My Grievances of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

[CorporalClegg]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

There's no reason they couldn't have had that without the idiotic ending of Kirk being instantly placed in full official command of the enterprise.

There is nothing idiotic about it. ST09 was the story of how James Tiberius Kirk becomes captain of the Starship Enterprise.

The wonderful thing about a battlefield promotion is: it's temporary (just like Riker in BoBW).

First of all, never cite TNG as an example of anything.

Second, field promotions do become permanent, especially under extenuating circumstances--like saving the planet. In fact, in the histories of all the navies in the world, when a person of lesser rank but extraordinary ability displays this kind of ascendance over his shipmates during a crisis, it is not that uncommon for him to receive appropriate compensation afterwords. During WWII, for example, similar scenarios occurred all the time (especially on subs).

I think the mistake (and I've mentioned this before) was making his rank captain. He should certainly have been made captain of the Enterprise at the end of the film but only held the rank of commander--or Lieutenant Commander, even. Then readjust the others' ranks accordingly.

Third, it's best to put a colon after an independent clause. But never put one immediately following a verb.

And killing Pike to provide Kirk full ascendancy to the Captain's Chair (after actually having something resembling Starship experience) would've still provided the perfect opening to the second film.

No.

And, if that wasn't good enough for the writers, then they should have just sucked it up and started Kirk with a higher rank than 'Cadet on Academic Suspension', no matter how desperate they were to show his Kobayashi Maru test.

And no.

Not to mention the fact that Rogers was handpicked for the responsibility and passed his training with flying colors, while Kirk hadn't even graduated from the academy yet and already had a disciplinary record. These are not even remotely comparable situations.

Kirk's aptitude also registered off the charts and he had achieved his own brand of notoriety amongst the faculty and brass.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

The wonderful thing about a battlefield promotion is: it's temporary (just like Riker in BoBW).

First of all, never cite TNG as an example of anything.

It was an example of fact. Whether you liked the storytelling in that show or not is not particularly relevant.

Second, field promotions do become permanent, especially under extenuating circumstances--like saving the planet. In fact, in the histories of all the navies in the world, when a person of lesser rank but extraordinary ability displays this kind of ascendance over his shipmates during a crisis, it is not that uncommon for him to receive appropriate compensation afterwords. During WWII, for example, similar scenarios occurred all the time (especially on subs).

Yes, field promotions become permanent, after review and confirmation by the top brass. Which is not at all believable in this case. If the Federation were at war, losing captains everyday and desperately in need of new ones who clearly at least have the talent if not the experience - then, yes, I would believe it. But even in the highly optimistic Federation logic, it does not make sense fast tracking someone this far up in one day when there are clearly plenty of officers around, whether they saved earth or the whole universe.

I think the mistake (and I've mentioned this before) was making his rank captain. He should certainly have been made captain of the Enterprise at the end of the film but only held the rank of commander--or Lieutenant Commander, even. Then readjust the others' ranks accordingly.

Still would not convince me. Like I said - the important thing is the responsibility, not the title.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

And my point is Rogers had a similar jump in rank and responsibility. He goes from recruit to propaganda tool to leader of an elite team of commandos. We've no real idea how big that team expanded to. It might have been more than just the initial group by the time Rogers was iced. A Captain in the Army is usually in charge of Company, which could include a couple of hundred men. Also the missions the team was sent on were vital and important to the War effort. So that's an increase in responsibility as well. Much more than punching "Hitler" and dancing with show girls.

All of which came gradually, not 'overnight'. ST09 takes place across a time span of a day or two, Captain America takes at least a year, probably more. And even if he got a full company to take on his important missions - it's still not close the same level of responsibility as being the captain of the starfleet flagship, a position requiring a massive amount of *independent* leadership beyond simply the ability to improvise during planned missions, not to mention the endless technical considerations necessary for commanding a ship in such a hostile natural environment.

Not to mention the fact that Rogers was handpicked for the responsibility and passed his training with flying colors, while Kirk hadn't even graduated from the academy yet and already had a disciplinary record. These are not even remotely comparable situations.

All irrelevant to my point. Rogers goes from propaganda tool to leader of men after one success. (he disobeys orders to do so). Rogers doesn't need exactly the same responsibility as Kirk or the same background to draw a comparison about a jump in rank.

The jump in rank for Kirk is actually my biggest beef with the film. But I understand it.

 

[Franklin]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Kirk had to be in the captain's chair at the end of the movie. The problem was how to get him there in the least implausible manner. Nothing was going to be perfect or completely believable. Let's face it, everyone's rise in status was meteoric except perhaps Spock's, who was Pike's first officer to begin with.

At least in STID, they showed that Kirk was not ready for the chair. Give them credit for that.

