Rogue Reviews thread [Read-only] [SPOILERS, no doubt]
- Thread starter AntonyF
- Start date
- Status
Re: Nibiru
To boldly go where no starship has gone before. Dive... Dive... Dive....
The only excuse I can see for them stopping the volcano is if it was going to errupt because of some other accidental interference by the Federation. Say a probe crashed there and it's antimatter containment was failing.
To boldly go where no starship has gone before. Dive... Dive... Dive....
The only excuse I can see for them stopping the volcano is if it was going to errupt because of some other accidental interference by the Federation. Say a probe crashed there and it's antimatter containment was failing.
Re: Where's the equality?
Well, it's not my cup of tea but I don't really object to it. Strip him JJ.
They should bring back the decontamination gel for the next film. Get them all naked simultaneously in one big decon gel orgy.
And deserves just as much screen time as her undies flash did
Well, it's not my cup of tea but I don't really object to it. Strip him JJ.
They should bring back the decontamination gel for the next film. Get them all naked simultaneously in one big decon gel orgy.
Re: Nibiru
I was going to ask what the specific reason is for the Enterprise to hide under water instead of in space. Filmmakers said there was a very good reason. So what is it?
I was going to ask what the specific reason is for the Enterprise to hide under water instead of in space. Filmmakers said there was a very good reason. So what is it?
Re: Nibiru
Because they needed another cool shot for the trailers.
Depends on what exactly you consider an "interruption of the natural development". Letting the vulcano erupt would have killed the entire civilization. Stopping the vulcano without being seen would have allowed the civilization to survive without their belief system being "polluted". I think the latter, but not the former, is what the Prime Directive initially was supposed to be about.
Because they needed another cool shot for the trailers.
Depends on what exactly you consider an "interruption of the natural development". Letting the vulcano erupt would have killed the entire civilization. Stopping the vulcano without being seen would have allowed the civilization to survive without their belief system being "polluted". I think the latter, but not the former, is what the Prime Directive initially was supposed to be about.
Re: Where's the equality?
Or the decon rays from the old Gold Key comics!
Or the decon rays from the old Gold Key comics!
Re: Where's the equality?
Gel is better.
It involves rubbing and stuff.
Gel is better.
It involves rubbing and stuff.
Re: directors cut of into darkness
It's not a matter of cost or difficulty.
If they disliked it and wanted to cut it they would have done so in the editing room before the movie came out.
It's not going anywhere.
It's not a matter of cost or difficulty.
If they disliked it and wanted to cut it they would have done so in the editing room before the movie came out.
It's not going anywhere.
Re: Feeling dejected *spoilers*
You know, if a company lied to you about the content of a product, you'd sue it or boycott it. In entertainment, people are blatantly lied to, and they suck it up.
You know, if a company lied to you about the content of a product, you'd sue it or boycott it. In entertainment, people are blatantly lied to, and they suck it up.
Re: Nibiru
The more they avoid the immoral and abominable TNG interpretation of the Prime Directive that it's better to let a species die than to interfere in their development by saving them the better. What possible difference does interfering make if the species won't have any further development thanks to being extinct?
They think they're avoiding playing God in TNG by letting nature take its course, but who's to say having other more technologically advanced cultures --preferably secretly-- protecting species from destruction isn't part of the "natural order" (whatever that means) itself? They evolved naturally to that state, and they have already made countless changes and interfered with the course of development of the universe simply by existing. That's the way things have been happening for billions of years. Earth (and other Federation worlds) was certainly no stranger to having overseers and protectors from future/more technologically advanced cultures looking out for preserving species or the planet itself, so it's amazingly hypocritical to deny that service to other species when Humans and the Federation are put in the same position.
It also makes the arrogant assumption that species are too primitive or irrational or stupid to handle to truth if it's explained to them, in the cases where you have no choice but to reveal yourselves to save them. While that might be true sometimes, the PD's blanket zero tolerance policy is irrational and stupid itself. We get a glimpse of that attitude in the TNG episode where the villager kills himself upon exposure to the truth after Worf's brother saved him, and people act as if Nikolai was some kind of monster as a result, when if the Enterprise crew were left to their devices the villager and all of his people would be dead anyway.
