What Amazes Me

[OneBuckFilms]

how did Kirk Chris Pine's not show any compassion in what way did he not care

Well, after the destruction of Vulcan, Kirk showed little to no sympathy or compassion towards Spock. Bob Orci actually said that the reason Kirk doesn't do that is because he knows Spock has no emotions..

I'm not familiar with where Orci actually said this, but I believe Kirk's reaction was to try and get the Enterprise to go after Nero before he does the same thing to another planet.

Spock and Kirk came to blows on how to address the issues at hand, and that has nothing to do with sympathy, simply immediate priorities.

Really? You call that shocked look and aimless wandering on the Transporter pad after Spock witnessed his mother die isn't a sign of emotion? Especially when the father, who is standing right there looking like a statue in comparison? I do love writers who give characters excuses to be jerks.

Again, not sure where your Orci quote is from, but there are REASONS Kirk is doing what he's doing.

And it's made only worse when Kirk later yells at Spock in front of the entire crew and starts a fight everyone around him with the intent of taking Spock down.

NOTE: At the advice of... SPOCK !!!!!

Now, also bear in mind, that he is acutely aware that HIS home planet, Earth, is likely to be next.

If my home were going to be blown to bits, along with everyone and everything I know and love, do you think I'd give an Airbourne Copulation about the feelings of someone who's decisions are preventing me from doing something about it?

Again, it's not a loack of compassion, but a need to try and save a LOT of lives, and prevent the same thing happening to HIS HOME PLANET !!!

And of course we have Kirk doing it yet again in order to take command away from Spock. And even after Spock decides to work with Kirk, Kirk doesn't offer any sort of apology or explanation behind his actions. He just mockingly smacks him on the shoulder as if to say the jokes on him (why else do you think the audience laughs?). Way to treat the guy who just lost his mother, his home planet and pretty much his entire race a**hole.

The explanation is not actually needed for what he did, Spock understands fully the OBVIOUS reasons.

 

[Devon]

If you're only discussing the parts before the Pike rescue attempt. After that, you really can't say that fairly.

Which is why I say "And faster than you can say warp speed, they're absolutely fine with each other."

Then you should clarify with something like:

At first, the only interaction I get between Kirk and Spock is nothing but mean-spirited conflict. That's all it is.

 

[Jeyl]

Again, it's not a loack of compassion, but a need to try and save a LOT of lives, and prevent the same thing happening to HIS HOME PLANET !!!

.

Of course, which is why when Kirk is abandoned on Delta Vega, he spends all his time whining about Spock violating protocols when he abandoned him there alone, and not trying to justify what he did that got him stranded there in the first place. And he's recording this! The man who wants to save a LOT of lives and prevent the destruction of HIS HOME PLANET, and all he wants to do is record his bit**ing about Spock. I'm still not convinced.

 

[BurntSynapse]

how did Kirk Chris Pine's not show any compassion in what way did he not care

Well, after the destruction of Vulcan, Kirk showed little to no sympathy or compassion towards Spock. Bob Orci actually said that the reason Kirk doesn't do that is because he knows Spock has no emotions..

I'm not familiar with where Orci actually said this, but I believe Kirk's reaction was to try and get the Enterprise to go after Nero before he does the same thing to another planet.

Kirk's motivation is not really at issue, I think everyone agrees stopping Nero was clearly his goal. The huge problem with this plot element, like so many others but especially like Kirk's earlier insubordination/disorderly conduct, the WAY he proposes to stop Nero makes no sense whatsoever - in science and philosophy we might call his position "not even wrong" because he has no plan. He offers no plausible option for attacking Nero solo, seems to have no understanding of the level of his own ignorance regarding his opponents, has no reasonable justification for rejecting Spock's plan, he cannot justify abandoning to even warn the fleet, the list of guidelines for good military and intelligence doctrines which he violates seems rather substantial. Tremendous contortions are needed to avoid the obvious conclusion that the writing was below minimal acceptable standards, IMO.

And it's made only worse when Kirk later yells at Spock in front of the entire crew and starts a fight everyone around him with the intent of taking Spock down.

