Plot hole city: Part II!

[William Wallace]

A reasonable person might conclude that the transporter didn't cancel any momentum, and they're still falling because they were falling when the transport occured.

A "reasonable person" wouldn't give two shits and just think "Cool action scene, bro."

Exactly. Think about any of it too much (or, for some parts, at all) and it falls apart. It's a summer popcorn flick. It's big explosions and bigger than life characters and SFX out the wazoo.

Enjoy it for what it is.

I think ST09 is a bit more story-driven than the typical summer popcorn flick. And for that reason, the script needs to be consistent and well-thought-out.

 

[number6]

And it was, for the most part. The things brought up here are seriously nitpicky and not that big of a deal to most. I don't think the velocity at which Kirk and Sulu fell on the pad constitutes a "plot hole."

 

[Cyke101]

And it was, for the most part. The things brought up here are seriously nitpicky and not that big of a deal to most. I don't think the velocity at which Kirk and Sulu fell on the pad constitutes a "plot hole."

Geeze, especially since Chekov said he was, y'know, compensating for gravity. It's not a plot hole if it was addressed in the movie!

 

[number6]

It's not enough that Chekov simply compensated for the planet's gravitational pull. He should have shown the math, just like in physics class. After all, that's what good storytelling is all about.

 

[Set Harth]

At no point did I make an effort to "rewrite" the film.

At this point, for example: unable to decided exactly what he wanted an how he wanted to go about getting it done. That has no resemblance to what was depicted in the film. It's a speculative rewrite with precisely zero on-screen support.

It's irrelevant

Wrong. It shows that your careless rewriting of the story contradicts the intentions of the writers. Thus any so-called "plot holes" created by your rewrite don't have anything at all to do with the spatial geography intended by the film. You're still only finding plot holes in your own work.

and doesn't prove anything toward the plots except that it was left out there for plot hole.

That makes no sense. You can't invent a so-called "plot hole" out of thin air by moving stars around to different locations.

If you did, prove it, if you didn't, you are wrong.

This essentially constitutes an admission that you really have no idea what I said and are just guessing. My posts on the subject are a matter of public record.

The conclusion is derived logically from the facts of the film and is the simplest understanding of the film.

Wrong. The Kelvin being in non-Federation space for no discernible reason ever mentioned in the film is not the simplest explanation. The simplest explanation which requires the least extraneous assumption is that the Kelvin was in Federation space, as confirmed by the script.

It's a writing issue which leans upon too many coincidence for which to occur realistically.

Coincidence is not a "plot hole". Just something you don't like. You're not talking about an especially "realistic" franchise or genre.

The Argumentum ad Populum stands...

Only if you deliberately choose to misinterpret what you're reading and ignore my statement that I don't know who's in the majority. The point of stating that the film made sense to unspecified others is not a reference to majority, but a refutation of the implied significance of the fact that it failed to make sense to you.

Another appeal to authority?

So you're saying I claim you as an authority on the film? Not quite.

If the Hobus Star was actually the birth location of Kirk then it removes the infinite coincidence of location for a (moderately) more believable happenstance. At least reducing two improbable events to one.

Unfortunately there are various problems with the above, the first being that you continue to act as if you know everything about the mechanics of red matter black holes even though they were never before seen in canon. Also, logic ( the real kind ) dictates that the Hobus star was most likely in Romulan space, so in that event you have to explain why Kirk being born in Romulan space is somehow less "improbable" than the alternative. Denying outright that Kirk was born in Federation space, as confirmed by the script, is what got you into this untenable position.

Going to the script to fill the gap doesn't satisfy the plot hole. It never will.

Rewriting the script to create a fake "plot hole" doesn't fool anyone. It never will.

 

[chardman]

The Argumentum ad Populum stands...

 

[number6]

Awesome!

 

[Broccoli]

You know what pisses me off about the movie and is a total plot hole? ALL THOSE DAMN LETTERS!!! Sure, they spell out the title of the movie and the cast and crew names, but the background is IN SPACE! And the movie never addresses why letters are flying around there!!! Why The Face??!?! PLOOOOOOOOOOOT HOOOOOOOOOLE!

