Star Trek 4

Who?

His opinion makes a lot of assumptions about the enterprises importance that bear no relevance to the alternative timeline.

In TOS the enterprise was not the flagship, it was one of 12 identical ships, important to the federation, but not irreplaceable.

The ship became legendary because of the actions of Kirk and his crew on that five year mission, and the missions that followed, enough to make sure the name carried on in other ships, although either they took care of the B for a very long time, or there was a significant gap between B and C, there definitely was between C and D.

In 2009 there was no mention of the enterprise being the flagship then either, and it didn't have any history because it had only just been launched.

There were cadets on board because the ship was not expected to be taken into battle, much like the similar situation in star trek II.

At the end of the film Kirk was willing to spare the life of the man who killed his own father in the name of peace and the greater good, to suggest that this is the same cocky Kirk from the start of the film seems to be the mark of a person not really paying attention to the film.

And if Kirk is not acting like the Kirk we know, maybe because the Kirk we know had a living caring father, not some abusive step father banging his mother to get closer to his dads collection of antiques.
 
And that is just TOS, you want to talk about reducing dramatic impact. Remember how terrible it was seeing the enterprise burn in star trek 3? And how it just wasn't the same in Generations?

That is because by the time generations came along we had already seen the enterprise D blow up seven times.

I'm going to stop you right there. The reason why the destruction of the Enterprise D wasn't as dramatic as the original Enterprise being destroyed was NOT because we've seen it blow up seven times before. It was because the circumstances behind it's real genuine destruction didn't have any drama to begin with.

Star Trek 3 built the Enterprise up as a ship past her time. The original ship that has been a part of the show since it's very beginning was going to be decommissioned and scrapped. When Kirk and crew steal the Enterprise, they know that this will probably be their last journey not only on the Enterprise, but as Starfleet officers. But when they get to Genesis, their hopes are almost shattered when a surprise attack by the Klingons leaves the Enterprise disabled and helpless. Kirk's attempt to intimidate the Klingon Commander Kruge fails which winds up costing the life of his son. When it comes to surrendering the Enterprise, there's only one thing left to do. Destroy the Enterprise. The moments that begin with the self-destruct sequence all the way to seeing it's remainds entering Genesis' atmosphere are some of the most dramatic and intense work ever seen in a Star Trek film Thanks in no small part to James Horner's incredible score (RIP!). And this was done all in the confines of one film.

The Enterprise D in Generations?
  • We see the crew screwing around on a holographic boat while making fun of Worf.
  • The Enterprise arrives too late to stop the Romulans from killing the stations 18 compliments but they do save the villain.
  • The crew allow the villain to go back onto the station where he takes their chief engineer hostage and blows up the whole solar system.
  • No one thinks about checking Geordi's visor to see if it was tampered with.
  • Remember what Picard says here. "Maybe they're just trying to decide whether a twenty year-old Klingon Bird-of-Prey can be a match for the Federation flagship."
  • Picard allows himself to be the Klingons' hostage in order for him to have a chance to stop Soran. Results? Picard inconveniences Soran from crossing a bridge.
  • The Enterprise D, armed to the freaking teeth with enough weapons that would make the Borg pause, fires only one single phaser blast at the Bird of Prey, turns around and flees. Worse, the only way the crew think they can defeat the Klingons is with *rolls dice* Technobabble! Yes, the Enterprise defeat the Klingons because of nonsense.
  • Geordi's engineering springs a leaks and he gives up instantly saying 'there's nothing I can do'.
  • When all is said and done, Picard feels very, VERY passive about the destruction of the Enterprise (Our casualties were light) and even leaves many of his priceless invaluable artifacts for a gawddang family album that was only introduced in this movie and was never seen again.
Conclusion... The original Enterprise's destruction had drama and a lasting impact. The destruction of the Enterprise D was contrived and nobody seemed to care. When the newly resurrected Spock started to remember Kirk by calling him Jim, Kirk finally felt vindicated. After all that Picard had went through, it took the sight of his family album to make him happy again. So, no. It wasn't the TNG series that diminished the destruction of the Enterprise D.
 
I think both reasons are valid.

Not when you talk about the film within the confines of itself. And Star Trek Generations on it's own just happens to be a unorganized mess that originated from a studio mandated check list than an actual draft of a story. The destruction of the Enterprise D could have been one of the most impactful things to ever happen to the TNG crew even with the entire series behind it. Saying that episodes like "Cause and Effect" diminish the destruction of the Enterprise is an unfair point because Cause and Effect was a FREAKING AWESOME EPISODE! The Enterprise being destroyed wasn't even the main problem because it was never permanently destroyed to begin with. The loop was the problem.
 
And if had just been that one episode you would have a point, but it blew up in time squared, cause and effect, Yesterdays enterprise, Timescape, and the very last episode before Generations itself, all good things, where you get three different enterprises blowing up.

Kirks enterprise was a big deal when it blew up because until then it had never blown up, Picards enterprise blew up an average of once a season.

