What was happening in the Laurentian System?

[Timo]

He could accomplish a great deal. He can easily overwhelm any Starfleet vessel

But he cannot;

He did. Which led to a lot of 09 threads about how the hell a mining ship could be that tough. I am sure you remember them.

He did, but he also did not, and that's the big mystery here. In the fight against the Kelvin, Nero was the complete underdog: even during the first fight that forced Robau to parley, the Starfleet ship lost weapons and then immediately restored them; she was ready for a rematch right after Robau was killed (Ael: "I said SPARE him, Sir, SPARE him!"), and with 100% success rate shot down Nero's missiles threatening the evacuation shuttles. The Enterprise had no trouble dealing with Nero's firepower, either, shooting down Nero's "fire EVERYTHING!" - and Pike appeared perfectly willing to continue the fight over Vulcan already.

It seems that single starships can defeat Nero in battle even if somewhat surprised, but a fleet of them cannot. Which would be a massive plot hole if not for the fact that we never saw Nero defeat a fleet. We only saw an aftermath...

There is no reason to avenge himself upon either Spock or Vulcan. That was always a non-starter. It made no sense whatsoever.

But Nero doesn't need to ask you for permission. It's his madness to satisfy, and his ship to do it by. "Sense" is not a relevant plot element at all.

Repair would be a big problem. He is riding a mining ship, not a mobile dry dock and repair ship. Two very different things, and very different sets of equipment.

He's seen carrying a fleet of smaller ships inside the rig when Spock's vessel enters. Some sort of MRO capacity is clearly implied... Today's drilling rigs have plenty of tooling for repairs, too - in theory, even for massive switch-a-leg type operations in certain cases.

It ought to be very hard to fight well in that vast tub built for mining operations. He should not have fought so well.

He never fought well. He couldn't stop a starship after minutes upon minutes of trying. He couldn't shoot down Spock. He couldn't destroy the Enterprise in any of his attempts.

And the armament of the ship wasn't red matter.

he ship was armed with red matter, so her armament was red matter. Among other things.

He had a lot of missiles however.

Or mining charges, or whatever. These were easily shot down (the deciding factor probably being whether they were coming at you or at some third party) and failed to truly cripple any of the ships victimized.

It is a revolutionary and absolutely game changing occurrence. This would have been a major historical event at the time. I cant imagine a larger manhunt and search than there would have been for that ship.

I can't agree. Trek is full of much larger incidents, entire star systems dying, the whole universe threatening to blow up, even; these don't create massive counterreactions. Losing a single ship to a space monster sounds like Page 7 news; it's not even a monster capable of procreating, but just an individual starship.

This is something massive, and that they are looking for. Their sensor range is measured in light years. It's very hard to imagine a ship this massive staying anywhere near the location now known to Starfleet. Let alone going decades with no one ever picking it up anywhere. The comic answer is that the Klingons captured it. That is why it never shows up in the intervening years and why no one ever found it.

Having the Klingons capture it solves nothing. Why would it suddenly become invisible when moving across the Klingon border? At best, the issue would escalate into a diplomatic crisis about extraditing that vessel.

Apparently the whole galaxy was threatened by something that would have taken millions of years to slowly propagate through it.

Having Romulus die would certainly threaten the whole galaxy! It didn't take millions of years - it took minus 150 years for Vulcan to die. No doubt something larger would have been happening in the 24th century where the only Romulan fighting asset wouldn't be a civilian mining rig...

Have no fear though. The jellyfish can fly right through the planet shattering shock wave and "suck it back" to the point of origin. The actual shockwave will go backwards the way it came. Awesome!

We never saw anything like that happen. Spock deployed a droplet of the stuff at the wavefront, which achieved... Well, something. We weren't told what. We weren't shown what. We have no idea what happened afterwards, other than Spock stopped to catch his breath and was immediately drawn into a fight with Nero, and to the timehole he had created.

When Harve Bennett was asked what he thought of ST09 he said "they lost me when they put the grand canyon in Iowa". I don't take ST09 that seriously when it comes to geography, astronomy or stellar cartography.

I don't take Harve Bennett seriously.

(A big hole in Iowan turf is a must in story terms, mind you. After all, we see corresponding mounds aboveground a few years later: massive arcologies darkening the horizon. That material must have come from somewhere!)

