• 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!

Kirk drift—misremembering a character…

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mres_was_framed! said:
Was not the Farragut supposed to have been lost in 2257, which would not fit with the new shows?
Click to expand...
Where's any evidence that the Farragut was lost/destroyed? The ship was attacked by the Space Vampire Cloud which killed half its crew, including the Captain. The Space Vampire Cloud showed no capability to destroy stuff, only suck the red blood corpuscles out of people. The other half of the ship's crew had to get home somehow, most likely on the Farragut. ~10 years later in SNW, the Farragut looked fine to me (at least until Kirk destroyed it). :)

blssdwlf said:
That's a big stretch, IMHO.
Click to expand...
Ya, I was exaggerating things a bit to introduce my new "Kirk drift" idea that he wrecks ships. More honorably, Kirk could have gotten a plumb assignment at Starfleet Command.

As to why I like to put Kirk on a ground/base assignment, it gives a one year time window for Lester and Kirk to establish a close relationship which I don't think could occur if Kirk is ship based and Lester wasn't. Then again, Kirk and Lester could be on the same ship, but I like this less likely especially if Kirk is either commander of the ship or its first officer, hence the idea of a non-ship assignment. Repeating myself from before, I decided to put Lester later in Kirk's timeline simply because of the "your world of starship captains..." which as the only clue, seems to link Kirk to getting promoted to Captain of a starship, and hence, shortly before he gets the Enterprise. Any other time is just as good, but with less evidence IMHO.

Back to the original Kirk drift on womanizing, here's my order of Kirk's pre-TOS girlfriends covered in the series:
  1. Ruth
  2. Carol Marcus
  3. Janet Wallace
  4. Areel Shaw
  5. Janice Lester
  6. USS Enterprise ;)
  7. Helen Johansson? <Could Helen Johansson actually be Helen Noel after she left the Enterprise and got married?>
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kkt
fireproof78 said:
So he's just supposed to jump in to that new focus with no tendency towards the old behaviors?
Click to expand...

That is what I really did not like about that scene: In real life people have setbacks, but I really had no interest in a movie about Kirk having setbacks. Though arguably a bit of a stretch, we longtime fans might be able to interpret the idea that showing Kirk with two women underscores the fact that Kirk has not fully learned to focus (yet). However, by newer viewers, it could be interpreted (or rather misinterpreted) as perpetuating the idea that Kirk does not really emotionally care about any particular woman, in a particularly harsh case of "character drift." Worse, for viewers expecting a "family movie," the scnece could be misinterpreted as normalizing that kind of behavior by having the "hero" of the story do it. I do not think that was the writer's intention, but the movie would have been much better of without it.

Henoch said:
Helen Johansson? <Could Helen Johansson actually be Helen Noel after she left the Enterprise and got married?>
Click to expand...

I say that it makes sense for them to be the same Helen, and adds a bit of continuity between episodes.

Henoch said:
Where's any evidence that the Farragut was lost/destroyed?
Click to expand...

I suppose that it is true that we have no evidence that the ship was destroyed, but it seems peculiar to leave it in service after half the crew has died, unless it was during a period of ship scarcity like after "The Best of Both Worlds".
 
Mres_was_framed! said:
Though arguably a bit of a stretch, we longtime fans might be able to interpret the idea that showing Kirk with two women underscores the fact that Kirk has not fully learned to focus (yet). However, by newer viewers, it could be interpreted (or rather misinterpreted) as perpetuating the idea that Kirk does not really emotionally care about any particular woman, in a particularly harsh case of "character drift." Worse, for viewers expecting a "family movie," the scnece could be misinterpreted as normalizing that kind of behavior by having the "hero" of the story do it. I do not think that was the writer's intention, but the movie would have been much better of without it.
Click to expand...
I mean, I don't entirely disagree but at the same time the film is about how unfocused Kirk is. He thinks he has it all figured out, looking forward to a 5 year mission in space, strutting about, and not taking things seriously, either the rules or his assignment. Pike has to call him on the carpet for it, and he has to own that mistake, In short, he has to grow.

