New plot element confirmed by Trekmovie (Spoiler)

[Lumen]

Starship Polaris said:

Lumen said:
The formative moments for the character of James Kirk are losing, and then winning.

Which may not be the focus of those scenes anyway.

Nothing about this project so far sounds even glancingly like it's going to be "Kirk Begins."

The focus of those Academy scenes may be on what Spock sees and experiences as far as Kirk and the other humans are concerned.

My views are a little fanwankish, as is everyone else's on this subject, but I imagine it'll be something like what you say.

Kirk's cheating will be implied, and Spock will witness him beating the no-win test, after seeing him lose.

Spock was the first to describe the outcome of Kirk's test in TWOK, so there's definite merit to your prediction that this plot point will pivot around Spock's opinion of Kirk.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Zachary Smith said:
Seems gratuitious to me. We know what happens. The "how it happens" is tedious as there is no suspense as to the "what happens". It's NOT new information about Kirk, Spock or anyone else so it doesn't advance our understanding or appreciation for the characters and we know the characters so it doesn't provide insight as to what motivates them.

I disagree. You're thinking like a Star Trek fan... WE know these characters so well that we've all, already, filled in all the blanks re: this situation.

But for someone who barely knows the characters, or even someone who knows NOTHING about them... what better way to demonstrate Kirk's character traits than showing this? A short sequence will tell the "newbies" all about how he's unwilling to ever accept losing, and will go beyond the "rules" when required to avoid it. It would illustrate WHO HE IS and HOW HE BECAME THAT WAY.

Which is really what an audience wants to see... not "the mysterious unknown force of the week, with kewl explosions."

I think if such a scene DOES appear, it should be VERY brief and maybe for a somewhat comedic effect. Maybe it could be used to show Kirk developing a disdain for some of his superiors as he's brought up for a scolding and, for the first time ever, we see the man who WILL be Captain James T. Kirk thinking on his feet and in the "heat of battle" as it were, taking on a more skilled, better prepared opponent and winning when he manages to TALK his way out of a reprimand and get it turned into a commendation. That might make it work. I could almost SEE Shatner playing that scene. Someone else, it might be tough.

One certain thing, ten minutes of slinking around in corridors Mission Impossible style and reprogramming a computer = boring.

The film is likely going to be about 120 minutes long. Out of that, I expect a four minute scene with Kirk as a boy, a five-minute scene with him arriving at SFA, a fifteen minute bit with him aboard Farragut, another fifteen minute scene with him at the SFA again for Command School (and the Kobayashi Maru)... alllll of which will have been for "character building." Stuff that the fans will like because it's "kewl stuff we've never seen but always heard about" but more importantly, that non-fans will NEED because it will let them get to know the character and what his motivations and drives are. THis is NOT uncommon... I'm talking about roughly the same amount of "build-up-time" that you get in most movies, before they go into the "increasing tension" phase that really leads into the main plot.

They NEED to tell the audience (the non-Trek fans at least) who this Kirk guy really is. They don't know him as well as we all do, don't forget that!

 

[denmaroca]

Franklin said:
I will say that one thing that MIGHT make it worth seeing is to find out why his solution got him a commendation for original thinking rather than at least repremanded or even demoted for cheating on the exam.

It's a test of character, not of competency. He's not lying and pretending to be something he's not. He just subverted the test protocols. So the question becomes: given what this action reveals of his character, is that the kind of character who would make a good Starfleet officer or not? Everyone else acquiesced in the test's original purpose (to see how they handled defeat). Kirk did not. Seems like good officer material to me!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That sounds like "good officer material?" For Blackwater, maybe.

You've missed the only real point that the writer and director were trying to make with that entire story thread.

"It's a test of character."

"You cheated."

The reason that it might be interesting to see why he got a commendation is that, in fact, by the terms of the test he flunked the test.

You can call that "good officer material" if you like, but (to paraphrase Doctor Johnson) I'd make sure to lock up the good silver before I invited this guy to dinner.

 

[intrinsical]

Zachary Smith said:
Seems gratuitious to me. We know what happens. The "how it happens" is tedious as there is no suspense as to the "what happens". It's NOT new information about Kirk, Spock or anyone else so it doesn't advance our understanding or appreciation for the characters and we know the characters so it doesn't provide insight as to what motivates them.

It might not provide much to TOS fans, but to people who are new to TOS or Star Trek, it provides insight to what kind of person Kirk is.

 

[Kagan]

Deuterostome said:

Babaganoosh said:
Well, we *know* how it will turn out. Kirk pretty much spelled it out in ST II: He reprogrammed the simulation..

Although we will probably have to see it at least twice - one before he cheats, the other one after - so we can see *why* he does it.

I guess one way to do that would be to start and end the film with each sequence -- the previously by-the-book Kirk having learnt that you sometimes can and must rewrite the rules.

And the commendation for original thinking could be given as the end credits scroll?

See Kirk and Picard are opposites.
Picard was push-the-envelope, met Boothby, and became by-the-book.
Kirk was by-the-book, met ????, and became push-the-envelope.

Maybe someone in Kirk's past inspired that "original thinking".

 

[seigezunt]

Kagan said:

Deuterostome said:

Babaganoosh said:
Well, we *know* how it will turn out. Kirk pretty much spelled it out in ST II: He reprogrammed the simulation..

Although we will probably have to see it at least twice - one before he cheats, the other one after - so we can see *why* he does it.

I guess one way to do that would be to start and end the film with each sequence -- the previously by-the-book Kirk having learnt that you sometimes can and must rewrite the rules.

And the commendation for original thinking could be given as the end credits scroll?

See Kirk and Picard are opposites.
Picard was push-the-envelope, met Boothby, and became by-the-book.
Kirk was by-the-book, met ????, and became push-the-envelope.

Maybe someone in Kirk's past inspired that "original thinking".

Gary Mitchell.

 

[Franklin]

seigezunt said:

Kagan said:

Deuterostome said:

Babaganoosh said:
Well, we *know* how it will turn out. Kirk pretty much spelled it out in ST II: He reprogrammed the simulation..

Although we will probably have to see it at least twice - one before he cheats, the other one after - so we can see *why* he does it.

I guess one way to do that would be to start and end the film with each sequence -- the previously by-the-book Kirk having learnt that you sometimes can and must rewrite the rules.

And the commendation for original thinking could be given as the end credits scroll?

See Kirk and Picard are opposites.
Picard was push-the-envelope, met Boothby, and became by-the-book.
Kirk was by-the-book, met ????, and became push-the-envelope.

Maybe someone in Kirk's past inspired that "original thinking".

Gary Mitchell.

If that's not in the story, copyright it.

Stuff like this is thinking along the right track, though. There's not supposed to be technobabble to speak of in the movie, so it will probably focus on the "whys" and the consequences of the test rather than the "how it was done."