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Commishsleer]

Maybe they mined dilithium crystals in a quarry in Iowa in the 22nd century.

Maybe a bomb hit Iowa in World War 3 and created a canyon.

 

[AirCommodore]

He did, but he also did not, and that's the big mystery here.

Well any ship carrying our hero is not going to be blown up. At least not while our hero was still on it. Even if the Kelvin fought the Death Star, it will not be destroyed before Baby James is safely off. But they shredded ships that did NOT have our hero on them. And at no time did the Narada seem an underdog against the Kelvin. On the contrary, the Kelvin was battered down easily, all hands abandoning ship and was left with only the option of ramming to help the escape of the survivors.

"Sense" is not a relevant plot element at all.

I couldn't agree more. Making sense was not an element for this plot!

He's seen carrying a fleet of smaller ships inside the rig when Spock's vessel enters. Some sort of MRO capacity is clearly implied... Today's drilling rigs have plenty of tooling for repairs, too - in theory, even for massive switch-a-leg type operations in certain cases.

They rely on outside help for major repairs. Sometimes from the same company that manufactured it. And for many other resupply and replenishment needs. None of which is available to the Narada.

He never fought well.

He fought very well. Shredding starships, beating them down. Now as for Spock and Kirk, Nero had the same problem the Emperor did when a "Legion of (his) best troops" suddenly developed serious aiming issues! Yeah, then they didnt do so well. But we know why. Does this create some contradictions or some potential plot or plausibility issues? Of course. This sort of thing always does no matter what show or movie it happens in, including ST and Star Wars.

he ship was armed with red matter, so her armament was red matter. Among other things.

That doesnt even make sense. She was armed with missles. It is not the case that if an Aircraft Carrier carries nukes therefore all the missiles and guns on the ship and its aircraft are therefore nukes. They had red matter aboard. That's all.

Or mining charges, or whatever.

Missiles. It doesnt matter what the payload is designed to do. And they were only stopped by the hero ship. Everyone else didnt do so well, including the Kelvin which was easily beaten. I think the Kelvin should made mincemeat out of this thing. But they didnt. They were beaten down with ease.

I can't agree. Trek is full of much larger incidents, entire star systems dying, the whole universe threatening to blow up, even; these don't create massive counterreactions. Losing a single ship to a space monster sounds like Page 7 news; it's not even a monster capable of procreating, but just an individual starship.

Over hundreds of years, many large scale events happen. And all were huge events at the time they happened. And this would be a tremendous event in Federation history at the time as well. A colossal 8,000 meter Romulan ship appears and easily pulverises a Federation starship. What could possibly be bigger news at the time?

Having the Klingons capture it solves nothing. Why would it suddenly become invisible when moving across the Klingon border? At best, the issue would escalate into a diplomatic crisis about extraditing that vessel.

Id sooner believe that the Klingons could get this thing over the border one time, than that it was invisible for 25 years.

Having Romulus die would certainly threaten the whole galaxy!

No it wouldnt. It wouldnt harm the Galaxy at all. Many civilizations in the Galaxy have never even heard of the Romulans. Apparently they wanted the warp speed supernova (and it must have been or there would have been many, many years to evacuate Romulus) to threaten the whole Galaxy to give more motivation for the Federation to want to stop it. Had they just said it was a trilithium warhead into the Romulan star, that wouldnt threaten anyone else.

We never saw anything like that happen. Spock deployed a droplet of the stuff at the wavefront, which achieved... Well, something. We weren't told what. We weren't shown what. We have no idea what happened afterwards, other than Spock stopped to catch his breath and was immediately drawn into a fight with Nero, and to the timehole he had created.

Well the whole thing is a mess. They wanted him to hate Spock, the Vulcans and the Federation. So they try to give him some motivation, even though it makes no sense. It's impossible to see how he would blame them for a Supernova, or for Spock failing to stop it. The trilithium attack makes alot of sense for blaming the Federation if it was made to appear that Section 31 had done it. There would have been no Spock mission to stop it however, as the whole thing would have been over in minutes. And having an animus toward Spock, for some unknown reason, was important to JJ and O&K.

As for what spock does, it's impossible to say. Releasing something at the wave front shouldnt have done anything at all. Suck back the shock wave? I dont get it. No one does. But this is O&K we are talking about here. The whole sequence of events is pure nonsense from the word go.