If the audience misinterprets it then fine, let them. That's what discussion are for. But, unlike you I personally want a Kirk with setbacks, and struggles and learning. Watching him over the course of the film, even with the ladies, his attitude shifts completely. He goes from leering, to peeking, to worried about Carol to actually checking on her after they beam back. There is a clear through line of growth in the whole movie and that's what makes it so great.

Yeah, maybe that scene can be excised with little loss, but I would still say it reflects Kirk's growth and I find more value in that than the space jump scene (which I completely ignore).
 
fireproof78 said:
That Kirk gets a command after the events of TSFS still blows my mind.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's hard to believe. He saved Earth so their punishment was a thinly disguised reward. It's a "slap on the wrist." Also, as a Captain, he's not only doing what he does best, he is back down the chain of command. So he has more people watching him. I'm sure he lost a lot of Admiral privileges. Kirk's actions (disobeying orders, stealing the ship and going off on his own) put him in a position to save Earth. If he accepted what Vice Admiral Morrow told him, he would have been stranded on Earth with everyone else.

Blowing up the Enterprise to keep it out of enemy hands and taking most of them with the ship is certainly not gonna be a black mark. This was something the original series touched on at least 3 times. The Enterprise will not fall into enemy hands. Period. Not only was the Enterprise going to be decommissioned anyway, scuttling the ship in combat is a part of Naval history. Harve Bennett even said he based it on Oliver Hazard Perry, who scuttled his ship in battle and rowed over to another one and took command.

Kirk wasn't dicking around drunk blowing up ships and ignoring orders. As in "Amok Time" he decided Spock's life was "worth a career." In battle, he was making quick decisions to get his crew to the next place. In TSFS, he was literally thinking no further than that: "We have to stay alive long enough to figure out another option." That was pretty much that entire sequence in the film.
 
Ssosmcin said:
I don't think it's hard to believe. He saved Earth so their punishment was a thinly disguised reward. It's a "slap on the wrist." Also, as a Captain, he's not only doing what he does best, he is back down the chain of command. So he has more people watching him. I'm sure he lost a lot of Admiral privileges. Kirk's actions (disobeying orders, stealing the ship and going off on his own) put him in a position to save Earth. If he accepted what Vice Admiral Morrow told him, he would have been stranded on Earth with everyone else.

Blowing up the Enterprise to keep it out of enemy hands and taking most of them with the ship is certainly not gonna be a black mark. This was something the original series touched on at least 3 times. The Enterprise will not fall into enemy hands. Period. Not only was the Enterprise going to be decommissioned anyway, scuttling the ship in combat is a part of Naval history. Harve Bennett even said he based it on Oliver Hazard Perry, who scuttled his ship in battle and rowed over to another one and took command.

Kirk wasn't dicking around drunk blowing up ships and ignoring orders. As in "Amok Time" he decided Spock's life was "worth a career." In battle, he was making quick decisions to get his crew to the next place. In TSFS, he was literally thinking no further than that: "We have to stay alive long enough to figure out another option." That was pretty much that entire sequence in the film.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but the following are not excusable to me:
  • Disobeying a direct order.
  • Facilitating a brig break
  • Assault on Federation officers.
  • Damage to Federation property.
  • Mutiny. Or at least conspiracy to usurp lawful chain of command.
  • Sabotage of military equipment.
  • Theft of military equipment
  • Violation of a quarantine zone
  • Destruction of military property
  • Using a false flag of truce to kill foreign nationals.
That's just off the top of my head. His lack of respect for lawful military authority is quite clear.
 
Into Darkness also continues the TNG trope of "It's better to let a civilization die than to ever let them ever even see a spaceship."

Kirk's growth in STID is to learn this. That'll teach the pasty primitive buggers.

