That was explained quite a few times.Or in DS9 for why Ferenginar is always rainy?
That was explained quite a few times.Or in DS9 for why Ferenginar is always rainy?
Again, interesting story development, and I would enjoy it. But, it doesn't "deserve" to be told, at least in my view.They don't have to do what they did in TOS, just be sort of who they were, character-wise. How did Nero's incursion affect them personally, if at all, or what events are they now a part of that only happened after the incursion?
Given the lack of hand rails and exploding consoles, perhaps the red lights on top of tall buildings to warn aircraft have fallen by the wayside.Should there be fallout? A starship crashes; that it happens to be a black project is sort of incidental and unlikely to interest folks much.
One wonders how often starship crashes happen on Earth. Not only does this timeline suggest an ability to routinely operate inside the atmosphere, or a tendency to perform at least that one sortie (initial launch) from surface to orbit, there's also the evidence from earlier Trek that ships in "orbit" (probably futurospeak for hovering, considering) will drop like flies if losing power. Heck, even a random interstellar approach led to a near-crash in "Tomorrow is Yesterday". Perhaps this is why the skylines of major cities are so inconsistent in Trek...?
Timo Saloniemi
I doubt that average Federation citizen would be interested in the crash
I doubt that average Federation citizen would be interested in the crash. I was more interested in the political fallout between the Federation and the Klingons. Again, that's my personal interest, because I would like to see some different facets of that relationship. One of the few times I'm wishing we saw more Klingons.
Not directly. It more refers to this song, by PIllar, and this verse. However, that is one of my favorite movies of all time.How often do big starships crash into Earth cities in 2250s AR?
OT, just wondering; does your username come from the movie "Fireproof"? https://www.fireproofthemovie.com/redirect.html
It's not the Klingons knowing about the Vengeance but the very militaristic stance that Marcus was taking in provoking the Klingons.Agreed. I just don't quite see how "discovery of the Vengeance" would tie to this, as the Klingons did not discover the Vengeance as far as we know.
OTOH, if they do have a spy network going, they probably knew about that ship already. After all, she's not that black, what with the desktop model and all. Just a need-to-know project, possibly with several vessels already completed because Marcus felt so prepared to launch his war.
Timo Saloniemi
That's a great point. In my opinion, ending the film that way was a much more interesting way.The movie takes steps of sort to address the issue already: Kirk and peace prevailed where Marcus and war lost, because the final scene explicitly happens one year later and there's no sign of Klingon aggression there.
Supposedly, the villain was right in his assessment that the Klingons would only go to war if a Starfleet ship rained death on their very homeworld, or was caught trying to do so. And thanks to Kirk's moderating tactics, neither of these happened.
Timo Saloniemi
You're wildly overthinking this. Nero destroyed a chunk of the Klingon fleet and a huge chunk of Starfleet. There's no reason for subterfuge or confusion. The circumstances leading to the drill being sabotaged were quite extraordinary and Nero's obsession with Spock was used to goad him into a trap. It's not quite as simple as "gunfire" and "single shuttle."Watching the movie doesn't help there, because the alleged event was not seen. As it appears crucial for Nero's plans, our two options here seem to be
1) thinking Nero did it and
2) thinking Nero faked it.
The former assumes Nero could swat 47 Klingon ships. Why, then, does he appear so weak in the movie, succumbing to handgun fire over Vulcan and a single shuttlecraft over Earth? The latter assumes Nero needed to even the odds, and achieved that by luring Starfleet to Laurentius to fight phantoms. After all, this was his modus operandi: he sent fake messages in the name of Vulcan (there was no seismic activity yet when the message went out).
Apart from that, though, why should the loss of 47 ships reduce the odds of the Klingons going to war? The 2009 movie showed that the very real loss of nine Starfleet ships left Earth defenseless in an exceptional situation; it did not establish that either nine or 47 ships would be a significant number for waging war.
Alex Marcus would know about the ships lost anyway. He still thought the Klingons were a threat best negated by goading them into attacking, not by striking them when they were seriously handicapped.
Timo Saloniemi
You're wildly overthinking this. Nero destroyed a chunk of the Klingon fleet and a huge chunk of Starfleet. There's no reason for subterfuge or confusion.
The circumstances leading to the drill being sabotaged were quite extraordinary and Nero's obsession with Spock was used to goad him into a trap. It's not quite as simple as "gunfire" and "single shuttle."
See TMP as a prime example.I think the re-imagination of the Klingons was perfectly handled in STID. Some updates to the looks of both the species, outfits and ships. Qo'nos looked good. But they were still so very much Klingon.
I think it's good changes like this are done sometimes. Same old same old everyday gets boring. Like, really really boring.
Yes on all counts. They were back to being guys you don't fu*k with.Did you like the look of the Kelvinverse Klingons?
Their ships?
Their planet?
Their attitudes?
I think the re-imagination of the Klingons was perfectly handled in STID. Some updates to the looks of both the species, outfits and ships.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.