Star Trek Into Darkness Shut Out At Saturn Awards – TNG Wins For Blu-ray | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Into Darkness Shut Out At Saturn Awards – TNG Wins For Blu-ray June 27, 2014

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Awards,CBS/Paramount,Celebrity,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

orci

Thursday night in Burbank was the last stop in awards season, with the 40th Saturn Awards – honoring the best in science fiction and fantasy. Last summer’s Star Trek Into Darkness went into the night with five nominations, but got shut out. There were also more Trek-related winners and losers at the Saturns. Details below.

Into Darkness falls to Gravity at the Saturn Awards

The 40th awards show for the Academy of Science-Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films was held tonight in Burbank, CA. JJ Abrams’ 2013 feature Star Trek Into Darkness was nominated for five Saturn Awards, but wasn’t triumphant in any of its categories. The big winner of the night was Warner Bros Gravity starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. The film picked up five awards, three of which were in categories with Into Darkness. The table below details the results.

Into Darkness Nomination Winner
Best Science Fiction Film Gravity
Best Director:
J.J. Abrams
Alfanso Cuoron
– Gravity
Best Special/Visual Effects:
Roger Guyett, Patrick Tubach, Ben Grossman, Burt Dalton
Tim Webber, Chris Lawrence, David Shirk, Neil Corbould
– Gravity
Best Supporting Actor:
Benedict Cumberbatch
Ben Kingsley
– Iron Man 3
Best Costume:
Michael Kaplan
Trish Summerville
– The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Into Darkness isn’t the first Trek film to get shut out at the Saturns. All the Star Trek films with the exception of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier received Saturn nominations ranging from two (Generations) to ten (The Motion Picture and First Contact). Four Trek films picked up one award at the Saturns (Motion Picture, The Voyage Home, The Undiscovered Country and 2009’s Star Trek.). Wrath of Khan took  home two and First Contact has the record with three wins.

The Saturn Awards marks the end to ‘award season.’ All in all Into Darkness was nominated for three People’s Choice Awards, three Film Critics’ Awards two Teen Choice Awards, an Academy Award, a BAFTA, an MTV Movie Award, an Empire Award along with some guild technical awards…none of which it won. So far the only awards won were a Britannia Award for Benedict Cumberbatch, a Satellite Award for the Blu-ray release, and a Hollywood Movie Award for JJ Abrams, plus one silver and two bronze awards at the Key Art Awards (for a trailer and the Star Trek app).


Star Trek Voyager star Robert Picardo presenting Saturn Award for Best Makeup Effects (photo @WarnerArchive)

Star Trek TNG Blu-rays win again + Trek nonfic author honored

And for the second year in a row, CBS Home Entertainment won the for Best DVD or Blu-ray TV Series for Star Trek The Next Generation (Seasons 3, 4 and 5). Last year they won for Seasons 1 and 2. TNG beat out releases for The Adventures of Superboy (Season 3), Search (The Complete Series), Under the Dome (Season 1), The Walking Dead (Season 3), and The White Queen (Season 1).

Author Marc Cushman received a Special Recognition Award for his two recent Star Trek books "These are the Voyages: TOS: Season One" and "These are the Voyages: TOS: Season Two," which detail the making of the original Star Trek series and cover the making and development of each episode. This project took six years of research to complete. The third book (Season 3) will be published later this year.


Mark Altman presenting Marc Cushman special award for his Star Trek non-fiction(photo Geek Magazine)

Fuller & McDowell Pick Up Special Awards + Fuller shares TV award with Bad Robot

A number of Star Trek alumni were up for awards and some were also getting special honors. Actor Malcolm McDowell (Soran in Star Trek: Generations), picked up the Life Career Award. And Star Trek Voyager and Deep Space Nine writing/producing vet Bryan Fuller was honored with the Dan Curtis Legacy Award.


McDowell receiving his Lifetime Award – presented by Lance Henricksen (photo Loretta Ramos)

In addition, Fuller’s latest series Hannibal was up for four awards, and took home two, including tying for Best Network Television series with the now-cancelled Revolution (produced by Star Trek producers JJ Abrams and Bryan Burk). One of the shows Hannibal beat was Sleepy Hollow (from producers Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman). The Orci/Kurtzman produced sci-fi film Ender’s Game was also up for three awards, but came home empty handed. Also shut-out was The World’s End, which was up for three awards including Best Actor and Best Writer for Simon Pegg.


Fuller receiving his Legacy Award (photo Loretta Ramos)

Full list of winners is available at www.saturnawards.org.

Comments

1. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - June 27, 2014

Interesting …

2. Elias Javalis - June 27, 2014

Saturn awards, big deal.

3. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

Gravity deserves its wins.

Ben Kingsley as best supporting actor is a bit of a head-scratcher.

He was fine, of course—he is Ben Kingsley—but his performance in Iron Man 3 was just a bit of comic relief that wasn’t all that memorable.

Cumberbatch did a good job with the part he was given; it just wasn’t very well written and had him portraying a whiny little brat whose motive was thinking that, maybe, Adm Marcus has killed his 72 frozen buddies.

What a premise for a movie villain, ay? The old honest misunderstanding.

4. Dom - June 27, 2014

3. Cygnus-X1:

Agreed. It shouldn’t be assumed that Star Trek has a God-given right to win awards just because it’s Star Trek. It’s a hangover from the TNG era when Star Trek was the only significant scifi series around. The fact that STID won no awards isn’t even a demerit to the film: it just happened that there were other films the awards panel found more deserving.

I’m one of those people who had no issue with Cumberbatch as Khan, but I never saw him as the villain in the film. He was a p1$$ed off guy who had as big a beef with the main villain, Marcus, as Kirk’s team did.

Actually, I’d be all for a Khan spin-off with Khan out on the frontier seeking redemption. It would be interesting to keep Khan around as an anti-hero in this universe.

5. Captain Slow - June 27, 2014

Gravity shouldn’t have won best sci-fi film. Personally I’m not a fan of it, but most people liked it so that’s irrelevant. But I can’t think of a single sci-fi element in it. Just because it’s set in space it doesn’t make it sci-fi. However Gravity certainly deserves the awards for VFX. The effects in STID were excellent but Gravity had possibly the best effects I’ve ever seen in a movie.

6. Newdivide1701 - June 27, 2014

I too agree with Cygnus -X1 that just because it’s Star Trek, it deserves to win every single time.

I enjoyed Gravity as much as Star Trek Into Darkness, gave both 9/10,

As to Khan, I still have yet to read any real argument he was badly written, especially since 32 years ago, Khan blamed Kirk for leaving him and his Augments behind on Ceti Alpha 5 and the hell they had to endure just to survive, even though Kirk was not responsible for Ceti Alpha 6 exploding and shifting the orbit of CA5, nor could he have predicted what was going on in the Federation, the frontier beyond, nor being promoted to Admiral and made chief of Starfleet operations and thus never returning to CE5.

And Khan still wanted revenge for something that was totally out of Kirk’s control.

7. star trackie - June 27, 2014

Gravity didn’t do much for me either. Sandra Bullock was,well, Sandra Bullock…as stranded astronaut who talks to herself a LOT as she encounters the most improbable series of unfortunate events. I mean, she REALLY had a bad day! lol Sure, it was fun…but no ground breaking science fiction in that movie!

And TrekMovie, really? Trying to stir the pot a bit with your graphics and headlines? I’m afraid the actual story doesn’t quite match the “dramatics” of your headline. Having said that, I’m glad there is more contributions to the site, maybe Pascale is letting go of some of that ad revenue to actually fund a staff.

8. LogicalLeopard - June 27, 2014

6. Newdivide1701 – June 27, 2014

As to Khan, I still have yet to read any real argument he was badly written, especially since 32 years ago, Khan blamed Kirk for leaving him and his Augments behind on Ceti Alpha 5 and the hell they had to endure just to survive, even though Kirk was not responsible for Ceti Alpha 6 exploding and shifting the orbit of CA5, nor could he have predicted what was going on in the Federation, the frontier beyond, nor being promoted to Admiral and made chief of Starfleet operations and thus never returning to CE5.

And Khan still wanted revenge for something that was totally out of Kirk’s control.

*****************************

Yeah, some people may say that the Khan character was a bad choice for a movie villain. That’s debatable. Some may say that Benedict Cumberbatch was a bad casting choice for Khan. That’s debatable, and laughable when people start talking about Hispanic actors. *LOL* But anyway, like you said, no one can really say the part was badly written.

9. Disinvited - June 27, 2014

#8. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

Yes, their choice of bronzer was the epic fail. For the life of me, how did CBS let the Coppertone branding opportunity slip through their hands with this picture’s licensing? ;-)

10. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

5. Captain Slow – June 27, 2014

Gravity shouldn’t have won best sci-fi film…I can’t think of a single sci-fi element in it. Just because it’s set in space it doesn’t make it sci-fi.

That was my first thought as well.

And then I realized that I didn’t think of Gravity as sci-fi because it was so realistic. Yes, I’ve read the criticisms about the incidences of inaccurate physics portrayed in the movie, by Neil DeGrasse Tyson and others. But what the movie gets right really does dwarf what it gets wrong, the latter of which was due creative license. However, that very creative license is what reminds you that Gravity is, after all, science fiction and not a documentary or bio-pic.

11. andre - June 27, 2014

I think this is the Industry telling Paramount to hire real writers for Star Trek

12. PaulB - June 27, 2014

#6 NewDivide1701: In TWOK, Khan was quite justified in his complaint. Out of Kirk’s control?! Nonsense! Kirk made the decision to place Khan and his people in the Ceti Alpha system, and then Kirk NEVER checked up on Khan to make sure they were doing okay. That’s two ways Kirk is responsible for Khan’s anger, and thus, Khan’s vengeance is well founded.

Oh, and it’s also obvious in TWOK that Khan is pretty much crazy after years of blaming Kirk, who was the only person Khan possibly could blame (besides himself) for his tragic life. That is a VERY human reaction, and something that makes complete sense.

As for Khanberpatch being well written…well, “My name isss….KHAAAAAANnnnnnnn” is just one example of the less-than-brilliant writing in STID. (It’s up there with Vader’s “Noooooooo!” as truly bad character writing.)

The Saturn Awards were right: STID did not deserve any of these awards. (ST09, on the other hand…)

13. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

8. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

Yeah, some people may say that the Khan character was a bad choice for a movie villain. That’s debatable. Some may say that Benedict Cumberbatch was a bad casting choice for Khan. That’s debatable, and laughable when people start talking about Hispanic actors. *LOL* But anyway, like you said, no one can really say the part was badly written.

Of course one can say that the part was badly written.

It was badly written.

In TWOK and Space Seed, Khan was an uber-masculine, charismatic leader of men and seducer of women. He was a man who did all things with a well-defined purpose. He was a man of action. A man who said what he meant and meant what he said.

In STID they reduced Khan to a whiny little bitch who cries at the very thought of his friends being dead, even as he knows that they’re actually not.

