Which, in turn, explains the cooks' phasers.
Is probably just sweat stains that made it appear yellow.
TUC Concerns
- Thread starter balls
- Start date
Which, in turn, explains the cooks' phasers.
Is probably just sweat stains that made it appear yellow.
I agree with the OP for the most part. But really, there are few movies that you can't pick apart to no end. From TUC, to 2009's ever changing ship scales, to the last 3 disappointing Star Wars movies (that I still watch at least 3 times a year none-the-less, along with the 2009 Star Trek flick...)
That said, TUC, while not my favorite Star Trek film, just flys by so fast every time I watch it. I'm astonished to this date how short the movie feels to me. It's all the quick cut scenes I think. I think it's still has lots of clever and fun dialogue. And the battle scenes are decent.
That said, TUC, while not my favorite Star Trek film, just flys by so fast every time I watch it. I'm astonished to this date how short the movie feels to me. It's all the quick cut scenes I think. I think it's still has lots of clever and fun dialogue. And the battle scenes are decent.
Last edited:
Cloaks are usually sneak attacks. Unless you're expecting someone you're not going to be shooting tracking torpedoes out randomly hoping to score a hit on something that may not be there. Here we're dealing with a ship that is cloaked and firing so there's a more immediate need.
Plus, it's always possible that this kind of cloak - a new one - was not as adept at cloaking emissions. Anyway, the fault is not with this film, its with all the rest of Trek for not thinking of this likely weakness earlier.
Last edited:
I don't think anything you've noted interferes with the logic of the movie. They are valid nits, but the film wouldn't move along differently without them. Obviously the bit about Scotty and the bridge crew is to have the whole crew clapped at at the end. The rest is about setting up jokes and dramatic speeches that aren't weighed down with plot details we just heard.
Its not like TWOK where the very nature of the film is created around illogical nonsense like mistaking one planet for another when you have scanners (a la Doomsday Machine) that can tell a whole system config and match it to previous records. Or having a whole crew of nobodies in RAD suits and a chief engineer siting on their hands who could bring the mains online just so Spock can die. I mean, seriously, they're all going to die! Send a frakking trainee with a helmet in there! Send three if you have to, and keep sending them until its fixed.
Who says the configuration of the system was known? TOS stands witness to the idea that Starfleet has very little knowledge of places not visited by starships - and Kirk would probably have chosen a place not visited by starships for his marooning of Khan. Again, basic Star Trek assumptions and conventions are at fault, not ST2:TWoK choices.
Repairing the warp drive that way probably wouldn't have occurred to Scotty. He had previously bypassed this fundamental damage with his "Christmas tree" jury-rigging, and it was that jury-rigging that he would have been trying to repair in order to keep things working. But ST:TMP already shows that Spock knows a thing or two about how the ship really works, so it's not unexpected for him to spot something Scotty would overlook. Spock is the ruthlessly logical guy who sees the bottom line, Scotty is the paternal figure whose very job it currently is to keep young lads and lasses from hurting themselves while repairing machinery. So, an expected plot turn, not an unexpected one.
Timo Saloniemi
Repairing the warp drive that way probably wouldn't have occurred to Scotty. He had previously bypassed this fundamental damage with his "Christmas tree" jury-rigging, and it was that jury-rigging that he would have been trying to repair in order to keep things working. But ST:TMP already shows that Spock knows a thing or two about how the ship really works, so it's not unexpected for him to spot something Scotty would overlook. Spock is the ruthlessly logical guy who sees the bottom line, Scotty is the paternal figure whose very job it currently is to keep young lads and lasses from hurting themselves while repairing machinery. So, an expected plot turn, not an unexpected one.
Timo Saloniemi
Dude, come on. How did Kirk know there was a class M planet that was mildly inhospitable? How did the Reliant know there was a desert planet in the habitable zone? Because the system had been surveyed several times. And so one planet was an asteroid belt and the other was pushed inward. Both of these are changes that the ship would have scanned and reported on. The mistake is extremely dumb.
