Rewatching TWOK....

[Pauln6]

Just couldn't resist the chance to bash the Abrams movies?

I get tired of this shit. If I were out to bash Abrams' fucking films at every opportunity I'd be haiunting the nuTrek forum constantly--which I don't do--and leaping on every remark and refrence ever made on this BBS regarding them--another thing I don't do and the Mods around here can attest to it.

But if someone brings mention or reference of these films into my own thread then it's fair game for me to comment on them.

If anything is going on it's people leaping on any criticism of Abrams' films in an effort to discredit and denigrate said criticism.

Yikes yeah - all I said was that I felt the emotion of the death scene was well played in TWoK but rang hollow in STiD and it was treated like sacrilege. It was a comment on one aspect of STiD was WAS blatantly and unashamedly taken from TWoK. Even the dialogue was the same. But that isn't to say that TWoK doesn't have many silly elements of its own.

I've been to see new Terminator tonight. Now THAT is the way to do an homage reboot!

Although TWoK was made only a few years after TMP I think all the actors were relieved that they did not have to try and look young and thin any more. The new uniforms certainly helped with expanding waistlines. That alone probably mitigated against the movie taking place straight after TMP. Plus a lot of the emotion of the movie comes from Kirk getting old and how he deals with that.

I think many of TWoK's flaws could be overcome with tweaks to the dialogue to patch the plot holes. If Chekov had been treated as if he'd not been on the ship aged 21, then him forgetting Khan and a missing planet doesn't look as stupid (especially if Kirk's dialogue confirms that the decision to allow Khan to colonise the planet was unofficial and fudged in his log). Kirk doesn't have to be the only ship in the quadrant if he's the only person with security clearance. And a five year old can come up with a more cunning bluff than Spock's, 'hours could seem like days' malarkey.

Still, I'd still love to see a series set in the second 5-year mission.

 

[Warped9]

You could've just said, "Hey, this isn't about the Abrams movies", when they were brought up. But you just couldn't resist...

He made a valid remark and one that could be fairly remarked upon in turn. But nothing he or I said could be considered "bashing." But you're the one who chose to stir the hornets nest with an accusation of bashing.


This evening I was reflecting further on scenes or moments I did like in TWOK. There were quite a few of them, but the sum of them all still isn't enough for me to elevate the film when balanced out against the things where I think things went wrong.

A lot of stories do things for dramatic effect (or out of production necessity such as no shuttlecraft yet built and available in TOS' "The Enemy Within"). But when Chekov realizes where they are and need to get the hell out fast why didn't they at least try to contact the Reliant for immediate beam-up from right inside the cargo container? Why did they need to go outside? If they can beam through solid rock to get inside an asteroid they why can't them beam out of a cargo container? It's played out this way simply for effect.

To the best of our knowledge planets don't just explode. They might be destroyed if hit by a big enough mother of an asteroid. Or they could conceivably be destroyed by some intelligence with a crazy new weapon (any more doomsday machines floating around?). And considering Khan's circumstances he would have had to have had at least a decent telescope to know anything had happened to any of the other planets in the Ceti Alpha system. Assuming he has a telescope and just happens to be looking in the right place at the right time then he still doesn't really know what happened to the destroyed planet. At best he's guessing. And even if another planet is destroyed how would that necessarily effect the planet Khan and his followers are on? few people ever seem to remark on this and it doesn't really matter how Khan knows what happened, but it is a question mark because little if anything about it makes sense.

When the Reliant entered the Ceti Alpha system they would have had at least a basic knowledge of the system's makeup just as the Enterprise had fifteen years earlier. Khan claimed the planet's orbit shifted (again, he could have been mistaken), and if so then the planet's location wouldn't have been where the Reliant expected it to be. And none of this remarked upon. We're led to believe that Ceti Alpha 5's orbit shifted sufficiently enough for the planet to be mistaken as Ceti Alpha 6. Is that even possible? The Reliant's science officer was really sloppy.

Even back in 1982 nebulae were well enough understood to know what they are and what it's most likely to be like if you're inside one. It was known even then that you might not even know you are in a nebula. It certainly wouldn't be like you're in a fog bank (with lightning) and one that renders shields and sensors useless.

It's meant merely to really creep us out, but it's really unlikely that a creature the size of baby Ceti eeel could bore its way through your ear to your cerebral cortex without doing serious internal damage. Never mind becoming susceptible to suggestion--you become incapacitated and completely useless especially if the thing continues growing. The idea behind such a parasite does exist in nature, but they are a helluva lot smaller than baby Ceti eels. As such it doesn't totally invalidate the idea presented onscreen, but how it was done was over-the-top for the greatest effect.