Ssosmcin said:
Blowing up the Enterprise to keep it out of enemy hands and taking most of them with the ship is certainly not gonna be a black mark.
Click to expand...
But the only reason it was there to fall into enemy hands was because Kirk and his gang stole it. Mind you, without stealing the Enterprise the Genesis tapes would be in the hands of the Klingon Empire. Better to be lucky than good.
 
Warped9 said:
CM was cooked up just to lean into the many girls caricature.
Click to expand...
Is there evidence for that?

I've wondered whether Carol was cooked up just to avoid paying royalties to the author(s) of "The Deadly Years," but I know of no evidence for that.

Anybody have anything on this?
 
Here is a theory regarding Janice Lester.

After the Farragut limps home (or to starbase) after losing Captain Garrovick and half the crew Kirk and the rest of the crew are basically tied up in port while the ship is repaired and new crew reassigned to the ship. While at starbase Kirk meets up with the Farragut's new Captain, L.T. Stone, (whom we'll see later in "Court Martial"). All the while Kirk is still racked with guilt over what happened to Captain Garrovick and the rest. Along comes Janice Lester who spots a wounded soul in Kirk whom she can woo and “heal." A young Kirk welcomes the attention even as he doesn't initially spot the darker aspects of Lester's clingy character. Kirk might even ignore the warnings of others that Lester is big trouble and he should run in the other direction.

Over a period of time Kirk starts to get a handle on his emotions (including his guilt). His prior ambition and perseverence returns as he rediscovers he wants to continue pursuing his career and ambition to be a starship captain someday. This leads to friction with Lester who wants Kirk to stay with her wherein Kirk starts to awaken to her darker aspects and actions. In the end we know Kirk leaves with Stone aboard the repaired and remanned Farragut, leaving Lester bitterly distraught, and unknown to Kirk she vows to extract payback from him someday. Maybe Lester tries to join Starfleet (or she is already in it, but tries to get promoted and assigned to starship duty). Nonetheless, Starfleet judges her unsuitable and potentially unstable. Subsequently Lester judges Kirk's rejection of her for his career and Starfleet's rejection of her as somehow a rejection of her just for being a woman.

And she nurtures and embraces that deranged bitterness for easily a dozen years. waiting for her chance. She proves she certainly knows how to carry a grudge.


Just off the top of my head.
 
Last edited:
fireproof78 said:
Sorry, but the following are not excusable to me:
Click to expand...

Luckily for Kirk, you're not on the council. :)

I know a lot of your points are specific charges in Star Trek IV but obviously Kirk declined legal council or was told not to bother because some of them are defensible and a good attorney would argue a number of them

  • Disobeying a direct order. Sure, in the service that is actionable, but as far as "inexcusable" it's not the first time this has happened in Star Trek. Kirk violated the Neutral Zone regulation in Balance of Terror. He was forgiven before the credits rolled. As I mentioned, he directly disobeyed the Admiral in Amok Time. Again, forgiven. When Kirk does it, it's because he's looking past the narrow-mindedness of the order and considering a greater good.
  • Facilitating a brig break - granted
  • Assault on Federation officers. granted (Sulu and Uhura are on the peg for this too)
  • Damage to Federation property. - Not Kirk, Scotty. And what damage? He removed some chips. No harm done.
  • Mutiny. Or at least conspiracy to usurp lawful chain of command. Nope just disobeyed orders. No more mutiny or a conspiracy than in the two prior episodes I mentioned. Insubordination at most.
  • Sabotage of military equipment. Scotty
  • Theft of military equipment Can't argue that since it is the high point in the film.
  • Violation of a quarantine zone Okay sure, this is minor. Trespassing/insubordination.
  • Destruction of military property Again, that was a tactical move and well within the norm for Star Trek and Naval combat. Kirk could easily have argued this down.
  • Using a false flag of truce to kill foreign nationals. Nope, Kirk was more than willing to negotiate. The Klingons were the aggressors. Kirk only responded in kind. No crime there.
fireproof78 said:
His lack of respect for lawful military authority is quite clear.
Click to expand...