The parts of the Prime Directive that say you shouldn't needlessly expose a culture to future technological advancements that can be abused or to social customs that can alter their own, and that you shouldn't interfere in internal disputes (so long as they don't threaten the entire species) are conscientious and reasonable. But when it's used as an excuse to sit back and do nothing as a species is wiped out by a natural or technological disaster or war it's disgusting and arrogant and playing God every bit as much as if you were to interfere directly. Good riddance to it.
The more they avoid the immoral and abominable TNG interpretation of the Prime Directive that it's better to let a species die than to interfere in their development by saving them the better. What possible difference does interfering make if the species won't have any further development thanks to being extinct?
They think they're avoiding playing God in TNG by letting nature take its course, but who's to say having other more technologically advanced cultures --preferably secretly-- protecting species from destruction isn't part of the "natural order" (whatever that means) itself? They evolved naturally to that state, and they have already made countless changes and interfered with the course of development of the universe simply by existing. That's the way things have been happening for billions of years. Earth (and other Federation worlds) was certainly no stranger to having overseers and protectors from future/more technologically advanced cultures looking out for preserving species or the planet itself, so it's amazingly hypocritical to deny that service to other species when Humans and the Federation are put in the same position.
It also makes the arrogant assumption that species are too primitive or irrational or stupid to handle to truth if it's explained to them, in the cases where you have no choice but to reveal yourselves to save them. While that might be true sometimes, the PD's blanket zero tolerance policy is irrational and stupid itself. We get a glimpse of that attitude in the TNG episode where the villager kills himself upon exposure to the truth after Worf's brother saved him, and people act as if Nikolai was some kind of monster as a result, when if the Enterprise crew were left to their devices the villager and all of his people would be dead anyway.
The parts of the Prime Directive that say you shouldn't needlessly expose a culture to future technological advancements that can be abused or to social customs that can alter their own, and that you shouldn't interfere in internal disputes (so long as they don't threaten the entire species) are conscientious and reasonable. But when it's used as an excuse to sit back and do nothing as a species is wiped out by a natural or technological disaster or war it's disgusting and arrogant and playing God every bit as much as if you were to interfere directly. Good riddance to it.
Re: Nibiru
I may be wrong, but it seems like all the episodes where TOS Kirk bends the Prime Directive, the natives had already been contaminated by the Feds or some other culture.
I may be wrong, but it seems like all the episodes where TOS Kirk bends the Prime Directive, the natives had already been contaminated by the Feds or some other culture.
Re: Nibiru
If you save a culture from a volcano by coming down in a big space ship, you don't really save it. It dies that day, because that event will spark a religion, and we all know how much that transforms a culture.
Imagine a close relative is dying, and you could only save him by wiping his entire memory and personality in the process. He/She would be alive, but at the same time completely gone.
So yes, the proper choice would have been to let nuSpock die there and keep the Abramsprise under water, because that way the culture would have been saved without a GOD coming down to them saving them.
If you save a culture from a volcano by coming down in a big space ship, you don't really save it. It dies that day, because that event will spark a religion, and we all know how much that transforms a culture.
Imagine a close relative is dying, and you could only save him by wiping his entire memory and personality in the process. He/She would be alive, but at the same time completely gone.
So yes, the proper choice would have been to let nuSpock die there and keep the Abramsprise under water, because that way the culture would have been saved without a GOD coming down to them saving them.
Re: Nibiru
I'm sure there was an explanation given why the ship had to be close - obviously I wasn't paying close attention because I can't remember.
Yes, that's what Spock and Pike said.
But then if a natural disaster happens here somewhere on Earth today, does the rest of the the countries not try to help?
The PD is, if applied with this bureaucratic word-for-word mentality, as cold and inhumane as "the needs of the many..." is dangerous if applied blindly without reflection to every situation.
I'm sure there was an explanation given why the ship had to be close - obviously I wasn't paying close attention because I can't remember.
Yes, that's what Spock and Pike said.
But then if a natural disaster happens here somewhere on Earth today, does the rest of the the countries not try to help?
The PD is, if applied with this bureaucratic word-for-word mentality, as cold and inhumane as "the needs of the many..." is dangerous if applied blindly without reflection to every situation.
Re: Nibiru
I hated how in TNG they'd let a civilization die out even if the Enterprise could save them without them ever knowing about Enterprise. Even so, is it really terrible for a civilization or small part of it to worship the Enterprise like a God if they can save them from total annihilation? Eventually it'll just be a myth, think of how many religions and Gods have died out in our history.
