Honestly other than the superficial similarity to Hornblower, I don't think Meyer really got the character of Kirk. It shows in the two movies he helmed.
The One Thing You Could Change - Move Edition
- Thread starter Bry_Sinclair
- Start date
Honestly other than the superficial similarity to Hornblower, I don't think Meyer really got the character of Kirk. It shows in the two movies he helmed.
I think Spock dying is devastating for Kirk and NOT out of character.
We don't really know how close he and his brother were. We all know people who have siblings that don't really get along, but are casual with each other.
Gary Mitchell... they were close, and they did go to the Academy together. We don't know if they served together after, though.
Spock... we know how deep their friendship is. They saved each other's lives time and again. They faced death and the unknown together. They worked for YEARS on a ship together, day in and day out. I myself have worked with some people so long they ended up being a brother or sister to me.
For my money, Kirk was not out of character in this.
We don't really know how close he and his brother were. We all know people who have siblings that don't really get along, but are casual with each other.
Gary Mitchell... they were close, and they did go to the Academy together. We don't know if they served together after, though.
Spock... we know how deep their friendship is. They saved each other's lives time and again. They faced death and the unknown together. They worked for YEARS on a ship together, day in and day out. I myself have worked with some people so long they ended up being a brother or sister to me.
For my money, Kirk was not out of character in this.
Actually, I think Kirk in TWoK feels far more consistent with Kirk in Balance of Terror. He's the Kirk I wish we'd seen more often, the one exception being how naive he was approaching the Reliant given the distress call and early evidence that they were lying.
I don't have a major issue with his speech to David but I would have preferred if Kirk had at least acknowledged the death of his brother in some dialogue somewhere in the movie franchise. It's clear that he was nowhere near as close to his brother as he was to Spock at the time of TWoK but that death didn't mean nothing.
Maybe something like, "I've lost people before, even family, but it's never felt like this."
I'm struggling to work out how to re-word "I lost a brother once," in STV to be less disrespectful to Sam's memory but I'm sure it could be contextualised.
Was Peter Preston ever conceived as Peter Kirk? Presumably he was raised by Kirk's surviving parents although I'm not clear on when they died. Fifteen year old Kirk either must have been alone or with his mother at the time of Kodos' massacre but if she had died there, you would have thought he would have mentioned it. His father was canonically alive when he was promoted to captain and would only have been 80 ish at the time of TWoK. Shame they worked so hard to make Kirk a loner.
I don't have a major issue with his speech to David but I would have preferred if Kirk had at least acknowledged the death of his brother in some dialogue somewhere in the movie franchise. It's clear that he was nowhere near as close to his brother as he was to Spock at the time of TWoK but that death didn't mean nothing.
Maybe something like, "I've lost people before, even family, but it's never felt like this."
I'm struggling to work out how to re-word "I lost a brother once," in STV to be less disrespectful to Sam's memory but I'm sure it could be contextualised.
Was Peter Preston ever conceived as Peter Kirk? Presumably he was raised by Kirk's surviving parents although I'm not clear on when they died. Fifteen year old Kirk either must have been alone or with his mother at the time of Kodos' massacre but if she had died there, you would have thought he would have mentioned it. His father was canonically alive when he was promoted to captain and would only have been 80 ish at the time of TWoK. Shame they worked so hard to make Kirk a loner.
Ive never gotten why people insist on taking this line as if someone forgot or (gasp) was disrespectful to the memory of Sam Kirk.
It's a very natural figure of speech. I might say "I flipped a canoe once, but we all had a good time when we got back to camp" and it doesn't mean it's the only time I flipped the canoe. It does mean that there was only one time we flipped and still enjoyed ourselves when we got back to camp, though. It's a natural quirk of how we choose to employ language. We do it all the time. Kirk lost a "brother" (in this case Spock) who he was lucky enough to get back. He has lost another brother as well, but Sam was obviously not resurrected. Kirk's statement is just fine, and isn't an exclusion or lack of respect to his own blood brother.
He's trying to comfort Spock over losing Sybok. It's not about HIM in that moment. It's about expressing his feelings for Spock in a crisp and heartfelt way.
It makes perfect sense, and it would have been dramatically flat to mention Sam in any way in that moment, even as an indirect reference, just to satisfy some over-picky fans such as we.