 

[number6]

And why the smaller lettering for the end title credits?? Did they "run out" of big letters? Are they making a statement about the "little people??" We don't know the intent of the writers here and that's bad writing.. Really lazy, especially since they were too lazy to even come up with cool names.. They just copied names of people who worked on the movie and pasted it into a long scroll.. Seriously lazy.

 

[Saquist]

At this point, for example: unable to decided exactly what he wanted an how he wanted to go about getting it done. That has no resemblance to what was depicted in the film. It's a speculative rewrite with precisely zero on-screen support.

The "rewrite" you see is imaginary. You found a term which you applied to the analysis which both deflects the necessity of logical character flow and the need to recognize the films deficiencies as such. It's just a classic case of denial.

Wrong. It shows that your careless rewriting of the story contradicts the intentions of the writers.

Writer intent is irrelevant to the plot.

That makes no sense. You can't invent a so-called "plot hole" out of thin air by moving stars around to different locations.

Nothing you've said since your initial engagement of my post has aspired to anything logical, Seth Harth. Not one proper syllogistic statement and a lot of confidence statements which you think repeating argumentum ad nauseum will win you the battle. If you're going to go through this much effort to defend an inanimate object like a film at least bring facts from the films. But you don't have any. You've already figured out just how bleak your rational plight is because you've come down to these poorly constructed premises which you know I won't ever accept depended on irrelevant material. But just keep going with the irrational argument if you wish. Shooting down the irrational is good practice for my debate class.

This essentially constitutes an admission that you really have no idea what I said and are just guessing. My posts on the subject are a matter of public record.

You created a fallacy for an admission.
You begged off responsibility to show facts.
You failed to prove your point.
Why do you keep going? Is this a show where egos are the leading roles and we're competing? I don't care about egos...show me facts. Leave that testosterone hose at home.

Wrong. The Kelvin being in non-Federation space for no discernible reason ever mentioned in the film is not the simplest explanation. The simplest explanation which requires the least extraneous assumption is that the Kelvin was in Federation space, as confirmed by the script.

You got to get your facts right.
I never said that the Kelvin was in "non Federation Space" so I can't be wrong.

Coincidence is not a "plot hole".

GOOD JOB!
You're the one that thinks its a plot hole. That's why you created a strawman in which you think that's what I said.

Only if you...

THANK YOU for the false option but logic defers only to the literal meaning.

So you're saying I claim you as an authority on the film? Not quite.

You said it, I didn't.
I suggest you stop spinning your sarcasm and get down with some facts because so far I've had no reason to believe you at all.

Unfortunately there are various problems with the above, the first being that you continue to act as if you know everything about the mechanics of red matter black holes even though they were never before seen in canon.

Analyzing the plot has nothing to do with canon.

Also, logic ( the real kind ) dictates that the Hobus star was most likely in Romulan space,

Never said in the film.
The film establishes that the threat was Galactic and therefore without knowing where Romulus is in relation to the Hobus Star there is no logical deduction of it's area location.

Rewriting the script to create a fake "plot hole" doesn't fool anyone. It never will.

Red Herring.
Strawman
Evasive

Analysis does not equal rewrite
That has nothing to do with what you quoted. Going to the script to fill the gap doesn't satisfy the plot hole. It never will.

 

[Gojira]

Going to the script to fill the gap doesn't satisfy the plot hole. It never will.

I just want clarification on something. If the script explains something either through action or dialog how can it be a plot hole?

 

[number6]

It's a plot hole because Saquist says so. Haven't you been paying attention??

 

[Saquist]

Going to the script to fill the gap doesn't satisfy the plot hole. It never will.

I just want clarification on something. If the script explains something either through action or dialog how can it be a plot hole?

It's a plot hole if it's relevant to the plot and missing from the film. Seth Harth is attempting to fill gaps in the film with script data that wasn't included. Namely the naming of the Romulan Neutral Zone which is never named in the film.