I found it hilarious how long it took for the Enterprise to raise its shields when previously throughout TOS the shields could be raised practically instantly. This was dumbed down in the film just to have the delay they wanted to allow Khan to get in the first shots. It also paints Kirk as stupid as hell particularly after Saavik's reminder and Spock confirming the Reliant's message is bullshit about some coil being burnt out.

Why would Scotty bring his severely injured and dying nephew to the Bridge rather than Sickbay? Was he that much in shock that all his sense and years of training and experience left him?


Any one of these instances (and there are more) could be excused on its own, but when they start to pile up they undermine the whole story as a whole.

 

[BillJ]

But when Chekov realizes where they are and need to get the hell out fast why didn't they at least try to contact the Reliant for immediate beam-up from right inside the cargo container? Why did they need to go outside? If they can beam through solid rock to get inside an asteroid they why can't them beam out of a cargo container? It's played out this way simply for effect.

That presupposes that there isn't something in or around the Botany Bay that hampers communications. Reliant couldn't tell what exactly it was on the surface, so something was obviously hampering their sensors.

To the best of our knowledge planets don't just explode. They might be destroyed if hit by a big enough mother of an asteroid. Or they could conceivably be destroyed by some intelligence with a crazy new weapon (any more doomsday machines floating around?). And considering Khan's circumstances he would have had to have had at least a decent telescope to know anything had happened to any of the other planets in the Ceti Alpha system. Assuming he has a telescope and just happens to be looking in the right place at the right time then he still doesn't really know what happened to the destroyed planet. At best he's guessing. And even if another planet is destroyed how would that necessarily effect the planet Khan and his followers are on? few people ever seem to remark on this and it doesn't really matter how Khan knows what happened, but it is a question mark because little if anything about it makes sense.

Maybe Khan simply made an educated guess? Maybe they had some telescopes and he was unable to locate a planet that was there before?

When the Reliant entered the Ceti Alpha system they would have had at least a basic knowledge of the system's makeup just as the Enterprise had fifteen years earlier. Khan claimed the planet's orbit shifted (again, he could have been mistaken), and if so then the planet's location wouldn't have been where the Reliant expected it to be. And none of this remarked upon. We're led to believe that Ceti Alpha 5's orbit shifted sufficiently enough for the planet to be mistaken as Ceti Alpha 6. Is that even possible? The Reliant's science officer was really sloppy.

I think sometimes you have to simply chalk something up to human error.

Even back in 1982 nebulae were well enough understood to know what they are and what it's most likely to be like if you're inside one. It was known even then that you might not even know you are in a nebula. It certainly wouldn't be like you're in a fog bank (with lightning) and one that renders shields and sensors useless.

TNG also uses nebula in this manner in "The Best of Both Worlds". Sometimes Star Trek science in simply incompatible with what we know.

It's meant merely to really creep us out, but it's really unlikely that a creature the size of baby Ceti eeel could bore its way through your ear to your cerebral cortex without doing serious internal damage. Never mind becoming susceptible to suggestion--you become incapacitated and completely useless especially if the thing continues growing. The idea behind such a parasite does exist in nature, but they are a helluva lot smaller than baby Ceti eels. As such it doesn't totally invalidate the idea presented onscreen, but how it was done was over-the-top for the greatest effect.

It's sci-fi, so I tend to roll with it. If I want realism I'll read A Brief History of Time or other books on the subject.

I found it hilarious how long it took for the Enterprise to raise its shields when previously throughout TOS the shields could be raised practically instantly. This was dumbed down in the film just to have the delay they wanted to allow Khan to get in the first shots. It also paints Kirk as stupid as hell particularly after Saavik's reminder and Spock confirming the Reliant's message is bullshit about some coil being burnt out.

I never really cared if shields in one Star Trek is consistent with shields in another Star Trek. They are there to serve the story not vice-versa.

Not raising shields is meant to show Kirk as rusty from not commanding a starship for a while. It makes him human that he makes mistakes.

Why would Scotty bring his severely injured and dying nephew to the Bridge rather than Sickbay? Was he that much in shock that all his sense and years of training and experience left him?

I think that is a fair guess. But, there was probably some questions which is why the scene was cut from the theatrical version.

Any one of these instances (and there are more) could be excused on its own, but when they start to pile up they undermine the whole story as a whole.

The Wrath of Khan (like Into Darkness thirty-years later) is a wildly entertaining film.

 

[Warped9]

The Wrath of Khan (like Into Darkness thirty-years later) is a wildly entertaining film.

