Which implies that Kirk knew he had a grown son and the only surprise was that he was working with his mother on Regula 1. Nothing about David was a shock to Kirk.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
Which implies that Kirk knew he had a grown son and the only surprise was that he was working with his mother on Regula 1. Nothing about David was a shock to Kirk.
One of the dumbest things I've ever made
Burnham: Meanwhile I had a relationship every season.
This is completely beside the point. When your son's mother tells you to get lost (all but issuing a restraining order probably too) that seriously messes with a guy. You are not eagerly jumping into the arms of the next woman without seriously reflecting again and again and again just what went wrong.
I certainly would not be as loose and free spirited with the ladies in TOS like Kirk was with that kind of trauma.
Awww. I wish you had never prompted me to Google that. It's been a hard enough few years after already losing all respect for Mathangi "M.I.A." Arulpragasam.
I also just read she was in a London actors bible group. That is so so far from the type of group activities my London actor friends were engaged in.
Didn't say that didn't affect Kirk. Just making the statement I did because some fans seem to believe Kirk didn't know about David.
Um...depends on the person.
Indeed. Some may become more cavalier.
Huh, so not only can't they change anything in the continuity, characters can't change in-continuity either.
At the point where the fundamentals of the characters are changed. His skin colour and precise upbringing are not fundamental.
Oh they can. I just might not feel it's very good. Like in Star Wars (spoilers for Boba Fett)
Yes Boba hiding in the desert for 5 years doesn't contradict Disney's new canon per se. But is it at all like what we know about him?
Yes it is. The point of change in characters is the simple fact that they are responding to new stressors. It's going to impact how they respond.
How precise are we talking? For example, Eggsy's lower class background from Kingsman is completely inappropriate for James Bond, and they are both British white secret service agents. Eggsy's upbringing is precisely what distinguishes him as a different character, and not a James Bond Rip-off.
The Book of Boba Fett is outstanding. They took a non-character, a cipher, a nobody without any attributes of personhood except only the most superficial (at least as far as the saga films are concerned) and made him a character who developed substantially as a person over the course of the series.
Boba spoilers
Except he actually had a lot of character that the show didn't touch on, even after Disney's reboot. He blames the clones/Empire for helping the Jedi kill his dad. He hates Jedi for killing his dad. Neither is addressed in the show, and in fact Grogu shows up within fighting range of him and nothing comes of it. Fennec Shand outright killed his parental figure Taun We. It's never brought up in the show. Of all the history that Boba had, they literally took a bounty hunter who only interacted with Boba in one episode of the Clone Wars to be his final showdown.
If a character cannot change or grow over the course of a story, there is no point in telling stories at all. By your definition, all literature should be little more than Wikipedia articles.
There's a difference in growing a character and artificially knocking them down and "regrowing" them back to where they were to begin with to create the illusion of development. See decent man Poe Dameron in Star Wars 7, magically became a jerk in 8, then "grows" back to being a decent character in that movie and 9--back to where he started.
Regressing Kirk to have custody issues that never were mentioned before is part of this retroactive knocking down, rather than growing him with new relationships.
That's not "artificially regressing" a character, that's you missing the point. In Episode 8, Poe's ego got the best of him and he became dangerously reckless, to the point of it costing lives for him to get a victory. That's not artificial. It happens. Look up "hubris". And rightly so, the higher-ups lost confidence in his ability to make sound tactical decisions. He had to correct his thinking and regain their trust. Again, nothing artificial. It's called a redemption arc. Look that up, too.
Kirk didn't "regress" with regard to David. He was disappointed Carol didn't tell David about him. You're reading WAY too much into the situation.
I agree. Poe was fine. Same with Kirk. Well. TMP and TWOK did repeat the "Kirk feels moribund in his current position. " idea.
So you expecting the next Bond to forget he died and that he has a daughter? How would that affect the character?
No, Black Panther is not a diverse movie, the fact it was a cultural phenomena reveals something about the society that produced it.
Last edited:
