Unresolved Trek trailer questions

[Batnam]

This is about 15 miles north of me in a town called Buffalo, Ia. The town James T. Kirk is born in (Riverside, Ia) is about 25 miles west of me. I live in Muscatine, Ia. This quarry is a lot deeper in person and has a striking resemblance to the one in the trailer. Food for thought

 

[Batnam]

^ what do you sy about that!?

 

[Mogh]

that the central plank of Star Trek, a message of optimism and humanity carried by protagonists who are a better breed of human being.

In short, no matter what revisions are made to the rest of it, I hope Star Trek doesn't lose it's soul. It'll be interesting to see if we hear anything else before the movie premieres that clues us in to whether the franchise is safe in the hands of its new masters.

TOS was never about a "better breed of human beings". That's a Modern Trek concept - and a poor one, just like the idea that Vulcans have "evolved" structures that suppress their emotions rather than exerting emotional control through personal effort. TOS was about human beings who, through great struggle and effort, most of the time manage to overcome their baser instincts.

"Yes, we are savages. But I'm not going to kill today." - James T. Kirk

Indeed. GR's reboot in '87 has taken hold firmly in most people's minds.

I don't accept that premise, nor do I see a conflict between the two. TOS presented human who were free of prejudice; they were blind to skin colour and gender; they had surpassed greed and petty envy; and they put the cause before their own lives.

You've only to look at the way that references to the 20th century or to past Earth warfare are laced with adjectives such as "primitive" to see that GR clearly intended these humans to be a better breed. The fact that by today's measures their attitudes to racism, war and greed are somewhat more commonplace shouldn't take away from the fact that in sixties, they were ahead of their time and clearly intended to be so.

It's not a huge surprise that GR would try to move 24th century humans even further down that path (perhaps too far?). However, watching TOS it's hard to deny that in the context of the era in which it aired, it was clearly meant to show a better type of humanity than the audience's contemporaries.

 

[RoJoHen]

^ what do you sy about that!?

I say you just double posted for no apparent reason.

 

[M'Sharak]

Well, well, if it ain't God himself.

Pretty poor excuse for a supreme being at your service

Heya, Supreme Being.

Another silly question: After seeing the trailer, I watched the DS9 ep in which Worf killed Gowron and noticed Gowron's boots, which reminded me of the robocop's boot seen in close-up in the trailer. I'm not going to search around for screencaps, but . . . ?

Gowron's boots? (I'll let someone else scrounge up the hoverbike guy's, for comparison.)

Kirk's uncle could have kept the car when they moved. Most families do, don't they?

Are you sure that the scenes of *young* Kirk (in the car) have structures like that? I don't think so.

They are there, look again...

I just watched the HD trailer again. Those structures only exist in the scenes with older Kirk on the motorcycle. They are NOT in the Iowa scenes at all (where he's in the car).

Do note the red circles...

Pwnt.

 

[steveman]

^



Yes, as I said, they're there Babaganoosh.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

TOS was never about a "better breed of human beings". That's a Modern Trek concept - and a poor one, just like the idea that Vulcans have "evolved" structures that suppress their emotions rather than exerting emotional control through personal effort. TOS was about human beings who, through great struggle and effort, most of the time manage to overcome their baser instincts.

"Yes, we are savages. But I'm not going to kill today." - James T. Kirk

Indeed. GR's reboot in '87 has taken hold firmly in most people's minds.

I don't accept that premise, nor do I see a conflict between the two. TOS presented human who were free of prejudice; they were blind to skin colour and gender; they had surpassed greed and petty envy; and they put the cause before their own lives.

You've only to look at the way that references to the 20th century or to past Earth warfare are laced with adjectives such as "primitive" to see that GR clearly intended these humans to be a better breed. The fact that by today's measures their attitudes to racism, war and greed are somewhat more commonplace shouldn't take away from the fact that in sixties, they were ahead of their time and clearly intended to be so.

It's not a huge surprise that GR would try to move 24th century humans even further down that path (perhaps too far?). However, watching TOS it's hard to deny that in the context of the era in which it aired, it was clearly meant to show a better type of humanity than the audience's contemporaries.

While I'll agree that the intention was to show humans as beyond things like racism and sexism, I must point out that TOS in particular was rife with gender-based bias, and both TOS and TNG had an extremely colonial attitude toward civilizations with a level of technology that they took to be lower than their own. They also often had a snobby attitude toward the various god-like aliens they encountered. In other words, Humans were best and Vulcans were even better. Which was simply the expansion of the tribe. That is - it used to be that my tribe was my people and everyone else was other and enemy. Then it was my city-state is my tribe. In our time it is my nation is my tribe. By Trek's time, it is humanity is my tribe.

But Klingons (Romulans, Cardassians) are a naturally barbarous, warlike culture and we need to fight them.