Spock didn't know something Scotty didn't. Spock helped Scotty get to where he would have been sooner. Your explanation that Scotty couldn't fix his own mess is reaching. He purposefully took the main engines off line because of the radiation. He could have easily put them back on. The problem wasn't jury rigging or broken engines. The engines were off. No one was allowed in the reactor room because of the radiation. Anyone could have restored them.
It's perfectly in line with the rest of Star Trek, though. Entire planets can go missing or appear out of nowhere, and this will only be noticed when one of the heroes takes the time to actually look at his instruments. Systemwide scans are a dialogue-specified exception, not a norm. And system data previews are utterly unheard of.
If the bored-out-of-their-skulls Reliant crew spotted a desert world in the Ceti Alpha system and headed for it without taking an in-depth look at the surroundings, then that's Star Trek. These people aren't space explorers as much as they are space exploiters and enforcers; they do only the sort of science that their current mission profile allows or calls for.
It's a fair point that this may look dumb. But Star Trek is dumb that way, and probably the real world of overseas exploration was dumb that way, too, for the most part. Furthermore, the stupidity doesn't affect the plot much: our heroes might have noted the strange orbital changes, but they would still have beamed down on that desert planet they coveted, and Chekov would still have remembered far too late why the name Ceti Alpha was itching on the base of his thick skull.
Timo Saloniemi
I can name a bunch of episodes like Doomsday Machine and The Changeling where the Enterprise scanned a system ahead of time and knew its configuration had changed in a moment. You're talking about extreme incompetence on the part of the Reliant, and remember these same lazy asses also found life on the planet when they weren't expecting it. So much for not doing things by the book.
I think the biggest concern about this movie is that Spock heard "Let them die!" and let Kirk go on the mission. He should've never let Kirk on that mission and if he felt trapped by the Admiral's orders, that should've been expressed in the movie. It put the mission in jeopardy. They need someone who believes in this. He showed outright hatred for them and disdain for the mission.
Umm, "DDM" specifically establishes that Starfleet is unable to tell whether a star system still features planets (!) until and unless a starship enters the system to perform said scans. And Kirk knew in advance to expect a changed configuration.
"The Changeling" and "Immunity Syndrome" show us that the crew is able to determine whether there's life in the system ahead, which apparently is different from being able to tell whether there are planets there. In both cases, our heroes obtain the information only after specifically having been alerted to the fact that something is amiss in these systems.
TWoK doesn't really compare to the latter two situations, but does compare to "DDM" and is perfectly in line with it.
Why not? Kirk's "Let them die!" only confirmed that Spock had made the right choice, that he had found his perfect Nixon for the mission. Spock explicitly needed a ruthless Klingon-slayer, and his diplomacy would have benefited from having said slayer do some explicit redneck antics so that neither side could accuse Starfleet from being soft. Assassination was of course a tad much, but it worked out all right in the end.
Timo Saloniemi
All Kirk and company knew going into the DDM situation is that the Constellation was in some kind of trouble. That's all. There was no reason to scan the systems they where traveling into except that's what you do when you enter a system. Systems surveyed only once before. The Reliant was specifically looking for a planet that was scanned closely enough to know if it had life and was at the proper distance from the sun to support it. Here's the dialog from DDM in case you've forgotten:
The distress call definitely came
from one of the solar systems in this sector.
Can you pinpoint it any closer, Lieutenant?
Negative. It was so badly garbled
all we got was the name Constellation.
Sir ...
we're now within the limits of System L-370,
but I can't locate --
Captain, sensors show this entire solar system has been destroyed.
Nothing left but rubble and asteroids.
But that's incredible.
The star in this system is still intact.
Only a nova could destroy like that.
Nonetheless, Captain,
sensors show nothing but debris
where we charted seven planets last year.
Continue a search pattern.
Aye-aye, sir.
Entering limits of System L-374, sir.
