Why The Huge Gap Between TMP & WOK?

[Christopher]

Agreed. Kirk's assignment is clearly for the V'ger incident alone.

That's how it started, but there's no reason it has to stay that way. Kirk certainly wouldn't settle for that after going to such great lengths to get command back. He could argue that his success in the V'Ger mission proved he was still the best choice to command the ship. And Captain Decker was no longer on this plane of existence, so there was a vacancy anyway. And really -- Kirk just saved Earth. He could pretty much write his own ticket at that point.

His reduction in rank is just stupid, Decker's even more so, but there's no reason to suppose that Nogura and Starfleet Command intended it to be permanent. "OK, admiral, you can command the ship during this emergency, and after that why don't you just give up your responsibilities as an admiral and stay there for good." That just doesn't sound believable. Or it sounds more like a punishment.

I see it as the price Nogura demanded in exchange for agreeing to Kirk's request. "You want to go back to starship command that badly? Fine -- then it'll be permanent. You'll have to give up the extra rank and privileges of an admiral. You can't have it both ways." From Nogura's perspective, it was punishment in a sense -- the cost of defying Nogura's wishes. But it was a price Kirk was happy to pay, because from his perspective, being stuck behind a desk was the real punishment.

I've always interpreted the "Out there... thataway" line as Kirk taking the ship on a victory lap before returning to his duties as an admiral.

Which is certainly not how the filmmakers of TMP intended it, because they were trying to start a series of movies that they hoped to continue themselves. It's not like they knew going in that they'd be replaced by a totally different creative team. And of course TMP's story was based on the pilot script for Phase II, so it was always meant to be the beginning of a new mission under Kirk's command.

After all, Kirk's "Thataway" line was followed by the onscreen caption "The Human Adventure Is Just Beginning." The ending of the movie was meant to feel like a new beginning, for Kirk and for the franchise.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I see it as the price Nogura demanded in exchange for agreeing to Kirk's request. "You want to go back to starship command that badly? Fine -- then it'll be permanent. You'll have to give up the extra rank and privileges of an admiral. You can't have it both ways." From Nogura's perspective, it was punishment in a sense -- the cost of defying Nogura's wishes. But it was a price Kirk was happy to pay, because from his perspective, being stuck behind a desk was the real punishment.

I must have missed that scene.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

I must have missed that scene.

It's generally assumed that Nogura--who likely promoted Kirk in the first place--was not happy about Kirk using V'Ger as an excuse to get the Enterprise back. I've always wondered about what happened between Kirk leaving Sonak and beaming up to orbital platform.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It's generally assumed that Nogura--who likely promoted Kirk in the first place--was not happy about Kirk using V'Ger as an excuse to get the Enterprise back.

Yes, I'm aware of that. It's just that there's no information conveyed in the film about what's happening with Kirk's rank after the crisis is over, which is why I said that there's nothing implied about it. Naturally, the lack of implication cuts both ways.

 

[Christopher]

I've always wondered about what happened between Kirk leaving Sonak and beaming up to orbital platform.

That scene is depicted at the end of Chapter Four of Roddenberry's novelization, and it basically boils down to Kirk making his case on the basis of his experience and Nogura saying that he'll agree if Kirk assures him he has no ulterior motives beyond the good of the mission, with Kirk making that assurance -- and believing it at the time. It doesn't address the rank-change issue.

 

[Tallguy]

Anything else isn't implied by what's on screen.

If the next movie had started with Captain Kirk, no one would have batted an eye.

The end of the (Roddenberry) novel clearly indicates that Kirk has every intention of keeping the ship and using the Vejur crises to do it.

As others have said, you can make it make sense (Starfleet sees things differently, nobody learns from their mistakes) but that wasn't what was meant by the end of TMP.

 

[wayoung]

Just throwing this out there, Decker was Commodore and still captaining a Connie in Doomsday Machine so flag officers could captain individual starships without any reduction in rank.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

If the next movie had started with Captain Kirk, no one would have batted an eye.

The end of the (Roddenberry) novel clearly indicates that Kirk has every intention of keeping the ship and using the Vejur crises to do it.

As others have said, you can make it make sense (Starfleet sees things differently, nobody learns from their mistakes) but that wasn't what was meant by the end of TMP.