Regardless, my point was that there came to be a prevalent belief in the TNG era that within Trek humans had actually evolved, not just culturally but fundamentally, into beings who were no longer capable of such flaws. In TOS it was abundantly clear that humans were beyond prejudice because of effort - individual, personalized effort every single day, and that everyone still had within them the potential to revert to the barbarian that lives inside each of our breasts. I find nothing admirable in people who are free from prejudice because it has been bred out of them (I also think that's quite impossible), just like there's nothing intriguing about Vulcans who have evolved organs that suppress their emotion (which is truly biologically impossible). Where is heroism in being noble if you were simply born that way?

 

[T'Cal]

How did young James drop the convertible top on the Vette while driving it at 80+ MPH?? The pursuit starts out with the white convertible top up but soon the top is down, not something you can do in a mid 60s Vette.

He beamed it out.

All right. I accept that explanation.

Those structures are climate control towers. In the 23rd century they're in every country to control the weather.

But where is the trailer's music from? It sounds really familiar.

 

[Psion]

Those structures are climate control towers. In the 23rd century they're in every country to control the weather.

Wow. I like that explanation better than arcologies. Weather modification has been discussed in Trek a lot before, AND it's sort of topical as a Trek answer to Anthropogenic Global Warming.

 

[Data Holmes]

Those structures are climate control towers. In the 23rd century they're in every country to control the weather.

Wow. I like that explanation better than arcologies. Weather modification has been discussed in Trek a lot before, AND it's sort of topical as a Trek answer to Anthropogenic Global Warming.

How is that any better an explanation than arcologies, which are already in prelim development stages?

 

[Franklin]

Eh, just looks like really dry dirt to me. I'm from the midwest, and honestly, this could be one of several states.

Looks sandy to me. Midwest dirt tends to be more of a burnt brown... almost like a Wendy's frosty. Eastern dirt tends to have more rocks in it overall from the Appalachians. Southeastern tends to have that red clay color. South west tends to be more of a reddish brown. Rockies tends to be more of a gray color. West coast tends to look more sandy and almost a beige dusty color...

At least on TV and in movies...

Good Iowa dirt can be black as coal. But it's all shades from tan to black really. And it runs from sandy to clay, too.

If he was driving from Iowa to San Fransicso, he sure packed light. It's anywhere from a 1600 to 1900 mile drive from Iowa to SF.

Also, if the bar scene supposedly takes place in Iowa, the only logical reason for Sulu, Uhura, cadets, and Pike to be there is if Starfleet is doing something -- like building the Enterprise -- in the area. Either that, or talk about your out of the way places to go for happy hour. And fancy choosing a place where they meet Jim Kirk. Small world.

 

[Franklin]

Those structures are climate control towers. In the 23rd century they're in every country to control the weather.

Wow. I like that explanation better than arcologies. Weather modification has been discussed in Trek a lot before, AND it's sort of topical as a Trek answer to Anthropogenic Global Warming.

How is that any better an explanation than arcologies, which are already in prelim development stages?

Sorry for the double post.
Arcologies make sense in a way. But why in Iowa? Is land really that scarce in the 23rd century?
Could they be left over from an earlier period? If we meld Trek history, maybe they were some of the first structures built after people recovered from WWIII (TNG version). Many parts of the world may still have been uninhabitable at that point. In Kirk's time, maybe the world has been thoroughly detoxed, and with colonies all over the place, it's possible the arcologies are anachronistic to Kirk's time. Still used, though.

 

[Data Holmes]

Wow. I like that explanation better than arcologies. Weather modification has been discussed in Trek a lot before, AND it's sort of topical as a Trek answer to Anthropogenic Global Warming.

How is that any better an explanation than arcologies, which are already in prelim development stages?

Sorry for the double post.
Arcologies make sense in a way. But why in Iowa? Is land really that scarce in the 23rd century?
Could they be left over from an earlier period? If we meld Trek history, maybe they were some of the first structures built after people recovered from WWIII (TNG version). Many parts of the world may still have been uninhabitable at that point. In Kirk's time, maybe the world has been thoroughly detoxed, and with colonies all over the place, it's possible the arcologies are anachronistic to Kirk's time. Still used, though.

Well, there are two areas where the arcologies are going under planning and development, and that is in Japan and the american south west...

Japan is because of space constraints, but the problem is it's hard to get past design phase because of geological concerns.

The american south west because it's the home of the guy who developed the idea, and also because the land is cheap and there is plenty of open space.


I think the american midwest would be perfect for such developments, it's close to the farms thus cutting down on transportation of those goods, and it's geologically stable, flat, and relatively easy to dig down to bed rock... also, it's far from the current urban/suburban spans of the few megalopolises that already exist, which is good because of the space needed to set them up and also because of the price of land in those areas.

 

[JoeD80]

just like there's nothing intriguing about Vulcans who have evolved organs that suppress their emotion (which is truly biologically impossible).

How would you know what was biologically possible for a race that evolved on another planet?