 

[Opus]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

If the Federation were at war, losing captains everyday and desperately in need of new ones who clearly at least have the talent if not the experience - then, yes, I would believe it.

Starfleet lost a number of captains, officers and ships over Vulcan confronting Nero in ST09.

So... I can believe it.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

And, if that wasn't good enough for the writers, then they should have just sucked it up and started Kirk with a higher rank than 'Cadet on Academic Suspension', no matter how desperate they were to show his Kobayashi Maru test.

"Cadet" is not a rank. According to screens in the 2009 movie, Kirk was already a lieutenant. (And so was Saavik in ST II.)

 

[UFO]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

There's no reason they couldn't have had that without the idiotic ending of Kirk being instantly placed in full official command of the enterprise.

There is nothing idiotic about it.

Of course there is. Even the writers effectively agreed on that much (although they probably wouldn't use that exact wording and good on them for coming to their senses).

ST09 was the story of how James Tiberius Kirk becomes captain of the Starship Enterprise.

I though it was a little more than that, but even if so, you'd think they would move Heaven and Earth to make sure that part of the story was at least vaguely believable. I guess that’s why so many here feel the need to defend it so … passionately, shall we say. In the event, it was poorly done, whatever excuses are trotted out to "explain it way". Let’s face it, no one would attempt to justify it in a movie they didn’t like and that’s the final test.

... Like I said - the important thing is the responsibility, not the title.

Exactly, and of course experience. A "Title" won't help you get your ship out of trouble etc.

All irrelevant to my point. Rogers goes from propaganda tool to leader of men after one success. (he disobeys orders to do so). Rogers doesn't need exactly the same responsibility as Kirk or the same background to draw a comparison about a jump in rank.

The jump in rank for Kirk is actually my biggest beef with the film. But I understand it.

I don't know much about this Rogers fellow of whom you speak, but if he gained experience leading men over a period of time that would seem very relevant. In fact Kirk's lack of experience and unknown abilities are clearly the primary issues here. I.e can he do the job well?

I think we all understand it on a number of levels. Its just understanding doesn't make it one jot more believable. But good on you for admitting you have a problem with it.

Kirk had to be in the captain's chair at the end of the movie. The problem was how to get him there in the least implausible manner. Nothing was going to be perfect or completely believable. Let's face it, everyone's rise in status was meteoric except perhaps Spock's, who was Pike's first officer to begin with.

At least in STID, they showed that Kirk was not ready for the chair. Give them credit for that.

And I do, see above , but I don't think that was anywhere near the "least implausible manner". What's the point in explaining how someone got to be where he is, if your explanation doesn't make sense? I think Pike should have wished Kirk well as he went off to serve on another starship. Then, "Three Years Later", we see a two minute scene of Kirk as captain of a cruiser in a fight against the odds but he pulls off a brilliant manoeuvre to save the day (probably involving three dimensional thinking ). Then we cut to a scene where his superior is saying: "Starfleet and I agree Captain. You have earned a new command. Yes, yes, I understand your reservations, but somehow I think you’ll be pleased". Cut to Kirk stepping back on to the bridge of the Enterprise … . Now if you don't like that, then the whole story should have been reorgainsed to give him more experience (it wouldn't have to be on screen of course, just so we know he has some).

Starfleet lost a number of captains, officers and ships over Vulcan confronting Nero in ST09.

So... I can believe it.

I can't see him being the next most (obviously) capable officer in all of Starfleet.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

I don't know much about this Rogers fellow of whom you speak, but if he gained experience leading men over a period of time that would seem very relevant. In fact Kirk's lack of experience and unknown abilities are clearly the primary issues here. I.e can he do the job well?

He had no experience leading men. He had never even been on the battlefield till he decided to conduct a one man rescue mission against orders. Prior to that he was a performer in a moral building USO show. He had training and ability, but no actual experience.

 

[trevanian]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

I find it stunning that people can get upset over something as trivial as lens flare. It's weird touch that JJ likes to put in his projects, it has no effect on the story, acting or any other detail. It's just an easy straw to grasp at and complain.

It's as disruptive to visuals for me as if they sped up the action like a Benny Hill skit. It is certainly not trivial, as movies are meant to be watched, not obscured.

Would you do a whole movie with rack focus every shot? Don't think so.

 

[Khan444]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Kirk saved Earth in ST 09, demonstrated his leadership abilities WHILE commanding the Enterprise, making him Captain is not hard to buy. It was Kirk's initiative that saved Earth. If Spock had been in command, or if Kirk had followed Pike's orders, there would be no more Earth because Nero would have destroyed it. Then, they showed that it may have been premature in STID, so I don't agree with the complaints. Also, Rogers was a propaganda tool with ZERO combat experience who disobeyed orders and went on a rogue mission for personal reasons (to rescue his friend) and was rewarded by being made a Captain and being able to handpick an team to go on elite missions with.