 

[Nerys Myk]

In any case, it's a great line and I used it for that reason. I don't understand the choice they made, actually. Beyond a desire to show a daredevil young Kirk, which could have been shown in many, many different ways. Why go to Vermont? I have no idea. Bakersfield CA was Iowa as well. The idea that the entire state of Iowa offers no location where someone could be a daredevil, so that you have to choose a cliff that doesn't exist there is not in any sense "understandable".

To see the film's plot, plausibility and cartographic errors you only have to watch the movie.

Locations are chosen for many reasons. Cost being a major one. Vermont might have offered the production a better price than Iowa.

Are you saying there are no rock quarries in Iowa that the quarry in Vermont could represent?

 

[anh165]

Or mining charges, or whatever. These were easily shot down (the deciding factor probably being whether they were coming at you or at some third party) and failed to truly cripple any of the ships victimized.

Hmm, I dunno. One missile struck the Enterprise when she got out of warp next to Vulcan and Sulu alerted Pike that their weapons are powerful and they cannot take another hit like that.

I could see where you are coming from if a ship/crew survives the initial exchange of fire, they would have learned that the missiles can actually be shot down with phaser fire such as what the Kelvin did in round 2, and what the Enterprise did when the Jellyfish ship was being pursued by the Narada.

 

[AirCommodore]

In any case, it's a great line and I used it for that reason. I don't understand the choice they made, actually. Beyond a desire to show a daredevil young Kirk, which could have been shown in many, many different ways. Why go to Vermont? I have no idea. Bakersfield CA was Iowa as well. The idea that the entire state of Iowa offers no location where someone could be a daredevil, so that you have to choose a cliff that doesn't exist there is not in any sense "understandable".

To see the film's plot, plausibility and cartographic errors you only have to watch the movie.

Locations are chosen for many reasons. Cost being a major one. Vermont might have offered the production a better price than Iowa.

Are you saying there are no rock quarries in Iowa that the quarry in Vermont could represent?

That's fine when they use a street or alleyway in Vancouver to represent a street or alley in NYC. Both cities have streets and alleys so if one stands in for the other, no one cares. It's not an issue. You're not creating anything that doesn't exist in NYC.

In ST09 the environs of Bakersfield are Iowa. They obviously wanted to show young, ne'er-do-well daredevil Kirk and the way they decided to do that was by having him drive a 20th century car over a cliff. That is certainly not the only way to show that, but ok. However, I am guessing that Bakersfield didn't have a suitable cliff, nor does Iowa, so they used this quarry in Vermont. The fact that no such thing exists in Iowa is not a problem for JJ and O&K. I doubt they care.

 

[Nerys Myk]

In any case, it's a great line and I used it for that reason. I don't understand the choice they made, actually. Beyond a desire to show a daredevil young Kirk, which could have been shown in many, many different ways. Why go to Vermont? I have no idea. Bakersfield CA was Iowa as well. The idea that the entire state of Iowa offers no location where someone could be a daredevil, so that you have to choose a cliff that doesn't exist there is not in any sense "understandable".

To see the film's plot, plausibility and cartographic errors you only have to watch the movie.

Locations are chosen for many reasons. Cost being a major one. Vermont might have offered the production a better price than Iowa.

Are you saying there are no rock quarries in Iowa that the quarry in Vermont could represent?

That's fine when they use a street or alleyway in Vancouver to represent a street or alley in NYC. Both cities have streets and alleys so if one stands in for the other, no one cares. It's not an issue. You're not creating anything that doesn't exist in NYC.

In ST09 the environs of Bakersfield are Iowa. They obviously wanted to show young, ne'er-do-well daredevil Kirk and the way they decided to do that was by having him drive a 20th century car over a cliff. That is certainly not the only way to show that, but ok. However, I am guessing that Bakersfield didn't have a suitable cliff, nor does Iowa, so they used this quarry in Vermont. The fact that no such thing exists in Iowa is not a problem for JJ and O&K. I doubt they care.

What doesn't exist in Iowa? Quarries? They have quarries in Iowa. So what does it matter if they used a quarry in Vermont to represent a quarry in Iowa? They aren't placing a quarry where none exists. Just using one that meets the budget and production needs.