So, your argument is based on what's in the novelization and what might have been in a hypothetical sequel. OK.... I thought that I was clear that I was discussing what was implied by the film.

 

[DeepSpaceYorks]

So, your argument is based on what's in the novelization and what might have been in a hypothetical sequel. OK.... I thought that I was clear that I was discussing what was implied by the film.

But the implication of the film is very ambiguous and can be interpreted different ways, as we've already seen. In this instance the novel is being used as secondary, or supporting, evidence.

 

[Warped9]

We are discussing what is implied in the film.

When we think of TOS we envision our familiar characters in place aboard the Enterprise. And it's clear TMP brings them all back in place after being apart.

Let the new adventures begin.

You don't need the novelization to clearly pick that up.

The inconsistency isn't in how TMP ended. The inconsistency is in using the beginning of TWOK as a restart/reboot button.


Harve Bennett made no bones about disliking TMP and used TWOK to basically wipe the slate clean and restart the franchise as he saw fit. Nick Meyer--himself admitting he had little knowledge of Trek--followed through and completely ignored what happened in the previous film.

 

[Christopher]

We are discussing what is implied in the film.

When we think of TOS we envision our familiar characters in place aboard the Enterprise. And it's clear TMP brings them all back in place after being apart.

Let the new adventures begin.

You don't need the novelization to clearly pick that up.

Yeah. The film ends with the old crew reunited on the bridge, Spock agreeing to stay and keep the band together, Kirk ordering Sulu to take the ship "out there," and the final screen saying "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning." There is no way in hell that anyone seeing that ending in 1979-80, with no knowledge of what future films would do, would've come away thinking "Okay, obviously they're just going to go straight back home and break up again." That runs in complete opposition to what's on the screen in TMP itself. It's an interpretation that's only possible in light of what TWOK later established.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

On a literal level, the tag-line "The human adventure is just beginning" refers to more than the crew of the Enterprise. Its subject is the adventure of all of humanity. It's a general statement in line with the main theme of the film, which is that humanity is inherently more capable than machines. One can read it as a lead-in to further adventures of the crew, despite the fact that one of the main cast is conspicuously (half) alien, but one can also read it on face value, as a testament, directed at the audience, affirming that humanity's destiny is to achieve capabilities of cosmic significance, by our creativity, even those as great as the Decker/V'Ger fusion achieved. I've always read it in the latter way.

 

[Tallguy]

Yeah. The film ends with the old crew reunited on the bridge, Spock agreeing to stay and keep the band together, Kirk ordering Sulu to take the ship "out there," and the final screen saying "The Human Adventure is Just Beginning." There is no way in hell that anyone seeing that ending in 1979-80, with no knowledge of what future films would do, would've come away thinking "Okay, obviously they're just going to go straight back home and break up again." That runs in complete opposition to what's on the screen in TMP itself. It's an interpretation that's only possible in light of what TWOK later established.

Dammit, Christopher, I was just writing:

What's implied by the film is that the Enterprise that we see at the end of the film will now Boldly Go. Spock isn't going anywhere. Kirk is Captain. All is right back where we left it in 1969.

Nobody who saw the film in 1979 thought "Gee, I wonder how the next movie will get Kirk back onto the Enterprise?"

It's funny that TWOK ignored Kirk having his command back at the end of TMP. TSFS ignores that he ever lost it.

 

[Warped9]

On a literal level, the tag-line "The human adventure is just beginning" refers to more than the crew of the Enterprise. Its subject is the adventure of all of humanity. It's a general statement in line with the main theme of the film, which is that humanity is inherently more capable than machines. One can read it as a lead-in to further adventures of the crew, despite the fact that one of the main cast is conspicuously (half) alien, but one can also read it on face value, as a testament, directed at the audience, affirming that humanity's destiny is to achieve capabilities of cosmic significance, by our creativity, even those as great as the Decker/V'Ger fusion did. I've always read it in the latter way.

Regardless. The intent of the film's ending is that our heroes are again banded together to set off on new adventures. You can try to retcon the events because of what came later, but you cannot rewrite the unmistakable intention of TMP's creators.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Oh, I fully agree that the further adventures of the crew was always implied. The specific issue in question, though, is whether Kirk is supposed to head back to the admiralty after the shakedown cruise. The film leaves that specific question completely open.

