Solo4114
Master Member
Minor point, but that's actually directly addressed in the film.
Khan does get a good broadside in, but Kirk ultimately defeats him precisely because Khan is only thinking in 2 dimensions.
Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)
- Thread starter Dave Porter
- Start date
Minor point, but that's actually directly addressed in the film.
Khan does get a good broadside in, but Kirk ultimately defeats him precisely because Khan is only thinking in 2 dimensions.
Mola Rob
Sr Member
Yes I realize that. It's a pet peeve that movies don't take greater advantage of the three dimensional space. Almost everything takes place on a nice two dimensional plane.
Riceball
Master Member
Star Trek, TNG on mainly, always had a problem with 3D space or more to say that the writers always did. I remember in more than one episode in where the Enterprise/Defiant/Voyager had to make some sort of detour because of something in their way be it a minfefield or someone elses territory. The problem with that was that they always talked about having to go around to the left or right but never addressed going above or below.
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
Yes that's true- but I think the point Mola Rob is trying to make is that you don't have to be on the same level horizontally to fire at one another.
Picky picky picky but here goes...
Spock tells Kirk Khan thinks two dimensionally.
Kirk orders the Enterprise to descend 10000 meters.
The Reliant passes "overhead" because Khan is just circling around.
The Enterprise then ascends back up to the same horizontal plane as the Reliant and blasts them from behind. (No innuendo jokes please :lol )...
So... while the Reliant was passing over the Enterprise, why not just tilt the Enterprise 90 degrees and fire at the completely exposed underbelly of the Reliant? Why did they have to climb back up to its level?
To counter my own argument, I guess the Enterprise "needed" to be right up the Reliant's tailpipe in order to get a decent shot with the targeting computer down.
Fortunately this two dimensional way of thinking was truly abolished in Star Trek VI, in which the cloaked Klingon BOP fires at the Enterprise's underbelly in the exact way I described above.
Kevin
Jedi2016
Sr Member
Audiences like up and down. It was one thing in ST6, because one of the ships was invisible, but having the two ships in the Mutara Nebula, fairly close to each other, would have been disorienting. While it's true there's no real "up" or "down" in space, there is on the screen.
greatwazoo42
Master Member
Yeah but you gotta admit that first time you saw the Reliant visible for a moment in the viewscreen static and nearly on top of the Enterprise about to ram her you jumped. It was one of the best moments in Trek.
rodneyfaile
Sr Member
So a female who is being supportive is a bimbo?
A woman can be strong without having to beat anyone up, shoot them, win an argument, or disarm a bomb, and the same can be said for a man.
This too.
SmilingOtter
Master Member
And to counter your counter argument, directly behind the Reliant, Kirk was aiming for the smallest cross-section possible. (Well, that or directly in front of Reliant.)
If he had kept Enterprise beneath the plane, and just pitched the bow up, he would have had the entire hull to hit. Even better would have been to taken the Enterprise straight up, then pitched the bow down. That way he could have potentially taken out the bridge, especially since there were no shields to protect it.
Solo4114
Master Member
No, I'm sorry. There isn't time.
True. No argument there. Babylon 5 and the new BSG are the only shows with space combat that I can think of which treated 3D space accurately.
Yes that's true- but I think the point Mola Rob is trying to make is that you don't have to be on the same level horizontally to fire at one another.
Picky picky picky but here goes...
Spock tells Kirk Khan thinks two dimensionally.
Kirk orders the Enterprise to descend 10000 meters.
The Reliant passes "overhead" because Khan is just circling around.
The Enterprise then ascends back up to the same horizontal plane as the Reliant and blasts them from behind. (No innuendo jokes please :lol )...
So... while the Reliant was passing over the Enterprise, why not just tilt the Enterprise 90 degrees and fire at the completely exposed underbelly of the Reliant? Why did they have to climb back up to its level?
To counter my own argument, I guess the Enterprise "needed" to be right up the Reliant's tailpipe in order to get a decent shot with the targeting computer down.
Fortunately this two dimensional way of thinking was truly abolished in Star Trek VI, in which the cloaked Klingon BOP fires at the Enterprise's underbelly in the exact way I described above.
Kevin
They...um....were going to....buuuuuut.....there was a...ah....problem with the torpedo loader! Yeah! That's it. And then they got it fixed, but to score a precise hit, they needed to come up directly behind it. They were targeting a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The target area was only two meters wide, so...you know...yeah.
Nah, I got nothin'. Done for dramatic effect. That's it.
Yep. I think that about sums it up.
Because it makes for an awesome reveal shot of the Enterprise with James Horner's music playing. Plus, maybe firing at the underbelly would have destroyed the Reliant, so I guess Kirk wasn't in a destroying mood.
ProfKSergeev
Sr Member
I saw the nine minute preview of STD last night in front of The Hobbit, which was marvelous, and to be frank I am beginning to agree with many of the members here, though perhaps for different reasons.
I feel dirty complaining on the internet about a movie that countless artists and technicians must surely be working hard on at this very moment, but here goes.
(Mods, if this thread isn't the place for these comments, please move them.)
