Discussion in 'Star Trek: Picard' started by gazomg, Sep 2, 2019.
Alex Kurtzman needing to mark his territory.
I kinda-sorta think he did that with the Multi-Million-Dollar-Five-Year Contract and his own Personal Office Bathroom on the CBS lot.
I kind of agree with this sentiment, if I read it correctly. In hindsight it now looks like a quick gimmick to boost the 2009 movie. The destruction of both worlds in both timelines never got a real reaction out of me, but I accepted it as a part of the story and timelines.
If the Kelvin movies were still going strong and got fans invested in Vulcan's fate, I could understand the decision.
But with the 2009 movies stalled, it seems like it was all for nothing anyway- for BOTH timelines. Vulcan was destroyed in one timeline for a series that prematurely ended, and Romulus, a very important planet and culture in Trek was destroyed for the same reason.
Then again maybe they will make something interesting out of it. Maybe someone like Sela might somehow show up.
If three movies and key part of the next Trek series is "all for nothing" I'm genuinely curious what kind of impact something needs to have in order to have worth.
CBS owns the the rights those movies too. Paramount made them under license from CBS.
Alex Kurtzman is the worst thing ever. Anything bad that comes with the "Star Trek" name these days is because of his heavy-handed manipulation of the story to fit "some" "agenda." (You know what I mean, *nod* *nod* *wink* *wink* *Hi-Five*)
Anything good called "Star Trek" is because Alex Kurtzman delegated the authority to someone with some brains this one time and is off playing with the Creature from the Black Lagoon or something, IDK.
Kurtzman Trek is the worst thing since Abrams Trek which is even worse than Braga Trek or Berman Trek. Bring back Maurice Hurley!
How is it "for nothing" if Picard is picking up the storyline and exploring the consequences? How is getting two movies in which we explore Spock's personal struggles with the destruction of Vulcan "for nothing?"
The Kelvin movies are not big epic political thrillers. They are deeply personal stories around intergalactic events. So, I struggle, genuinely, with the idea that it was "for nothing" when we got so much character and story moments out of these moments, and potentially more with Picard.
That's the big problem--is whether fans are as vested in Vulcan's destruction and Spock's struggles as the movie itself. I have noticed that some fans at least say that they didn't have much of an reaction to it, so it wouldn't surprise me if they felt the same about Romulus's destruction too.
Because the Kelvin movies stalled out at 3 -- we never really get to see Spock struggle with the loss Vulcan. Not in the way that the series was rushed. The character growth should have been really getting underway by the third movie and instead it's stopped abruptly.
So that's how it can seem like a waste.
I'm pretty sure Picard will pick up on it and expand it.
Given the ambivalence towards Kelvin Trek (even ten years later) I don't think it would much matter to any fans if it continued. I personally think they did well with Spock even in the short time that it was done, and the whole situation was well done. And the destruction is still something that hits me hard, both Vulcan and Romulus. Because of how Spock and Nero react.
That's the difference for me. I think it was there in Into Darkness going forward.
Another problem is the perception for a lot of fans is that the extent of Spock struggling was the adventure with Khan in ITD, and then Spock talking about resigning to help establish a new colony for Vulcans in Beyond. And that's it, the franchise is over. (or may be over) Everything felt rushed.
There was so much that could have been done in the movie series - to see more Vulcans, see their plight, how they react, Pon far, all of that-- but to that, they had to slow down, ease up on the action, and not rush or skip over events.
I have a feeling the studios intended to do a lot more films in the Kelvin series--at least up to 7, possibly more, but rushing everything the way it did, kind of sabotaged the series imo.
Then I think the "a lot of fans" missed the point of Spock's struggle in ID.
Which is more appropriate for a TV series than a film series. And they did explore that in the comic series, so I don't think they missed the opportunities, so much as recognized what stories they wanted to tell in what medium.
I don't know about 7, but definitely more than 3. I have the opposite feeling about "rushing", though. I think the NuTrek movies took too long to come out. Four years is too long of a wait for a "new" film series. Especially one that's intended to skew young. Four years is a long time for a young person. It's the difference between being a freshman in high school and being a freshman in college. To this day, I think they should've come out every two years.
No, in this case I mean rushing events within the films itself. Particularly making Kirk captain of the Enterprise at the end of the 2009 movie. And the other cadets into seniors officers.
By Beyond, Kirk is applying for admiral and it's implied out of boredom, and it's only been 3 years.
And the Enterprise was destroyed. We were barely getting used to it. So from that point of view it really seems like they were rushing things.
You'd think over time we're supposed to gradually see them grow into the characters we've always known, and we were going to gradually get familiar with the ship, but in reality the movie was saying they already are the characters we've always known.
I have a feeling they had ambitious plans for the series. As many stories that they can make from the storyline and be profitable.
They introduced Carole Marcus in the second movie, so if they planned to follow up on it with them and a relationship it would probably take another 2 to 3 movies. And then there's the Vulcan situation, the Klingon situation, characters like Khan, Mudd, the Romulans, Lester etc.
To do all that, it seems like they would stretch the franchise as far as they can.
Okay, got it. I don't think Kirk should've been in the running for a promotion to Admiral until at least the five-year mission was over. If they had it been five years after the end of Into Darkness instead of two-and-half, it would've been fine. Except they wanted to have Kirk turn 30. I would've dropped the Admiral subplot.
The burden of command could've started getting to Kirk and he could've flirted with the idea of taking command of a Starbase. It's not a promotion to Admiral but it would've been the same basic idea: Kirk behind a desk.
I'm just thinking about this as I type. When I saw Beyond, I thought it was too soon to offer Kirk an Admiral position but I didn't think he'd take it, so I didn't think much of it. Kelvin or Prime, Kirk is Kirk. You can't keep him away from the Enterprise. Not for long anyway.
I had no issue with the promotion plot in Beyond. Mostly because it wasn't the real goal of Kirk. It was Kirk struggling with an inner depression and how to avoid it, which is represented in the destruction of the Enterprise. And Kirk has to find his way through this new doubt that he has.
Now, I think the pacing of these films is a little too fast but I'll never deny the character growth in them.
The destruction of Vulcan had a massive impact on Spock throughout the trilogy. In the second movie he had survivors guilt and was willing to die in a volcano and in the third he wanted to take Old Spock's place rebuilding Vulcan (again, after Old Spock talked him out of it at the end of '09) after he died.
Not boredom. Kirk questioning his place in the universe after the chaotic events of the first two movies. It's pretty much spelled out "My dad joined Starfleet because he believed in it. I joined on a dare."
He was almost like Pike in The Cage...
Separate names with a comma.