Did Kirk sacrifice himself for his crew? Initially it was for Harrimans crew and then after that for the population of Veridian IV?
Poll Silliest death and immediate resurrection?
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Into Darkness Kirk in the Kelvin Universe.
Spock (TMP), Picard ("Sarek"), and Ben Sisko ("Emissary") might dispute that. Janeway too, if you count "Coda" (the events of which technically didn't happen).
He'd known Spock better and longer than he'd known David, so I don't think that's very surprising.
Kirk's behavior in V can be explained as him trying to be diplomatic (and not intoxicated), by the fact that grief isn't a linear progression, by the possibility that things happened off-screen between the two films to exacerbate his grief over David's death (in the novelization the Klingon BoP has attacked a couple of Federation colonies and Carol Marcus has been hospitalized), or by the fact that V isn't a great film. Pick any or all of the above.
^^this
If there had been a multi-season arc or even moment-of-brilliant-idea as to how to reverse it... even Q snapping his fingers would be good enough, though that too is a bit obvious a solution and when everyone heard Q was returning, everyone was hoping he'd do just that. The remaining seasons just didn't know what to do with the idea, despite all the exposition put into a synthetic auto-stop function. Hate to say it, but PIC had an easy way out for the robot issue but didn't do it. That's arguably worse than STID's resorting to "magic blood" as a "get out of drama card", and the poll question would have been a lot easier had Q snapped his digits.
Still, PIC tried being original and also had to deal with the possibility of Sir Patrick not returning, so the moment possibly being rushed and then not knowing what to do is easily more forgivable than a cheap joke role reversal in STID (a movie that I think is better if they kept it all going with John Harrison and not make him into wannabe-Khan; ID had plenty of narrative and dramatic weight without needing to use an old character as a crutch. Plus, Stewart elevated Picard above the scripting. Qunito's performance tries hard, but the script was forcing the "Vulcan Spock Dealing With His Emotions"(tm) routine yet again and way too much. That said, Kirk sacrificing himself by saving the crew is probably the best way Kirk could be killed off. Though kicking into alignment what is clearly a very big and heavy piece of machinery strains credibility in that regard. (or are the elements designed to be rotated and it was stuck out of position until Kirk's kicks loosened it into ooperation where it finished a self-realignment procedure?) Still, the scene focusing more on Kirk's action and that was well-handled overall, it's easier to roll with. It's all a little sappy and soppy, as with most 21st century sci-fi fantasy, but I'd argue the scene still earned the audience's emotion.)
PIC gets my vote, despite the behind-the-scenes issues. And, as @Lord Garth said, PIC did utilize a more original idea than mere role reversal. Props to that for sure, but the fan backlash and then nothing being done or addressed was a downer. The more I think of it, maybe I should change my vote to STID. It's a tough call, for both good and bad reasons for both situations.
Excellent point. A lot of people will agree on something in fandom, but it's almost never a 100% truism.
True, but is it done organically to the narrative and character development, because of the tight timeframes and possibility of cast not returning, or done just to piss off established fans as part of a publicity stunt even though that doesn't always work? (or other?) There were times in all the previous Trek shows when a known character would act out of character and it doesn't quite fit with established character traits and without explaining why said character is not being out of character. At least Robot-Picard wasn't able to play frisbee with Data and throwing a shuttle around as a makeshift disc! By the sounds of things, Picard was robotified due to Stewart not reprising the role again, and STID was doing role reversal for the sake of the narrative.
Both deaths and resurrections were silly, but I voted for Kirk's in STID, and much of my reasoning has already been stated by others here. Plus, STID is the worst film in the franchise, easily.
I give Picard's a bit more leeway because of the beautiful scene between him and Data.
I don't count Weyoun because the very nature of the Vorta as clones doesn't make them dying and coming back seem as ludicrous as some of the others mentioned.
I give Picard's a bit more leeway because of the beautiful scene between him and Data.