I hated how in TNG they'd let a civilization die out even if the Enterprise could save them without them ever knowing about Enterprise. Even so, is it really terrible for a civilization or small part of it to worship the Enterprise like a God if they can save them from total annihilation? Eventually it'll just be a myth, think of how many religions and Gods have died out in our history.
Re: Nibiru
In TNG: Pen Pals, they eventually did save them. And in the other episode, we see what happens to the culture when they witness "divine intervention". So I think TNG was pretty balanced and coherent on that issue.
A carpenter with 30 followers somehow made it into the main religion for our planet.
ANY visible intervention is bad intervention. You cannot foresee the consequences.
In TNG: Pen Pals, they eventually did save them. And in the other episode, we see what happens to the culture when they witness "divine intervention". So I think TNG was pretty balanced and coherent on that issue.
A carpenter with 30 followers somehow made it into the main religion for our planet.
ANY visible intervention is bad intervention. You cannot foresee the consequences.
Re: Nibiru
The problem is you have no idea what effect saving said culture will have. Lots of seemingly feel good ideas often have unintended consequences.
The problem is you have no idea what effect saving said culture will have. Lots of seemingly feel good ideas often have unintended consequences.
Re: Nibiru
In Pen Pals, they helped because she asked for help. Although, that seems like a lame reason. Unless somewhere in the episode she knew Data was an ET.
In Pen Pals, they helped because she asked for help. Although, that seems like a lame reason. Unless somewhere in the episode she knew Data was an ET.
Re: Nibiru
Now if there was an asteroid on a collision course with Earth, I wouldn't expect an alien civilization, no matter how evolved and civilized, to save us. But if we sent out a distress call, and they'd react to it by blowing the asteroid up, that would be nice.
If they react to it by blowing the asteroid up and then presented a bill, that would be ugly.
And if they react to it by blowing the asteroid up and then ask us to worship them, that would be horrible.
That brings up an interesting question. Is there ANY NASA protocol that specifies a distress signal for catastrophes? I mean just in case there MIGHT be a UFO out there? It would be the scientist version of a prayer, I guess.
Now if there was an asteroid on a collision course with Earth, I wouldn't expect an alien civilization, no matter how evolved and civilized, to save us. But if we sent out a distress call, and they'd react to it by blowing the asteroid up, that would be nice.
If they react to it by blowing the asteroid up and then presented a bill, that would be ugly.
And if they react to it by blowing the asteroid up and then ask us to worship them, that would be horrible.
That brings up an interesting question. Is there ANY NASA protocol that specifies a distress signal for catastrophes? I mean just in case there MIGHT be a UFO out there? It would be the scientist version of a prayer, I guess.
Re: Nibiru
As Scotty said, it was a stupid idea. And Pike said, Kirk is full of stupid ideas.
We're dealing with a universe in which they failed to save Vulcan. I think that changes the way our characters - especially Spock - feel about life.
I remember when 9/11 happened. Part of us just wanted everything to go back to normal. And part of us keep saying "everything is different." But the truth was somewhere in between.
Remember, this is still very early in Starfleet's space-exploration. According to the ST:ID, this is the first 5 year mission ever. Which kind of makes me think that either ENT never happened (happy days!), or it was "cancelled" after four years
The point being, Spock couldn't save his people. He isn't just going to sit around and let some other race suffer the same fate. And his captain - Kirk - is cool with breaking the rules. So there is literally no way to stop them. Except by taking away their ship. Which is what Pike did. But that lasted what, five minutes?
As Scotty said, it was a stupid idea. And Pike said, Kirk is full of stupid ideas.
We're dealing with a universe in which they failed to save Vulcan. I think that changes the way our characters - especially Spock - feel about life.
I remember when 9/11 happened. Part of us just wanted everything to go back to normal. And part of us keep saying "everything is different." But the truth was somewhere in between.
Remember, this is still very early in Starfleet's space-exploration. According to the ST:ID, this is the first 5 year mission ever. Which kind of makes me think that either ENT never happened (happy days!), or it was "cancelled" after four years
The point being, Spock couldn't save his people. He isn't just going to sit around and let some other race suffer the same fate. And his captain - Kirk - is cool with breaking the rules. So there is literally no way to stop them. Except by taking away their ship. Which is what Pike did. But that lasted what, five minutes?
- Status
Similar threads