And they made the same mistake with Khan as they did with Nero in ST09—they gave him a weak motive. Maybe my friends have been killed by Adm Marcus is a LAME and weak motive for a bad guy. There’s no advantage thematically or in terms of character arc in STID for giving the Khan a motive for murder which turns out to have been all a big misunderstanding. I mean, they could have derived some benefit out of such a motive by directing Khan’s arc accordingly, but they didn’t. Khan, formerly the super genius, man of action, as his defining act in STID, makes a mistake. Oh, my friends are all alive? Sorry, my bad. Khan has a weak motive as a result of the plot being poorly constructed. And just about every critic and most fans agree that the plot of STID was a mess.

Bad writing.

14. TrekMadeMeWonder - June 27, 2014

It will take years for the general public to take a liking to Into Darkness.

Kinda’ like Star Trek V

15. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

It’s not even just Khan that they lame-ified.

They’ve made Kirk and Spock lame, too.

They’ve turned Kirk into an irresponsible brat who has no business being in command of a state-of-the-art, incredibly powerful piece of equipment like the Enterprise, and who manages to make it through each story without ever really learning much of anything.

And they’ve turned Spock—the logical Vulcan character whose trademark was being cold, calculating and rational to a fault—into an emotional train-wreck who cries and has a temper tantrum in every movie and is more emotionally unhinged than his human crew-mates opposite whom he’s supposed to serve as a dispassionate counterbalance.

And since the logical Vulcan character is now a basket-case, there’s really no need for the character (McCoy) who used to serve as the heart/passion vis-a-vis Spock’s mind/thinking with Jim Kirk formerly balanced between the two polar opposites.

Now Kirk is a brat. Spock is a head case. And McCoy is just grumpy all the time with no real thematic contribution to make.

It’s all just terrible writing, honestly. And it actually makes STV look much better in retrospect. STV was a failure of execution, but at least there was substance, thoughtfulness and meaning at its core.

16. jerr - June 27, 2014

I have to agree that gravity was a better science fiction film than Trek ITD. Gravity had way less plot holes and broke less laws of physics than ITD did. I think it was just a battle of who broke the least laws of nature :-)

17. Dom - June 27, 2014

12. Cygnus-X1 said: ‘Of course one can say that the part was badly written. It was badly written.’

I think it wasn’t just the writing of Khan that’s an issue: the movie had Marcus as it’s main villain, then was supposed to hand over that role to Khan. It fatally unbalances the script. This universe’s Khan is a victim. Genuinely, I feel sorry for the guy. We know from the original universe that the guy can carry a grudge and when he’s annoyed at someone, he doesn’t go after them in a minor way! Even when he wreaks indiscriminate death and destruction at the end, though, I can’t entirely blame him. So his storyline makes it impossible for him to be the proper bad guy.

‘In TWOK and Space Seed, Khan was an uber-masculine, charismatic leader of men and seducer of women. He was a man who did all things with a well-defined purpose. He was a man of action. A man who said what he meant and meant what he said. In STID they reduced Khan to a whiny little bitch who cries at the very thought of his friends being dead, even as he knows that they’re actually not.’

The alt-universe thing, I suppose, gives us an out on that one. He’s called Khan, but he’s clearly a different person from the one in the original universe. I know we’re supposed to be dealing with a divergent timeline, but I tend to see the alt-Trek universe in the same way as the alt-universe from the Orci/Kurtzman series Fringe.

‘And they made the same mistake with Khan as they did with Nero in ST09—they gave him a weak motive. Maybe my friends have been killed by Adm Marcus is a LAME and weak motive for a bad guy.’

Like I say, I don’t think he’s the bad guy in the long run. Khan’s a lion Marcus released from his cage to wreak controlled havoc, only to find his pet lion turned around and ate him. Also, Kirk betrays Khan and shoots him on the say-so of a version of Spock from a parallel universe. I think Spock Prime was being bitchy and wanted revenge for the trauma of his own death.

‘Khan, formerly the super genius, man of action, as his defining act in STID, makes a mistake. Oh, my friends are all alive? Sorry, my bad.’

In fairness, the ‘torpedoes,’ had Kirk obeyed orders and fired them, would have killed Khan’s people, so Khan had every reason to think his people were dead. Effectively, they were. More than that, a genetically-engineered genius, being rather high-strung, probably would assume Marcus would be as ruthless as he (Khan) is.

‘Khan has a weak motive as a result of the plot being poorly constructed. And just about every critic and most fans agree that the plot of STID was a mess.’

Yeah, it was a mess, but I still enjoyed it. As I said on another thread, the film wasn’t worth the four-year wait to see, although I would have been fine had it turned up a couple of years after the original with another expected in a similar timespan (in other words, they’d be shooting Star Trek 4 by now!)

‘Bad writing.’

I’ve come across better . . . and worse . . . ;)

18. Thorny - June 27, 2014

Gravity was a great movie deserving of its accolades, but yes it was entirely science fiction. It may have *looked* realistic, but there was absolutely nothing realistic about blowing up the Shuttle, Space Station, and Hubble with space debris (from satellites 22,300 miles up!) or astronauts be-bopping around in orbit as depicted in this movie. Never mind the last act where Sandra spacewalks for a long time in a spacesuit that has no oxygen tanks…

World War Z walking away with a Saturn award is the kind of thing that makes me lose faith in awards. That movie is the textbook definition of mediocrity.

19. dswynne - June 27, 2014

@14 (Cygnus-X1): I think the real problem with STiD is not the characters themselves, but that they essentially did a “reset” on the characters in order to center a plot around. Remember, Star Trek 2009 had put the characters into place. However, because there was a complaint that Kirk going from cadet to Captain was seen as “unrealistic”, the writers wanted to address this in a round-about way. So, you have Kirk falsify a report (and lied about it, rather than justify his action on Nibiru), and Spock STILL having issues (though, IMO, this is somewhat understandable, since his entire planet “blew up”). And the problem with “Cumber-Khan” is that he didn’t have a clear motivation: was he the villain, or an anti-hero? This is on top of the fact that he was “white-washed”, and didn’t even behave like classic Khan in disposition at the very least. And there were a number of classic ‘Trek villains could have been used, but used Khan for his pop-culture recognition.

Still, I was entertained by this film, and still watch it once a week.

20. Ahmed - June 27, 2014

@ 2. Elias Javalis – June 27, 2014

“Saturn awards, big deal.”

LOL, I’m sure if STID had won the awards, you would consider the Saturn Awards the most prestigious in town :-)

21. dswynne - June 27, 2014

@14 (Cygnus-X1): But I am not surprised that STiD didn’t win, since , as you put it, the writing was ‘lame’. Giving the fact that Lindelof was involved, I am not surprised.

22. Ahmed - June 27, 2014

@ 17. dswynne – June 27, 2014

“However, because there was a complaint that Kirk going from cadet to Captain was seen as “unrealistic”, the writers wanted to address this in a round-about way.”

And they addressed it brilliantly by demoting Kirk, 5 seconds later, he was baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack, just BRILLIANT!

23. Ahmed - June 27, 2014

@ 19. dswynne – June 27, 2014

“But I am not surprised that STiD didn’t win, since , as you put it, the writing was ‘lame’. Giving the fact that Lindelof was involved, I am not surprised.”

Probably one of the good things about ST 13 that Lindelof is out for good. Lets just hope that no one will call him ever again.

24. Disinvited - June 27, 2014

#16. Thorny – June 27, 2014

“That movie [World War Z] is the textbook definition of mediocrity.” — Thorny

And deemed by Paramount as worthy of a special marketing release premium ticket double-bill with STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, so maybe Para will let STID/BR share?

25. Disinvited - June 27, 2014

# 20. Ahmed – June 27, 2014

” And they addressed it brilliantly by demoting Kirk, 5 seconds later, he was baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack, just BRILLIANT!” — Ahmed

Not just that, it brilliantly foreshadows reality. Rumor has in Bob’s Director chair has “IT’S GOOD TO BE THE KIRK!” emblazonedly embroidered on its back.

26. Ahmed - June 27, 2014

@23. Disinvited

“Not just that, it brilliantly foreshadows reality. Rumor has in Bob’s Director chair has “IT’S GOOD TO BE THE KIRK!” emblazonedly embroidered on its back.”

Indeed.

Kirk is fast tracked from cadet to captain of the flagship, taking over from his mentor Captain Pike.

Orci is fast tracked from writer to director of a tentpole movie, taking over from his mentor Abrams.

Life imitating art!

27. Shannon T. Nutt - June 27, 2014

Of course it was shut out…it’s not a very good movie. I’m actually surprised it even got nominated for anything, aside from visual effects.

28. Scott B. here. - June 27, 2014

Meanwhile … congratulations to Marc Cushman for his well-deserved Special Award for writing “These Are the Voyages,” the definitive history of the production of the greatest television show of all time, Star Trek.

Scott B. out.

29. I am not Herbert - June 27, 2014

yeah, nu-trek is NOT sci-fi… even as fantasy, it sucks… thanks, boborci! =(

30. Lemingsworth Bint - June 27, 2014

The “science” of Gravity was absolutely dreadful. Still enjoyed it, though.

31. LogicalLeopard - June 27, 2014

12. Cygnus-X1 – June 27, 2014
8. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

Of course one can say that the part was badly written.

It was badly written.

In TWOK and Space Seed, Khan was an uber-masculine, charismatic leader of men and seducer of women. He was a man who did all things with a well-defined purpose. He was a man of action. A man who said what he meant and meant what he said.

In STID they reduced Khan to a whiny little bitch who cries at the very thought of his friends being dead, even as he knows that they’re actually not.
*****************************************************

Did we watch the same movies? Lets take a look at this.

Ubermasculine: Khan wasn’t ubermasculine in STID? I would kind of consider taking on an entire patrol of Klingon warriors, breaking necks, and squeezing heads is pretty ubermasculine.

A charismastic leader of men: Didn’t get the opportunity to see that, because Khan was alone in this movie. There was certainly nothing to suggest that he wasn’t.

A seducer of women: He was only a seducer of women because he immediately perceived that McGivers was able to be seduced and give him an advantage in his situation. She was looking at him like adolescent girls look at Justin Bieber. Uhura probably didn’t give him the same open ogling, due to her being involved with Spock, so he decides to seduce Kirk instead….feeding him a dramatic tale about doing all that he did for his family, and asking him if he’d do the same. The teardrop is masterful *LOL* He’s not WHINING about it, you admit yourself he knows his people are alive. He shed the tears on command to help manipulate Kirk into believing him. And also, notice that he subtly attempts to isolate Spock (who isn’t going to buy into his display of emotional nonsense being a Vulcan) by insulting him in front of Kirk.

He did all things with a well defined purpose: In Space Seed, his purpose was taking over the ship for…uhm…what? I forget. In TWOK, his purpose was revenge on Kirk….which is pretty well defined. And in STID, his purpose was to get his people back. Pretty well defined.

A man of action/acting ruthlessly when necessary: See Klingon shooting, neck breaking, head popping comments above.

******************************

And they made the same mistake with Khan as they did with Nero in ST09—they gave him a weak motive. Maybe my friends have been killed by Adm Marcus is a LAME and weak motive for a bad guy. There’s no advantage thematically or in terms of character arc in STID for giving the Khan a motive for murder which turns out to have been all a big misunderstanding. I mean, they could have derived some benefit out of such a motive by directing Khan’s arc accordingly, but they didn’t. Khan, formerly the super genius, man of action, as his defining act in STID, makes a mistake. Oh, my friends are all alive? Sorry, my bad. Khan has a weak motive as a result of the plot being poorly constructed. And just about every critic and most fans agree that the plot of STID was a mess.

