There's a great scene in Into Darkness where Pike basically calls Kirk out for being so cocky.
Kurtzman gets 5 1/2 year deal with 3 new shows in the works
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I'd argue that Lower Decks' Crisis Point is a great story - the best I've seen yet in the Kurtzman era, and even better than the vast majority of VOY and ENT. Calypso is likewise fantastic (though the idiotic need to "work it into continuity" may yet ruin it). But since the "stories" of Discovery and Picard to date have been serialized arcs which have been flubbed in some manner, I'd concede in general storytelling has not worked out yet for Kurtzman Trek.
But I could just as easily point to inconsistent characterization throughout Trek. Even Riker himself changed over the course of TNG from being first conceptualized as a "man of action" in the Kirk mein to a beta to Picard's alpha who grew domesticated in his role on the ship to the point he didn't even want his own command immediately. Why did he change? For the needs of the show - because they didn't want to write him out of the show, so he had to be okay with being stuck at first officer. Consistency took a back seat to show convenience and storytelling.
Lower Decks had its issues, but by the end of the first season it was by far the best of the Kurtzman Trek series. I have no issue with the "unprofessionalism" of the crew because:
1. All of them (other than Mariner, who is a special case) actually take their jobs seriously.
2. This isn't a flagship like the Enterprise - it's a normal ship, and it makes sense the crew are less the top 0.01%.
3. I don't expect everything I see onscreen in Trek to be the literal "this is how it happened" in the Trekverse. It's a show, not a documentary.
Good. They shouldn't love it. They should tell stories they want to in the Star Trek sandbox, not handle Star Trek like fine china that could break. Star Trek is more than sets and the fact that the litmus test of "real Trek" are sets is something I do not understand.
Star Trek's identity is not at risk at all. TOS is the largest Trek touchstone in history and the fact that Kurtzman is willing to attempt to try something new around that era shows an attitude that Trek has lacked in a while-of being willing to explore new frontiers.
Kirk had a reason to be that way in 09 and ID and made for a more interesting and richer character. TMP did not and was probably the most disrespectful of that character from TOS. It was merely to make him an ass and it did nothing for the plot.
The whole "Kirk is a rebel cowboy who disobeys Starfleet commands and does what he thinks is right, damn the consequences" was largely a movie invention. Aside from Amok Time, I'm hard-pressed to think of a time in TOS he actually went against orders - and many times he followed orders despite his own displeasure.
Much like they made Picard into an action hero in the TNG movies because it's what Stewart wanted, despite it not working within continuity at all.
Much like they made Picard into an action hero in the TNG movies because it's what Stewart wanted, despite it not working within continuity at all.
IDK. I felt exactly the same way when TNG premiered in 1987. 1701D design sucked hard. And the only reason for any existing 'visual continuity' in TNG was because overall, they reused most of the set elements from Star Trek The Motion Picture and the TOS era feature films.
As for the ships (again as a purely production cost saving measure); they used any and every ship model that was ever used in the TOS era future films.
So yeah TNG had a 'Star Trek' look, But for me as far as the characters and 24th century world of the Federation <--- Nope TNG win it premiere didn't feel like Star Trek. What I enjoyed about Star Trek was jettisoned in favor of Gene Roddenberry's new "Utopian" version of humanity.
There's being cocky, there's being an insufferable a-hole, and than there's the insufferable a-hole who doesn't learn a thing.
And it is a bad scene because nothing of consequences happens. Not only does Kirk get away from the punishment he so rightfully deserved (Sending him back to the Academy), he gets a simple demotion to First Officer on the Enterprise. You'd think Kirk would at least contemplate that maybe lying on the report was a mistake and that if he stood by his decision, he might not have lost command in the first place. But no, Kirk still continues to blame Spock for losing his command. Going so far as to call Spock's actions a 'stab in the back'.
That's the thing about great scenes. They leave a lasting impact on the characters. That is not what happened in that scene. Kirk still believed he did nothing wrong and continued to blame others for his mistakes. Naturally Kirk gets command of the Enterprise back a few minutes later.
Kirk certainly learned a thing or two by the end of the movie.
Gene Roddenberry's "Utopian" version of Humanity was always a problem because when you boil it all down, it was 'his' idea of a perfect humanity. Not everyone's.