I feel dirty complaining on the internet about a movie that countless artists and technicians must surely be working hard on at this very moment, but here goes.
(Mods, if this thread isn't the place for these comments, please move them.)
In a pedestrian fake-out, the clip opens with the sensor pings from the first movie, which then become the ring of an alarm clock, the staple opening shot of undergrad short films. This tells us nothing about the characters except that, like all human beings, they sleep and then wake up. The filmmakers could have cut to the chase and had the sensor pings become the beeps of medical equipment in the daughter's hospital room and then reveal that her parents haven't left her side because of her condition.
The rest of the clip is a frenetic action sequence with constant split-second cutting to distract you from very poor writing. I realize now that when Abrams has a bad script, he resorts to such sleight of hand. Here's what's wrong:
- The Prime Directive is inexplicably re-interpreted to mean that interfering with an alien culture is fine as long as they don't notice you doing it.
- Spock is lowered by cable from a shuttlecraft (What happened to the transporter?) into the mouth of an active volcano so he can plant a device that will save the planet. (Again: why not just beam the device into the volcano so Spock doesn't have to risk his life? Obviously for the sake of very artificial drama.)
- Meanwhile, Kirk and McCoy flee from a temple with a stolen scroll. Why? This is never mentioned, but obviously so they can be chased.
- The temple is within running distance of the ocean where the Enterprise is hiding. It is explicitly stated that the Enterprise is submerged to conceal her from the alien culture, which means that the mile-long starship had to enter the atmosphere and dive right in front of them at some point--and yet they didn't notice it? Why not just remain in orbit and use the transporters? A primitive alien tribe is not going to spot you if you STAY IN OUTER SPACE.
- Spock, of course, ends up getting trapped inside the volcano as it is about to erupt. To save him would require surfacing the Enterprise, hovering over the volcano, and DROPPING A LINE (another comment about the characters' sudden ignorance of transporters would be in vain), but if they did that, the aliens would see them and thus the Prime Directive would be broken. I believe the writers must have conflated the Prime Directive (which simply means "Never interfere--ever") with the TNG episodes in which alien civilizations are observed in secret. These are clearly two separate things.
The rest of the clip is a frenetic action sequence with constant split-second cutting to distract you from very poor writing. I realize now that when Abrams has a bad script, he resorts to such sleight of hand. Here's what's wrong:
- The Prime Directive is inexplicably re-interpreted to mean that interfering with an alien culture is fine as long as they don't notice you doing it.
- Spock is lowered by cable from a shuttlecraft (What happened to the transporter?) into the mouth of an active volcano so he can plant a device that will save the planet. (Again: why not just beam the device into the volcano so Spock doesn't have to risk his life? Obviously for the sake of very artificial drama.)
- Meanwhile, Kirk and McCoy flee from a temple with a stolen scroll. Why? This is never mentioned, but obviously so they can be chased.
- The temple is within running distance of the ocean where the Enterprise is hiding. It is explicitly stated that the Enterprise is submerged to conceal her from the alien culture, which means that the mile-long starship had to enter the atmosphere and dive right in front of them at some point--and yet they didn't notice it? Why not just remain in orbit and use the transporters? A primitive alien tribe is not going to spot you if you STAY IN OUTER SPACE.
- Spock, of course, ends up getting trapped inside the volcano as it is about to erupt. To save him would require surfacing the Enterprise, hovering over the volcano, and DROPPING A LINE (another comment about the characters' sudden ignorance of transporters would be in vain), but if they did that, the aliens would see them and thus the Prime Directive would be broken. I believe the writers must have conflated the Prime Directive (which simply means "Never interfere--ever") with the TNG episodes in which alien civilizations are observed in secret. These are clearly two separate things.
Last edited:
Force Commander
Sr Member
ProfKSergeev
Sr Member
Ah, gotcha. Consider that complaint retracted then.
EDIT: But why does he have to lure them away in the first place? Am I the only one who found that action sequence almost intentionally obscure?
Last edited:
Zuiun
Sr Member
I haven't seen it, but this actually could be explained if there is lava splashing around where he is being lowered. The space might be empty at the time of transporter lock, but not when it's complete -- resulting in Spock materializing in the middle of a lava splash.
However, that doesn't much explain why they can't beam him out.
However, that doesn't much explain why they can't beam him out.
I watched a 'supposed' hero of Star Trek condone a doctor's suggestion to let an entire species die out of some pretense that he didn't become a starship Captain 'to play god'. And the episode depicted those events as the right thing to do. Now we have a Star Trek story trying to create dramatic tension by...
Again, allowing an entire alien race to die is totally ok, but you should choose death if it means avoiding
not showing the Enterprise to the natives.
Again, allowing an entire alien race to die is totally ok, but you should choose death if it means avoiding
the natives looking at your big shiny space thing.
Force Commander
Sr Member
I believe it was so the shuttle would not be seen.
ProfKSergeev
Sr Member
You're kidding. Starfleet is so sophisticated they have to do a "Look over here!" trick to go unnoticed?
I'm starting to warm to those fan-made continuations of TOS.
Force Commander
Sr Member
I don't see the big deal.
Similar threads
