The fact that TOS Spock has routinely made “illogical” decisions about just such matters in the past is all I need to know in this instance. In particular, I would argue given advanced preparedness of Nero’s actions and motivations, not to mention Nimoy/Spock’s familiarity with the weaknesses of Nero’s 24th Century technology put the odds for success in their favor (and original Spock is a stickler for quoting those odds in such circumstances). While a few people might die who did not before, “the needs of the many [(Vulcan)], outweigh the needs of the few or the one”, or perhaps this more experienced Spock has rethought that axiom as well? In my mind he has not.

And this is exactly why Abrams’ acknowledges his “reboot”will NOT please everybody. And why I further surmise that much of the onscreen canon has been left intentionally vague.

There are plenty of reasons for Spock to logically deduce that changing the past is not a good option here, and neither is offering up the necessary knowledge for others to do so (slingshot effect calculations).

Not only would they have to be successful in saving Vulcan, but they would also have to be able to count on being able to recreate the same set of circumstances that allowed them to defeat the Narada before. And there would be no guarantee that they would be successful in either case.

They could actually end up making things much worse instead. At that point (where Nimoy’s Spock emparts the future knowledge to Scotty and to Kirk), the objective is to make sure Kirk assumes command of the Enterprise, and gets to Earth in time to save it. They were fortunate to stop Nero and defeat him permanently in the process.

It should go without saying that they wouldn’t risk not being able to do the same thing all over again.

And holding up their efforts further by trying to convince the younger Spock to buy into the slingshot effect (which, in the original timeline, was discovered by accident later on) could have so delayed them that the Narada would have been lying in wait for the Enterprise in the Sol system (having already destroyed Earth)…and of course a head-on encounter with the Narada would likely have been the end of the Enterprise.

Just because you have the knowledge to try—doesn’t mean it is a good idea, especially if you could end up making things worse in the process.

We have seen this theme dealt with previously in Trek (VOY “Year Of Hell”).

Wrong choice of words. And, no I can’t. Because there is no way the Spock I know would allow 9 billion people and Vulcan to be destroyed in a linear time-line when he risked his friends lives to TRY to save Earth.

Closettrekker WROTE: “nothing in the film suggests than he is anyone other than the same Spock we have always known”

And I would simply argue that I was being kind. The fact that Spock does not behave as I have come to expect no matter how you recton it, “suggests” that he is not the same Spock. However, considering there is no evidence either way FOR ANYTHING I am debating, means there is no clearly defined intention suggested anywhere in the film. All we have is off-screen, non-canon explanations and stated intent … AND A LOT OF ON-SCREEN QUESTIONS!

Agreed about MWI/QM. It is NOT canon and likely never to appear again because of the implications for further time travel. Then again, if Abrams decides he’s written himself into a corner with his NEW canon, all one has to do is have the new crew accidentally time-travel into yet another alternate universe where that canon hasn’t happened yet (and the best part is that the old and original canon will still be a part of it). LOL

I don’t think you are stuck with it. I believe it is a choice, particularly since nothing in the film promotes the MWI of QM. You can just as easily choose to view the time travel in this film as being no different from the way in which it is presented in “TCOTEOF”, “Tommorow Is Yesterday”, etc.

“I seriously doubt that any of the ambiguities regarding the exact origins of this timeline will ever be canonically reconciled on-screen…”

I understand your point of view, I think. The way I see it, you are looking for reasons to consider the tie-in to previous continuity to be ambiguous—since Spock “Prime” is quite obviously *intended* to be perceived as having come from the timeline we know as the original.

No one can tell you how to interpret things. You are free to overlook the fact that nothing in the film suggests than he is anyone other than the same Spock we have always known. If this allows you to see the film as you wish—a complete reboot—then I say ‘congratulations’.

Personally, I accept the intentions of the filmmakers in that I see Spock Prime as the same character from TOS, the original 6 films, and TNG’s “Unification, Parts I and II”. I am comfortable that the film’s story and dialogue supports this. After all, there has been nothing in previously established canon which suggests that any other Spock exists—outside of the “Mirror Spock”, whom I am thoroughly convinced is not “Spock Prime”.

What is truly “ambiguous” is the notion that time travel in this film is treated any differently than in previous Trek stories, since Orci’s off-screen MWI take on the subject is not canon.

While I accept the filmmakers intentions as to who the Spock Prime character is—-I dismiss the non-canon notion of the MWI of QM being applied to Star Trek time travel, particularly since the film itself offers this theory no support at all.

Vulcan with a blue sky. Choice or mistake?

No scanner for Spock on the bridge? You guys have got to fix that for the next movie unless I just missed it. :)

And please, lets get the big E out in space away from Earth in the next movie. Let’s follow that famous Kirk motto that ended this wonderful movie.

The speeches by Spock Prime, Pike and Sarek are as well written and meaningful as anything in Trek history.

—-As I see it, the Roman Nero was a bit of a nut-job. He was a crazy. I think your answer is that the Romulan Nero was also just that crazy. The fact is, ST’s Nero had no motivation… When his homeworld bought it, he made a sharp left and headed north of Nuts-ville.—-

It’s a fair point, and I suppose that could well be what the writers intended.

But, in that case, it just seems like a cop-out: “Let’s just make the villain crazy, and not bother with his motivation, because his behavior is not supposed to make sense anyway.”

It’s in the same bag o’ tricks as, “Let’s just go kitchen-sink with the story, and in the end, it will turn out to have all been a dream.”

Even crazy people have reasons for what they do. And, getting a look at those reasons is what makes for a compelling and intriguing theme and story. Hannibal Lecter was crazy, but his motivation was explored. His was a much better developed character. The same with the other Thomas Harris villains, for that matter—Jame Gumb….Francis Dolarhyde—all totally nutso, and all with intriguing motivations and rationales for their behaviors.

This is why I previously suggested something like a council meeting, perhaps, in which Spock’s plan to save Romulus won out over Nero’s. And, then, we learn how Nero perceived and interpreted Spock’s influence and actions. And, then, the Nero character is solid and much more interesting. Could’ve even gotten a very nice theme out of it. Instead, the Nero character character is little more than a functional mechanism for the story—bringing all of the characters together, and getting them their motivations—but, lacking in his own motivation.