• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

It's weird, I have only one complaint about ST (2009)...

How do you know it doesn't always do both, depending on how you enter the singularity ?

I'd imagine it still would, just in a million pieces. It's possible that the debris from Vulcan traveled through time as well.

But I think the point was that the red matter black holes were so magical and beyond what we actually know of as black holes, that they really only did what they needed to (stop "supernovas", travel in time, implode planets, attack enemy ships, etc.) They weren't given that much thought.
 
I have to agree with the OP. I loved the movie, there's almost nothing else I'd change about it. But that scene... I think it's very Star Trek for Kirk to at least offer Nero the chance to surrender peacefully. It's something Prime Kirk would have done, and to me it's the moment when NuKirk shows how much he's matured since the beginning of the movie.

But Spock's petulant response, inner turmoil or no inner turmoil, rings untrue to me. It isn't so much that it's "making fun of Roddenberry's philosophy" as it is I'd imagine that Nimoy's Spock (you know, the guy who tried to broker peace with Klingons?) would have been in favor of the proposition. He may not have liked what Nero had done, but he'd put it aside. As Kirk said, that would be the logical thing to do.

Of course, seeing as Nero immediately threw Kirk's offer back in his face, he was asking for an ass-kicking. :)


it rang true to me. And Nimoy's Spock wasn't some naive fool(look at "balance of terror" or "errand of mercy") he was a pragmatist. Negotiating with dovish Klingons is prgamatism.

Making offers and deals with genocidal madmen is not pragmatism, it's stupid.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top