Star Trek 2009... I gave it another chance
- Thread starter SSgt Burton
- Start date
robn1
Master Member
No they didn't erase it, they just cast it aside. I want new stories in the prime universe. Anything else is like the Mirror universe, who cares?
madeinscotland
New Member
To be honest, I loved the movie. having watched every single star trek episode of every series, and knowing the entire universe inside and out, i dont really care about all the unrealistic coincidences and what not. quit nit picking guys. seriously. I thought the casting couldnt have been done better. and it was entertaining!
there is literally only two things i found fault with. I dont understand why they went to hide behind saturn, and then the the next scene had nero dropping the drill on earth? continuity error much? another was when, at the end, kirk offer to assist nero, claiming it might help make peace withe romulan empire. WTF? where was kirk when nero specifically stated he did not represent the romulan empire (multiple times). the line just doenst make any sense.
all in all tho, its a great film, and i cant wait for the second one.
there is literally only two things i found fault with. I dont understand why they went to hide behind saturn, and then the the next scene had nero dropping the drill on earth? continuity error much? another was when, at the end, kirk offer to assist nero, claiming it might help make peace withe romulan empire. WTF? where was kirk when nero specifically stated he did not represent the romulan empire (multiple times). the line just doenst make any sense.
all in all tho, its a great film, and i cant wait for the second one.
TheDoctor
Sr Member
"Nitpicking" is 'The Enterprise travels to Vulcan in five minutes at Warp Speed but every one knows it would take days to get to Vulcan at top warp."
"Serious Plot Holes" is 'Kirk goes from being a cadet to Captain of the flagship in less than a week.'
It's more than nitpicking, it's completely rubbish writing - more like a 'fanfic'. There were any number of ways to get Kirk into the Captain's chair - probably the best being not starting out with Kirk at the academy - at least give us a '10 years later' bit.
TheDoctor
Sr Member
Sure, plenty of people receive battlefield promotions - you get promoted to the head of a squad, or an enlisted might receive an Officer commission.
Never, EVER, in the history of ANY military has a cadet (he didn't technically graduate) been promoted to the Captain of the Flagship in less than a week. It just wouldn't happen. Sure, for saving Earth they might drop any charges, give him a commission as Lieutenant and give him a medal... not give him command of the most powerful ship in the fleet.
For that to happen, Pike had to be right on the ball when he said Starfleet needed good officers. Did they only have 10 ships (3 of which were destroyed at Vulcan)? Of those ships remaining, NONE of the Captains were more qualified than Kirk? How about Starfleet Command? No Admirals or other officers willing to take the job?
The whole thing is so laughably stupid.
Never, EVER, in the history of ANY military has a cadet (he didn't technically graduate) been promoted to the Captain of the Flagship in less than a week. It just wouldn't happen. Sure, for saving Earth they might drop any charges, give him a commission as Lieutenant and give him a medal... not give him command of the most powerful ship in the fleet.
For that to happen, Pike had to be right on the ball when he said Starfleet needed good officers. Did they only have 10 ships (3 of which were destroyed at Vulcan)? Of those ships remaining, NONE of the Captains were more qualified than Kirk? How about Starfleet Command? No Admirals or other officers willing to take the job?
The whole thing is so laughably stupid.
The equivalent today would be Captain of a US Navy carrier or perhaps a nuclear submarine.
You will not find anyone in that command that did not earn it every single inch of the way. Severely earned it.
And it is a fiercely unforgiving position. Somebody effs up, scrapes the bottom, scuffs another vessel. Your over.
So let's go extreme worst case war scenario and a tiny amount of people are left alive and whoever is highest in rank steps up for command. Sure, they're acting Captain for a while, but it's not going to last long once the crisis is over, obviously could help a career going forward. But your not going to leapfrog to the Captaincy from a lowly level overnight.
It was a bubblegum movie, and that's how it works with them.
They should have had him relinquish command to a Captain and said you got a taste Kirk, now go earn it.
You will not find anyone in that command that did not earn it every single inch of the way. Severely earned it.
And it is a fiercely unforgiving position. Somebody effs up, scrapes the bottom, scuffs another vessel. Your over.
So let's go extreme worst case war scenario and a tiny amount of people are left alive and whoever is highest in rank steps up for command. Sure, they're acting Captain for a while, but it's not going to last long once the crisis is over, obviously could help a career going forward. But your not going to leapfrog to the Captaincy from a lowly level overnight.
It was a bubblegum movie, and that's how it works with them.
