Re: Keeping the same basic scene, how could you make Kirk's death bett
Kirk sacrificed his life to save billions. how is that stupid and pointless?
And he died just like how he predicted in Star Trek V. Without Bones and Spick there to cover him.
I really don't feel that his death was stupid and pointless.
What would be stupid and pointless would be to bring him back. That pretty much negates his death.
Kirk really did die a heroic death. There was no fanfare to it and only Picard knows because everybody else believes he died on the Enterprise B when the Nexus ribbon struck that ship.
Does every heroic death need fanfare?
First I never said his reasons for dying were stupid and pointless, the way they shot it was.
Second, and I know this is going to be in vain to some degree because either people truly thought the death was fine or because some people slavishly accept everything Star Trek does as being great in some way, no matter how stupid and ill thought it may be.
Let's look at the demise of 3 central characters in Sci-Fi franchises.
Spock in TWOK. Makes the logical decision to sacrifice his life to save the Enterprise from being destroyed by the Genesis explosion.
Darth Vader in ROTJ. A character who has been portrayed as a heartless killing machine for the series can't stand the sight of his own son being slowly tortured to death by his master and makes the decision to save Luke's life pretty much knowing that by grabbing the Emperor his lightning will cause fatal damage to his life support suit.
Flynn in Tron: Legacy. A man who, as the creator of the grid, realizes he is the most powerful entity on it but, because he blames himself for the way it's become and his generally peaceful nature, doesn't use his full power until the point where CLU is threatening to harm his son and then, knowing it will destroy both of them, uses his power to reassilimate CLU into him.
Even Luke Skywalker, who didn't die, made the decision to sacrifice his own life rather than join Vader.
So ALL of these CENTRAL characters choose, beyond any doubt as far as they were concerned, to die for what they considered to be a truly noble and/or heroic reason. Luke is spared through a combination of other's actions and sheer luck. But all of these characters took their own fate into their hands and decided death was preferable to the alternative.
Now let's reshoot these scenes like Kirk's death scene, where they knew it was dangerous but thought they would probably survive.
Spock would have repaired the Warp engines, suffered injury from the radiation but have told Kirk he believes he is OK but as he is on the way to the door he touches an exposed electrical conduit and is electrocuted to death.
Vader is in bad shape but believes if Luke can get him off the Death Star he can be saved, but as they are heading towards the shuttle a beam jarred loose by the attack hits Vader in the head and kills him.
Flynn is a little spent and out of breath but is OK, then when he returns to the human world he suffers a heart attack because of the stress of the events.
Luke tells Vader he'll never join him and instead of deciding to plummet to his death, Vader just says "OK" and rams his lightsaber right through Luke's heart.
Now please tell me WITH A STRAIGHT FACE that any of those alternative scenes would have been more emotional and dramatic than how they were really filmed.
For a character like WILLIAM SHATNER AS JAMES TIBERIUS KIRK the most central and important character in the entire Star Trek Universe and either #1 or #2 in terms of popularity (Nimoy's Spock the other contender, I don't think Picard would beat Kirk) out of the dozens, if not hundreds of significant characters in all the ST franchises, you're damn right he deserves a death where he takes his fate into his own hands and dies because he decided it was the necessary sacrifice, not just because he was in a dangerous situation and his luck just ran out.
We are not talking about Jadzia Dax, or Tasha Yar, or even Data.....this is Captain Freaking Kirk. Out of all the characters in ST he, above anyone else, should have a dramatic end that comes of his own choosing. Not because some chains, he thought might hold, couldn't support his weight and gave way.
Let's say if, as was supposedly intended, Spock's death in TWOK was meant to be the end of the character. Yeah it would have sucked to have Spock gone, but at least when thinking about his death you couldn't have asked for a more noble and fitting end. Like I said if Spock's death had been written like Kirk's he would have gone into the radiation chamber realizing it was dangerous and he might die, but also might survive and then upon not receiving fatal injuries while fixing the warp engines would have died of some unexpected explosion or other element as he was walking towards the exit doors.
Would you really have thought that was the way a character as important and beloved as Spock was should go? Seriously?
I honestly can't believe I have to explain why something like Kirk's death is crappy storytelling and filmmaking and I can't believe even further still why people will continue to say it was good. Not every film should follow filmmaking 101, but there are obvious cases where something tired and true is actually the BEST way to do something.
I guess I could be wrong though. I mean "Generations" was such a masterpiece of filmmaking, I guess it might be crazy of me to think such a classic could possibly screw up Kirk's death