But I can't simply accept that. It assumes I'm simply going to turn off my mind and passively accept anything they throw at me. This isn't simply a case a missing things the first time around but noticing these inconsistencies right off. As such I'm inevitably left with the impression of carelessness and lack of respect for my intelligence as one of the audience. When that happens enough it begins to hurt my enjoyment of the film.

I can accept all sorts of absurdity when I'm watching a cartoon played mainly for laughs, but when I'm watching live-action science fiction I have a greater expectation.

 

[BillJ]

The Wrath of Khan (like Into Darkness thirty-years later) is a wildly entertaining film.

But I can't simply accept that. It assumes I'm simply going to turn off my mind and passively accept anything they throw at me. This isn't simply a case a missing things the first time around but noticing these inconsistencies right off. As such I'm inevitably left with the impression of carelessness and lack of respect for my intelligence as one of the audience. When that happens enough it begins to hurt my enjoyment of the film.

I can accept all sorts of absurdity when I'm watching a cartoon played mainly for laughs, but when I'm watching live-action science fiction I have a greater expectation.

Life's too short to care that much about entertainment. If I like something, I'll revisit it down the road. If I don't, I let it go and move on.

Star Trek has always put the story above plot logic or science. Seriously, if V'ger truly wanted to know about the creator, it wouldn't have dicked around and negotiated with Kirk. It would have digitized him and taken the information that way. Does anyone truly believe a wormhole would act in the way we see in TMP? It was included because it was a cool effect.

You can slice, dice and mince pretty much any Star Trek plot/episode/movie if you really think about it.

 

[Warped9]

The Wrath of Khan (like Into Darkness thirty-years later) is a wildly entertaining film.

But I can't simply accept that. It assumes I'm simply going to turn off my mind and passively accept anything they throw at me. This isn't simply a case a missing things the first time around but noticing these inconsistencies right off. As such I'm inevitably left with the impression of carelessness and lack of respect for my intelligence as one of the audience. When that happens enough it begins to hurt my enjoyment of the film.

I can accept all sorts of absurdity when I'm watching a cartoon played mainly for laughs, but when I'm watching live-action science fiction I have a greater expectation.

Life's too short to care that much about entertainment. If I like something, I'll revisit it down the road. If I don't, I let it go and move on.

Star Trek has always put the story above plot logic or science. Seriously, if V'ger truly wanted to know about the creator, it wouldn't have dicked around and negotiated with Kirk. It would have digitized him and taken the information that way. Does anyone truly believe a wormhole would act in the way we see in TMP? It was included because it was a cool effect.

You can slice, dice and mince pretty much any Star Trek plot/episode/movie if you really think about it.

It boils down to you find it acceptable and I don't. If it happens too often then I can't accept it.

And Vger was curious. There had to be a strong enough element of doubt and curiosity in Vger for it to keep talking with Kirk. It had already been established that Vger had attained a measure of consciousness so its actions were not nonsensical in that context.

 

[Ithekro]

but when I'm watching live-action science fiction I have a greater expectation.

Why? You watched TOS so you should know better than anyone about having greater expectations for Star Trek based plot/entertainment value.


As for Mister Scott showing up on the bridge with his nephew, could it be some of the turbolifts were out due to the battle damage and the fastest way was via the other lift on the bridge. He comes out one, we get a shocking display (and a cut), he heads for the other lift to get his nephew to Sickbay, where we see him next. If there was anyone of the ship that would know the fastest way somewhere it be Mr. Scott.

 

[beamMe]

but when I'm watching live-action science fiction I have a greater expectation.

Why? You watched TOS so you should know better than anyone about having greater expectations for Star Trek based plot/entertainment value.


As for Mister Scott showing up on the bridge with his nephew, could it be some of the turbolifts were out due to the battle damage and the fastest way was via the other lift on the bridge. He comes out one, we get a shocking display (and a cut), he heads for the other lift to get his nephew to Sickbay, where we see him next. If there was anyone of the ship that would know the fastest way somewhere it be Mr. Scott.

You can't explain that scene with anything in-universe.
It only exists for dramatic reasons - and it works.

 

[Warped9]

If you pull one or two logic flaws in a story you can get away with it. When you pile them by the bucket full then you've crossed a line as far as I'm concerned. And this is on top of the other criticisms I have of the film.

Evidently a lot of people are perfectly fine with the film as it is. For me the positives are outweighed and undermined by the negatives. Too many instances of WTF simply spoil the whole thing.

 

[beamMe]

If you pull one or two logic flaws in a story you can get away with it. When you pile them by the bucket full then you've crossed a line as far as I'm concerned. And this is on top of the other criticisms I have of the film.

