one he gives up the fantasy really quickly and easily.
Last edited:
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
It didn't need to be "powerful" the way you're suggesting. The point of the scene was that Kirk realizes the Nexus and everything he does in it isn't real.
Nope. This rabble-rousing about Antonia is just more needless nitpicking of an already problematic film. Better stated: Not every opportunity need be taken to tie things back to other points in the franchise to connect the dots, whether via the character's history or otherwise.
Except that this was Kirk's last hurrah/film.
The character should've been tied with more respect to his history.
In the Nexus, any one of the TOS girlfriends should've been there, maybe Carol Marcus maybe not, but any of them would be better than Antonia. And I disagree with you: it DOES need to be "powerful". After all, the fact that the Nexus is addictive would've come across more forcefully to the audience if it had been tied to a loved character, like Edith. Kirk forcing himself to leave the addictive nature of the Nexus would've been felt more had he been leaving an established character that we have a connection with.
Or you can scrap ALL THAT and go to Kirk's first and foremost love: the Enterprise.
But here we have a Kirk doubting his Starfleet career, with a woman we've never seen, and with none of his 25-year history referenced, except for the names Spock and Bones.
Sorry, but that just doesn't seem right to me.
The character should've been tied with more respect to his history.
In the Nexus, any one of the TOS girlfriends should've been there, maybe Carol Marcus maybe not, but any of them would be better than Antonia. And I disagree with you: it DOES need to be "powerful". After all, the fact that the Nexus is addictive would've come across more forcefully to the audience if it had been tied to a loved character, like Edith. Kirk forcing himself to leave the addictive nature of the Nexus would've been felt more had he been leaving an established character that we have a connection with.
Or you can scrap ALL THAT and go to Kirk's first and foremost love: the Enterprise.
But here we have a Kirk doubting his Starfleet career, with a woman we've never seen, and with none of his 25-year history referenced, except for the names Spock and Bones.
Sorry, but that just doesn't seem right to me.
Last edited:
I've noticed this phenomenon in a few long-running franchises like Trek, and especially in comic books. After a certain amount of time, it becomes a bit unbelievable to some fans when creators suddenly introduce a previously-unheard of element of a character's past. TOS probably could've gotten away with introducing a lost love of Kirk's named Antonia (or a long-lost brother for Spock), but when we've been following these characters for 20+ years, it strains credulity a bit. Especially when one character has put his consciousness into another's for weeks/months on end.
Granted, it's possible to pull it off. I remember being a little taken aback when Frank Miller gave Daredevil a hitherto-unmentioned lost love named Elektra some twenty years into the run of the comic books, but clearly he knew what he was doing!
Granted, it's possible to pull it off. I remember being a little taken aback when Frank Miller gave Daredevil a hitherto-unmentioned lost love named Elektra some twenty years into the run of the comic books, but clearly he knew what he was doing!
Good point. And Matt Murdock's trainer Stick was another continuity implant, as he'd never even been hinted at before Miller introduced him. And then Miller introduced Matt Murdock's previously-thought dead mother less than a decade after that!
So I guess that sort of thing is a bad idea until someone comes along and does it well.