 

[Opus]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Starfleet lost a number of captains, officers and ships over Vulcan confronting Nero in ST09.

So... I can believe it.

I can't see him being the next most (obviously) capable officer in all of Starfleet.

Well, he had just spent the better part of the last few days before being made catain of the Enterprise defeating a crazed Romulan in an uber-ship from the future from using his magic red matter to create a black hole within earth's core.

So... there's that.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Shouldn't the OP have waited till Festivus to start this thread?

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

We all get a little impatient sometimes.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

It just seems Festivus is starting earlier and earlier every year. No respect for tradition.

 

[UFO]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

I don't know much about this Rogers fellow of whom you speak, but if he gained experience leading men over a period of time that would seem very relevant. In fact Kirk's lack of experience and unknown abilities are clearly the primary issues here. I.e can he do the job well?

He had no experience leading men. He had never even been on the battlefield till he decided to conduct a one man rescue mission against orders. Prior to that he was a performer in a moral building USO show. He had training and ability, but no actual experience.

I guess he must have been a natural then, otherwise both sound equally problematic.

Kirk saved Earth in ST 09, demonstrated his leadership abilities WHILE commanding the Enterprise, making him Captain is not hard to buy. It was Kirk's initiative that saved Earth. If Spock had been in command, or if Kirk had followed Pike's orders, there would be no more Earth because Nero would have destroyed it. Then, they showed that it may have been premature in STID, so I don't agree with the complaints. Also, Rogers was a propaganda tool with ZERO combat experience who disobeyed orders and went on a rogue mission for personal reasons (to rescue his friend) and was rewarded by being made a Captain and being able to handpick an team to go on elite missions with.

Actually it was Kirk's one man mutiny that later, by pure luck, gave him a way to get aboard the Narada. As for Rogers, it doesn't sound like the best precedent for Starfleet's actions.

BTW, what was shown to be premature in STiD?

Starfleet lost a number of captains, officers and ships over Vulcan confronting Nero in ST09.

So... I can believe it.

I can't see him being the next most (obviously) capable officer in all of Starfleet.

Well, he had just spent the better part of the last few days before being made catain of the Enterprise defeating a crazed Romulan in an uber-ship from the future from using his magic red matter to create a black hole within earth's core.

So... there's that.

Kirk didn't defeat Nero. Nero was betrayed by the plot.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

All irrelevant to my point. Rogers goes from propaganda tool to leader of men after one success. (he disobeys orders to do so). Rogers doesn't need exactly the same responsibility as Kirk or the same background to draw a comparison about a jump in rank.

The jump in rank for Kirk is actually my biggest beef with the film. But I understand it.

Oh, I understand why they did it. But, as another poster said, that still doesn't make it anymore believable.

As for Cap, I simply don't see the two situations as truly comparable, because the jump in responsibility - to me - is several orders of magnitude larger for Kirk, and the abilities he'd proven himself to have were neither extremely urgently needed, nor impossible to find in other officers, whereas the abilities Captain America demonstrated were both.

Kirk had to be in the captain's chair at the end of the movie. The problem was how to get him there in the least implausible manner. Nothing was going to be perfect or completely believable. Let's face it, everyone's rise in status was meteoric except perhaps Spock's, who was Pike's first officer to begin with.

At least in STID, they showed that Kirk was not ready for the chair. Give them credit for that.

That's true, and the whole thing taken together is actually my biggest problem with the story (aside from Nero) - not just Kirk. The discussion around Kirk is more extreme because he is the most ridiculous outlier, but the others' rise in position is fairly weird as well. The only one I really believed was Uhura, since she was flat-out stated to be a communications prodigy.

But how exactly did McCoy end up the second highest ranking doctor when he hadn't even been in space yet? And while I get that you have to make do with what you have in a crisis, how does Sulu become the permanent helmsman of the enterprise when he hasn't even trained to fly a full sized starship? Not to mention Scotty going from some kind of apparent exile to chief engineer of the flagship with seemingly no difficulty...

As for giving them props for acknowledging his inexperience in STiD - I really wanted to. When I first saw it, I for a few brief moments thought 'This is going to redeem that whole mess'. But they didn't do anything with it whatsoever. There was five minutes of general angst and then BAM, Pike's dead, Spock's back on board and off we go, nobody pay any attention to that completely unresolved storyline behind the curtain. Overall, I do actually like STiD. But nothing in it makes up for the bizarre storyline in ST09.

If the Federation were at war, losing captains everyday and desperately in need of new ones who clearly at least have the talent if not the experience - then, yes, I would believe it.

Starfleet lost a number of captains, officers and ships over Vulcan confronting Nero in ST09.