Evidently a lot of people are perfectly fine with the film as it is. For me the positives are outweighed and undermined by the negatives. Too many instances of WTF simply spoil the whole thing.

To which logic flaws in the story are your referring?

 

[Trekkin]

JJ may have altered the story to an extent,

Agreed. It's been altered to a point where they are nothing alike.

but it's obvious he was trying to play on TWOK's popularity. Still, I'm not going further afield of this thread by listing every bit of ridiculousness of STID.

TWoK may be popular. But that is mainly amongst us fans and a narrow field of sci-fi enthusiasts. Tell a millennial about Montalban and you'll get a "that old guy from Spy Kids" in return.

And of course Into Darkness is ridiculous - just as the rest of Star Trek, I mean, just look at Janeway's season one hairstyle.

True story: My sister and I were both staying at our parents place over Easter, and I popped in Space Seed whilst she happened to be in the from. She spent 15 minutes going 'I know that guy...' before I cracked and said 'It's Ricardo Montalban.'

Cue a blank look.

'Fantasy Island? Dynasty?'

Nothin'

'...Grandpa from Spy Kids?'

'Oh!'

Funnily enough, she flat out didn't believe me when I pointed out that Kirk was what Denny Crane looked like in his 30's.

Back to the topic - TWOK has a lot of flaws and dumb elements. Most of those things are elements that the plot actually hinges upon (No planet miscount, no plot. No totally-not-a-nebula, no climax. No magic torpedo, no mcguffin. Etc etc.) As my old IMDB account could show, I was discussing those things long before ST09 even came out.

But like with most things I enjoy, I find its positives outweigh it's negatives. The negatives are there, I recognise them, but i dont find that they're enough to make the movie 'bad.' That's just my opinion, and others can differ for reasons other than 'they're defending STID'. That sister mentioned up thread didnt like either of the movies, and with TWOK it was mainly because she got surpremely annoyed by Khan only allowing the third act to happen by temporarily changing his entire modus operandi. ('Oh yeah, like he wouldn't just kill him.')

Oh, and I didn't jump in because Abrams ended up being discussed. It's because the thread popped up when I was looking for discussions about 'Khan' the character.

 

[Pauln6]

The novelisation specifies that the turbolifts to sick bay were not operating, although it's more likely easier to get off one or two decks above or below than coming all the way to the bridge, but, given the amount of time McCoy spends on the bridge, it's possible that Scotty in his shell-shocked state might have been hoping to find him there rather than carrying Preston down a turbo shaft.

It's also possible that some kind of planet-eating life form blew up and then ate the debris of Ceti Alpha VI but, having filled up on the planet-eating equivalent if bread sticks, decided to move on before eating any other planet. We shouldn't be too critical on this point.

An abrupt temperature shift could lay waste to a planetary eco-system, although it's silly to suggest that the eel is the last surviving life form on the entire planet. A line of dialogue about the information in the database on the system being inaccurate might have fudged the issue a bit if Kirk had not logged the presence of the colony.

The nebula fudge is a bit silly, and especially placing it within the habitable zone of a star system. How is it resisting the gravity of it's local star? Giving it a technobabble name might have been better. It's not quite as offensive as bad black hole and supernova science because it clearly is not intended to be a real world nebula.

 

[BillJ]

The nebula fudge is a bit silly, and especially placing it within the habitable zone of a star system. How is it resisting the gravity of it's local star? Giving it a technobabble name might have been better. It's not quite as offensive as bad black hole and supernova science because it clearly is not intended to be a real world nebula.

You're just trying to come up for excuses for bad science in a movie you like vs. a movie you don't like. Don't forget The Wrath of Khan also has the magic terraforming torpedo.

Also, Kirk could have never gotten away with not logging what happened in "Space Seed". He was missing a crewman after the incident (Lt. Marla McGivers). Besides, he logged three official entries during the episode and one specifically mentions Khan.

Captain's log, stardate 3141.9. A full hour has elapsed since interception of the strange vessel. Our presence alongside is still being completely ignored. Although our sensors continue to show signs of equipment and life aboard, there has been no indication of danger to us.

Captain's log, supplemental. Alongside the SS Botany Bay for ten hours now. A boarding party of engineering and medical specialists are now completing their examination of the mysterious vessel. Attempts to revive other sleepers await our success or failure with the casualty already beamed over. Doctor McCoy is frankly amazed at his physical and recuperative power.