Scanners show the same evidence of destruction.
Every solar system in this sector blasted to rubble.
Still no sign of the Constellation.
Matt Decker's in command.
What could have happened to him?
The two inner most planets of this system
appear to be intact.
Honestly, you're arguing just to argue or because you just love the movie too much. Calm down. They made a dumb mistake. One of several - like having Genesis - a terraforming device - make a planet from scratch as well as a star at just the right distance.
The distress call definitely came
from one of the solar systems in this sector.
Can you pinpoint it any closer, Lieutenant?
Negative. It was so badly garbled
all we got was the name Constellation.
Sir ...
we're now within the limits of System L-370,
but I can't locate --
Captain, sensors show this entire solar system has been destroyed.
Nothing left but rubble and asteroids.
But that's incredible.
The star in this system is still intact.
Only a nova could destroy like that.
Nonetheless, Captain,
sensors show nothing but debris
where we charted seven planets last year.
Continue a search pattern.
Aye-aye, sir.
Entering limits of System L-374, sir.
Scanners show the same evidence of destruction.
Every solar system in this sector blasted to rubble.
Still no sign of the Constellation.
Matt Decker's in command.
What could have happened to him?
The two inner most planets of this system
appear to be intact.
Honestly, you're arguing just to argue or because you just love the movie too much. Calm down. They made a dumb mistake. One of several - like having Genesis - a terraforming device - make a planet from scratch as well as a star at just the right distance.
It would've put the mission in jeopardy. It at least should've strained things between the two main characters. Spock shouldn't understand Kirk's bigotry.
I think Spock understood Kirk's bigotry. Remember "Friday's Child"? "Revenge, Captain?" "Why not?" I think Spock believed, wrongly, that Kirk could rise above it given a certain circumstance. In a way it's a strange emotional blindness. If only he knew the stakes he could put his grievances aside for the greater good. It makes sense to me that he would do this.
I'd point out that we don't know what the "limits" of a solar system are....its star's heliopause?
"Dining on ashes" isn't that great of a scene. They tried and failed to explain this. Each one confessing what they had done wrong. But "You're a great one for logic..." is where it loses me. One, he's not so he doesn't know his friend. "Logic, logic, and logic..."Second, Kirk is pontificating instead of making amends.
My judgment is Kirk in II. "No, not like this. I haven't faced death. I cheated death and patted myself on my back for my ingenuity." He is at a low point, hand-wringing like we've never seen from him before.
He was a bigot. There is no room for that on the Enterprise. There is no room for that in Starfleet. He jeopardized the mission. There is no room for that, except...Kirk has been allowed to become arrogant and play by his own rules since III (the movie that ruined the movies, IMO). In The Motion Picture, he pulled these kind of antics and Bones slapped him for it. In II, he was made to understand the consequences of his actions. In IV he was rewarded for stealing the Enterprise.
They made him into a rebel without a cause and now we're supposed to understand why Mr. Spock wants anything to do with him? Kirk broke the rules before mostly because the rules stopped him from doing what was right. But he didn't throw out the rule book. And he listened to his superiors. He worked with them. Instead, here, he is just all by himself thinking he's always right and that Starfleet needs more people like him. That's the character they wrote in the new movie and people said he was "unlikeable." I guess Shatner just sold it better because it's the same guy we have seen from him taking command in the first movie to quoting Peter Pan in the last movie.
It covered the first seven (or, the TOS one covered the first six, and the Second TNG one covered number seven).
I've leafed through those books so many times that I know that information by heart. Disturbing.
Well, not really - I think ST2 is a fairly mediocre piece of Trek. A good course correction after ST:TMP, though...