So rather than rewording the dialogue, look at it from that perspective
Last edited:
Whether Kirk should be sad or not over Spock after his death isn’t the issue anyone is arguing. It’s whether he had the stuff to order someone, anyone, to die for the good of the ship. Or is he, as shown in the movie, a dumb bunny who’s avoided making any hard calls and would freeze when presented with a real life threatening situation that demands a sacrifice.
in what way? In that he’s vulnerable and self doubting? That’s fine. But again, not the issue. See above.
But that's not the story that TWOK was telling.
Kirk is my favorite fictional character of all-time, and I find nothing inaccurate or incorrect in the way he is portrayed in the films.
I always look at this as a Kirk who has changed with age. In fact, I think that's the whole point. And frankly, I find Movie Kirk even more compelling than TOS Kirk because of that evolution and vulnerability.
In TWOK in particular the whole theme of the film was that Kirk has lost a little off his fastball, and it cost them. He has to face that. That's the beauty of the story.
I always look at this as a Kirk who has changed with age. In fact, I think that's the whole point. And frankly, I find Movie Kirk even more compelling than TOS Kirk because of that evolution and vulnerability.
In TWOK in particular the whole theme of the film was that Kirk has lost a little off his fastball, and it cost them. He has to face that. That's the beauty of the story.
Didn't you announce you weren't having this conversation with me anymore? What story Nick *wanted* to tell doesn't mean much if it makes no sense for the character. I may want to tell the story of how Kirk married Rainbow Bright, but no one would buy it.
I don't see how becoming unable to make a hard choice or being presented as never having to have made it in the first place is a change with age. You can like all the midlife crisis stuff and not believe Kirk would massively drop the ball in a pretty simple situation and kill his whole crew. He literally keeps yelling down to an engine room that's not responding to him. He sends no one to check it out. He doesn't go down himself. He gives zero orders. He's a complete goof.
I'm sorry that you see it that way, and as a result, your ability to enjoy the film is hampered.
I'm lucky enough to have a very different take, and thus enjoy the film tremendously.
Don’t feel bad for me. I like a lot of other films. I don’t need to like this one to be happy. And I’m really “seeing it that way”. I’m describing things that factually happened in the film. I’m glad you can look past them and enjoy the film anyway. *Shrug gif or something*
Well, nominally, but if the point of the Kobyashi Maru was to demonstrate there are some scenarios where no matter what choice you make you can't win, then arguably the narrative should have forced Kirk to make a no-win choice: to save the ship you have to sacrifice someone. As it is the script robs Kirk of making any choice at all. He can't learn he can't cheat his way out of it because he's never given any say in the matter. Spock just does it. So Spock takes the test for reals and Kirk just suffers the aftermath.
That's a fairly condescending statement. That makes it out to be the viewer's fault if they don't enjoy the story as told. The audience is always right about what it does and doesn't like.
But the choices that Kirk makes throughout the story are what lead to the moment of Spock's sacrifice. It doesn't just come out of nowhere.
You mean the single choice he makes to not raise the shields.
I didn't say it was anyone's fault they didn't enjoy it. I didn't say anyone was wrong in feeling the way they do. I said it was unfortunate their point of view put them in a position of being unable to enjoy the film. I acknowledged my circumstances are different, and counted myself lucky.
Not sure what the problem is, or why you need to have an issue with it since it wasn't intended or aimed at you.
Yup. I like TWOK for the same reason I like Picard.
The blackjack and hookers?
How did you know?
The one universal constant in all of Roddenberry's visions of the future.How did you know?
Because this is a public forum and we are free to comment on other people’s posts, that “I wasn’t talking to you” thang don’t wash.I didn't say it was anyone's fault they didn't enjoy it. I didn't say anyone was wrong in feeling the way they do. I said it was unfortunate their point of view put them in a position of being unable to enjoy the film. I acknowledged my circumstances are different, and counted myself lucky.
Not sure what the problem is, or why you need to have an issue with it since it wasn't intended or aimed at you.
I think telling someone that their POV “hampers their ability” to enjoy/critique/whatever is condescending. YMMV
If you could change one thing about each of the first 10 movies, what would it be?
Similar threads