See, Kirk could intend to return to the admiralty, and then on the shakedown cruise another crisis emerges and Kirk has to take charge again. That could keep him in the center seat regardless of what his intentions were at any point in TMP.

 

[Warped9]

Christopher's point is spot on. After just saving Earth Kirk could basically write his own ticket.

What isn't addressed in TMP is why Kirk gave up his command in the first place after TOS. I never really did buy GR's rationalizations in his novelization. In TWOK it's much easier to accept Kirk as an Admiral due simply to progressive promotions through the years since TOS. With TMP following (supposedly) so soon after TOS it's harder to understand.

Of course, the real issue is that the timeline stated in TMP doesn't gel with the underlying vibe that the crew has been apart for sometime. Robert Wise has said he assumed it had been about a decade since TOS "in universe" as well as in real time. One way to have fixed this confusion would have been to include a line that established, or at least suggested, Kirk had commanded two 5-year missions with the Enterprise and then had been promoted. That would have gelled with the obvious age difference of the cast.

Indeed, all they had to do was change one line. Instead of Kirk saying (to Decker), "My experience--five years out there dealing with situations like this." He could have said, "My experience--my years out there dealing with situations like this."

 

[Tomalak]

What isn't addressed in TMP is why Kirk gave up his command in the first place after TOS. I never really did buy GR's rationalizations in his novelization. In TWOK it's much easier to accept Kirk as an Admiral due simply to progressive promotions through the years since TOS. With TMP following (supposedly) so soon after TOS it's harder to understand.

I've always thought Kirk planned his career out early on, and then ruthlessly pursued it, at the exclusion of all else: family and friends. It's apparent later on - in TWOK and TSFS where he regains and loses a son, in TFF when Bones notes they're basically all each other has got, and in Generations, Kirk ruminates on losing Antonia and being left with "an empty house".

He was supposedly one of the youngest Starship captains, and presumably therefore one of the youngest Admirals too. But that essentially left him having completed his career objectives by his early 40s. No wonder he felt listless. It was only once he got what he thought he wanted that he realised how empty he'd made his life. The only thing he had was being a captain of a starship, and he'd given that away.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Christopher's point is spot on. After just saving Earth Kirk could basically write his own ticket.

There wasn't ever any question about that, was there?

 

[J.T.B.]

And Captain Decker was no longer on this plane of existence, so there was a vacancy anyway.

So Kirk would be throwing his weight around to bump the next serving captain in line out of a command. No real organization would work that way, nor does Kirk seem like the kind of spoiler who would do that to an up-and-coming fellow officer. Actually, some of what's implied in TMP, if thought through, make him seem more like some kind of foot-stamping brat than the serious but compassionate leader of TOS.

I see it as the price Nogura demanded in exchange for agreeing to Kirk's request. "You want to go back to starship command that badly? Fine -- then it'll be permanent. You'll have to give up the extra rank and privileges of an admiral. You can't have it both ways." From Nogura's perspective, it was punishment in a sense -- the cost of defying Nogura's wishes. But it was a price Kirk was happy to pay, because from his perspective, being stuck behind a desk was the real punishment.

Yeah, could be. That requires one buy into the conceit now prevalent in Star Trek, that great leaders are at their best when they progress to one point but no further, that greater responsibilities and challenges are unfulfilling if they involve a desk, etc. Which is not how real leaders act, and I was never crazy about it, so I am probably projecting my own opinions.

After all, Kirk's "Thataway" line was followed by the onscreen caption "The Human Adventure Is Just Beginning." The ending of the movie was meant to feel like a new beginning, for Kirk and for the franchise.

Of course that line was also featured in advertising for the movie. I always saw that as more of a reflection on the movie the viewer had just seen than a tease for potential sequels.

If the next movie had started with Captain Kirk, no one would have batted an eye.

Well, I would, because that would be stupid. The idea that the only good storytelling possible in Star Trek involves everyone remaining in the same places they were at the very beginning has always rubbed me the wrong way. Which, I guess, is why I only re-watch the first two movies.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Of course that line was also featured in advertising for the movie. I always saw that as more of a reflection on the movie the viewer had just seen than a tease for potential sequels.

Right. It was the tag-line on the movie poster.