Not really, he just placed Spock's life and McCoy's sanity above his career and regulations again. This is pure Kirk, a man who will sacrifice his career and standing for his friends. He was stonewalled by closed-minded superiors. Now you personally may find his actions unforgivable, but the folks in charge weighed those actions and his motivations against his saving Earth.

Kirk kept the Genesis data from remaining in Klingon hands.
Kirk dealt with the people who destroyed a science vessel and its crew.
Kirk brought Spock back to life (he was after all the best first officer in the fleet)
Kirk went back in time and saved Earth from certain death (the key event).

Those things make Kirk a hard person to punish, especially when you consider he also saved Earth a decade earlier. Also his prior record.

So they punished him on paper and could posture to the Klingons that Kirk was demoted in disgrace (which is how it seems they took it in Star Trek 6), but they knew they couldn't drum him out.
 
I’m recalling the armchair quarterbacking of the Earth President in Babylon 5 after Sheridan led the resistance and saved the planet: “You did the right thing, but you you did it in the wrong way.”

Sheridan thinking, “Uh, okay. I was kinda on my own here while everything was going to hell.”
 
To expand from an earlier post:
  • Disobeying a direct order. Sure, in the service that is actionable, but as far as "inexcusable" it's not the first time this has happened in Star Trek. Kirk violated the Neutral Zone regulation in Balance of Terror. He was forgiven before the credits rolled. As I mentioned, he directly disobeyed the Admiral in Amok Time. Again, forgiven. When Kirk does it, it's because he's looking past the narrow-mindedness of the order and considering a greater good. Um, that as not his motivation in disobeying Morrow's order. It wasn't the greater good; it was Spock's good.
  • Facilitating a brig break - granted
  • Assault on Federation officers. granted (Sulu and Uhura are on the peg for this too). Thank you. Also, unlawful imprisonment for Uhura.
  • Damage to Federation property. - Not Kirk, Scotty. And what damage? He removed some chips. No harm done. No, Scotty disabled a ship of the line, reducing it's effective and Starfleet's combat effectiveness. Also on Scotty: missing ship's movement, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming.
  • Mutiny. Or at least conspiracy to usurp lawful chain of command. Nope just disobeyed orders. No more mutiny or a conspiracy than in the two prior episodes I mentioned. Insubordination at most. Kirk had a officer from another ship come off his post to assist him. Conspiracy.
  • Sabotage of military equipment. Scotty. Hopefully it can be demonstrated Kirk did not know about this.
  • Theft of military equipment Can't argue that since it is the high point in the film. Indeed and why I would not trust Kirk in the future with it.
  • Violation of a quarantine zone Okay sure, this is minor. Trespassing/insubordination.
  • Destruction of military property Again, that was a tactical move and well within the norm for Star Trek and Naval combat. Kirk could easily have argued this down. Maybe. But, it could also be argued that the Enterprise would not need to be destroyed if he hadn't been insubordinate or stolen it in the first place.
  • Using a false flag of truce to kill foreign nationals. Nope, Kirk was more than willing to negotiate. The Klingons were the aggressors. Kirk only responded in kind. No crime there. No. Kirk agreed to a truce on terms, then booby trapped the Enterprise under a false flag of truce.

Ssosmcin said:
Kirk kept the Genesis data from remaining in Klingon hands.
Kirk dealt with the people who destroyed a science vessel and its crew.
Kirk brought Spock back to life (he was after all the best first officer in the fleet)
Kirk went back in time and saved Earth from certain death (the key event).
Click to expand...
None of these things motivated the original insubordination and other crimes. Punish him, and put him behind a desk or at the Academy. Rewarding him with a command after disrespecting the chain of command, and other officers in the Fleet is just ridiculous.

Yes, he's a hero. Yes the Council felt that a demotion was sufficient. I do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top