NOTE: At the advice of... SPOCK !!!!!

Again, no one disputes Spock Prime's advice to Kirk that he reveal young Spock's emotion, it was that Kirk chose violence as the acceptable means to accomplish this goal.

In this discussion, no one is challenging the outlandish, unsupportable claim by Prime Spock that Nero can be stopped and the galaxy saved if, and only if Kirk's butt is parked on the E's captain chair. The entire film reeks of religious "chosen people" ordained by God, Destiny, and the Universe (r)

If my home were going to be blown to bits, along with everyone and everything I know and love, do you think I'd give an Airbourne Copulation about the feelings of someone who's decisions are preventing me from doing something about it?

His regard for other's "feelings" are not being questioned either, AFAICT.

Again, it's not a loack of compassion, but a need to try and save a LOT of lives, and prevent the same thing happening to HIS HOME PLANET !!!

Saving Earth and possibly other Federation worlds is Alt Spock's goal also.

And of course we have Kirk doing it yet again in order to take command away from Spock. And even after Spock decides to work with Kirk, Kirk doesn't offer any sort of apology or explanation behind his actions. He just mockingly smacks him on the shoulder as if to say the jokes on him (why else do you think the audience laughs?). Way to treat the guy who just lost his mother, his home planet and pretty much his entire race a**hole.

The idea that a commander must RESIGN his entire command if emotionally compromised at ANY point in ANY mission is a ludicrous plot sham. No organization of biological creatures could function this way unless everyone in command of every team followed something like Vulcan emotional control perfectly nearly every time.

Also, using this plot device is inconsistent since Kirk has demonstrated even greater emotional compromise on the mission by getting into more fights, having greater violations of protocols, insubordination and refusing to obey a host of lawful orders.

 

[Shazam!]

The idea that a commander must RESIGN his entire command if emotionally compromised at ANY point in ANY mission is a ludicrous plot sham.

Yeah, they could've given McCoy something to do by having him relieve Spock of command.

 

[RookieBatman]

Again, no one disputes Spock Prime's advice to Kirk that he reveal young Spock's emotion, it was that Kirk chose violence as the acceptable means to accomplish this goal.

In this discussion, no one is challenging the outlandish, unsupportable claim by Prime Spock that Nero can be stopped and the galaxy saved if, and only if Kirk's butt is parked on the E's captain chair. The entire film reeks of religious "chosen people" ordained by God, Destiny, and the Universe (r)

God, Time, Fate or Whatever, as Captain Archer might've put it.

You do raise an interesting point, though. Spock Prime believed that Kirk was the one that needed to be in the Captain's Chair to save the universe, which seems perfectly reasonable, it was to me as I was watching the movie, and right up until I read your post. But you got me thinking... wouldn't Spock have realized that because the timeline was diverted with the Kelvin incident, that this Kirk would have a different set of abilities, strengths and weaknesses than what Kirk Prime had, and may not actually be the best person for the job? I don't know, just pondering aloud.

On this whole general subject of Kirk's alleged bad attitude, it would be interesting to take a poll to see whether most people who didn't like the movie thought Kirk was a jerk, and it's corollary, whether most people who liked the movie didn't notice any problems with his behavior.
Of course, it wouldn't prove anything, because it would create and chicken-and-the-egg problem. Do people think Kirk was a jerk* because they already were against the movie, or did their opinion of Kirk cause them to enjoy it less? There's really no way to test that, as far as I can see.
This, by coincidence, brings us back to the main theme of the thread!

[*Sidebar: it bothers me that those two words rhyme (even though this is written, I know I'm crazy), but I don't want to use anything more caustic.]

 

[BurntSynapse]

But you got me thinking... wouldn't Spock have realized that because the timeline was diverted with the Kelvin incident, that this Kirk would have a different set of abilities, strengths and weaknesses than what Kirk Prime had, and may not actually be the best person for the job? I don't know, just pondering aloud.