But I can't understand how you can copy-paste the dialogue of "DDM" and still argue that it's somehow at odds with ST2:TWoK. The copy-pasted bits clearly confirm that the heroes can only establish the disappearance of whole planets if they are "within the limits" of a system. They first do this when they have already stumbled into L-370 in their search for the Constellation, proving that it's not standard procedure to scan for such things. And they apparently do it that way again in all the subsequent star systems, because in L-374 they're still first entering a system and only then scanning for the disappearance of planets. They must have done a system-by-system search to get the result of "All systems reduced to rubble", because if they could do it without entering systems, there would have been zero reason to enter L-374 and scan it.
That's how Starfleet works. We don't know if it's because their tech is limited in that fashion, or because their doctrine is a bit myopic. But at least it's perfectly consistent from TOS to ST2.
Never indicated. Genesis transformed dead planets to live ones. Genesis was detonated within a star system (or at least within a very short impulse hop from one). Hence, no need to create new planets or stars (and somehow make the original star disappear!). For all we know, Genesis Planet used to be called Regula...
QFT.
Umm, what? You can become Commander, Starfleet by being a bigot. Clearly, plenty of room there...
Timo Saloniemi
I think you're totally off about III. TMP and II Kirk is wishy washy and petulant. In TMP he never makes a correct decision except to enter the cloud against Decker's whining. Same in II. He can't even save his own ship several times because he's being uncharacteristically stupid. Not raising shields and then not sending some engineer to his death to put the mains online were both extremely dumb. This is not the Kirk in TOS. III at least makes him capable again.
And, yes, he steals the ship. But he also stops a dangerous Klingon incursion and then saves the Earth by going back in time, AND the Vulcan government is clearly conspiring with him. How would you have punished him?
And to say there is no room for bigotry on the ship is the over simplify a situation. What to you do when you're fighting an enemy for 50+ years? Do you just trust them? VI is a study in that. That even the most open minded people can have their prejudices when that kind of history is involved. In the end Kirk learns his lesson and that's what's important. I don't see how Kirk put the mission at risk at all. Except for an embarrassing dinner that was meaningless he made all the right calls after the Q1 was attacked (which was out of his control). He surrenders instead of fighting. What else should he have done?
So...he has to become an outlaw to be decisive again? At the end of II, an ending ruined by Kirk missing Spock, he had the wind back in his sails. He felt young. He learned to embrace his life instead of being miserable. He learned all of this from David, from Saavik, and yes, by losing Spock. Leave him dead and have Kirk return to be Captain of a ship. But that's not the III we got and the outcome makes him extremely arrogant from that point on.
I wouldn't have brought Spock back. I wouldn't have written III if I were in charge of this. However, considering that all of III and IV are written and I have a chance to re-write the scene, I lop off his head. Star Trek has become "if our 7 crewmembers are on the bridge of the Enterprise, it's a good movie." This is where that started.
Take this from the Klingon point-of-view. You disapprove of the Chancellor's dealings. Remember, Klingons kill weak leaders. You have a chance to challenge Kirk and lop off the head of the Government making yourself in-charge. Why did Spock possibly need him, especially if he didn't believe in the mission. You seem to be arguing the points of the movie, I am looking at whether they should've done it and does it make logical sense. Are they worrying about dying?
When was the last time James Kirk did something he didn't feel like doing? He goes by the seat of his pants. If Spock learns that he's not thrilled with the mission, he won't be Kirk on the mission, just a figure-head (if you accept the crazy logic of VI), then why would he endanger the mission by not putting someone who believes in peace in the fray? 99% of Starfleet feels the way Kirk does. This is a tenative peace, a fragile affair. Spock opened the door and let a bull in the china shop. That's how he put the mission in danger.
I'm not following your arguments because I don't understand Kirk was arrogant or endangered the Kitohmer mission. You haven't really explained either of those. Especially since you said 99% of fleet captains would be no different than Kirk.
Why an outlaw Kirk? I don't know. Why not? We've seen him every other way, but mostly as the good, if not rough around the edges, soldier. This is a new facet of Kirk and it shows what he;s willing to do for friendship. I don't see where arrogance shows up here. Just fierce loyalty. You need to give me some examples.