I don't count Weyoun because the very nature of the Vorta as clones doesn't make them dying and coming back seem as ludicrous as some of the others mentioned.
This is my go to. It's ridiculous to think that grief is something that after so many months people just walk off. Misunderstanding at best of the grief process.
Also, it's not a celebration. It is a light reception, and Kirk gives a halfhearted salute to the Klingon captain and then drinks with his friends. That's hardly "making peace with the Klingons" level of a celebration.
Oh. Him
Comparing the reactions to Spock and David's deaths need to have a little context.
Spock was his best friend for 20 years. Then Spock died and the next film was just days later. So we got to see Kirk's grief while it was still fresh overlapping into another film, actually fueling that film's plot. He gets Spock back, so we get to the a definitive beginning, middle and end to his grief in a very short and intense amount of time.
David, who he has personally known for those same amount of days Spock has been dead, dies and we next see Kirk a full three months later. That's three months of dealing with the grief, loss, telling Carol, drinking with Bones, and then getting ready to go back and face the music. Saavik doesn't even talk to Kirk about it until they're leaving Vulcan which can easily mean Kirk wasn't ready to talk about it until then. Other than unloading into his personal log, have we ever seen Kirk talking to everyone about personal loss if his grief isn't interfering with the mission? Anyway, as per usual, Kirk then is confronted with a crisis and that becomes his focus. I can't see him overcome with memories of David when he's trying to find whales and save Earth.
The next movie is at least three weeks after that and Kirk is now throwing himself into extreme sports like free climbing, thumbing his nose at death and obviously melancholy about not having a family and dying alone. Something about his life at this point is eating at him and "lack of family" is at the core (David is dead - Carol might as well be). He then gets caught up in another crisis and by the time that's resolved is feeling better about his "adopted" family being what he has.
And, finally, we pick up three years later and Kirk is still nursing bitterness over David. That cut didn't heal because he wouldn't stop picking at it.
I don't know, seems to me like there's plenty of wiggle room for Kirk to be carrying sadness over the loss of his son throughout the films. Anyway, people deal with loss differently. Kirk dealt with it his way.
Spock was his best friend for 20 years. Then Spock died and the next film was just days later. So we got to see Kirk's grief while it was still fresh overlapping into another film, actually fueling that film's plot. He gets Spock back, so we get to the a definitive beginning, middle and end to his grief in a very short and intense amount of time.
David, who he has personally known for those same amount of days Spock has been dead, dies and we next see Kirk a full three months later. That's three months of dealing with the grief, loss, telling Carol, drinking with Bones, and then getting ready to go back and face the music. Saavik doesn't even talk to Kirk about it until they're leaving Vulcan which can easily mean Kirk wasn't ready to talk about it until then. Other than unloading into his personal log, have we ever seen Kirk talking to everyone about personal loss if his grief isn't interfering with the mission? Anyway, as per usual, Kirk then is confronted with a crisis and that becomes his focus. I can't see him overcome with memories of David when he's trying to find whales and save Earth.
The next movie is at least three weeks after that and Kirk is now throwing himself into extreme sports like free climbing, thumbing his nose at death and obviously melancholy about not having a family and dying alone. Something about his life at this point is eating at him and "lack of family" is at the core (David is dead - Carol might as well be). He then gets caught up in another crisis and by the time that's resolved is feeling better about his "adopted" family being what he has.
And, finally, we pick up three years later and Kirk is still nursing bitterness over David. That cut didn't heal because he wouldn't stop picking at it.
I don't know, seems to me like there's plenty of wiggle room for Kirk to be carrying sadness over the loss of his son throughout the films. Anyway, people deal with loss differently. Kirk dealt with it his way.
What a coincidence, that's my Halloween costume this year...He was a naughty scientist.
Perhaps Spock reminds Kirk of Sam - now that we know they were both blueshirts. He loses one, and gains a surrogate; he also lost Spock and re-gained him. Double meaning wordplay.
Similar threads