Captain's Log. Stardate 3143.3. Control of the Enterprise has been regained. I wish my next decisions were no more difficult. Khan and his people. What a waste to put them in a reorientation centre. And what do I do about McGivers?

Then, it would be impossible to keep all 430 crew members silent. Star Trek Into Darkness actually shows how silly it is for a captain to try and falsify records. The captain isn't the only one filing reports.

 

[Pauln6]

The nebula fudge is a bit silly, and especially placing it within the habitable zone of a star system. How is it resisting the gravity of it's local star? Giving it a technobabble name might have been better. It's not quite as offensive as bad black hole and supernova science because it clearly is not intended to be a real world nebula.

You're just trying to come up for excuses for bad science in a movie you like vs. a movie you don't like. Don't forget The Wrath of Khan also has the magic terraforming torpedo.

Also, Kirk could have never gotten away with not logging what happened in "Space Seed". He was missing a crewman after the incident (Lt. Marla McGivers). Besides, he logged three official entries during the episode and one specifically mentions Khan. Then, it would be impossible to keep all 430 crew members silent. Star Trek Into Darkness actually shows how silly it is for a captain to try and falsify records. The captain isn't the only one filing reports.

Ha ha - just because I point out flaws in a movie doesn't automatically mean that I dislike it. Promoetheus had so many fundamental flaws that I REALLY disliked it, even though the visuals were amazing. STiD had very silly elements that rankle more than the silly elements in TWoK. Neither one featured Janice Rand. My mileage may vary.

Kirk could have logged that Khan's vessel had been released with MacGyvers adding a log entry about her attending as a voluntary liaison officer. The original episode's conclusion was silly in itself but if the Federation did have logs telling it about the colony then yes, Khan had a very legitimate complaint if nobody had even tried to contact them in 15 years!

I think this is part of the problem with the increased travel times in NuTrek. If space is big and it takes years to travel to the fringe then isolated colonies can't expect much help. The flip side would be that it could take Chekov 10 years just to scout out a handful of suitable planets for Genesis.

The Genesis torpedo is just a giant, super-powerful replicator. It is silly that it could terraform so quickly of course and the super-rapid evolution of living plant life forms was hard to explain even with Trek science but I suppose if seeds can stay dormant then a replicator could conjure one up and there are plenty of examples of rapid cell growth in many episodes. Technically it had months to develop into what we saw in STIII. The image of the torpedo in STII need not represent the torpedo resting there immediately after being fired.

But yeah - still silly.

 

[eyeresist]

Speaking strictly for myself the Star Trek I loved in TOS died in TWOK (although I didn't yet know that in 1982). We caught a brief glimpse of it being revived in TMP, but then Bennet and Meyer killed it in TWOK and the films that followed. The rest of the films were basically shutting down the TOS era. One can argue it being a reasonable thing to do given the cast was getting older, but

I really don't see TMP as continuing the legacy of TOS. It was cold and colourless, and its new look in terms of interiors and uniforms was a much more generic sci-fi look. TWOK brought the colour and fun of TOS back (as it was intended to). The new uniforms do still strike me as unusual, but their bulkiness was necessary to flatter the several crew members who had expanded in the intervening years. I like that they suggest a connection with historical uniforms.
As for the emphasis on growing old in this and the later films, the actors were all really getting old. One might believe an older captain leading a younger crew, but when the entire cast looks like they're wishing for a soft armchair and a nap, you can't just leave the issue unacknowledged.

Technically it had months to develop into what we saw in STIII. The image of the torpedo in STII need not represent the torpedo resting there immediately after being fired.

I think of that last shot as being more poetic than literal (the same way I see the original ending of Blade Runner).

 

[Trekkin]

'The original ending' being the mysteriously appearing green grass and blue skies, or Gaff's origami unicorn? I've got the bluray set with about 5 different versions, so I'm not being sarcastic or anything.

 

[eyeresist]

'The original ending' being the mysteriously appearing green grass and blue skies, or Gaff's origami unicorn? I've got the bluray set with about 5 different versions, so I'm not being sarcastic or anything.

I think the origami unicorn is in all versions. I'm talking about the drive through the countryside. It's allegorical for the happiness Deckard and Rachel find together amidst all the dystopian dreariness of the real world.

 

[Trekkin]

Hmmm, I didnt think there was anything unicorn-related in the theatrical. Admittedly, it's been a while since I saw it.

To people who haven't seen Blade Runner, this conversations would make that movie look so weird. How often do you see 'dystopic' and 'unicorns' when referring to the same text?

 

[eyeresist]

"It's a dystopia. With unicorns."
"I want!"

 

[Trekkin]

'Best. MLP Episode. Ever.'