Throw in the fact that every time we ever see a galaxy class that isnt the enterprise that blows up too, its no wonder people had galaxy class explosion fatigue by the time it finally bit the dust for real.

You also didn't take star trek 3 in terms of only itself, you yourself mentioned the history of the ship throughout the series, and other films.

You seem to want to have your cake and eat it. Noone is arguing with you that generations is a mess, least of all me, but you are trying to invalidate my theory by ignoring the same thing in yours.
 
You also didn't take star trek 3 in terms of only itself, you yourself mentioned the history of the ship throughout the series, and other films.

I believe Star Trek 3 literally used clips both narratively and in-context with the film to tell it's story. The blue-tinted recap of Spock's death, funeral and final resting place to the the security footage from engineering. All from the previous film. So bringing up the previous movie is still within the boundaries of the movie itself. And don't forget that the self-destruct sequence code from the original series episode Let That Be Your Last Battlefield is used digit by digit. Even on it's own, Star Trek 3 still acknowledges the details that I brought up. It's a far more practical explanation than using deleted scenes to explain why a character did nothing for 25 years.
 
The biggest problem with Into Darkness... was simply it couldn't stand on its own. Even being so pathetic as to have to contact Spock Prime to fill them in on who Khan was. It was an incoherent mess, and I hated everything about it, from the first teaser sequence.

That being said, why would I go see ST3? I didn't bother seeing Revenge of the Sith.
 
Who?

His opinion makes a lot of assumptions about the enterprises importance that bear no relevance to the alternative timeline.

In TOS the enterprise was not the flagship, it was one of 12 identical ships, important to the federation, but not irreplaceable.

The ship became legendary because of the actions of Kirk and his crew on that five year mission, and the missions that followed, enough to make sure the name carried on in other ships, although either they took care of the B for a very long time, or there was a significant gap between B and C, there definitely was between C and D.

In 2009 there was no mention of the enterprise being the flagship then either, and it didn't have any history because it had only just been launched.

There were cadets on board because the ship was not expected to be taken into battle, much like the similar situation in star trek II.

At the end of the film Kirk was willing to spare the life of the man who killed his own father in the name of peace and the greater good, to suggest that this is the same cocky Kirk from the start of the film seems to be the mark of a person not really paying attention to the film.

And if Kirk is not acting like the Kirk we know, maybe because the Kirk we know had a living caring father, not some abusive step father banging his mother to get closer to his dads collection of antiques.


Enterprise doesn't have to be THE ship in the fictional verse, there are others. It is however THE ship for the TOS message as we view the show. It is THE ship to us the viewer. And why she is out there is important.
Not the least of which is what was very clearly spelled out in legendary Shatner fashion.....


And Abrams never understood that. He never liked Star Trek.
As Spock explained about V'ger not understanding emotions... it had no meaning to him.

JJ Trek fails to connect with many of us and this is one of the reasons why.
Your calling it Star Trek, you having characters that are TOS based, but beyond that?
Does that not mean great expectations of handling the material?
There is no there there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My problem with the new version of Star Trek is that everything is broken. In the original, Kirk worked his way up through the ranks to command and he was good. In the new ones he was bumped ahead of all the other experienced officers on the bridge because Pike liked him and he made horrible, seat of the pants decisions. He was almost thrown out of Starfleet for cheating on the Kobayashi Maru, but in "The Wrath of Kahn" he was given a commendation for doing that. Why couldn't we have just had an origin story that kept to original and showed some of his earlier mission? Because they wanted a blockbuster action movie with enough story to tie the action together.


The worst is that the writer got lazy or for some other reason decided to have Khan transport directly from Earth to Kronos. At this point they barely need ships. In this universe when the Voyager gets pulled into the Delta quadrant all the have to do is leap frog through transporters until they get home. A couple of weeks, tops.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The best "Star Trek" movie in years.......

mc2.jpg



If you have not seen this, you must.
There is action, drama, incredible characters, exploration, power of nature, science, dedicated crew, a noble ship with a name
that might remind you of another we love.

Master_and_Commander-The_Far_Side_of_the_World_poster.png


 

Attachments

  • mc2.jpg
    mc2.jpg
    30.4 KB · Views: 45
  • Master_and_Commander-The_Far_Side_of_the_World_poster.png
    Master_and_Commander-The_Far_Side_of_the_World_poster.png
    204 KB · Views: 53
Last edited by a moderator:
So you are slagging off the new star trek by showing the honest trailers star trek, that spends four minutes actually praising the film?

I guess you only take from that the bits that you agree with an ignore the rest.
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again: It's an OK generic action movie, but it isn't Star Trek and the lens-flares genuinely gave me a headache. Add in the total character 'wrongness' like Kirk is an entitled jerk, Chekov is only there for the accent to be a joke and the overall treatment of women is worse than it was in the 60's. I am allowed to not like it, y'know.
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top