******************************

I don’t believe that Khan for a moment thought his friends were all dead. He was manipulating Kirk with a sad story that you fell for. His motive was always getting his people back and getting out from under Starfleet. That’s a well defined motivation, unlike Nero whose revenge was pretty silly. Saying that just about every critic and most fans agree that the plot of STID was a mess is just not true.

32. LogicalLeopard - June 27, 2014

12. Cygnus-X1 – June 27, 2014

I forgot to mention that Khan’s tears and attempt at manipulation is in line with his character. In Space Seed, he attempts to appear non-threatening and weaker than he actually is, even feigning that he is too weak and tired to leave Sick Bay as I remember, but of course feeling good enough to study the Enterprise’s technical manuals. Khan is simply going to present himself however he needs to get what he wants.

33. Spock's Bangs - June 27, 2014

“I am Not Herbert” is probably a TNG fanatic like that dullard Ahmed! Wouldn’t understand TOS if he was schooled on it by the ghost of Gene Coon himself! Its no wonder they dont get Bad Robot TOS based Trek!! lol

FACT!!

34. LogicalLeopard - June 27, 2014

22. Ahmed – June 27, 2014
@ 17. dswynne – June 27, 2014

“However, because there was a complaint that Kirk going from cadet to Captain was seen as “unrealistic”, the writers wanted to address this in a round-about way.”

And they addressed it brilliantly by demoting Kirk, 5 seconds later, he was baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack, just BRILLIANT!

*************************************

They didn’t address it by demoting Kirk. They addressed it by pointing out the havoc he potentially caused on Niburu, and the attitude he had. Showing that yes, he wasn’t as mature as he should have been to be a Captain. Addressing something doesn’t mean you have to change it. The demotion isn’t really addressing the the problem is – Kirk’s experience. And that was addressed throughout the whole movie. But as I’ve said before, Starfleet appears to be a purer meritocracy than most, and experience is less important. Look at hotshot Captain Tryla Scott from TNG. She was the youngest in SF history, and didn’t seem particularly humble too when Picard asked if she was as good as they said *LOL*

35. TUP - June 27, 2014

STID would have worked on a much better scale without Khan’s involvement and with Marcus as the main villain. He was a far more interesting character and Peter Weller was far more interesting an actor.

36. IDIC Lives! - June 27, 2014

TUP, good to see you. I agree, STID should have had Marcus as its one villain.

Many months ago I very much enjoyed your take on Kirk’s character. I hope you have seen “Star Trek Continues.”

37. oscar - June 27, 2014

Obvious thing…STID is pure garbage….a bombastic piece of null made in Orci & friends company…a sub product made for easy movigoers, people who likes Michael Bay’ s transformers…same kind of noisy and ludicrous stuff…Crash Trek…
If this piece of garbage is the best thing nu trek can give….beh, garbage, and forgotten garbage…good.

38. HubcapDave - June 27, 2014

It’s pretty hard arguing against any of them who won…except for Ben Kingsley over Sherlock. Gravity was a fantastic movie!

BTW, I have no problem with calling Gravity a “Science Fiction” movie. After all, the movie featured plenty of science, and it was a work of fiction…..

39. LogicalLeopard - June 27, 2014

35. TUP – June 27, 2014
STID would have worked on a much better scale without Khan’s involvement
****************************
Hmmnn…..well, it’s impossible to tell, because you’re comparing the movie that is real to the movie that is hypothetical. You’d have to really see that hypothetical movie to see how it works. But in general terms, yeah, I can see STID being a good movie without Khan. You’d have to get another terrorist to fill in, say John Harrison, and make him less Khanlike, which would also make him less interesting. But the payoff is when Marcus is revealed as the bad guy. It’d be funny to see, because I bet we’d get a lot of STID detractors saying, “Hey, what is this, a Tom Clancy novel?”
****************************
and with Marcus as the main villain. He was a far more interesting character and Peter Weller was far more interesting an actor.

*******************************

More interesting character? Eh, I say Khan wins that hands down. More interesting actor? Now this is personal opinion, but am I the only one that thought some of Weller’s lines sounded clichéd and kind of wooden? I thought so in the theatre, but some of that was the material he was given to work with (“In the name of those we’ve lost, we’re going to hunt the **** down.”) I thought he shined after the reveal though, very good stuff. Love how they cut him off midsentence when he was going to fire on the Enterprise, like killing so many people is just an afterthought.

40. Spock's Bangs - June 27, 2014

#37. “If this piece of garbage is the best thing nu trek can give….beh, garbage, and forgotten garbage…good.”

Balderdash! Speaking of “garbage”, back into the trash can you go, Oscar old boy. Yet another simpleton ignorant of the ways of TOS. Sad sad little grouch. Your assignment is to watch 2 episodes of TOS, there will be a test tomorrow!!

41. Jeff - June 27, 2014

Of course Gravity was science fiction.

They were still using the Space Shuttle!

42. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

17. Dom – June 27, 2014

I think it wasn’t just the writing of Khan that’s an issue: the movie had Marcus as it’s main villain, then was supposed to hand over that role to Khan. It fatally unbalances the script. This universe’s Khan is a victim. Genuinely, I feel sorry for the guy.

I agree that the story’s ambivalence about who the real villain is was also a problem. And when Khan is weeping in the brig, being familiar with the Khan character as a master manipulator and possible sociopath, I assumed that Khan was doing a little act to play on Kirk’s sympathies and get him to fully trust Khan. But they didn’t even play up that angle of it. They just turned Khan into a whiny little bitch.

And “having every reason to believe that his friends were dead” is a LAME motive for the would-be villain of a feature film. Adm Marcus’s Dick Cheney motive was a good enough motive, but by having Khan commit an act of mass murder at the beginning of the story (two acts, if you count the archives), they diluted the sense of Marcus’s villainy to some degree. Sure, Marcus is still a bad guy—he tried to have Kirk & crew sacrificed to the Klingons in order to start a war with them—but we don’t really blame Marcus for wanting to kill Khan’s 72 buddies, if they’re all as much of a menace as he clearly is.

What can I tell you; it’s just bad writing that goes no where and has no point and nothing to say. What’s the theme of STID? Well, they have Khan say something to the effect of wouldn’t you do anything for your family? so, I guess that’s supposed to be the theme. But, do you feel that the story makes any relevant point or meaningful statement about family? Sometimes people will do anything for their family is a mundane notion which the movie does not even explore as a theme in any depth. These movies are so shallow and superficial, it’s ridiculous. They give you the gesture of a theme or the gesture of a concept here and there, at best. And ST09 didn’t even have a gesture of a theme. The entire movie was just plot exposition, unless you count Spock’s first temper tantrum and then learning his place from it as a theme.

I’m genuinely happy for you that this all doesn’t bother you much; I guess it just comes down to taste. But the writing in STID seriously hindered my ability to enjoy the movie. And I’m not even getting into the plot holes, bad science and how Khan is a supernatural being in the Alt Universe.

43. P'trick - June 27, 2014

In TNG’s “Conspiracy” I always assumed that Captain Tryla Scott “made Captain” so quickly in her career because she was part of the alien-invasions tactical reassignment of “infected” Starfleet-officers. She may or may not have been qualified to be a Starship commander, but she’d only received her promotion because the aliens needed her for the many machinations they’d engaged in. Even within the episode I think it’s implied that she did as they’d planned – even destroyed Picard’s old friend Captain Walter Keel’s ship (in order to prevent him from exposing the alien-threat).

44. TUP - June 27, 2014

At IDIC – thanks! I’ve been back posting a bit in some of the other threads (debating/arguing etc).

Fill disclosure: I was in favour of Khan. I wanted to see a fresh take on Space Seed. But man did they muck it up. The movie actually would have been much better if it was revealed that Harrisson was lying and “Khan” was actually Jochin. You could still have the WTF moment when this pasty faced Brit admits to being Khan and then Spock Primes appearance actually matters when he says “hey wait y’all, that aint Khan”, giving Spock the knowledge he needs to out wit Jochin. End the movie with the camera panning over the tubes and lingering on the face of Ricardo Montalban.

As for Marcus, while it would have made the movie better to expand Weller’s role and make Marcus the chief villain, it would be yet another Star Trek story centering around our characters having to defy orders or work against a corrupt establishment. Enough already.

Also, it’s a crime that Marcus never said “Dead or alive, you’re coming with me”. Like, come on…

45. Keachick (Rose) - June 27, 2014

CygnusX1 – Just stop. You are repeating yourself on every single thread.

You also appear to lack any sense of sympathy for any of these human characters. Cumberkhan was both victim and instigator. He had as much *right* to be angry and vengeful as TWOK’s Khan, perhaps more so.

Why are so angry? Oh never mind, because I know I will get the same spiel about “bad writing” etc, the same stuff that you have been writing for months. Talk about not being able to let go and move on…:(

Too many rabid dogs with badly gnawed old bones in Tred *fandom*.

46. boborci - June 27, 2014

Malcom McDowell’s speech was priceless, especially the part where he recounts his conversation and time with Shatner on Generations.

47. boborci - June 27, 2014

He joked that killing Kirk was a favor to him to free him up for Boston legal.

48. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

31. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

Ubermasculine: Khan wasn’t ubermasculine in STID? I would kind of consider taking on an entire patrol of Klingon warriors, breaking necks, and squeezing heads is pretty ubermasculine.

I wouldn’t. I’d call that “violence.” There’s more to masculinity than being violent. And I say this as a man who is not violent. If you want to understand what I meant, go back and watch TOS Space Seed. See how Khan is portrayed? Compare that to how he is portrayed in STID. You should be able to see a significant difference in the two characters.

I don’t believe that Khan for a moment thought his friends were all dead. He was manipulating Kirk with a sad story that you fell for. His motive was always getting his people back and getting out from under Starfleet. That’s a well defined motivation, unlike Nero whose revenge was pretty silly.

Really? Dom just said in #17 that Khan believed that his friends were all dead and had every reason to believe that. Which is it? What was Khan’s motive—irrationally lashing out to avenge the deaths of his believed-dead friends; or getting his friends back from Starfleet? If his motive was the latter, how did he expect to accomplish it by attacking Starfleet HQ and killing the people who were in the best positions to help him? Umm…hey, yeah…sorry to bother you Admiral Nice Guys, but Admiral Marcus is doing illegal, sinister things behind your backs and holding my buddies hostage to force me to help him. Could you guys maybe help me out, seeing as how Marcus is betraying every principle that you’ve sworn to uphold? Kthanks!!

The writing of STID is so bad that even people who were satisfied with the movie can’t agree on the plot and the characters’ motives.

Saying that just about every critic and most fans agree that the plot of STID was a mess is just not true.

It is, from my experience. Go read the reviews at RottenTomatoes.com.

See if you can find any reviews that have anything good to say about the writing in STID. They’re few and far between, if they exist at all. And most people here acknowledge that the plot is confusing, even if they liked the movie on the whole. You don’t even understand the plot, yourself. And I don’t blame you.

49. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

34. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

They didn’t address it by demoting Kirk. They addressed it by pointing out the havoc he potentially caused on Niburu, and the attitude he had. Showing that yes, he wasn’t as mature as he should have been to be a Captain. Addressing something doesn’t mean you have to change it. The demotion isn’t really addressing the the problem is – Kirk’s experience.

HUH?!???

Of course they meant to address Kirk’s immaturity by demoting him. That was the whole friggin point!

Addressing something doesn’t mean you have to change it???

What, do you regard Star Fleet as like some preschool where they don’t want to hurt the feelings of their insubordinate, rogue commanders, so they just point out what they’ve done wrong and then leave them in positions of great responsibility hoping they’ve learned from their mistake? Now, Kirk…you disobeyed our most sacred principle and that was very naughty of you. You can still be captain of the Federation flag ship, but just don’t be naughty again, mmk? Now you can eat your ice cream.

50. Cygnus-X1 - June 27, 2014

35. TUP – June 27, 2014

STID would have worked on a much better scale without Khan’s involvement and with Marcus as the main villain. He was a far more interesting character and Peter Weller was far more interesting an actor.

I agree that Marcus was a more interesting character than what they turned Khan into. I think that B-Patch did a fine job with the part that he was given, but, like you I enjoyed the Marcus character more. As someone else said…maybe a critic…Weller played Marcus with just the right amount of a-hole in his tone, “Now, I’m gonna ask you again…one last time, son….”

I think that Peter Weller has been underappreciated for his performance in STID, which was totally believable. Everyone got all excited about B-Patch, and he did a fine job with what he was given, but Weller made it look so natural.

51. IDIC Lives! - June 27, 2014

Keachick (Rose) – June 27, 2014
“CygnusX1 – Just stop. You are repeating yourself on every single thread.”

Excuse me?? This thread is very interesting, I am truly enjoying what Cygnus X1, TUP, and others are discussing. How rude you are, Keachick, to interrupt with your sarcasm..

Keachick, you say, “Too many rabid dogs with badly gnawed old bones in Tred *fandom*.” (I assume you mean Trek?)

How insulting you are to people who are enjoying expressing and sharing their well thought out, intelligent opinions. Perhaps you are subconsciously projecting – regarding your rabid dog name calling?

52. IDIC Lives! - June 27, 2014

Now, where were we, guys? I know how much I enjoy posting on this site, how much I love TOS (and “Star Trek Continues” these days), and how much I enjoy discussing characters, plots, and so forth. I am tired of being bullied off this site by someone who purposely picks fights, who insults us and then whines if she is insulted back. Let’s see if we can IGNORE and continue to enjoy the discussion.

53. Allen Williams - June 27, 2014

Into darkness was pure crap. It didn’t deserve any nominations except possibly for CGI effects. ILM did a great job as always. Jar Jar Abrams did a better job than previous, but it still looked like crap compared to the other movies, but the real tragedy was the writing. There was no reason to recycle khan. We needed something new and into darkness wasted a movie.

54. Keachick (Rose) - June 27, 2014

#51 – Once again IDIC just appears from *nowhere*, calling me out. This poster has not commented here for some time, despite the fact that Bob Orci has now been named Star Trek 3 director etc, there are new writers etc…

I was not interrupting anything, you twat. I was posting a comment to this thread just like everybody else.

The point is that Cygnus has repeated his objections to STID on every single thread – no thread is left untouched.

You are not being constantly picked on because you don’t contribute here much and when you do, the first thing you do is to call me out, for any reason, whether it has the slightest bit of legitimacy or not, which means that it is you, IDIC, who purposely picks fights and is a bully. It is me who is picked on by you.

You are right about one thing. Perhaps alluding to Cygnus as being a kind of rabid dog was somewhat over-the-top (I apologize, CygnusX1). However, it certainly applies to you, IDIC!

55. CmdrR - June 27, 2014

They wanted to give STID an award, but the engraving machine blew up when they programmed it to print: “Star Trek Into Darkness as Heavily Inspired and Largely Lifted from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Oh, That’s Right. It’s An Alternate Universe, So It’s Fine to Take All The Best Bits And RePlay Them Out of Context.”

56. Disinvited - June 27, 2014

#51. IDIC Lives! – June 27, 2014

My two cents: I could do without the dog part but I’d think rabid is much less over the top than “Talifan” and, these days, also gives a clever dig to those appalled by VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TREK.

57. TUP - June 27, 2014

@cygnus – I agree that Weller is underappreciated. He has a very natural acting style. As good as Cumberbatch is, you watch him and appreciate his acting, but with Weller, you forget he’s acting. I thought he took some potentially laughable dialogue and delivered with just enough swagger that it was interesting without being over the top.

As for the debate about Kirk being demoted, it was a wink wink moment by the writers who were responding to the rightful criticism of their awful ending of Star Trek where they promoted Cadet Kirk passed everyone ahead of him to command of their newest, biggest, strongest ship. They admitted as such saying that they were “addressing” the criticism.

The problem is, it seemed like an after thought like they were wounded by the criticism so wrote the brief demotion story to “answer” as if they had purposely given Kirk the rapid promotion so they could address it in the next film. In reality that was clearly not the case and it was an example of weak writing that they tried to cutesy their way out of in STID. Except ofcourse, the demotion only highlighted the fact Star Fleet made the inexplicable decision to promote him in the first place and they immediately undid the demotion by giving him back his command.

If they *had* to do it that way, it would have been better if Marcus had been the one to insist Kirk take command of the Enterprise. What we really needed was a scenario where Marcus and Pike were two sides of the same coin, “mentoring” Kirk with obviously different styles and advice. Pike dies (which shouldnt have happened) and Marcus gives Kirk a fatherly speech (echo’ing Pike’s from Star Trek) and implores him to take command do whats right. The motive for Marcus is to give an inexperienced, brash, immature officer bent on revenge the position knowing he wont hesitate to fire the missiles and start war with the Klingons. Only he doesnt because eventually it’s Pike’s influence that wins out and not Marcus. When Marcus is revealed, that reveal should sting Kirk who looked up to him as a father figure in much the way he did Pike. It’s a much stronger lesson, a much more believable plot and adds to the depth of Marcus’ character and his relationship with Kirk (adding depth to Kirk and Carol also).

58. Marja - June 27, 2014

35 TUP, STID would have worked on a much better scale without Khan’s involvement and with Marcus as the main villain. He was a far more interesting character and Peter Weller was far more interesting an actor.

Agreed. I’m thinking of the dramatic possibilities of a conflict between Pike and Marcus: Marcus wants to make Starfleet a war fleet and Pike wants to continue the mission of seeking out new life and new civilizations and using diplomacy. Marcus wants to start a pre-emptive war with the Klingons. Pike’s old loyalty to Marcus [who supposedly convinced Pike to joint Starfleet] and Kirk’s taking action based on Pike’s position would really have ramped up the father & son issues, the war & peace issues, and in the end, peace would be negotiated with the Klingons. If they wanted to recycle a character, why not recycle the Organians.

There were so many complications in the plot … it [to me] had some good political themes, in reference to our times, but it would have been much better with a little less plotty plotty action action. A good plot, good writing, and a sensible amount of action, with time for political/philosophical dialogue between Spock, Kirk, McCoy and Uhura would have made for a very good second entry in the NuTrek series.

59. Keachick (Rose) - June 27, 2014

#57 – “it would have been better if Marcus had been the one to insist Kirk take command of the Enterprise.”

Yes, I agree. I think that had not Kirk volunteered, that Marcus would have given him the assignment anyway. This is the feeling I got when Marcus was angry that Kirk did not fire the torpedoes at Kronos and then told Kirk that he was never going to spare Kirk’s ship and crew.

60. Cygnus-X1 - June 28, 2014

57. TUP – June 27, 2014

If they *had* to do it that way, it would have been better if Marcus had been the one to insist Kirk take command of the Enterprise. What we really needed was a scenario where Marcus and Pike were two sides of the same coin, “mentoring” Kirk with obviously different styles and advice. Pike dies (which shouldnt have happened) and Marcus gives Kirk a fatherly speech (echo’ing Pike’s from Star Trek) and implores him to take command do whats right. The motive for Marcus is to give an inexperienced, brash, immature officer bent on revenge the position knowing he wont hesitate to fire the missiles and start war with the Klingons. Only he doesnt because eventually it’s Pike’s influence that wins out and not Marcus. When Marcus is revealed, that reveal should sting Kirk who looked up to him as a father figure in much the way he did Pike. It’s a much stronger lesson, a much more believable plot and adds to the depth of Marcus’ character and his relationship with Kirk (adding depth to Kirk and Carol also).

I agree. The Obi-Won/Emperor juxtaposition. Two mentor father-figures, each trying to turn the apprentice to their own world-view.

Addressing the issue of Kirk being promoted too quickly was a good idea; they just did a lousy job of it, nullifying the effect of the demotion by killing off Pike and re-advancing Kirk to the captaincy 10 min later. Neither of those things should have happened in STID.

61. Buzz Cagney - June 28, 2014

The Saturns honour the best in Sci-Fi. STiD was hardly shut out, it just doesn’t qualify.
But don’t worry, it made a few quid at the Box Office and that’s all that really matters. Oh, hang on, so did Gravity. Hmm, that is a conundrum. A movie wins awards AND makes money. So it is possible.

62. IDIC Lives! - June 28, 2014

Cygnus-X1 and TUP,

There is so much wrong in STID that is amounts to a snowball effect. When a production gets its main character as wrong as it got Kirk, it is like building a house with a faulty foundation.

Yes, ye old Obi-Won/Emperor thing: Like so much of STID, it is actually Star Wars, even down to the white plastic sterility of the Enterprise which looks like a Storm Trooper’s giant uniform.

Kirk had no “father figure” in TOS and he did just fine, yet it became an issue from the first scene of the reboot. STID tries to insert “personal stuff” on a popcorn movie basis. Superman has father issues too.

Star Trek is about the STORY at hand – the science fiction plot which plays out. The characters with which we are so familiar, come into this scenario. (This is why Trek is made for episodic television or computer streaming like the wonderful “Star Trek Continues”–see it!!).

So I will give the JJ folk a small break and say that they had to make a movie, not a tv episode. However, there are plenty of great science fiction films (there should be more), from “Silent Running” to “Dark Star” to “2001” and even “Gravity” which are centered around the science fiction scenario/plot which happens. The TOS movies are this also.

But STID went off on tangents of personal issues of basically faulty characters (hey, that Kirk could never captain a battle ship in WW2 or a starship in 2030 – get real!) Then we have Spock and Uhura’s ongoing soap opera, Khan so angry that he blew up half of San Francisco because MAYBE Marcus killed his crew, and so much more which just does not ring true. The bell is cracked, and after a while, nothing rings true.

The story-based TOS rings so true when we see the crew in the rec room, for instance – yes, personal – but not an ongoing soap opera.

STID is a summer popcorn super-hero film, Lois Lane and Clark Kent have nothing on Spock and Uhura. The characterization of Spock is WAY OFF, actually as bad as Kirk’s.

I had hopes for keeping TOS alive with the JJ universe, instead it is slowly, painfully killing TOS.

However, there is “Star Trek Continues.” Hey, if you have not seen their episodes, WATCH THEM! They are THAT good. I support them in every way.

Sure, they are tiny compared to Paramount and their enormous production. However, Star Trek has always been kept alive by fan fiction, fan effort, campaigns to name the space shuttle Enterprise, campaigns to have the first Motion Picture–and we have been experienced disappointment before.

Paramount cracked down on fan-made creations at conventions, cracked down on fan fiction, only the prototype shuttle was named “Enterprise” and never went to space, the first Motion Picture fell into the V’ger abyss BUT–

It has always been a group of intelligent, geeky (as in “intelligent!”) TOS Trekkers who kept the dream and the premise alive. We don’t need to endorse or support the Empire, our protests will keep Trek alive longer.

63. Disinvited - June 28, 2014

# 62. IDIC Lives! – June 28, 2014

” Kirk had no “father figure” in TOS and he did just fine…” — IDIC Lives!

Whoa there, pardner, maybe not on screen but there was that whole his doing time on the USS Farragut and it was fairly clear he was mentored there which was the primary motivation for his guilt when he thought that it was his fault they hadn’t stopped the cloud vampire.

64. Red Red Ryan - June 28, 2014

#62.

We never saw the younger TOS version of Kirk so its impossible to compare him to nuKirk. Who’s to say young TOS Kirk didn’t have any issues?

Also, the rest of your post is nonsense. You come off as being whiny, petulant, and entitled. And don’t overstate the importance of “fan campaigns” in keeping Trek “alive” — more often, the studios see casual audiences as a way to expand their brands. Paramount isn’t going to listen to you.

65. IDIC Lives! - June 28, 2014

#63 Disinvited

Ya got me there, pardner. One episode, just one episode and it was also because hundreds of crewmates had died – or some such figure.

66. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

TOS Kirk did have a father and mentor. This Kirk’s father was very much alive and proudly saw him graduate and be promoted to captain. We may not have seen him, but he was there for TOS Kirk, certainly in spirit. His father (and mother) was someone he could send and receive messages via subspace, while on his journey exploring the far reaches of space. The same applied to his brother he affectionately called Sam. Despite the enormous distances that separated them physically, it was clear that they were all very much a family, in the best sense of the word. Not so for this alt.Kirk.

This nuKirk only knows (apart from some film footage of George Kirk Snr that his mother may have) that he and his mother lost a father and husband on the day of his birth…I would say that is a BIG difference.

I agree with Red Dead Ryan – your post is nonsense.

67. IDIC Lives! - June 28, 2014

Red Dead Ryan, You can bow down to Paramount all you want, I merely speak the truth – of my life for over 67 years with Star Trek in it for much of that time.

Yes, Keachick, pile on, you bully. Dismiss other people’s truths as nonsense, that’s what you do best.

The worst representatives of STID and JJ’s universe are its fans like you.

68. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

IDIC – stop bullying me. That is all you do whenever you come to this site – first thing you do is go for my jugular. So you are now 67 years old. Is it not about time you stopped walking into sites every so often just to harass regular contributors. If anyone is “interrupting”, to use your own description of what I did, it is you who has become almost synonymous with this kind of behaviour. This is not the first time and what’s more, you do not start off by commenting on the topic of a thread, you go for me. No, it is you who dismiss other people’s truths.

Nobody is “bowing down to Paramount all you want”, you rude bitch. You see, this above quoted is what you do best.

OK – I suppose you will call me out for calling you a rude bitch, but frankly I don’t care anymore. I do not agree with much of what you write. Your interpretation of these present movies and their characters come off to me as being shallow, yes, shallow, and I have stated in a previous post just why I think it is the case. It comes back to actually knowing and understanding original TOS characters. I cannot understand, for the life of me, how you could write such nonsense about alt Kirk.

69. IDIC Lives! - June 28, 2014

I have only given my honest opinions on STID, alternate Kirk and so forth. I have called no one any names as you just did to me, Keachick.

Are you having a meltdown? I’m leaving -again – same old story. Fact is, you would not have the nu-universe and Chris Pine if it weren’t for Trekkers throughout previous years keeping Trek alive.

It’s all yours, your tantrum has won again. I’m gone.

70. Ahmed - June 28, 2014

@68. Keachick

“So you are now 67 years old. Is it not about time you stopped walking into sites every so often just to harass regular contributors.”

“Nobody is “bowing down to Paramount all you want”, you rude bitch.”
————-

That is way out of line, Keachick.

If you have a strong feeling against a comment made by someone, then try to use sarcasm in your response instead of insulting & calling people names the way you just did.

71. Ahmed - June 28, 2014

@69. IDIC Lives!

“I’m leaving -again”

You don’t have to leave, you have the right to be here as much as anyone else on this site.

If I may, I think it is better for you to skip & ignore all the comments made by Keachick & RDR.

From my own experience with M-J & his “gang”, I learned that it is better to not engage with that type of people after a while. Because if you do, nothing good will come out of it, things will get too personal & you will feel angry.

72. IDIC Lives! - June 28, 2014

Ahmed, thank you, I think I have a right to be here too.

Just for the record, I came on this thread to chat with Cygnus, TUP, and others whom I had not “seen” since about the time STID came out.

TUP said he was glad to see me back.

We were discussing the STID double villains when Keachick popped up and said we were rabid dogs chewing an old bone and that Cygnus had said what he was saying–before. So what? We were having a civil, intelligent, interesting discussion. She had only not to participate if she didn’t like it.

Everyone can go back and check this thread.

I did not – did NOT – call Keachick any name other than a “bully,” which she often is in a passive-aggressive way.

She always calls my comments “nonsense” – and then calls me ‘bitch” and more. That’s not me, it’s HER. I have never done the same.

And THAT is why I have not been on this site as much, as she point out.
It’s because of her.

I have intelligent opinions on Trek, I have a lot of experience. I have something to offer. I am not saying other opinions are not intelligent, nothing of the sort. Check the thread.

Everyone is very indulgent of Keachick most often, perhaps you are ignoring her. But it leaves anyone who attempts to protest, out in the cold.

Ahmed, thanks for speaking up. I will sleep on what you said here.

73. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

I do not always call IDIC’s posts “nonsense” and IDIC’s behaviour towards me over various times has earned her the title of “bitch”. She seems to have made it a point of “going to town” on me every few weeks/months (and it is not just me she has gone for) and then she disappears again. She went for me some weeks ago over a discussion that was finished with nine months before, after which she disappeared, only to suddenly reappear again to bitch at me and another poster, simply because she failed to read comments properly and in context, but that, of course, was mine and the other regular poster’s fault (read my sarcasm).

IDIC offers nothing new to any discussion, other than her own repetitive, rude, bitter asinine comments, even though since she was here last, major developments within the Trek movie making world have taken place.

Ahmed – please do not compare me with MJ and his many sockpuppets, so it turns out. He/they bullied me to *tears… yet everyone just stood back and watched. It felt like being mugged in a New York street crowded with onlookers.

*Oh, that’s right. No one can mention “tears”, lest they be further victimized by the various MJs and IDICs. and before I forget, the word “victim” can’t be mentioned, because, of course, there are no such people…

WRONG – on both counts.

You can ignore me and Red Dead Ryan. It is not like he or I can do anything about it. It just means that I can *look forward* to another poster like TUP lying about me, refusing to apologize and moving the goal posts in a discussion. Nice going there. Frankly, some of your ethics demonstrated here are in the toilet and that is far worse than me honestly calling a person “bitch” when they have proven themselves *worthy* of the title.

74. Disinvited - June 28, 2014

# 65. IDIC Lives! – June 28, 2014

” Ya got me there, pardner. One episode, just one episode and it was also because hundreds of crewmates had died – or some such figure.” — IDIC Lives!

200 but not just that, Kirk’s mentor, Captain Garrovick, was one of the casualties.

Garrovick’s son was under Kirk’s command in the episode and I believe there’s a line where Kirk tells the son what a great man he was or some such.

But perhaps more important this episode, OBSESSION, establishes that Kirk being mentored by a starfleet captain ain’t nothin’ new to Trek.

75. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

“Everyone is very indulgent of Keachick most often”

Who is everyone? Now you are calling out the entire site, because of…what? I express my opinions, just as others do. There is agreement on some views being expressed and not so much on others. Does that bother you, IDIC? You are the one blowing in like a hurricane every few months, making personal attacks on me, and now you are blaming “everyone”…OKaaay

It could be that some are being overly indulgent of you as well.

76. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

“Are you having a meltdown? I’m leaving -again – same old story. Fact is, you would not have the nu-universe and Chris Pine if it weren’t for Trekkers throughout previous years keeping Trek alive.”

Wow, you really are full of it. I *like* the dig, as in the mention of Chris Pine…:( What has Trekkers keeping Trek alive got to do with your behaviour here? What knowledge? What experience? What intellect? The reality is that you contribute nothing new and that is NOT my fault. Unfortunately, it is always true that with age comes wisdoms. Case in point.

I can talk/argue/discuss with anyone…so long as they don’t just blow me off or lie about me. One poster to this site really did offend me personally some time back (said far ruder words to me than just “bitch”), however he apologized. So far, it is all been good…

Of course, you are leaving – again – because that is what you do. Shovel your crap at me and then when I shovel it back to its owner, you get haughty and leave. Same old, same old.

77. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

edit: should read, “Unfortunately, it is NOT always true that with age comes wisdom…”

78. Mikey1091 - June 28, 2014

Gravity defiantely deserved to win, it was an amaziong movie. Still, I’d like to see a Trek movie win, just onces. One single time, that’s all I’m asking! Of course, it’ll probably never happen (unless it has and I somehow missed it of forgot all about it) but we’ll see.

79. LogicalLeopard - June 28, 2014

48. Cygnus-X1 – June 27, 2014
31. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

I wouldn’t. I’d call that “violence.” There’s more to masculinity than being violent. And I say this as a man who is not violent. If you want to understand what I meant, go back and watch TOS Space Seed. See how Khan is portrayed? Compare that to how he is portrayed in STID. You should be able to see a significant difference in the two characters.

**************************

True, but aggression is a pretty significant trait of masculinity, whether it becomes full blown violence or not. You’ll see the difference in the two characters, true, but you have to realize that they are accomplishing different things. Khan in Space Seed is freshly thawed and has to think on his feet and manipulate the situation. His first instinctual reaction was violence, when he tries to kill McCoy upon being awakened. Once he realizes the situation he’s in, he has to nuance it, and do what’s necessary to get what he wants. He goes about it in a different way, because he’s in a different situation. The Khan of STID has been thawed for a while, and had to go along with Admiral Marcus for a while. He tries to manipulate Kirk, but when it all comes down to it, he resorts to brutal, naked violence just like he did in Space Seed.
**********************************

Really? Dom just said in #17 that Khan believed that his friends were all dead and had every reason to believe that. Which is it? What was Khan’s motive—irrationally lashing out to avenge the deaths of his believed-dead friends; or getting his friends back from Starfleet? If his motive was the latter, how did he expect to accomplish it by attacking Starfleet HQ and killing the people who were in the best positions to help him? Umm…hey, yeah…sorry to bother you Admiral Nice Guys, but Admiral Marcus is doing illegal, sinister things behind your backs and holding my buddies hostage to force me to help him. Could you guys maybe help me out, seeing as how Marcus is betraying every principle that you’ve sworn to uphold? Kthanks!!

The writing of STID is so bad that even people who were satisfied with the movie can’t agree on the plot and the characters’ motives.

********************************

Bad or good? *LOL* You know, I watched the scene again https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8Sa6oUUByE , and here’s what we have:

1) Khan said that he put the augments in the torpedoes
2) Khan said that he was trying to get out from Admiral Marcus, and smuggle his friends out
3) Khan also describes an elaborate plot of Marcus to start war with the Klingon empire by getting a ship to fire missles at QuonoS, and then strand it.

I submit to you that Khan Noonien Singh is a tactical genius. He PUT his friends in missles he knew were going to be used against the Klingons. And to make it sweeter, where’s the first place he goes? QuonoS. To an abandoned province that Starfleet would have no problem nuking. And so it would be without doubt, he leaves the beaming device wholly intact with his exact coordinates. If he wanted to escape without a trace, he would have rigged an explosive on that sucker so it would explode without anyone knowing where he went. He knew that Marcus was going to send a ship after him and send the missiles right to his doorstep (probably as a cruel joke). I think he had an intercept method waiting to land those missiles safely on QuonoS. It’s too perfect. He believed Marcus killed his family? Why would Marcus kill the augments if Khan had merely ESCAPED? Why would Khan attack if he was seriously concerned about his family? Unless he played it from the very beginning, knowing that Marcus would consider it a cruel joke to blow him up with his own people after Khan intentionally attacked SFC London and left a trail of breadcrumbs to his door.
***********************************************************.

It is, from my experience. Go read the reviews at RottenTomatoes.com.

See if you can find any reviews that have anything good to say about the writing in STID. They’re few and far between, if they exist at all. And most people here acknowledge that the plot is confusing, even if they liked the movie on the whole. You don’t even understand the plot, yourself. And I don’t blame you.

************************************************************

I’ll have to leave that to your experience, because I’m not going to look at all of those reviews. I could be wrong. On both counts. The first fan polls I saw on this website were positive toward the movie, with the majority thinking it was a good or excellent movie. Have other, more comprehensive polls found something otherwise? Not sure.

80. LogicalLeopard - June 28, 2014

49. Cygnus-X1 – June 27, 2014
34. LogicalLeopard – June 27, 2014

They didn’t address it by demoting Kirk. They addressed it by pointing out the havoc he potentially caused on Niburu, and the attitude he had. Showing that yes, he wasn’t as mature as he should have been to be a Captain. Addressing something doesn’t mean you have to change it. The demotion isn’t really addressing the the problem is – Kirk’s experience.

HUH?!???

Of course they meant to address Kirk’s immaturity by demoting him. That was the whole friggin point!

Addressing something doesn’t mean you have to change it???

**************************************

It’s a nuanced thing, yes, but like I said, “addressing” something doesn’t mean you have to change it. If a politician addresses the shortcomings of a piece of legislation in his speech, he can say, “I realize that the _____ bill has some flaws and kinks,but overall, the American people are better off with it having been passed.” They can even say “We’re working on it” without actually working on it.

The writers addressed Kirk’s meteoric rise to the chair by pointing out that he still wasn’t completely fit for it. If they wanted to “address it” by demoting him, he would have stayed demoted throughout the whole movie. It’s like if you address something by firing someone, they stay fired.

That’s my opinion, anyway.

*************************************

What, do you regard Star Fleet as like some preschool where they don’t want to hurt the feelings of their insubordinate, rogue commanders, so they just point out what they’ve done wrong and then leave them in positions of great responsibility hoping they’ve learned from their mistake? Now, Kirk…you disobeyed our most sacred principle and that was very naughty of you. You can still be captain of the Federation flag ship, but just don’t be naughty again, mmk? Now you can eat your ice cream.

***************************

*LOL* That’s kind of what they did with Admiral Kirk. They demoted him,and put him right back in the seat of the Enterprise, which is what he wanted all along. And I don’t think there was a person at Starfleet Command that didn’t know Kirk wanted to get back out there. “Admiral Kirk, that was very naughty of you, stealing a ship and saving one of our most decorated officers, and beating up on our enemies as well. So, even though you hate riding a desk, we’re going to put you back in the command chair of one of our best ships, WHICH YOU JUST STOLE, with your best buddy, WHO YOU STOLE THE SHIP FOR. Just don’t be naughty again, mmkay! We trust you to be wise with it, because after all, you’ve only had a career of breaking our most sacred principle, the Prime directive….

*LOLOL* I realize that was completely besides the point you were making, but it was so funny I had to point it out. But to address what you said, I wasn’t talking about how STARFLEET addresses an issue, I was talking about how the writers addressed this issue.

81. LogicalLeopard - June 28, 2014

62. IDIC Lives! – June 28, 2014
Cygnus-X1 and TUP,

There is so much wrong in STID that is amounts to a snowball effect. When a production gets its main character as wrong as it got Kirk, it is like building a house with a faulty foundation.

Yes, ye old Obi-Won/Emperor thing: Like so much of STID, it is actually Star Wars, even down to the white plastic sterility of the Enterprise which looks like a Storm Trooper’s giant uniform.

****************************

Er….what? Although I don’t understand what you mean by the Emperor/Obi Wan thing, you’ll have to do a little better than comparing the interior of the ship to a Storm Trooper uniform. The only solid reference to Star Wars is Mudd’s ship trying to squeeze through those buildings on QuonoS, which I thought was a cute reference, but some people didn’t like it *shrug* The speed of location changes is similar too, but that’s not so overt.
***********************

Kirk had no “father figure” in TOS and he did just fine, yet it became an issue from the first scene of the reboot. STID tries to insert “personal stuff” on a popcorn movie basis. Superman has father issues too.

**************************

Wait….who says Kirk didn’t have a father in TOS? Spock in ST09 says he did, and I don’t know if there’s anything to contradict that. And why is it a crime to insert depth into characters, popcorn movie or not?

************************

But STID went off on tangents of personal issues of basically faulty characters (hey, that Kirk could never captain a battle ship in WW2 or a starship in 2030 – get real!)

**************************

Well, he’s not captaining a battleship in WW2, or a Starship in 2030 (in whatever universe you’re talking about). Starfleet clearly has different command ideals than we’re used to. They give people who cheat on tests medals in some realities….

****************************

Then we have Spock and Uhura’s ongoing soap opera, Khan so angry that he blew up half of San Francisco because MAYBE Marcus killed his crew, and so much more which just does not ring true. The bell is cracked, and after a while, nothing rings true.

***********************
You mean London. And as I have written about two posts ago, I’m pretty sure Khan was trying to con Kirk with that motivation. He put his people in torpedoes he knew were planning to be used against QuonoS. THEN he escaped from Section 31. Why would Marcus kill his people because he escaped? But look, then he attacks London SFHQ and ESCAPES to QuonoS, leaving the transporter intact displaying the coordinates. Its like he used Starfleet like FedEx.

And if people don’t care for Spock/Uhura, okay, but it’s not exactly a soap opera. They have some pretty relatable interaction.

82. Cygnus-X1 - June 28, 2014

79. LogicalLeopard – June 28, 2014
80. LogicalLeopard – June 28, 2014

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you’re engaging in logical contortions trying to rationalize the plot, character and story problems of STID rather than admit what most other people admit—it’s a poorly constructed mess.

People like whatever they like. Watch STID once a week and enjoy it if it makes you happy.

But don’t tell me that STID was well written when the opposite is clearly true.

;-)

83. Keachick (Rose) - June 28, 2014

Did Khan actually know that Marcus planned to use those torpedoes against Kronos? I got the impression that it was the other way round. Once Marcus found out that the torpedoes were refitted and contained Khan’s crew and had them in his “hot, little hands”, then it was a matter of him disposing of said crew.

Being the opportunist that Marcus was, he quickly saw a way of using the torpedoes to get rid of Khan’s crew by pre-emptively starting a war with the Klingons (“the war he always wanted”), have Kirk and Enterprise destroyed by the Klingons and so get rid of Kirk and co. at same time. Marcus could claim that the Klingons fired on a Starfleet ship, without provocation and of course, the Klingons would correctly deny this. Nobody would know who was telling the truth but by then the battle lines would be drawn.

Marcus did not want Kirk and his crew around and I doubt he wanted Pike around either. Had Pike not been killed at SFHQ, then Marcus would have looked for a way to get rid of Pike as well. To warmongers like Marcus, the Pikes, Kirks, Spocks et al are major thorns in their sides that require excising. Why? Clue – Nibiru…now think about it…

@Bob Orci – Have I got the scenario and Marcus character motivations (fairly) correct?

84. Red Red Ryan - June 28, 2014

Funny how Ahmed can defend IDIC’s obnoxious behaviour, but then attack Keachick and I.

I’m trying to figure out the reason for this hypocrisy………hmmmmm……ya know, I think it has to revolve around the fact that Keachick and I happen to enjoy the reboot movies while IDIC and Ahmed don’t!

An easy explanation for Ahmed’s double standards in regards to behaviour exhibited on this site!

85. Keachick (Rose) - June 29, 2014

#84 – Some time back, I recall that one of the posters who suddenly appeared on a thread on this site, being abusive toward me, was Ahmed. I could not recall seeing him before, but like IDIC, blew in like a nasty tornado and ripped into me. He also did not speak to the topic of the thread either. Similar behaviour as well.

It is the behaviour of people who like to ambush another – kind of guerilla war type tactics.

86. Frustration - June 29, 2014

It wasn’t “shut out” – it just wasn’t bloody good enough.

87. Ahmed - June 29, 2014

@85. Keachick (Rose)

Please check yourself into a mental hospital!
This is my last advice to you.

88. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

Ahmed, Sorry I got you included in this witch hunt against me which Keachick is conducting with her henchmen. ((Incidentally, I remember seeing you before many times even if Keachick cannot, perhaps her wrath clouds her vision. I too have been on this site a number of times. I do not LIVE on it, however).

Yes, I know I am being melodramatic and over the top in calling it a witch hunt; for one thing, this is only cyberspace and for another, it insults the suffering of real victims of witch hunts throughout human history.

However, Keachick does not know she is being melodramatic and over the top in her verbose descriptions and there is the difference! Not a clue–

Nasty tornado, malevolent, rabid dog, and all I (and you) wanted to do was to offer our opinion on Star Trek.

89. Ahmed - June 29, 2014

@88. IDIC Lives!

No problem, I’m used to Keachick crazy rantings. Like I said, it is better to ignore her & the M-J wannabe.

Cygnus-X1 in another thread is doing just that, after all, there is no sense in having conversations with these two.

LLAP.

90. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

Ahmed, I’ll ignore her.

And I’m not leaving.

I could change my moniker to “Nasty Tornado” like I changed it to “The Malevolent One,” for a while months ago, and there is always “Rabid Dog,” all names she has called me for having a different opinion and then defending it and not buckling to what she wanted but–I’ll stay around.

91. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

Well, I feel like the little guy in “Plato’s Stepchildren!” (Sorry, forgot his name, shame on me).

I have been looking at other threads, per Ahmed’s mention of Cygnus X1’s successful ignoring of Keachick, and I must say, here I thought it was just me! (That’s the quote from the little guy, “I thought it was just me!”)

But, nope, she insults a number of people, like TUP and he grokked her bully ways, too, Cygnus X1 and others – also have felt her nasty tornado wrath.

Like little what’s-his-name said of Plato’s Stepchildren, I will not stoop to her methods. One has to wonder what goal she seeks.

Ah, well, I guess I should go watch “Plato’s Stepchildren.” I am free, I am free…! Keachick, you cannot get under my skin any more, I bet that really causes a meltdown.

92. Anthony Lewis - June 29, 2014

I think the Khan performance was taken a bit to literally or went over the heads of a lot of people here.

Everything BC’s Khan said or did was manipulation it seemed perfectly clear to me that Khan wanted his crew safe and he wanted the Marcus ship. To get them he was willing to do or say whatever it took to get him in that position (and because this Khan is actually smart he accomplished those things).

I love Ben Kingsley and I thought he was great in Iron Man 3 but BC owned STiD. And while I’m sure my inbox will get flooded with hate mail, I found the new Khan to be better written than the old.

While Mr. Montalban played the character fantastically I can no longer see him as a real threat. Khan wasn’t very super human, Kirk beat him in a fight, and Kirk easily outsmarts him numerous times.

I think STiD nailed Khan as a serious threat not just to Kirk but everyone and that is what a great villain does.

93. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

Logical Leopard, “Wait….who says Kirk didn’t have a father in TOS?”

Of course Kirk had a father in TOS. I said a “father figure” was not an issue for TOS Kirk, perhaps “father issue” would have been a better choice. You will forgive me?

I assume TOS Kirk had a good father, as indicated by the 2009 reboot. But TOS itself never addressed the subject.

Kirk was in in a near-starving colony at age 15 when Kordidian/Kodos wiped half of them out, so–don’t know how that works in. We never were told.

The nu universe Kirk has father ISSUES. Of course any Kirk would look up to a commanding officer he liked, be it Garrovick or Pike, but in the nu-universe, he only had a bad uncle in that Iowa barn – which, by the way, looks noting like a real Iowa barn. Maybe a nasty tornado will blow it away.

94. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

ALEXANDER!! That was the little Plato’s Stepchildren guy’s name–Michael Dunn played him. Whew, that was buggin’ me.

95. IDIC Lives! - June 29, 2014

I liked Montalban’s version of a human with enhanced genetics better than the super, super hero version of Cumberbatch’s Khan.

I suspect a genetically enhanced human would be stronger than Kirk, which Montalban’s version was, but not a super-super man who could wipe out a Klingon (they are big tough guys) division and be immune to a number of phaser stuns. Like so much in the nu-universe, this is more fantasy than science fiction.

Incidentally, I write science speculation and futurism for a living and artificial DNA letters have been created which gives us 172 amino acids (building blocks of life) instead of 20. Our organic DNA letters are C.T. A, and G, but the artificial DNA just developed, which they’ve given the letters X and Y (not related to gender chromosomes), do link together (they feared they would not). So the door has just opened for human genetic engineering, curing cancer through genetic engineering, possibly, and more – beyond imagination. Some of what we use it for will be good, other uses might be bad or have bad consequences. But we cannot stagnate as a human race, we always have to try new technology and science discoveries. And so Star Trek told us 50 years ago. It was a visionary series!

96. Jonboc - June 29, 2014

I’m sooo glad the studio isn’t listening to us.

Looking forward to the 50th anniversary more than ever, and thanking the stars that we will not be celebrating it within the confines of that wretched 24th century soap opera!

97. Disinvited - June 29, 2014

#95. IDIC Lives! – June 29, 2014

I think the first series opened the door to superpowers when they introduced kironide in the episode you brought up.

Can you imagine Khan on that stuff? Tribbles?

98. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

82. Cygnus-X1 – June 28, 2014

79. LogicalLeopard – June 28, 2014
80. LogicalLeopard – June 28, 2014

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you’re engaging in logical contortions trying to rationalize the plot, character and story problems of STID rather than admit what most other people admit—it’s a poorly constructed mess.

People like whatever they like. Watch STID once a week and enjoy it if it makes you happy.

But don’t tell me that STID was well written when the opposite is clearly true.

;-)

*****************************************

I suppose I would say much the same thing. Everyone has opinions, and everyone has different levels of enjoyment for what they watch. I don’t care if someone watched ST09, then watched STID in the theaters, hated both, and never want to watch another Abrams movie again.

But don’t try to make an argument that it’s a horrible film, or even one of the worst Trek films, because it’s really not. I know we’re talking about an issue of subjectivity, but I think when you look at this as objectively as you can, I think ultimately a rational person will say, “You know, this didn’t work for me. I couldn’t buy into it.” Let me be clear – you’ll never confuse STID with Citizen Kane. It does have plotholes, mainly the last act, in which these two ships are basically slugging it out over what should be one of the most heavily defended worlds in the Federation, without one single ship coming to their assistance. Even if Marcus told them to stand down, you’d think there’d be some sort of interceptor to prevent two starships from falling into populated areas. As far as the criticism on Khan, I think that if anything, the story fails because it doesn’t explain everything to everyone. The answers, or logical contortions as you put them, seem to be easily found if you look at the situation, but many people are not willing to look at the situation because they didn’t agree with the choice of Khan, the choice of actor, the choice to put Khan in alongside of another bad guy, whatever the case may be. And I tend to call that out whenever I see it, because if something doesn’t work for you, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s badly written. It could mean that you weren’t able to invest yourself in it, and that lack of investment hindered your appreciation of the movie. And we must remember, we ARE talking about Star Trek. Remember Star Trek III? Now that had some glaring story flaws, but most of us saw it, invested ourselves in it, and enjoyed it.

99. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

93. IDIC Lives! – June 29, 2014

Logical Leopard, “Wait….who says Kirk didn’t have a father in TOS?”

Of course Kirk had a father in TOS. I said a “father figure” was not an issue for TOS Kirk, perhaps “father issue” would have been a better choice. You will forgive me?

I assume TOS Kirk had a good father, as indicated by the 2009 reboot. But TOS itself never addressed the subject.

Kirk was in in a near-starving colony at age 15 when Kordidian/Kodos wiped half of them out, so–don’t know how that works in. We never were told.

The nu universe Kirk has father ISSUES. Of course any Kirk would look up to a commanding officer he liked, be it Garrovick or Pike, but in the nu-universe, he only had a bad uncle in that Iowa barn – which, by the way, looks noting like a real Iowa barn. Maybe a nasty tornado will blow it away.93. IDIC Lives! – June 29, 2014

Logical Leopard, “Wait….who says Kirk didn’t have a father in TOS?”

Of course Kirk had a father in TOS. I said a “father figure” was not an issue for TOS Kirk, perhaps “father issue” would have been a better choice. You will forgive me?

I assume TOS Kirk had a good father, as indicated by the 2009 reboot. But TOS itself never addressed the subject.

************************

But you realize, when you compare nu-Kirk’s father issues with Prime Kirk’s lack of father issues, that the timeline is not the same, hence those issues. It’s like the Mirror Universe. We take for granted that Kirk can be evil, if given the right circumstances, so why not accept the fact that something as basic as having a heroic, dead father, and absentee, military mother, can produce a juvenile delinquent?

*************************
Kirk was in in a near-starving colony at age 15 when Kordidian/Kodos wiped half of them out, so–don’t know how that works in. We never were told.
*****************************

You’re right, i was thinking about that too. But of course, that whole thing doesn’t make sense, because Kirk also has a brother, who wasn’t mentioned as being a survivor of that colony. So, what happened? Is Kirk there himself? Or was the whole family there, but only Kirk and the other guy saw Kodos’s face? More like this: The TOS writers didn’t exactly get together and work out Kirk’s history.

******************************
The nu universe Kirk has father ISSUES. Of course any Kirk would look up to a commanding officer he liked, be it Garrovick or Pike, but in the nu-universe, he only had a bad uncle in that Iowa barn – which, by the way, looks noting like a real Iowa barn. Maybe a nasty tornado will blow it away.

*******************************

Like I said, of course he has issues. His father died. And he never got to meet him. That can produce issues.

*LOL* about the barn

100. Keachick (Rose) - June 29, 2014

#98 – “The answers, or logical contortions as you put them, seem to be easily found if you look at the situation, but many people are not willing to look at the situation because they didn’t agree with the choice of Khan, the choice of actor, the choice to put Khan in alongside of another bad guy, whatever the case may be.”

Exactly. So many people are too distracted by their own personal preferences and prejudices. There is also much projection. Quite frustrating sometimes.

STID does provide valid answers within its story and they are not necessarily that hard to see. There is not a lot that is actually convoluted or messy, if anything. However, some of the comments I read here and elsewhere are unnecessarily convoluted, messy and logically untenable.

101. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

83. Keachick (Rose) – June 28, 2014

Did Khan actually know that Marcus planned to use those torpedoes against Kronos? I got the impression that it was the other way round. Once Marcus found out that the torpedoes were refitted and contained Khan’s crew and had them in his “hot, little hands”, then it was a matter of him disposing of said crew.

*****************************

Both, I think. I think the torpedoes were designed to be used against QuonoS because that’s why Khan was working with Section 31 in the first place, to design weapons to confront a savage enemy – specifically the Klingons. I think that Khan shut his family up in those torpedoes so that they would be fired at QuonoS, and in my headcanon, I’m thinking that Khan had a way to adjust the guidance on those torpedoes so they would land safely.

Its all too perfect, when you think about it. Why smuggle them in torpedoes? Why not just hijack a shuttle, or a ship? Because they’d be on the run, and Starfleet would be looking for them.

But if Khan hides his people in torpedoes, then runs away, knowing that Marcus is going to find them in the torpedoes, and knowing that Marcus is twisted and morally compromised enough to shoot them at QuonoS, all of his problems are solved. Khan leaves a trail of breadcrumbs (an intact beaming unit with his coordinates which he easily could have destroyed), Khan finds an idiot (Kirk, in this case) to do a covert mission to bomb the homeworld from a distance. Khan lands the torpedoes safely, makes an explosion so it looks like the torpedoes destroyed him and all the Augments. Marcus is happy because he destroyed Khan and the augments AND started a war. Khan and Co lay low until the Klingons and Federation have lumped each other up, then swoop in to not only take over a world, but a quadrant. If this were Spock’s wedding day, he’d say, “Logical…..flawlessly logical!” *LOL*
*******************************************

Being the opportunist that Marcus was, he quickly saw a way of using the torpedoes to get rid of Khan’s crew by pre-emptively starting a war with the Klingons (“the war he always wanted”), have Kirk and Enterprise destroyed by the Klingons and so get rid of Kirk and co. at same time. Marcus could claim that the Klingons fired on a Starfleet ship, without provocation and of course, the Klingons would correctly deny this. Nobody would know who was telling the truth but by then the battle lines would be drawn.