Exactly. Because of a pressing root canal appt., I didn't have time to raise that issue this AM, but this was a "fridge moment", not something I noticed while watching the film. Almost every minute of the film has multiple errors of varying degrees, but those that got my attention were when I was trying to put myself "in" the film, identify with the characters, and imagine what I would be doing or thinking if I were in Iowa, the Bridge, the Narada, Vulcan, Delta Vega, etc.

On this whole general subject of Kirk's alleged bad attitude, it would be interesting to take a poll to see whether most people who didn't like the movie thought Kirk was a jerk, and it's corollary, whether most people who liked the movie didn't notice any problems with his behavior.

How would you classify a person like me who liked AND hated the film?

Do people think Kirk was a jerk* because they already were against the movie,

Not in my case, I really wanted to see a great ST film.

did their opinion of Kirk cause them to enjoy it less?

I didn't feel like I got any information on Kirk as a person. As he was being born, every time they cut to George doing nothing on the Kelvin bridge, I was yelling at the screen: "Time to leave!"...in other words, I was raising my voice a lot, over and over. Then we see Kirk as a criminal delinquent saved by bad stunt effects at the cliff, then as a drunk who picks fights, then a frat-boy cadet who never cracks a book and can't think straight in the Academy hearing. On and on this went...until I was thinking more about the reprehensible film makers who ruined my big movie night rather than the nuTrek storyline I'd signed up for.

Feel free to count me as your first respondent in the unscientific, statistically insignificant viewer sample.

 

[RookieBatman]

On this whole general subject of Kirk's alleged bad attitude, it would be interesting to take a poll to see whether most people who didn't like the movie thought Kirk was a jerk, and it's corollary, whether most people who liked the movie didn't notice any problems with his behavior.

How would you classify a person like me who liked AND hated the film?

Well, not trying to put words in your mouth, but it seems like the parts you disliked were the story, the characters, etc., and the parts you liked were more ancilary things like visual effects, costumes, etc. I would say that that's indicative of an overall dislike. If you didn't like the story, you didn't like the movie, IMHO.

Do people think Kirk was a jerk because they already were against the movie,

Not in my case, I really wanted to see a great ST film.

Oh, I agree completely, it's just that if a poll indicated that most people who disliked the movie also thought that Kirk was an idiot, there would be no scientifically provable way to determine which one caused the other. We can hypothesize that maybe hating Kirk's attitude was part of what turned some people off of the movie, but it's still only subjective (as with all matters of taste and opinion).

Feel free to count me as your first respondent in the unscientific, statistically insignificant viewer sample.

I'm already making broad, over-generalized assumptions even as we speak! I'd say the poll is already a success!

 

[Jeyl]

Do people think Kirk was a jerk* because they already were against the movie, or did their opinion of Kirk cause them to enjoy it less? There's really no way to test that, as far as I can see.

Sure there is. Here I am!

It's definitely the the second one for me. Star Trek 09 was my number one "must see" movie of 2009. It was new talent both in front and behind the camera, there was great potential in everyone involved and I had high hopes that they could move Star Trek in a new direction. I wasn't clamoring onto the delusional curtain hoping that it would recapture the original series, because I know that would not only be impossible, but it would be a disservice to the things that changed in Star Trek over the years. I mean, who would want to go back to the predominately male driven crew who do everything while the women wear short skirts and stand in the background checking calls? Ooooh dear.

I wasn't asking for the world when I was hoping they'd make Kirk at least a likable fella. But what was the point of the crashing the car scene? Why introduce him as a rebel? What does that add to his character? Nothing about this scene is mentioned, looked back on or even brought up later in the film, but we just have to have Kirk do something stupid in a vein attempt to get me to like him.

Cop: Citizen, what is your name?
Kirk: I'm a person, and my name is Anakin!

I heard it with my own bleeding ears. I swear to god.

And let's not forget Kirk's behavior. Oh, he's a hero and a half in this reality. Hitting on anything that's female, picking fights and harassing women (If he expresses enjoyment, it's no longer accidental)? Surely this is what Starfleet needs! What's really confusing is that after all that, Uhura seems to be happy with Kirk being around. Why? Didn't he just ruin your fun night with your friends (All those drinks couldn't have been just for her), get you into the middle of a bar fight and grope you?

