Does ST09 make 'Nemesis' less consequential, or more tragic?
- Thread starter Destructor
- Start date
We've seen Sarek right before he died, and he was older than Spock is. Sarek at death didn't look that different than Sarek in ST:IV, yet Spock Prime looked significantly older than Sarek ever did. There's no on-screen evidence that Vulcans age more rapidly near death.
Pretty much, but that has to do with half-assed writing or screwed up priorities than the method used by the writer.
I really think this should get the "It's just a TV show" treatment. Actor's age and movies are made when movies are made, it's just the way it goes.
No offense, but if you're implying that ST09 erased Nemesis...I hate it when people say that. How many times does someone have to say alternate timeline?Gaith said:
Re: Does ST09 make 'Nemesis' less consequential, or more tragic?
Well, it certainly makes it easy to believe that Nemesis never happened...
How about... ST09 prevents Nemesis from happening AGAIN?
I like Nemesis. It's not great, but I like it fair enough. Then again, I like Generations too. Insurrection is the only TNG movie that was a major disappointment for me. Although to some degree, Generations and Nemesis could've been much more, so maybe they're minor disappointments.
^Yeah, you don't need to be a hard-core fan to understand the duality of the two races. Only problem is turning that into something entertaining. Nemesis had lots of dualities in it, but not all of it was well thought out.
Alas, I don't think JJ & Co are much into wrapping a movie around a philosophical point. They're more of a "memorable action set pieces" strung together with plot, on top of which you can throw a pseudo-morality tale which is overlooked because it really was superficial to the story.
Alas, I don't think JJ & Co are much into wrapping a movie around a philosophical point. They're more of a "memorable action set pieces" strung together with plot, on top of which you can throw a pseudo-morality tale which is overlooked because it really was superficial to the story.
I'd say that Spock coming to terms with his half-human nature was more than a superficial plot point.
Technically wouldn't Voyager's episode "Living Witness" be the final look at the prime universe? The Doctor in the 31st century.
.
The only thing we saw nuSpock come to terms with, was the fact that he was a 'Momma's Boy'.
nuSpock didn't come to terms with anything. Had nuKirk provoked him again in the final scene, he would have again kicked the shit out of him in anger. nuSpock didn't change at all.
Like hell it wasn't superficial. That's, in fact, a great example of what I'm talking about. That's just the justification for the stupid scene where Spock shot Kirk out an airlock, which was a poor attempt to force Nimoy into the plot. The "coming to terms," the escape pod, and even Nimoy were smashed together as afterthoughts.
Again, there's nothing wrong with centering a movie around action sets. However, it doesn't give you an excuse to half ass everything else.
It would be the furthest look into it, but not our final look.
So your evidence for this is a based on a hypothetical scene that you made up entirely. Interesting.
Poor according to? You?
They didn't need any either.
Captain Obvious has returned to tell everyone that their opinions are... opinions!
Based on completely made up scenarios then.
The novelization has also a scene in which Spock beats up a Romulan in anger on the Narada. AFTER he talked to his dad. So yeah.
And then there is this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI3SGSxpHTk#t=3m37s
The movie had no scene where Kirk provoked Spock after the conflict on the bridge. So no.
I think it's just the opposite -- the hypothetical scenario was based on the opinion.
^^^ I think this is why Jarod called you Captain Obvious. Quality is in the eye of the beholder.