Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Santa Borg, Oct 28, 2019.
The preview pictures are still online!
Assuming a sphere of destruction, and using the location of Hobus from the Star Trek Star Charts book, we're looking at something like (remember the map is 2D) a radius of 14 light years before Hobus reached Romulus
Interestingly the Picard map shows that Romii is still there, which would be JUST inside the sphere of destruction (again though, 2D maps vs. 3D space):
Continuing to repeat a fallacy will not eventually make it true.
The ship was on Vulcan, which was further away from Hobus, so they had more time to "outfit" it.
The sequence does show a star explode, but not that it explicitly is the Romulan star. One of the planet we see could be Romulus, but it's not clearly identifiable. Someone compare screencaps! XD
The Narada was upgraded and they got their tattoos after Romulus was destroyed. Spock stopped the nova, then Nero caught up with him and they were both dragged into the past.
...What the fuck? Are you trying to say something about the phrase you quoted was untrue?
In that case, think again. Better still, watch the movie again. Surely you don't want to be denying facts? That is, real real-world adult facts of the "this is how things are" sort.
Go watch the scene. There's only one truth there.
The movie makes it quite clear to anyone who isn’t a serial contrarian that the star that goes nova isn’t the Romulus home star. Because if it was, Romulus would have been destroyed in a matter of minutes, instead of the much longer span of time that Spock has the Jellyfish outfitted on Vulcan for his mission to absorb the already-created nova with Red Matter, after telling the Romulans of his plan. Perhaps you are the one who needs to rewatch the film.
But there is no "Hobus" in the movie. And it still would make no sense to outfit anything if they know they can't make it in time.
Well, it's the one and only planet construct in that scene, the one that stands for Romulus at the end of the scene. They didn't build two planets for it.
The movie leaves perhaps twenty seconds for Nero to get the upgrades and the tattoos. Spock stops the supernova, then gets intercepted by Nero who was an eyewitness to the destruction of Romulus, and a chase immediately takes them through the timehole.
Insert a week for the upgrading and tattooing... At which timeslot? After Romulus is lost but before Spock stops the supernova (aka "little time")? Or after Spock stops the supernova and before he sets sail for home? What is Spock's reason for taking a week off at the ruins of Romulus?
Don't try and dodge. What I said was that the movie shows the star next to planet Romulus blowing up. You called that a fallacy. I call you a liar. Go watch the scene.
In the mind meld, we see a star explode. Then we see Spock on Vulcan conferring with other Vulcans. Then we see the construction of the Jellyfish. Then we see Romulus getting destroyed by the remnants of the explosion. Feel free to call me a liar all you want, but the scenes speak for themselves.
Following the destruction of Romulus, they shaved their heads and got tattooed, and got the praetor aboard. Nero killed him and took his staff weapon. Then they found a secret Tal Shiar base that equipped them with Borg tech, and chased after Spock.
I should really read it again, though...
Hmm. The options here would seem to be
1) You saying that you feel the preponderance of evidence favors a supernova kaboom far away from Romulus
2) You saying there's specific evidence for said
3) You saying there is no visual that connects Romulus with the kaboom of a neighboring star.
The first is a nice opinion to hold and causes no obligations. The second calls for specifying of the evidence and may lead to interesting debate. The third just proves you a filthy liar. But it's not as if these are mutually exclusive or anything, and I for one am here for more of 1 and 2. Just cut the 3 crap, willya?
Yup, all within twenty seconds. Countdown and the movie just can't exist in the same universe.
Other stuff from the actual movie that contradicts the headshaving and tattooing idea: Nero's wife, while not shaven, is already wearing ample tattoos before the destruction of Romulus. Perhaps tattoos are a working class thing? Or perhaps they are chiefly worn by those Romulans who aren't well endowed with forehead ridges, as feeble compensation?
Alright due, chill the fuck out if you don't want a warning for flaming.
We're talking about the makers of Star Trek: Discovery here. I promise you, their version of continuity is less strict than yours and they'll change whatever they see fit. Those 20 seconds might as well be 20 years.
And therein lies the issue. IF Picard details what happened to Romulus, we'll have the definitive answer. We know Picard is doing it's own thing apart from what Countdown, novels and Star Trek Online detailed, but that it's drawn inspiration from all of them whether it's uniform designs or holographic consoles.
Chances are, it'll all be past tense vague references and we'll never learn any more than we already know.
Might be that Odo wasn't able to change their view of the Romulans, with all the backstabbing and intrigues that are part of romulan society, while his influence was enough in the case of the other solids. Or general stop their basic racism against them.
@Dukhat: I guess it might have been a single cloaked ship or shuttle with a cloaking device, so no one could detect the hands of the founders in all of this.
And the thing about the scale of destruction might have been more about the political impact instead of blowing up large regions of the galaxy...
Heh, as per above, Spock in Countdown seems to think the entire universe is at risk... "Universe, meet a single star. Star, meet the universe. Now fight." (Perhaps the supernova hit a mycelial node or something?)
Well, we have pretty high odds of hearing a survivor's story, now don't we? This already will tell us much more than the 2009 movie, where the only known survivors are aboard Nero's ship and won't linger in the 24th century to tell anybody anything.
No matter how vague (say, "I survived, thanks to you, Picard"), such a story would at least establish something about how much in advance of the actual destruction the Romulans learned about its coming...
I was quite clear about what the film shows and what Spock says, and the evidence is in favor of the star not being the Romulan home star. You’re welcome to continue to pick apart the scene for your own amusement but nothing is going to change that.
So you choose 1.
See? It's that simple, ceasing to try 3. If you just could have done that before resorting to insults...
1. You’re the one making the insults, not me, which I’m sure you’re quite aware. The mod certainly is.
2. Said mod already told you to chill the fuck out with the insults or you’ll get a warning for flaming. I’d heed his warning if I were you.
3. The remnant of the unknown star’s explosion hit and destroyed Romulus, not the Romulan’s star itself. That’s where you’re confused.
I think there's some room for interpretation with the supernova sequence, considering that the depiction was part of Spock's trippy mind meld, and also considering that many of the space visuals in J.J. Abram's works don't make a lick of sense unless you look at them as stylized abstractions.
I bow to the greater wisdom of the mod. Just please, please stop claiming untrue things about what is on screen and what is not. That is, if you have any decency in you.
The actual point of interest here is the third one. There is a visual of a star's expanding flamefront hitting a rubble field and then planet Romulus. A case of interstellar propagation of destruction, or of insystem propagation?
The former would presume that a random debris field lies between the star and Romulus, somewhere in interstellar space (say, like in "Pirates of Orion"). The latter would associate this field with yer standard scifi asteroid belts, insystem (say, like ST:Beyond). So it's a matter of stylistic interpretation all right. Why give the rubble field its fifteen milliseconds of fame unless it's part of the scene, so to say? Why not, say, have the wave hitting other stars, surely a more spectacular sight?
Romulus and the star are in fact briefly visible in one and the same image, although blissfully so briefly that we don't have to think too deeply about beachball-sized stars and grapefruit-sized planets. Yet tellingly, when the star is done destroying Romulus, we again see its angry sphere in its entire glory, backlighting Spock's tiny ship firing that tiny vial into it. If the star were now fourteen lightyears wide, that particular scene would be doubly absurd - for its visuals, and for the mismatch between the tiny vial and the immensity of the task facing it. If red matter could do that, why did Nero not deploy it 14 lightyears from Vulcan?
So the visuals aren't all that ambiguous in the end. If we're to consider them not representative of the events at all, then the same goes for what Spock's saying, too. After all, both are elements of one and the same meld.
Separate names with a comma.