I'm sure he'll get better as years pass by. Oh, look! He's sneaking into a girl's dorm and having sex with an Orion girl. Can this get any better? Oh! Uhura just walks right in and starts taking off her clothes while Kirk watches unnoticed. What's sad about this sequence is that this is Uhura's only sole contribution to anything important in this movie's plot. The Klingon Transmission. Unfortunately this very important contribution wasn't important enough to, you know, actually show it but instead only talk about it while we have a fan service moment that I sure as heck did not ask for. I'm sure the writers tried to give Uhura a more meaningful role in this movie compared to the original series, but I don't think having her strip while she talks about stuff is the right direction.

And of course the cheating. While not canon, I have read some books and played a lot of games, and every single one that features Kirk winning the "no-win" scenario always leads to the same conclusion. But here's the fun part. In the game Starfleet Academy, your character has three options in how to cheat in the simulation. if you pick the route that NuKirk went with, YOU WILL LOSE. Yes, making the klingons easier to kill is the losing cheat code. Trek09 was out-written by an FMV game. Of course, many will say that none of that matters because he still cheated, but I would say that judging it merely by it's resolution misses the point. It's not about the resolution, it's about the character. And what the classic Kirk did to beat the no-win scenario is a far more respectable one than what we got in Trek09. I mean, seriously. Kirk doesn't do anything, the simulator goes down, the klingons are now 'one-shot' kills and the instructors think this is a legitimate win?

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Again, no one disputes Spock Prime's advice to Kirk that he reveal young Spock's emotion, it was that Kirk chose violence as the acceptable means to accomplish this goal.

In this discussion, no one is challenging the outlandish, unsupportable claim by Prime Spock that Nero can be stopped and the galaxy saved if, and only if Kirk's butt is parked on the E's captain chair. The entire film reeks of religious "chosen people" ordained by God, Destiny, and the Universe (r)

God, Time, Fate or Whatever, as Captain Archer might've put it.

You do raise an interesting point, though. Spock Prime believed that Kirk was the one that needed to be in the Captain's Chair to save the universe, which seems perfectly reasonable, it was to me as I was watching the movie, and right up until I read your post. But you got me thinking... wouldn't Spock have realized that because the timeline was diverted with the Kelvin incident, that this Kirk would have a different set of abilities, strengths and weaknesses than what Kirk Prime had, and may not actually be the best person for the job? I don't know, just pondering aloud.

On this whole general subject of Kirk's alleged bad attitude, it would be interesting to take a poll to see whether most people who didn't like the movie thought Kirk was a jerk, and it's corollary, whether most people who liked the movie didn't notice any problems with his behavior.
Of course, it wouldn't prove anything, because it would create and chicken-and-the-egg problem. Do people think Kirk was a jerk* because they already were against the movie, or did their opinion of Kirk cause them to enjoy it less? There's really no way to test that, as far as I can see.
This, by coincidence, brings us back to the main theme of the thread!

[*Sidebar: it bothers me that those two words rhyme (even though this is written, I know I'm crazy), but I don't want to use anything more caustic.]

Spock stated to his younger senf that it was an act of faith.

In an alternate reality, Kirk is presumably still Kirk, and perhaps one of the few things Spock had any reason TO rely on.

He also wanted to set right what he could, and Kirk being captain of the Enterprise was something he could help fix.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Again, it's not a loack of compassion, but a need to try and save a LOT of lives, and prevent the same thing happening to HIS HOME PLANET !!!

.

Of course, which is why when Kirk is abandoned on Delta Vega, he spends all his time whining about Spock violating protocols when he abandoned him there alone, and not trying to justify what he did that got him stranded there in the first place. And he's recording this! The man who wants to save a LOT of lives and prevent the destruction of HIS HOME PLANET, and all he wants to do is record his bit**ing about Spock. I'm still not convinced.

Someone sends me onto a planet, I'd be p!ssing and moaning too.

Kirk got thrown off the ship for trying to save his home planet, and vented when he was kicked off the ship.

In that case, I'd actually say that Spock, for understandable reasons, was actually beeing the A$$hole here.

When people are upset, they vent, and often about something that immediately happened.

The more in depth reasons are something that might crop up when the venting is over.

 

[Jeyl]

Someone sends me onto a planet, I'd be p!ssing and moaning too.

Yes, heroic qualities indeed. I want a hero who sets aside depth and reasoning and instead just spends their entire time recording their whines and moans. This is not a character I want to follow. At all.

In that case, I'd actually say that Spock, for understandable reasons, was actually beeing the A$$hole here.

Oh ya. The person who was keeping his cool, understanding what the threat was, where it possibly came from and what their odds against it were, he was totally on the same field as Kirk who wouldn't have any of what he said.

Plus Spock wasn't the one shouting his mouth off and assaulting two federation officers with the intent to harm a superior officer. Do you have any idea what kind of trouble a person would be in if they did what Kirk did in any military, business or even school system? This attempt at adding realism in Trek sucks.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Someone sends me onto a planet, I'd be p!ssing and moaning too.

Yes, heroic qualities indeed. I want a hero who sets aside depth and reasoning and instead just spends their entire time recording their whines and moans. This is not a character I want to follow. At all.

In that case, I'd actually say that Spock, for understandable reasons, was actually beeing the A$$hole here.

Oh ya. The person who was keeping his cool, understanding what the threat was, where it possibly came from and what their odds against it were, he was totally on the same field as Kirk who wouldn't have any of what he said.

Plus Spock wasn't the one shouting his mouth off and assaulting two federation officers with the intent to harm a superior officer. Do you have any idea what kind of trouble a person would be in if they did what Kirk did in any military, business or even school system? This attempt at adding realism in Trek sucks.

Well in Starfleet, the price was being kicked off the ship.

And I for one don't believe in a flawless hero, and I don't think he's an a-hole simply because he gets peeved.

To have no animosity against Spock, or not react with frustration, would unrealistic and absurd.

 

[Withers]

To have no animosity ... or not react with frustration, would unrealistic and absurd.

That'd be TOS, a large cross section of TNG, and Voyager.

-Withers-​

 

[Jeyl]

And I for one don't believe in a flawless hero,

Funny that you would mention that. What flaws did NuKirk have in this film that he had to overcome in order to achieve his goal? As you keep pointing out, Kirk was always in the right. Was it his inability to cope with Spock? I don't think so because he didn't do anything in that department, Spock did. Unless you were to say that shooting bad guys with Spock did all the relationship building, I really don't think there was much going on between these two characters to warrant a complete turn around in what they thought of one another. It's all too convenient and it lacks character.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

And I for one don't believe in a flawless hero,

Funny that you would mention that. What flaws did NuKirk have in this film that he had to overcome in order to achieve his goal? As you keep pointing out, Kirk was always in the right. Was it his inability to cope with Spock? I don't think so because he didn't do anything in that department, Spock did. Unless you were to say that shooting bad guys with Spock did all the relationship building, I really don't think there was much going on between these two characters to warrant a complete turn around in what they thought of one another. It's all too convenient and it lacks character.

Spock coming to the Bridge and deciding to offer to help out added to the friendship.

Spock Prime advising Kirk on Delta Vega about the need to provoke younger Spock probably added to Kirk's understanding of Spock.

Spock observed how often Kirk was right on some things, and probably gained respect there.

So that's where some development came from.

Kirk, essentially, has to fight to gain respect from his crewmates, and eventual crew.

He also had to deal with his own past, in facing Nero etc.

So yes, there is some character development there.

As for the Flawed Hero; remember the barfight? Remember his reaction on the Bridge that got him thrown off? His cheating on the Kobayashi Maru?

Those are all character flaws. What I was RESPONDING to was the idea that Kirk was an A-HOLE, remember?

Or has that entire concept skipped your mind for the easier straw-man of me somehow making him perfect?

No, he's human, and like most, tries his flawed best.

 

[Jeyl]

Kirk, essentially, has to fight to gain respect from his crewmates,

I would argue that Kirks actions contradict your statement since he outright assaulted his fellow crewmates who were just following orders. How the heck do you gain respect by doing that? And who in their right mind would follow Kirk after he takes command from Spock by racially insulting and provoking him into fighting so he could take command? Not everyone got the memo why Kirk was doing this. To everyone else, Kirk was doing the exact same thing he did that got him jettisoned. Does he try to explain his actions? No. Does he take anything of what he said to Spock back? No. He does nothing and that makes him an a**hole.

 

[Jeyl]

As for the Flawed Hero; remember the barfight? Remember his reaction on the Bridge that got him thrown off? His cheating on the Kobayashi Maru?

Ya, I remember the barfight and his reaction on the bridge, but that's not a flaw that he over comes because he does the exact same thing. Only this time he gets away with it.

And why bother mentioning his cheating the Kobayashi Maru as a flaw? Wasn't that treated as an essential trait to his character rather than a flaw like it was portrayed in The Wrath of Khan?

Kirk: Going back in time, changing things? That's cheating.
Spock: A trick I learned from a friend.

Ya, the writers weren't treating Kirk's cheating the Kobayashi Maru as a flaw, they were glorifying it.

On a related note, that's the stupidest exchange in the whole movie. Spock didn't change crap. Everything that has happened in the past 25 years was thanks to Nero, and everything that happened after Spock's arrival was out of Spock's control. "You went back in time. Changed all our lives!" Hey idiot, it wasn't him. He just got there!

 

[OneBuckFilms]

Kirk, essentially, has to fight to gain respect from his crewmates,

I would argue that Kirks actions contradict your statement since he outright assaulted his fellow crewmates who were just following orders. How the heck to you gain respect by doing that? And who in their right mind would follow Kirk after he takes command from Spock by racially insulting and provoking him into fighting so he could take command? Not everyone got the memo why Kirk was doing this. To everyone else, Kirk was doing the exact same thing he did that got him jettisoned. Does he try to explain his actions? No. Does he take anything of what he said to Spock back? No. He does nothing and that makes him an a**hole.

First, you are talking about ONE action, not the SUM of his actions.

Second, by the end of the movie, he had led everyone on a successful mission. No respect there?

Third, his lack of apology? BOTH should have apologized technically, but it seemed unnecessary as we saw them both meet each other halfway in a sense.

Kirk, for instance, didn't want Spock to join him on the Narada initially due to how dangerous it was, then Spock and him obviously came to an understanding by the time they beamed over to the Narada.

A lack of an apology when NEITHER PARTY DEMANDED ONE, OR SAW IT NECESSARY, does not make him an A-hole.

 

[OneBuckFilms]

As for the Flawed Hero; remember the barfight? Remember his reaction on the Bridge that got him thrown off? His cheating on the Kobayashi Maru?

Ya, I remember the barfight and his reaction on the bridge, but that's not a flaw that he over comes because he does the exact same thing. Only this time he gets away with it.

And why bother mentioning his cheating the Kobayashi Maru as a flaw? Wasn't that treated as an essential trait to his character rather than a flaw like it was portrayed in The Wrath of Khan?

Kirk: Going back in time, changing things? That's cheating.
Spock: A trick I learned from a friend.

Ya, the writers weren't treating Kirk's cheating the Kobayashi Maru as a flaw, they were glorifying it.

On a related note, that's the stupidest exchange in the whole movie. Spock didn't change crap. Everything that has happened in the past 25 years was thanks to Nero, and everything that happened after Spock's arrival was out of Spock's control. "You went back in time. Changed all our lives!" Hey idiot, it wasn't him. He just got there!

He cheated: flaw. AND character trait.

Spock's response was an "I know, but it works out" reaction.

As for the coming back in time changed all our lives statement, that was a 4th wall statement that hilighted the effects of BOTH of their Time Travel.