They should have had him relinquish command to a Captain and said you got a taste Kirk, now go earn it.
darthgordon
Sr Member
I don't know. I gave this movie a shot a few weeks ago... drank a lot of vodka while watching it... I just didn't get the point. It didn't seem like there was real depth of plot or character. All I saw was an attempt to get the crew together and show off a bunch of explosions. While I felt the cast actually did quite well with what they had to work with... they didn't have much to work with. That's just looking at it as a casual movie goer... I tried to drop the Star Trek fandom for a moment to be objective.
Now of course, when I pick up my fandom I can still say, that isn't Enterprise, that isn't James Kirk and the production design was hideous.
And yeah, promoting a cadet to captain? That makes sense! If you're suffering from a serious brain fever!
Now of course, when I pick up my fandom I can still say, that isn't Enterprise, that isn't James Kirk and the production design was hideous.
And yeah, promoting a cadet to captain? That makes sense! If you're suffering from a serious brain fever!
darthgordon
Sr Member
I think the direction of travel was just done as a visual for the audience. The actual idea is to use the suns gravity along with the warp drive to excellerate to speeds high enough to travel through time... though the actual physics of that idea is spotty at best. But it is using fictional technology.
Picard was probably attempting to cause as little damage to the timeline as possible (he didn't know that the Enterprise would be destroyed and Kirk killed).
Take for instance, Annorax, from the Voyager episode Year of Hell. In attempting to change time he discovered that events worked like a web... each having an effect on the other. Changing just one thing can have drastic effects. Attempting to change things for the better, may end up making them worse. He tried to restore his empire and in doing so, destroyed it... wiping out his home world.
When McCoy traveled back in time in City on the Edge of Forever, he saved a young woman's life... in doing so, wiped out the future of humanity.
There are also a lot of ethical implications to altering the past... and a lot of paradoxes. I honestly don't know if I had the ability to travel back in time, if I would do it. Now forward... that's another story
cayman shen
Master Member
Since you mentioned it, I just want to jump in here and say the Voyager episode "Year of Hell" was friggin awesome. OK, back to the topic
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
I know Bro.
It just doesn't jive with me that flying one way sends you back and flying the other way sends you forward as the gravity pull/speed acceleration would be constant despite which direction of travel be it clockwise or anti-clockwise you chose to go around with. I do agree that it was a simple visual cue to the audience.
As you said we're talking about fictional technology. The "Black Hole" sending ships back through time doesn't make sense either, but again... it's a science fiction (emphasis on fiction) movie.
Personally I believe that time travel is impossible. For me it is much like watching a movie about Santa Claus; a fun story but fiction at best. So if a story called for say... a magic chant to travel back though time I would have just as much (or just as little) problem with it as a complex series of real world theories that a physical device uses to get the characters to travel through time... if you catch my meaning. :wacko :lol
Basically I just "go with it."
Of course if a "human" character simply waved their hands in the air and ended up deliberately travelling through time, I would have a harder time swallowing it than if they built a device, or at least had some kind of explanation for the ability. I'm not five years old either. :lol
On the surface when I first watched the movie I totally agree with you. My biggest problem was that Kirk showed no signs of growth.
However one thing that opened my eyes a bit was what Darth Saber said about Kirk's attitude during the Kobayashi Maru test, and when he takes command after Spock relieves himself of duty.
In the Kobayashi Maru he is completely arrogant, however after he takes command he shows a hint of doubt and humility (answering Uhura with "So do I." when she tells him "I hope you know what you are doing, Captain.").
That was just enough growth to demonstrate to me that this wasn't a completely two dimensional character. And it actually helped me get over a lot of the animosity I first had for this film.
About Kirk's promotion from "suspended" cadet to captain- Pike is really the one who got the ball rolling by making Kirk first officer. Even Spock said that he had to be joking. As for keeping him as captain... well...
Kirk at one time was considered an intergalactic criminal who should have been thrown in jail for his actions in stealing the Enterprise. However he saved the planet so not only did they give him a free pass on all that, but they "demoted" him to captain and gave him back command of a starship.
Don't tell me this isn't a wee bit contrived to have him as "Captain Kirk" once again.
Is it the same thing? I don't know. It feels like it though as the circumstances of "saving Earth gets you out of trouble" are there.
In the end yes I agree that this film was nothing more than a VERY contrived effort to get the gang together, and have Kirk as captain in less than two hours. It just doesn't bother me at all anymore. :lol
Kevin
Last edited:
Roddenberry-verse and JJ-verse are not the same places that is certain.
robn1
Master Member
I always saw it as having something to do with the sun's magnetic poles, and the direction of magnetic waves or something. Travel with them and you go one way through time, travel against them and you go the other way.I know Bro.
It just doesn't jive with me that flying one way sends you back and flying the other way sends you forward as the gravity pull/speed acceleration would be constant despite which direction of travel be it clockwise or anti-clockwise you chose to go around with. I do agree that it was a simple visual cue to the audience...
