FYI, in the UD, WWPS=What Would Palin Say?![]()
Every sperm is sacred.
FYI, in the UD, WWPS=What Would Palin Say?![]()
Nero was certainly capable of hurting Kirk & Co. if, for example, he and his people were beamed aboard with explosive devices they then used to destroy Enterprise.
You don't appear to be taking into account the frequent attempts by filmmakers to provide the audience with a cathartic experience. Even films that are overtly trying to "make a statement", like Unforgiven, provide a moment of cathartic release (in that particular case, through the very thing the movie spends most of its time criticizing). Trek had no such aspirations, so it's cathartic moment was of a piece with the events depicted. Whether you personally found it agreeable is up to you, of course, but the fact it occurred at all, especially given current social attitudes (something reflected in pop culture all the time), should not be surprising.
It's actually funny that this conversation is happening now. My boss was the Visual Effects Supervisor for Nemesis, and I was actually having a conversation about the film the other day with him. When it was brought back to Digital Domain to do the effects, after Blue Sky Studios did Insurrection, he was saying that he actually did want to change a lot of the, I guess I would call,"traditional" aesthetics of certain things. He mentioned changes to the Warp effect, and the transporter effect. They even wanted to have much more elaborate CG camerawork during the battle sequences. Whether or not this would have resulted in a more Abrams style aesthetic I don't know, but it interesting to see what might have been. The producers were evidently very keen of keeping with what had been seen before, so they ended going up with a much more familiar style, but there were a few tweaks they were able to do, such as the slightly different warping effect for the Enterprise.
I don't have trouble with Spock's reaction (his home planet was just destroyed and his mother died in front of him).
IF I were inclined to nitpick, I might object to Kirk's actions, but my Star Trek nitpicking days are long gone.
What we talking about here is whether Kirk should have just gotten his butt out of Dodge, or waste time petulantly contributing his relatively impotent efforts to the inevitable demise of a defenceless foe. Neither choice is heroic, but I can't see how having Kirk commit a war crime was the way to go.
Kirk Prime was never confronted with the man who killed his father. Never confronted with a guy who murdered six billion Vulcans.
Kirk Prime did meet the Klingon who murdered his son. He shot him instantly, without a word.
(emphasis mine)Lol, listen to these Prime-Berman-era fan boys playing the moral high ground card about nuKirk.
I see clutching at the straws.
No. I'm saying I understand his reaction.I don't have trouble with Spock's reaction (his home planet was just destroyed and his mother died in front of him).
Right, so you are saying he was still "emotionally compromised" and shouldn't have been on duty?
Yes. Yes it is.IF I were inclined to nitpick, I might object to Kirk's actions, but my Star Trek nitpicking days are long gone.
Is that even possible?
Popcorn entertainment like Star Trek? Nothing worth losing any sleep over.But I guess you are saying, when it comes to fictional material at least, nothing is important.
It's between a boyship and a girlship.I guess by "traditional" he means 4 identical ships flying in close formation.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.