oh yeah lol, sorry i just got it.
Nero's hatred of Spock makes no sense.
- Thread starter VOODOOXI
- Start date
oh yeah lol, sorry i just got it.
No, the "Shinzon syndrome" was Khan's problem. He was a dumbass and chose to blame Kirk for that. Consider this: Kirk brought him back to life, helped him get acquainted with the 23d century, threw a party in his honour, treated him with fairness when Khan, had he been in his place, would have executed him. In fact, Khan tortured him. Then, in the end, Kirk manages to get him and his lackeys onto a nice planet (which blew up but that wasn't Kirk's responsibility at all).
Blame Kirk. Yeah yeah, sure sure, whatever.
Just as plausible? No, even less.
Blame Kirk. Yeah yeah, sure sure, whatever.
Just as plausible? No, even less.
This may have been mentioned, (it was above. Whoops ) but Kirk was one of the only people attempting to help Khan when Khan tried taking over the Enterprise. Even afterward, Kirk was good enough to give Khan and his group an entire planet to colonize and build a civilization. Kirk obviously (if you apply logic) had no control over the natural disaster that turned Khan's planet into a desert.
Why did Khan want to kill Kirk? Makes no sense to me.
Thank you. He fed a completely irrational hatred toward Kirk when even someone who did not claim to be superior would have realised they only had themselves to blame. At least it wasn't Nero's own fault that his world collapsed. And he wasn't the brightest bulb to begin with.
Someone in the Trek universe should really do a study to see why so many planets/moon/suns explode as often as they do!
Ceti Alpha VI, Praxis, the Genesis planet, the Veridian star, the Hobus star...
Yeah, some of those were man-made explosions, but still.
Yes good point. I guess i glossed over that bit too myself suspending my disbelief to get on with the film, vaguely rationalising it by thinking well things can go faster than light in the star trek universe.
Conventional science does go though the window and i'm not a scientist either so i'll habitually tend to invent something like maybe the nature of the supernova was so different or there was some incredible fluke of circumstances from the view of their 24th Century science that caused space to warp unexpectedly and for the shockwave to move faster than they anticipated.
Crazy, isn't it?
Oh, and you know, if we only consider the evidence as presented onscreen, we could argue that Nero ran into Spock who was en route to destroy the nova the minute Romulus got roasted. How would you feel?
Oh, and you know, if we only consider the evidence as presented onscreen, we could argue that Nero ran into Spock who was en route to destroy the nova the minute Romulus got roasted. How would you feel?
No, Shinzon syndrome is when someone has misplaced vengeance. In Shinzon's case, Romulans tortured and imprisoned him all his life, so he decides to take it out on Earth. Make sense? No.
In Nero's case, Spock simply wasn't able to save Romulus. He didn't cause the supernova or actively harm Nero. So Nero places his blame on Spock, Vulcan, and the Federation because of this? Make sense? No.
In Khan's case, he was a dumbass, but at least his target was right. He tried to take out Kirk, and Kirk bested him. Yes, Kirk was fairly lenient, but at least Khan's grudge was towards the right person, and not some other target entirely.
Ryan, we're not getting anywhere with this, as I'm not going to change my mind and I already said what I had to say on the matter. You think Nero didn't have a reason to be angry at Spock, I think he did, and I said why. You like Khan as a villain and I don't, stating my reasons as to why that is. You used the term Shinzon syndrome, I just quoted it.
I guess that, in the end, it's only a matter of whether you feel empathy towards the character or not. Something about Khan ticks people's boxes, and I understand that, but I don't feel that way.
I guess that, in the end, it's only a matter of whether you feel empathy towards the character or not. Something about Khan ticks people's boxes, and I understand that, but I don't feel that way.
Spock may not have intentionally hurt Nero. However, Nero put all of his hope on Spock to save his world. When Spock failed, Nero, overcome with grief, blamed Spock for his failure.
He then destroyed Vulcan so that Spock could share his pain.
Is it over the top? Yes. Is it an insanely extreme reaction to what happened? Yes. But then again, none of us have ever witnessed the destruction of our entire race before. We can't really judge Nero for going out of his mind.