So... I can believe it.

They also lost an equal number of ships, so... that basically means there is no shortage of captains at all. Obviously the Enterprise wasn't built with the intention of handing it over to Lt. Kirk who hasn't graduated the academy yet. There must have been an experienced officer somewhere in line for the job.

And, if that wasn't good enough for the writers, then they should have just sucked it up and started Kirk with a higher rank than 'Cadet on Academic Suspension', no matter how desperate they were to show his Kobayashi Maru test.

"Cadet" is not a rank. According to screens in the 2009 movie, Kirk was already a lieutenant. (And so was Saavik in ST II.)

And skipping three full ranks (Or is it four? Are they lieutenants, or lieutenant JGs?) is still unprecedented in Starfleet history. Despite the fact that a number of starfleet officers have saved entire worlds on a regular basis.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Kirk had to be in the captain's chair at the end of the movie. The problem was how to get him there in the least implausible manner. Nothing was going to be perfect or completely believable. Let's face it, everyone's rise in status was meteoric except perhaps Spock's, who was Pike's first officer to begin with.

At least in STID, they showed that Kirk was not ready for the chair. Give them credit for that.

That's true, and the whole thing taken together is actually my biggest problem with the story (aside from Nero) - not just Kirk. The discussion around Kirk is more extreme because he is the most ridiculous outlier, but the others' rise in position is fairly weird as well. The only one I really believed was Uhura, since she was flat-out stated to be a communications prodigy.

But how exactly did McCoy end up the second highest ranking doctor when he hadn't even been in space yet? And while I get that you have to make do with what you have in a crisis, how does Sulu become the permanent helmsman of the enterprise when he hasn't even trained to fly a full sized starship? Not to mention Scotty going from some kind of apparent exile to chief engineer of the flagship with seemingly no difficulty...

Because "You are the best and brightest and have truly earned this job through years of exemplary performance" is dull even once, let alone seven times. Give me the colourful origin stories any day.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

Kirk had to be in the captain's chair at the end of the movie. The problem was how to get him there in the least implausible manner. Nothing was going to be perfect or completely believable. Let's face it, everyone's rise in status was meteoric except perhaps Spock's, who was Pike's first officer to begin with.

At least in STID, they showed that Kirk was not ready for the chair. Give them credit for that.

That's true, and the whole thing taken together is actually my biggest problem with the story (aside from Nero) - not just Kirk. The discussion around Kirk is more extreme because he is the most ridiculous outlier, but the others' rise in position is fairly weird as well. The only one I really believed was Uhura, since she was flat-out stated to be a communications prodigy.

But how exactly did McCoy end up the second highest ranking doctor when he hadn't even been in space yet? And while I get that you have to make do with what you have in a crisis, how does Sulu become the permanent helmsman of the enterprise when he hasn't even trained to fly a full sized starship? Not to mention Scotty going from some kind of apparent exile to chief engineer of the flagship with seemingly no difficulty...

Because "You are the best and brightest and have truly earned this job through years of exemplary performance" is dull even once, let alone seven times. Give me the colourful origin stories any day.

That is your argument? You don't even deny grendelsbayne's argument regarding the ridiculousness of the situation. You merely say you have no problem with the situation being ridiculous.

Personally, I would have preferred a movie that doesn't require turning my brain off.

 

[Set Harth]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

And skipping three full ranks (Or is it four? Are they lieutenants, or lieutenant JGs?) is still unprecedented in Starfleet history.

As far as you know.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: My Greivences of Nutrek. What makes me a hater...

All irrelevant to my point. Rogers goes from propaganda tool to leader of men after one success. (he disobeys orders to do so). Rogers doesn't need exactly the same responsibility as Kirk or the same background to draw a comparison about a jump in rank.

The jump in rank for Kirk is actually my biggest beef with the film. But I understand it.

Oh, I understand why they did it. But, as another poster said, that still doesn't make it anymore believable.

As for Cap, I simply don't see the two situations as truly comparable, because the jump in responsibility - to me - is several orders of magnitude larger for Kirk, and the abilities he'd proven himself to have were neither extremely urgently needed, nor impossible to find in other officers, whereas the abilities Captain America demonstrated were both.

But Cap's abilities were merely physical. He was stronger and faster than most soldiers. That doesn't make him a leader or deserving a jump in rank of three to twelve (if you count enlisted ranks) spots. Kirk on the other hand was shown to be a thinker, though very unorthodox one. Kirk had qualities Pike felt was lacking in Starfleet and no doubt pushed for Kirk to get the promotion and the command.

All I see is two characters who are given a jump in rank an responsibility after performing a heroic act. That similar enough to site a parallel.

No it's not believable in real life. In an action adventure film it meets certain needs and expectations.