 

[Mr_Splotch]

Is it the shoes?

​

 

[Lapis Exilis]

just like there's nothing intriguing about Vulcans who have evolved organs that suppress their emotion (which is truly biologically impossible).

How would you know what was biologically possible for a race that evolved on another planet?

Because evolution is a fundamental biological law no matter where you are in the universe. It was a stated part of Vulcan history in TOS that they have emotions and their emotional nature caused problem in their past, so they chose to suppress their emotions. Then in VOY we've got the EMH talking about Tuvok's organs of emotion suppression. Organic structures do not develop in response to cultural priorities. It is a common misconception about evolution that because an animal does or does not use a body part, that body part changes. Vulcans developing organs to suppress their emotions would be like giraffes developing long necks because they stretched to reach higher leaves and then passed their stretched necks on to their offspring, which is the exact opposite of how natural selection actually works.

 

[Jimmy_C]

just like there's nothing intriguing about Vulcans who have evolved organs that suppress their emotion (which is truly biologically impossible).

How would you know what was biologically possible for a race that evolved on another planet?

Because evolution is a fundamental biological law no matter where you are in the universe. It was a stated part of Vulcan history in TOS that they have emotions and their emotional nature caused problem in their past, so they chose to suppress their emotions. Then in VOY we've got the EMH talking about Tuvok's organs of emotion suppression. Organic structures do not develop in response to cultural priorities. It is a common misconception about evolution that because an animal does or does not use a body part, that body part changes. Vulcans developing organs to suppress their emotions would be like giraffes developing long necks because they stretched to reach higher leaves and then passed their stretched necks on to their offspring, which is the exact opposite of how natural selection actually works.

Humans have a section of the brain that allows us to suppress emotions too call the orbitofrontal cortex. It allows us to interact socially. It is conceivable that the Vulcans have evolved with a super-enhanced version of it. This gives them the option to suppress all emotion instead of just some emotion.

 

[Psion]

How is that any better an explanation than arcologies, which are already in prelim development stages?

Sorry for the double post.
Arcologies make sense in a way. But why in Iowa? Is land really that scarce in the 23rd century?
Could they be left over from an earlier period? If we meld Trek history, maybe they were some of the first structures built after people recovered from WWIII (TNG version). Many parts of the world may still have been uninhabitable at that point. In Kirk's time, maybe the world has been thoroughly detoxed, and with colonies all over the place, it's possible the arcologies are anachronistic to Kirk's time. Still used, though.

Well, there are two areas where the arcologies are going under planning and development, and that is in Japan and the american south west...

Japan is because of space constraints, but the problem is it's hard to get past design phase because of geological concerns.

The american south west because it's the home of the guy who developed the idea, and also because the land is cheap and there is plenty of open space.


I think the american midwest would be perfect for such developments, it's close to the farms thus cutting down on transportation of those goods, and it's geologically stable, flat, and relatively easy to dig down to bed rock... also, it's far from the current urban/suburban spans of the few megalopolises that already exist, which is good because of the space needed to set them up and also because of the price of land in those areas.

Don't get me wrong, 'Holmes, I was one of, if not the first to suggest arcologies around here. But there are so many of them seen on the horizon shots. Usually arcologies are proposed in SF literature as single, monolithic replacements for cities. One, maybe two goes up in every big city. But these things seem to be everywhere.

On the other hand, global warming is a big issue right now, and whether you or I believe the IPCC or not, a lot of people in Hollywood do, and these could be their interpretations of something to tackle that problem: enormous weather stations intended to cool the atmosphere/sequest CO2/print carbon credits.

It's actually kind of cool.

The one thing I don't like about arcologies in Star Trek brings me back to Gene Roddenberry. in his original vision, terrestrial cities extended underground and much of the surface was reclaimed for agriculture or simple wilderness. Arcologies are cool SF gimmicks, but they aren't a Star Trek gimmick. Although it's not anything I'd likely lose sleep over.

Unlike starships launching from the ground.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

Humans have a section of the brain that allows us to suppress emotions too call the orbitofrontal cortex. It allows us to interact socially. It is conceivable that the Vulcans have evolved with a super-enhanced version of it. This gives them the option to suppress all emotion instead of just some emotion.

The orbitofrontal cortex is a poorly understood part of the human brain, but research does not show that it "suppresses emotions". It does seem to be involved in how emotion influences decision making and to have something to do with impulse control and control of mood, but that is not the same thing as suppressing emotions.

Regardless, what I am saying is that it is impossible for any biological structure to evolve in response to a cultural choice. Unless someone wants to argue that Vulcans engaged in a controlled breeding program or genetically engineered such an organ, it is entirely impossible for it to have evolved naturally because they decided they wanted a culture ruled by logic rather than emotion.

 

[Python Trek]

The cornrows in Iowa channel the hyperforce that Doctor Spock uses to levitate the Enterprise.

Best non sequitor post evah, baby!