At least that's how we do it in the future
waltonrawlins
New Member
personally i never liked the original trek movies or the original show, i love the other movies and shows. this movie was fresh and was meant for a younger generation. plus i loved simon pegg as scotty.
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
At least that's how we do it in the future
I think their might be a misunderstanding in the point I was trying to make (and that is my fault for not being clearer when conversing on the internet
).Whatever the case may be of the method of time travel used (be it slingshot around the Sun, Guardian of Forever, or a Delorean
) I simply accept it as a plot device and go with the story.A lot of poeple complained about how a "black hole" (used in ST09) doesn't send you back through time, it "should" destroy your ship.
My point is that the "method" used to travel through time doesn't really matter "to me" as it's all fiction. Maybe it wasn't a Black Hole. Maybe it was a Wormhole (and Spock was simply describing it as a black hole because in the context of the writing... more audience members would recognize the term "black hole" than "wormhole").
Take for instance the time travel effect in The Final Countdown. This was a weird storm at sea. Why did it send the Nimitz back to a couple of days before the attack on Pearl Harbour? And if it was simply a random unexplained phenomenon, why did it reappear just before the Nimitz' airwing was about to change history? Why was it able to "follow" the ship as it changed course to avoid the storm? Why did it send them back to the present adding exactly the same number of days they spent in the past (in the present they were considered "lost at sea" during their stint in 1941)?
These questions really don't have answers nor is it necessary to answer them as we are just expected to "go with it." And that's what I do. I go with it.
So in the case of ST09 if we are supposed to accept that a black hole in space sends your ship back through time, I just go along with it. Kevin
PotionMistress
Sr Member
I think their might be a misunderstanding in the point I was trying to make (and that is my fault for not being clearer when conversing on the internet
Whatever the case may be of the method of time travel used (be it slingshot around the Sun, Guardian of Forever, or a Delorean
A lot of poeple complained about how a "black hole" (used in ST09) doesn't send you back through time, it "should" destroy your ship.
My point is that the "method" used to travel through time doesn't really matter "to me" as it's all fiction...
These questions really don't have answers nor is it necessary to answer them as we are just expected to "go with it." And that's what I do. I go with it.
Kevin
I completely agree...it's called 'SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF" ( see: Suspension of disbelief - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
- an absolute necessity if you are going to enjoy fiction of any kind.
(If Sheldon Cooper can do it, so can you! :lol)
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
Kirk and Chekov are indeed closer in age in ST09 compared to the TOS- 8 years between them in ST09 as opposed to 12 years in the TOS but this isn't really a huge difference is it? It's not like they are the same age or even close.
However the film begins with the arrival of the Narada and the creation of the alternate timeline- so if Chekov was born a little early (only 4 years early mind you) his birth still took place in the alternate timeline.
I get what you're saying in that they are in an alternate reality "before" any of this happens (even before the Narada arrives in 2233), but I don't see how Chekov's age lends credence to this.
Kevin
TheDoctor
Sr Member
About Kirk's promotion from "suspended" cadet to captain- Pike is really the one who got the ball rolling by making Kirk first officer. Even Spock said that he had to be joking. As for keeping him as captain... well...
Kirk at one time was considered an intergalactic criminal who should have been thrown in jail for his actions in stealing the Enterprise. However he saved the planet so not only did they give him a free pass on all that, but they "demoted" him to captain and gave him back command of a starship.
Don't tell me this isn't a wee bit contrived to have him as "Captain Kirk" once again.
Is it the same thing? I don't know. It feels like it though as the circumstances of "saving Earth gets you out of trouble" are there.
In the end yes I agree that this film was nothing more than a VERY contrived effort to get the gang together, and have Kirk as captain in less than two hours. It just doesn't bother me at all anymore. :lol
Kevin
It's not the same from a character/audience perspective.
1) Kirk has earned it. He started out as a Lieutenant, worked his way up through the ranks to Admiral - after saving the planet countless times. He wasn't just 'in the right place at the right time'. Kirk prime earned his keep.
2) It was a de-motion rather than a pro-motion - somehow it's a little more believable. While it probably wasn't 'military standard' it's at least more believable.
3) My biggest gripe, as with most 'reboot' and 'origin' stories is that they often stretch themselves too far for a story that doesn't need to be told. I don't care how Kirk met McCoy or Spock, it's a better story if we don't know and we can start off assuming a deep character relationship. The whole academy and how they met story felt like Abrams produced a big-budget production of someones fanfic.
TheDoctor
Sr Member
I thought it was kind of neat because it shows the ripple effect. If you toss a stone into a pond, ripples expand in 360 degrees - thus the Narada's arrival changes things "before" their arrival and after their arrival.
Similar threads