Actually, I'm not entirely fond of Khan myself, and don't place that movie on as much of a pedestal as most. However, I don't find a need to attack Khan just to vindicate Nero. Even though Khan was silly and over the top, at least his vengeance was directed at someone who actually has caused him wrong, regardless of whether he started it or not.
In this case and the case of Shinzon, they were blaming someone not directly related to their problem.
It would've been nice had this been conveyed more. Nevertheless, it doesn't exactly excuse multiple attempts at mass-genocide, especially when with time travel he could've prevented the whole thing. Now he has to accept that he'll likely never be born in this timeline, Vulcan is destroyed, and Romulus will likely still be destroyed.
I agree that this wasn't conveyed very well in the movie. Honestly, just an extra 3-4 minutes of backstory would have been enough to flesh-out Nero's character, but alas, this wasn't done. I don't think his motives are absent, but they could have been presented better. Probably my only nitpick about the movie.
If no one else has mentioned this, the comic book trade paperback Star Trek: Countdown adds a lot of background to the film. It was also written by the movie's two writers. Check at your local comic book store or Borders and Barnes and Nobel.
*sigh*
You misunderstand me. I'm not trying to vindicate poor Nero by bashing Khan... but if someone says Nero didn't have a motivation and Khan did, then I'm sorry, if you really want to see it that way, neither of them had logical reasons to hate the people they hated. So there's no other reason than personal liking or disliking for defending or slamming either of them.
They were both complete nutters.
You misunderstand me. I'm not trying to vindicate poor Nero by bashing Khan... but if someone says Nero didn't have a motivation and Khan did, then I'm sorry, if you really want to see it that way, neither of them had logical reasons to hate the people they hated. So there's no other reason than personal liking or disliking for defending or slamming either of them.
They were both complete nutters.
Yeah, I filled in the subtext from Spock's claim that the destruction of Romulus was something that he didn't expect. If it was a "normal" supernova acting in a normal way, he would have expected it - even if he couldn't predict the exact moment it went critical, the expansion would be take years. So perhaps some sort of weird, unpredictable subspace shenanigans were involved, something Spock wasn't aware of and couldn't predict.
What could that be? Maybe it ran into some weird anomaly that accelerated the blast to Warp 9. Maybe some faction of the Romulan government said "screw Spock and his Federation, we can do this" and shot subspace weapons at it, which caused it to accelerate. The Trek universe includes numerous possibilities.*
* (I realize there was a limited comic series called "Countdown" about these events, but the science there isn't any better, and doesn't answer any of these questions.)
People have, and I think the general idea is that a movie should be able to stand on its own without the requirement of other material, especially this movie which hoped to draw in people who hadn't even seen any Star Trek before.
I'm not sure Khan was logical, but at least his vengeance was more appropriately directed. It's the most basic example: Someone wronged me, I shall wrong them in return. Nero did it in a broad stroke that killed billions of innocent lives, and targeted billions more, all to get at one person who didn't even purposely cause him harm, which is far more extreme. Would Khan have destroyed Earth and all Federation planets to get back at Kirk? I'm guessing not. But we had a lot more exposition with Khan to know that. Nero remains sadly underdeveloped in this movie.
Personally, I'm kind of tired of these polar bad guys. These producers did what they do best in making the protagonists not truly good, so why did they have to go with the cliched truly bad antagonist? I prefer more shades of gray, and Nero, Shinzon, Ruafo, Khan, etc have just become far too bland for my tastes.
Blowing up entire races wasn't as popular in the 23rd Century. Khan is just behind the times. Everyone knows that 24th Century villains kill as many people as they can.
That's exactly my point: Kirk didn't wrong him at all. Some might argue that he did, but I don't see it. Khan was an idiot. That's all there is to it.
In a sense, the same goes for Nero as people can say either thing about him.
But use Khan to prove that Nero had no motivation is faulty logic. The judgement, if you look at the facts, is based solely on emotion. Because fact is, both Khan and Nero directed their hatred toward the wrong person.
In a sense, the same goes for Nero as people can say either thing about him.
But use Khan to prove that Nero had no motivation is faulty logic. The judgement, if you look at the facts, is based solely on emotion. Because fact is, both Khan and Nero directed their hatred toward the wrong person.
Similar threads