In STIV they went to the Monterey Bay Aquarium to create the Cetacean Institute in Salsulito. Should they have uses an aquarium on San Francisco Bay instead?

 

[AirCommodore]

Locations are chosen for many reasons. Cost being a major one. Vermont might have offered the production a better price than Iowa.

Are you saying there are no rock quarries in Iowa that the quarry in Vermont could represent?

That's fine when they use a street or alleyway in Vancouver to represent a street or alley in NYC. Both cities have streets and alleys so if one stands in for the other, no one cares. It's not an issue. You're not creating anything that doesn't exist in NYC.

In ST09 the environs of Bakersfield are Iowa. They obviously wanted to show young, ne'er-do-well daredevil Kirk and the way they decided to do that was by having him drive a 20th century car over a cliff. That is certainly not the only way to show that, but ok. However, I am guessing that Bakersfield didn't have a suitable cliff, nor does Iowa, so they used this quarry in Vermont. The fact that no such thing exists in Iowa is not a problem for JJ and O&K. I doubt they care.

What doesn't exist in Iowa? Quarries? They have quarries in Iowa. So what does it matter if they used a quarry in Vermont to represent a quarry in Iowa? They aren't placing a quarry where none exists. Just using one that meets the budget and production needs.

In STIV they went to the Monterey Bay Aquarium to create the Cetacean Institute in Salsulito. Should they have uses an aquarium on San Francisco Bay instead?

No such cliff. And I don't think Iowa had anything to do with it. If a suitable cliff was available where they were in California, I am sure they would have used in. Or they could have easily created one digitally. Has it happens I think they just took the footage of Vermont and digitally added it into the CA footage. Not unlike adding Chicago's overground trains to the Manhattan landscape in Spider Man.

It's not a matter of switching one building for another. It's creating something that does not exist in Iowa when there was no reason in the world to do it. Nothing forced this choice. They just mixed and matched Western and Northeastern footage to meet story needs, without any regard for whether that represents Iowa.

 

[Nerys Myk]

That's fine when they use a street or alleyway in Vancouver to represent a street or alley in NYC. Both cities have streets and alleys so if one stands in for the other, no one cares. It's not an issue. You're not creating anything that doesn't exist in NYC.

In ST09 the environs of Bakersfield are Iowa. They obviously wanted to show young, ne'er-do-well daredevil Kirk and the way they decided to do that was by having him drive a 20th century car over a cliff. That is certainly not the only way to show that, but ok. However, I am guessing that Bakersfield didn't have a suitable cliff, nor does Iowa, so they used this quarry in Vermont. The fact that no such thing exists in Iowa is not a problem for JJ and O&K. I doubt they care.

What doesn't exist in Iowa? Quarries? They have quarries in Iowa. So what does it matter if they used a quarry in Vermont to represent a quarry in Iowa? They aren't placing a quarry where none exists. Just using one that meets the budget and production needs.

In STIV they went to the Monterey Bay Aquarium to create the Cetacean Institute in Salsulito. Should they have uses an aquarium on San Francisco Bay instead?

No such cliff. And I don't think Iowa had anything to do with it. If a suitable cliff was available where they were in California, I am sure they would have used in. Or they could have easily created one digitally. Has it happens I think they just took the footage of Vermont and digitally added it into the CA footage. Not unlike adding Chicago's overground trains to the Manhattan landscape in Spider Man.

It's not a matter of switching one building for another. It's creating something that does not exist in Iowa when there was no reason in the world to do it. Nothing forced this choice. They just mixed and matched Western and Northeastern footage to meet story needs, without any regard for whether that represents Iowa.

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

 

[AirCommodore]

What doesn't exist in Iowa? Quarries? They have quarries in Iowa. So what does it matter if they used a quarry in Vermont to represent a quarry in Iowa? They aren't placing a quarry where none exists. Just using one that meets the budget and production needs.

In STIV they went to the Monterey Bay Aquarium to create the Cetacean Institute in Salsulito. Should they have uses an aquarium on San Francisco Bay instead?

No such cliff. And I don't think Iowa had anything to do with it. If a suitable cliff was available where they were in California, I am sure they would have used in. Or they could have easily created one digitally. Has it happens I think they just took the footage of Vermont and digitally added it into the CA footage. Not unlike adding Chicago's overground trains to the Manhattan landscape in Spider Man.

It's not a matter of switching one building for another. It's creating something that does not exist in Iowa when there was no reason in the world to do it. Nothing forced this choice. They just mixed and matched Western and Northeastern footage to meet story needs, without any regard for whether that represents Iowa.

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

None like that in Iowa. Nothing like it. My answer is that both Prime Trek and JJ Trek are both alternate universes and timelines from our own and that their Iowa is not like ours. That's it. I say that and move on with the rest of the movie. The same goes for adding a chunk of Chicago digitally into the skyline of NYC. You can say "well there are trains in both places so what's the big deal?" It's ridiculous if this is supposed to be our world. Nothing like that in NYC. Trains yes, but nothing like that. But it's not our NYC or our Chicago. Apparently in the SM universe that is what NYC looks like. Fine by me. I just say that and move on with the rest of the movie.

 

[Franklin]

No such cliff. And I don't think Iowa had anything to do with it. If a suitable cliff was available where they were in California, I am sure they would have used in. Or they could have easily created one digitally. Has it happens I think they just took the footage of Vermont and digitally added it into the CA footage. Not unlike adding Chicago's overground trains to the Manhattan landscape in Spider Man.

It's not a matter of switching one building for another. It's creating something that does not exist in Iowa when there was no reason in the world to do it. Nothing forced this choice. They just mixed and matched Western and Northeastern footage to meet story needs, without any regard for whether that represents Iowa.

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

None like that in Iowa. Nothing like it. My answer is that both Prime Trek and JJ Trek are both alternate universes and timelines from our own and that their Iowa is not like ours. That's it. I say that and move on with the rest of the movie. The same goes for adding a chunk of Chicago digitally into the skyline of NYC. It's ridiculous if this is our world. But it's not our NYC or our Chicago. Apparently in the SM universe that is what NY looks like. Fine by me. I just say that move on with the rest of the movie.

Um, native Iowan, here. Iowa has dozens of quarries, and one of the largest in the Midwest is near Stone City in eastern Iowa, going back to the 1880s. The limestone from that quarry is some of the finest in the country. The deepest quarries are around 100 to 200 feet down or so. The quarry in Vermont is 600 feet deep, so there is some license taken, there. But who's to say Iowa quarries won't be deeper in the decades to come?

For what it's worth, having spent the first 25 years of my life in eastern Iowa, the Bakersfield area was a fine proxy for the area around Riverside, which is a rather flat part of the state. The only problem I did have is it isn't quite that bleak. More groves of trees dotted around and some green growth around the quarry would've made it perfect. Still, it was not a bad representation of Iowa at all for the purpose it had to serve.

 

[Nerys Myk]

No such cliff. And I don't think Iowa had anything to do with it. If a suitable cliff was available where they were in California, I am sure they would have used in. Or they could have easily created one digitally. Has it happens I think they just took the footage of Vermont and digitally added it into the CA footage. Not unlike adding Chicago's overground trains to the Manhattan landscape in Spider Man.

It's not a matter of switching one building for another. It's creating something that does not exist in Iowa when there was no reason in the world to do it. Nothing forced this choice. They just mixed and matched Western and Northeastern footage to meet story needs, without any regard for whether that represents Iowa.

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

None like that in Iowa. Nothing like it. My answer is that both Prime Trek and JJ Trek are both alternate universes and timelines from our own and that their Iowa is not like ours. That's it. I say that and move on with the rest of the movie. The same goes for adding a chunk of Chicago digitally into the skyline of NYC. You can say "well there are trains in both places so what's the big deal?" It's ridiculous if this is supposed to be our world. Nothing like that in NYC. Trains yes, but nothing like that. But it's not our NYC or our Chicago. Apparently in the SM universe that is what NYC looks like. Fine by me. I just say that and move on with the rest of the movie.

Or it's a movie, doing things that movies have done since movies began.

 

[AirCommodore]

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

None like that in Iowa. Nothing like it. My answer is that both Prime Trek and JJ Trek are both alternate universes and timelines from our own and that their Iowa is not like ours. That's it. I say that and move on with the rest of the movie. The same goes for adding a chunk of Chicago digitally into the skyline of NYC. It's ridiculous if this is our world. But it's not our NYC or our Chicago. Apparently in the SM universe that is what NY looks like. Fine by me. I just say that move on with the rest of the movie.

