All television shows evolve as they develop, and as they do, a lot of them contradict themselves. Star Trek does this a LOT.

You’re like those fundamentalist Christians who are so worried about the literal words in the Bible that they completely miss the message contained in the Bible.

So to you, I say, canon schmanon. People like you take all the fun out of being a nerd. You’re turning a good collection of stories into dogma. As long as they get the spirit of the thing right, tell me a good story involving daring and brilliant and inspiring characters, and give me some sexy people and cool stuff to look at, my childhood is not going to be ruined.

That is the “Captain James T. Kirk” we know from early episodes of TOS, but the story in ST09 doesn’t appear to cover that period. We know virtually nothing of his youth, beyond his experience on Tarsus (which in itself is only briefly touched upon in one episode).

“Later on in the series his character evolves a bit. He woos women as if he’d done it all his life. He disobeys orders from Starfleet and his hair gets longer too. If anything his rebelness seems to come with age rather than the other way around.”

As for me, I can hardly imagine that the younger Kirk would not have been so “into women” as he was in later years. Men do not generally grow *more* passionate later in life. It is usually the other way around.

And Nick Meyer already established young Kirk as someone who was quite comfortable with “bending the rules”, and he was enough into “wooing women” in his younger days that he fathered a child with Carol Marcus. Moreover, as McCoy said of his friend in the TOS episode, “Court-Martial”, “All my old friends look like doctors. All of his look like you!”. Obviously, his prowess with the ladies didn’t begin at 30.

It’s very clear that, at some point, Kirk “grew up” and became the man we know from the Original Series and beyond. But even then, he was always capable of “bucking the system” a bit. I have no trouble seeing this guy go through a phase of questionable maturity and somewhat less tempered rebelliousness and guile during his youth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55q9UTZbSiU

Of course it would have *some* effect— but what I meant was that we really do not know *what* effect it had, since we know virtually nothing of Kirk in between that period (or before that period, for that matter) and the KM test (and we do know how that went).

What we do know is this:

–Kirk is born in 2233 and has a brother.

(enormous gap here)

–Kirk lives on Tarsus during the time of “Kodos The Executioner”.

(enormous gap here)

–At some point, he enters Starfleet Academy with the help of the father of a crewman who would later serve aboard the Enterprise and die under his command.

–Has some trouble with an upperclassman named Finnegan.

–Kirk cheats on a command test (could be here, or given Saavik’s rank of Lt. when she takes it, it could be later on).

–By the time Kirk serves aboard the USS Republic as an ensign, he is very much “by the book”, as evidenced in his decision to log a formal entry about Finney’s negligence.

–”Commands his first “planetary mission” on Neural (presumably while serving under Garrovick).

–His experience aboard the USS Farragut causes him to carry enormous guilt with him for years.

–By the time Lt. Kirk serves as an instructor at SFA, Mitchell views him as a “stack of books with legs”.

That is the crux of it. That’s pretty much it for an established backstory. That leaves alot of uncovered ground, particularly prior to his entry into SFA. I don’t think that the presentation of young Kirk as somewhat directionless or rebellious specifically contradicts anything at all, but I do think that some of his behavior can be attributed to his father’s presence being a variable in the timelines.

” Actions unfortunately have consequences and I’m just not sure I’d buy into the Academy — high scores or not; hero father or not — and Starfleet then putting him into a Comannd track. ”

I don’t see Kirk as having committed any crimes (at least not when past the point of being a minor), and his test scores combined with the recommendation of a starship captain (Pike) should be enough to get him in. I don’t see any problem with that.

As for the “command track”, I still don’t think it’s as simple as that, but I do have some reservations for sure.

LOL — I’m not even ON a road yet…nevermind the journey and destination. It’s the starting point I’m quibbling with. I just never saw Kirk as such in the old universe and can’t see it in this one. And I find it even more hard to swallow that he can become the person he was as a result. Actions unfortunately have consequences and I’m just not sure I’d buy into the Academy — high scores or not; hero father or not — and Starfleet then putting him into a Comannd track.

“But, since you bring up Tarsus, it isn’t really clear if that incident had such an effect upon him or not…”

Well, do we really need to be told implicitly that it would have affected him? I mean, it was horrible. No one can be present when half a colony is exterminated and NOT be. (Well, unless you’re a sociopath.)

“I find it funny that these staunch canon supporters are attacking Kirk’s portrayal in a movie they’ve yet to see. …. Give me an EFFING break here!
I reiterate. NOTHING will please these people about this movie! Don’t waste your intelligent arguments against their incessant nitpicking!”

Commenting and debating is hardly attacking. Gosh, how many posts would be sustained if it was just “Oh sounds great” and “I can’t wait!” ?Maybe 10? And then who could you complain about?

That’s just it. There is always the notion that more than one road can lead to the same destination.

But, since you bring up Tarsus, it isn’t really clear if that incident had such an effect upon him or not—since we know virtually nothing of him in between that time and his entry into Starfleet. It could very well be that, in the “original timeline”, Kirk went through a similar personal struggle which is resolved by the time he is commissioned an officer in Starfleet.

I think he is obviously “made of some strong stuff” in both timelines. I think that, if anything, his ability to overcome an obstacle like the absence of a stable father-figure to guide him through his youth and still become the hero we know him to be is evidence enough of that in the ST09 story—even if there are some reasonable “bumps along the way”.

But I think that if the young Kirk to whom we are introduced in ST09 is more of a “diamond in the rough” than the one in the original timeline (who, again, we know virtually nothing about anyway), then it is reasonable to conclude that it can be attributed to George Kirk as a constant influence upon his upbringing being the variable. The elder Kirk is apparently a man of great character. I find it difficult to fathom that his sudden absence in young James’ life could be anything but an obstacle to his growth (although certainly not an insurmountable one).

Great men like the character of JTK are most often alpha males. They are born with the natural inclinations to stand out amongst the crowd—but that doesn’t place them automatically on the right path. In many cases, alpha-males are even more in need of guidance than others. A lack thereof might even be somewhat dangerous, or at the very least, a waste of talent.

But I get the feeling that the Universe is “course-correcting itself” is placing both Pike and Nimoy’s Spock in position to steer young Kirk in the direction he must go in order to fulfill his destiny.

Ultimately, where he ends up is far more important than how he gets there, in my opinion.