TOS worked better than the early years of TNG because it showed us a Humanity that was better, not perfect. People can relate more to characters who do things better more than they can to those who are perfect. That's how many of us get inspired. If they can be better, so can we. It's hard to look up to a character who proclaims themselves to be perfect when all they do is talk down on others (which Picard did with pride).
Kurtzman's Star Trek doesn't feature a better Humanity. In fact, Kurtzman's depiction of Humanity in Star Trek is rather uninspired and downright vile most of the time. And everyone involved with the franchise now is happy to keep it that way.
I thought the argument you were making was that the two films glorify Kirk being an asshole? Into Darkness, flawed as it is, doesn’t glorify him at all really. He makes rash decisions, pushes his crew away and gets a lot of them killed. He’s pretty actively punished throughout for his behaviour. Sometimes arcs take longer than just one scene to manifest.
No. Berman stated back in the day it was done because he wanted new viewers to check the show out who weren't Star Trek fans, and was worried the Star Trek name would scare them off. UPN then decided to add Star Trek to Enterprise's title in the third season because of its low ratings, thinking the Star Trek name would attract viewers. To his credit, Berman actually spoke out against the idea, saying "I'm pretty sure everyone who already is a Star Trek fans is already aware of Enterprise."
I don't do that at all. If a show interests me, I'll watch it. If it doesn't, I won't. I don't care what awards, accolades or acclaim it does or does not get.
You are aware Lower Decks is a comedy, right? Its purpose is to make us laugh. Which it succeeds at.
Picard is definitely written by people who know and love TNG. Look no further than the scene with him dressed up as Kipling while walking among Romulan refugees. That was definitely written by someone who knows TNG in general and the character Jean-Luc Picard specifically inside and out.
Likewise, Lower Decks is clearly written by people who know and love the Trek franchise. That knowledge and love just oozes from the show.
What did he learn? That revenge is bad and "not who we are"? Even that point is ludicrous when you take into consideration all the things that happened in that movie. To quote SFDebris,
"If there was any lesson that should be learned, it's from Admiral Marcus and how a good man can become evil if he gives into fear. But that lesson seems to be one less important to teach than "Yeah, revenge is bad. That's why all of us who tried it are better off."
Kirk literally talks about not giving in to darker aspects. I like SF Debris a lot but don't agree on his Into Darkness take.
By punished throughout, you mean "We're taking away your ship! Actually, you can still serve on that ship as second-in-command... You know what? Forget about it. You're still Captain."
*Commands the Enterprise. A lot of crewman die.*
Such greatness.
To be fair, everyone was supposed to die, according to Marcus when he put Kirk back in command. Kirk was nothing more than a fall guy.
No, you're missing the point. I'm not talking about literal punishment by tribunal, or whatever. We're talking about how the film frames his attitude and his actions. In '09, when he breaks the chain of command and takes matters into his own hands, he's rewarded by being right. His actions actively lead to a positive outcome.
In Into Darkness, when he ignores Scotty's warnings about the torpedos, he's ultimately proven to be wrong and nearly ends up starting a war. Marcus literally uses Kirk's flaws against him. He's grief-stricken and hungry for revenge over the death of Pike. He ignores all the red flags, just to hunt down Harrison. It's petty, and shortsighted and ultimately everything would have been avoided if he'd just paused for a minute and looked at the situation. The film punishes him for his actions.
That actions have consequences. And he definitely learned humility in the face of his crew being killed.
But nothing can survive a hostile review so, whatever
But his take is still a valid one. Everyone who let in the "darker aspects" got what they wanted and we're supposed to believe that's the only lesson that matters.
What makes this whole thing worse is that this film DOES have more important lessons that our heroes can learn from. As far as anyone knows, Kirk still believes that lying on the report was still not a mistake.
We must have been watching different TV shows.
I'm not saying his take isn't valid. Only that I disagree because Kirk's whole rationale behind lying on the report was the simple fact that no one died. Except, he couldn't deny that post-Vengeance. His crew suffered massive losses, as did San Francisco because he let his need for revenge make him a useful puppet for Marcus. His sacrifice is exactly the lesson he needed to learn.
No, I don't think those who embraced the darker aspects "got what they wanted" because Spock didn't kill Khan, and Kirk had to die in order to save his ship. He couldn't deny death any longer.
Indeed.
It's nice to see Kurtzman getting fired so successfully all the time!
Similar threads