Um, native Iowan, here. Iowa has dozens of quarries, and one of the largest in the Midwest is near Stone City in eastern Iowa, going back to the 1880s. The limestone from that quarry is some of the finest in the country. The deepest quarries are around 100 to 200 feet down or so. The quarry in Vermont is 600 feet deep, so there is some license taken, there. But who's to say Iowa quarries won't be deeper in the decades to come?

For what it's worth, having spent the first 25 years of my life in eastern Iowa, the Bakersfield area was a fine proxy for the area around Riverside, which is a rather flat part of the state. The only problem I did have is it isn't quite that bleak. More groves of trees dotted around and some green growth around the quarry would've made it perfect. Still, it was not a bad representation of Iowa at all for the purpose it had to serve.

Well the differences in climate, vegetation, geology, etc are due to them filming somewhere unlike our Iowa. That accounts for the bleakness, less greenery, no such cliffs, etc. Very much like parts of our San Joaquin Valley though!

 

[AirCommodore]

Or it's a movie, doing things that movies have done since movies began.

No all movies don't add parts of Chicago to NYC. You would be amazed at how easy it is to set something in NY and NOT add Chicago to it. It's child's play. Star Trek is something else altogether. It's an alternate universe from ours, so they can have 1990's Eugenics Wars, etc. This was never our Earth anyhow, so it's easy to say that Iowa is like the San Joaquin Valley with a bit of Vermont thrown in. They didn't have to do that. All movies don't in fact do that. There is nothing about it being a movie that forces them to do that. But that's fine. It's not our Iowa anyway, so it doesn't matter.

 

[Franklin]

None like that in Iowa. Nothing like it. My answer is that both Prime Trek and JJ Trek are both alternate universes and timelines from our own and that their Iowa is not like ours. That's it. I say that and move on with the rest of the movie. The same goes for adding a chunk of Chicago digitally into the skyline of NYC. It's ridiculous if this is our world. But it's not our NYC or our Chicago. Apparently in the SM universe that is what NY looks like. Fine by me. I just say that move on with the rest of the movie.

Um, native Iowan, here. Iowa has dozens of quarries, and one of the largest in the Midwest is near Stone City in eastern Iowa, going back to the 1880s. The limestone from that quarry is some of the finest in the country. The deepest quarries are around 100 to 200 feet down or so. The quarry in Vermont is 600 feet deep, so there is some license taken, there. But who's to say Iowa quarries won't be deeper in the decades to come?

For what it's worth, having spent the first 25 years of my life in eastern Iowa, the Bakersfield area was a fine proxy for the area around Riverside, which is a rather flat part of the state. The only problem I did have is it isn't quite that bleak. More groves of trees dotted around and some green growth around the quarry would've made it perfect. Still, it was not a bad representation of Iowa at all for the purpose it had to serve.

Well the differences in climate, vegetation, geology, etc are due to them filming somewhere unlike our Iowa. That accounts for the bleakness, less greenery, no such cliffs, etc. Very much like our San Joaquin Valley though!

Well, who's to say what the climate will be like in Iowa in 200 years with global warming and all? They got the flat part right, anyway. For what it's worth, I did grow up near a pit quarry with very steep cliffs, however.

To me, it was just artistic license, not a serious cock-up. If I were budgeting the film, and had to approximate the area around Riverside for only three minutes of film, I'd drive the 100 miles to Bakersfield rather than fly an entire secondary shooting crew into Iowa.

Now if they had filmed "Field of Dreams" in Bakersfield -- . "Is this heaven?" "No, it's Bakersfield."

 

[AirCommodore]

Um, native Iowan, here. Iowa has dozens of quarries, and one of the largest in the Midwest is near Stone City in eastern Iowa, going back to the 1880s. The limestone from that quarry is some of the finest in the country. The deepest quarries are around 100 to 200 feet down or so. The quarry in Vermont is 600 feet deep, so there is some license taken, there. But who's to say Iowa quarries won't be deeper in the decades to come?

For what it's worth, having spent the first 25 years of my life in eastern Iowa, the Bakersfield area was a fine proxy for the area around Riverside, which is a rather flat part of the state. The only problem I did have is it isn't quite that bleak. More groves of trees dotted around and some green growth around the quarry would've made it perfect. Still, it was not a bad representation of Iowa at all for the purpose it had to serve.