As a result there was only one Neutral Zone in Star Trek 09 and it had Klingons in it in the first reference and Klingons related to it in the second reference. This is like a math problem. You may have knew that a 115 +23 =138 but if you wrote down 128 you still get the problem wrong on the test. We don't have access to the script during a movie experience and it's culturally not required so the film must stand on it's own.

 

[number6]

There is absolutely nothing in the film that states the Klingon Neutral Zone is the only one or how that even relates to the story or the topic of discussion. I don't really understand the point that you're trying to make, except that you're right and everyone else is stupid.

It only seems that you're filling the gaps yourself and insisting that you're the only one that's right...and you haven't been right about anything thus far, including your definition of a plot hole, which has been debunked here by at least two professional writers, one of which actually wrote for Star Trek.

 

[Sean Aaron]

As a result there was only one Neutral Zone in Star Trek 09 and it had Klingons in it in the first reference and Klingons related to it in the second reference.

i don't recall the Neutral Zone being any kind of important plot point. It gets mentioned in some dialogue a couple of times and that's it. You could probably remove the reference and it would make no difference to the film.

 

[number6]

As a result there was only one Neutral Zone in Star Trek 09 and it had Klingons in it in the first reference and Klingons related to it in the second reference.

i don't recall the Neutral Zone being any kind of important plot point. It gets mentioned in some dialogue a couple of times and that's it. You could probably remove the reference and it would make no difference to the film.

It's not important at all.

 

[Gojira]

Going to the script to fill the gap doesn't satisfy the plot hole. It never will.

I just want clarification on something. If the script explains something either through action or dialog how can it be a plot hole?

It's a plot hole if it's relevant to the plot and missing from the film. Seth Harth is attempting to fill gaps in the film with script data that wasn't included. Namely the naming of the Romulan Neutral Zone which is never named in the film.

As a result there was only one Neutral Zone in Star Trek 09 and it had Klingons in it in the first reference and Klingons related to it in the second reference. This is like a math problem. You may have knew that a 115 +23 =138 but if you wrote down 128 you still get the problem wrong on the test. We don't have access to the script during a movie experience and it's culturally not required so the film must stand on it's own.

But how is the Neutral Zone issue a plot point? What part of the story breaks down because of it?

 

[Saquist]

As a result there was only one Neutral Zone in Star Trek 09 and it had Klingons in it in the first reference and Klingons related to it in the second reference.

i don't recall the Neutral Zone being any kind of important plot point. It gets mentioned in some dialogue a couple of times and that's it. You could probably remove the reference and it would make no difference to the film.

It's not a major plot point no.

In the film the mention of the neutral zone seems to be part of the "trigger" which leads to Kirk's epiphany of the Narada at Vulcan.

The points he seems to draw on are Lightning Storm and Romulans. But in of themselves their is nothing deductive we can take from Romulans and Lightning storms that would cause us to believe the Narada was at Vulcan. The only possibility is if the Neutral Zone is where Kelvin was attacked at first and thus where this disturbance occurred 25 years later. Otherwise lightning storm is just another space phenomenon occurring at different places and time with no rhyme or reason. The film mentions only one Neutral (apparently) a Klingon Neutral Zone. A Trek fan may know there are two Neutral Zones but the average viewer isn't schooled in Trekology. A fair assessment then is to not consider external factors even if they allow the move to make sense. That would be allowing the movie to cheat it's plot requirements.

 

[number6]

Nope. The Neutral Zone isn't part of the "trigger" at all. The trigger was the lighnings storm in space accompanied by the presence of a massive Romulan ship. The Neutral Zone, Romulan or otherwise isn't a even remotely part of this equation.

So once again you are rewriting the movie to prove your flimsy premise.

 

[Saquist]

Nope. The Neutral Zone isn't part of the "trigger" at all. The trigger was the lighnings storm in space accompanied by the presence of a massive Romulan ship. The Neutral Zone, Romulan or otherwise isn't a even remotely part of this equation.

So once again you are rewriting the movie to prove your flimsy premise.

Number6 False Statement:

accompanied by the presence of a massive Romulan ship.

A Massive Romulan ship was never reported at Vulcan.
Once again you are imagining the facts to prove your fandom valid through the film. Feel free to try again.