Well the differences in climate, vegetation, geology, etc are due to them filming somewhere unlike our Iowa. That accounts for the bleakness, less greenery, no such cliffs, etc. Very much like our San Joaquin Valley though!

Well, who's to say what the climate will be like in Iowa in 200 years with global warming and all? They got the flat part right, anyway. For what it's worth, I did grow up near a pit quarry with very steep cliffs, however.

To me, it was just artistic license, not a serious cock-up. If I were budgeting the film, and had to approximate the area around Riverside for only three minutes of film, I'd drive the 100 miles to Bakersfield rather than fly an entire secondary shooting crew into Iowa.

Now if they had filmed "Field of Dreams" in Bakersfield -- . "Is this heaven?" "No, it's Bakersfield."

Oh there is no doubt it was a matter of budgets and storytelling. They aren't even in these areas for very long. These are just scenes to establish the young Kirk. I am sure that if the environment and landmarks weren't quite right, they were very willing to accept all that if they made the points they wanted to in these scenes and did it for a reasonable amount of money. And to me it's not worth looking through scenes for vegetation that doesn't grow in Iowa, but does in CA or VT, and then say "Ah-hah! They f'ed up there!" It's not our Iowa, anyhow so let's just keep moving.

 

[Nebusj]

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

Obviously, it goes to the movie's basic credibility. How can we possibly suspend our disbelief in this story of time-travelling Romulans imploding Vulcan with red matter to exact revenge on Spock for a supernova if they depict a future in which Iowan rock quarries are somewhat larger than those of today?

 

[AirCommodore]

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

Obviously, it goes to the movie's basic credibility. How can we possibly suspend our disbelief in this story of time-travelling Romulans imploding Vulcan with red matter to exact revenge on Spock for a supernova if they depict a future in which Iowan rock quarries are somewhat larger than those of today?

Haha! Oh I certainly agree that getting Iowa a bit wrong is almost the least of the silliness of ST09! The Warp Speed supernova is probably my favorite whopper. But yes revenge on Spock is ludicrous as well. But that's just to do with plot and character. Getting naturally occurring phenomena so preposterously wrong or getting settings wrong just shouldn't happen. It's not that hard to get it right.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Still not seeing the problem. If there are quarries in Iowa, why does it matter how that is represented on screen and what it takes to get it there?

Obviously, it goes to the movie's basic credibility. How can we possibly suspend our disbelief in this story of time-travelling Romulans imploding Vulcan with red matter to exact revenge on Spock for a supernova if they depict a future in which Iowan rock quarries are somewhat larger than those of today?

Haha! Oh I certainly agree that getting Iowa a bit wrong is almost the least of the silliness of ST09! The Warp Speed supernova is probably my favorite whopper. But yes revenge on Spock is ludicrous as well. But that's just to do with plot and character. Getting naturally occurring phenomena so preposterously wrong or getting settings wrong just shouldn't happen. It's not that hard to get it right.

Sorry but as I said, films have been using "stand in" locations since film began. It's simply a matter of budget, time and the needs of production. Sure not every production uses "stand ins", but it's hardly uncommon or unprecedented. When people complain about it, it makes them sound like they just need something to complain about.

 

[Franklin]

Obviously, it goes to the movie's basic credibility. How can we possibly suspend our disbelief in this story of time-travelling Romulans imploding Vulcan with red matter to exact revenge on Spock for a supernova if they depict a future in which Iowan rock quarries are somewhat larger than those of today?

Haha! Oh I certainly agree that getting Iowa a bit wrong is almost the least of the silliness of ST09! The Warp Speed supernova is probably my favorite whopper. But yes revenge on Spock is ludicrous as well. But that's just to do with plot and character. Getting naturally occurring phenomena so preposterously wrong or getting settings wrong just shouldn't happen. It's not that hard to get it right.

Sorry but as I said, films have been using "stand in" locations since film began. It's simply a matter of budget, time and the needs of production. Sure not every production uses "stand ins", but it's hardly uncommon or unprecedented. When people complain about it, it makes them sound like they just need something to complain about.

The next thing you're going to tell me is that "Gravity" wasn't filmed in Earth orbit.