******************************

Exactly. And meanwhile, through all of that, Khan and 72 augments are watching (and probably orchestrating things behind the scenes).

***************************
Marcus did not want Kirk and his crew around and I doubt he wanted Pike around either. Had Pike not been killed at SFHQ, then Marcus would have looked for a way to get rid of Pike as well. To warmongers like Marcus, the Pikes, Kirks, Spocks et al are major thorns in their sides that require excising. Why? Clue – Nibiru…now think about it…

*********************************

Mmmnnn….I don’t think he would have gotten rid of Pike. I think he would have just gotten another hawkish Captain to do his dirty work. Pike’s death provided the perfect opportunity, because Kirk had already established himself as being reckless and not particularly reverent towards regulations he didn’t agree with. Marcus knew Kirk’s attachment to Pike, and knew that he would go in guns blazing. The only thing he didn’t factor in was Kirk’s friendship with Spock, and the respect and friendship he had for his crew. And of course, Pike’s influence on Kirk overriding Kirk’s need to revenge Pike.

102. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

92. Anthony Lewis – June 29, 2014

I couldn’t agree more with that post. To me, it seems more in step with what Khan actually does. His ability to manipulate was what built his empire in the first place. And we see it on display here. In the Brig scene, you can’t possibly take what he was saying all at face value. Like excellent manipulators, they use some of the truth to bring you in, and twist it juuuust slightly so that you’ll believe them.

103. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

100. Keachick (Rose) – June 29, 2014

Exactly. So many people are too distracted by their own personal preferences and prejudices. There is also much projection. Quite frustrating sometimes.

STID does provide valid answers within its story and they are not necessarily that hard to see. There is not a lot that is actually convoluted or messy, if anything. However, some of the comments I read here and elsewhere are unnecessarily convoluted, messy and logically untenable.

************************

Very true. Like all movies, it has its faults, but the frustrating thing is that people appear to not point out the legitimate faults as much as they fall all over themselves to complain about things that they just didn’t like personally, framing it with an objective statement. They’ll say things like, “STID was horribly written, because Khan shouldn’t have been white.” Er….what? That’s not even writing, that’s casting.

I have no problem if people didn’t like something, but at least separate your opinions from your objective statements.

104. LogicalLeopard - June 29, 2014

95. IDIC Lives! – June 29, 2014

I liked Montalban’s version of a human with enhanced genetics better than the super, super hero version of Cumberbatch’s Khan.

I suspect a genetically enhanced human would be stronger than Kirk, which Montalban’s version was, but not a super-super man who could wipe out a Klingon (they are big tough guys) division and be immune to a number of phaser stuns. Like so much in the nu-universe, this is more fantasy than science fiction.
********************************

Well, first, what is the difference between Montalban’s Khan and Cumberbatch’s Khan? MontalKhan was strong enough to force open sealed ship doors and lift Chekov in a spacesuit onehanded. CumberKhan was strong enough to smoosh heads with both hands. Both were very able to assimilate advanced technological data pretty quickly, with MontalKhan understanding the Enterprise’s technical manuals in Space Seed, and CumberKhan knowing enough about Federation technology to improve on it in less than a year of being unfrozen, and also understand advanced technology like Scotty’s planet to planet beaming formula.

Beating the Klingons is pretty easy. He’s about as strong as them, if not stronger. I don’t know….I don’t remember ever seeing a Klingon lift a human one handed like MontalKhan did in TWOK. Also, remember, the Klingon are warriors, but they have limitations. They have their own morality system (honor) that restricts their fighting more than Khan’s “Get er done” style. But they don’t necessarily have advanced sensory abilities or strategic abilities, they just have a lot of training. Khan probably has hand-eye coordination abilities at least on par with Bashir, who can bullseye a dart with little effort. Combine that with the advantage of surprise, it’s no wonder he took out a whole patrol of Klingons. It’s just point and shoot. And leap, and dodge, and shoot some more. Klingons are immune (immunish) to phaser stuns at a normal level. Not a phaser set to kill. Khan did NOT have his phaser on stun. *LOL* If you can call it a phaser, I’d call it a cannon!

********************************

Incidentally, I write science speculation and futurism for a living and artificial DNA letters have been created which gives us 172 amino acids (building blocks of life) instead of 20. Our organic DNA letters are C.T. A, and G, but the artificial DNA just developed, which they’ve given the letters X and Y (not related to gender chromosomes), do link together (they feared they would not). So the door has just opened for human genetic engineering, curing cancer through genetic engineering, possibly, and more – beyond imagination. Some of what we use it for will be good, other uses might be bad or have bad consequences. But we cannot stagnate as a human race, we always have to try new technology and science discoveries. And so Star Trek told us 50 years ago. It was a visionary series!

*************************************

Very interesting! I think that this goes back to what you said earlier about it being fantasy instead of science fiction. I submit that it IS science fiction, but not science speculation, like you write. There’s an awful lot of hogwash in Star Trek, but that’s what makes it science fiction instead of fact. I’m not as well versed in biology as you are, but I remember being disturbed when I was told in science class that two members of different species cannot produce fertile offspring, like say,a mule. I’m thinking, “But….but….what about Spock? You’re saying that he couldn’t produce little Spocks? Or what about Simon Tarses, his grandparent was a Romulan, but they produced offspring! Stop lying to me real science!” *LOL* But then again, speaking of Spock, there’s no way that Amanda could have carried him….what would THAT placenta look like, that can filter red blood into green blood? Not to mention the kicking…

105. Keachick (Rose) - June 29, 2014

“But if Khan hides his people in torpedoes, then runs away, knowing that Marcus is going to find them in the torpedoes”

But that is not what happened. That makes no sense.

Khan did not run away at all, leaving the missiles for Marcus… to find. My impression was that he planned to steal the torpedoes with his crew inside and then remove crew once he, with torpedoes, found safety. However, Marcus found out and confiscated the weapons, knowing full well that the crew were hidden inside and Khan became a fugitive. Khan believed that Marcus had killed his crew, as Marcus had threatened Khan that he would do that if Khan did not comply with Marcus’s wishes. It seemed that Khan had no reason not to believe Marcus in this respect. This all occurred around the time that suddenly Carol Marcus was denied access to the new torpedoes or information about them at this point, and so was Khan. That was Marcus’s doing.

The story is straight forward and Admiral Marcus is an accessory in the bombing of S31 in London, because of his threats to Khan and that he had to have been aware of what Khan was capable of, if/when pushed, which is what Marcus did.

“Pike’s death provided the perfect opportunity, because Kirk had already established himself as being reckless and not particularly reverent towards regulations he didn’t agree with. Marcus knew Kirk’s attachment to Pike, and knew that he would go in guns blazing”

That was the assumption that Marcus got wrong, or did he? – that Kirk would necessarily go in guns blazing, given more time for reflection, even if Kirk had not been influenced by Spock. Kirk might have established himself as being reckless, but not in terms of aggression. If Marcus knew that Kirk was “not particularly reverent towards regulations he didn’t agree with”, why should Marcus believe that Kirk would obey his orders, if on reflection, he did not agree with them?

The reality was that in the case of going after Khan, Kirk did abide by certain Starfleet protocols and was resolved about following, the ones that Marcus had ordered him to go against. This is what I am trying to point out – that nobody seems to understand. Kirk is NOT irreverent at all…
This is why Marcus told Kirk that he was never going to spare Kirk or his crew. Marcus realized that Kirk and co. were not “Yes, Sir. Three bags full, Sir” kind of people who he could easily manipulate or get to do stuff that is morally untenable.

106. Disinvited - June 29, 2014

# 105. Keachick (Rose) – June 29, 2014

“My impression was that he [Khan] planned to steal the torpedoes with his crew inside and then remove crew once he, with torpedoes, found safety. ” — Keachick (Rose)

My impression was that Khan was planning to steal the ship, the Vengeance, after the torpedoes were loaded on it and resolve his people’s situation later while in safe hiding.

107. Keachick (Rose) - June 29, 2014

#106 Yes, that makes sense, but obviously things did not go according to plan.

The fact is that Khan did not have do anything other than tell the truth, which is what he did. Perhaps his story about his fear of losing his crew and his tearful “what would you do for your family?” bit might have been his attempts at emotional manipulation of Kirk, but he soon realized that it was pointless. He was left under no illusion that Kirk meant him to stand trial for his crimes, one of which Kirk himself witnessed, so that justice would be served.

I think the irony is that Khan from the first words he uttered in the film to Harewood to the final, were the truth. He never lied or *fudged* anything. He didn’t have to.

108. LogicalLeopard - June 30, 2014

105. Keachick (Rose) – June 29, 2014

But that is not what happened. That makes no sense.

Khan did not run away at all, leaving the missiles for Marcus… to find. My impression was that he planned to steal the torpedoes with his crew inside and then remove crew once he, with torpedoes, found safety. However, Marcus found out and confiscated the weapons, knowing full well that the crew were hidden inside and Khan became a fugitive. Khan believed that Marcus had killed his crew, as Marcus had threatened Khan that he would do that if Khan did not comply with Marcus’s wishes. It seemed that Khan had no reason not to believe Marcus in this respect. This all occurred around the time that suddenly Carol Marcus was denied access to the new torpedoes or information about them at this point, and so was Khan. That was Marcus’s doing.

****************************

But from what Khan says in the Brig, here is the timeline:

1) Khan designs weapons for Marcus
2) Khan hides his people in the weapons and tries to get away
3) Khan is “caught.” He doesn’t say what “caught” means, but he doesn’t look like he was physically caught, because….
4) Khan escapes from Section 31
5) Khan “believes his people are dead.”
6) Khan retaliates against Starfleet.

So I believe that Khan meant for Marcus to find the people in the torpedoes. Otherwise, he might have not hidden them inside of torpedoes, and would have done something different to get them out. Khan is a master strategist, could he not have come up with a better plan then smuggling his people inside of torpedoes?

But, like I said, I think the whole reason why he put them inside of torpedoes is because he was counting on Marcus to use them against him. He knows Marcus is brutal and ruthless. So, he escapes to QuonoS and leaves his exact coordinates. So since he escaped, Marcus has to make good on his threat to kill Khan’s buddies, right? What better way to kill them than to fire the torpedoes at Khan and kill two (seventy-three) birds with one (seventy two) stones? Actually three birds with one stone, because it offers an irresistible way to start the Klingon war he’s been itching for?

************************************

“Pike’s death provided the perfect opportunity, because Kirk had already established himself as being reckless and not particularly reverent towards regulations he didn’t agree with. Marcus knew Kirk’s attachment to Pike, and knew that he would go in guns blazing”

That was the assumption that Marcus got wrong, or did he? – that Kirk would necessarily go in guns blazing, given more time for reflection, even if Kirk had not been influenced by Spock. Kirk might have established himself as being reckless, but not in terms of aggression. If Marcus knew that Kirk was “not particularly reverent towards regulations he didn’t agree with”, why should Marcus believe that Kirk would obey his orders, if on reflection, he did not agree with them?

********************************************

Because Kirk was ticked off. That’s why he thought he would obey his order to bomb a guy who killed his friend/father figure from orbit. He didn’t think Kirk would “reflect.” And honestly, did any of us think Kirk was going to change his mind in the theatre? He was obviously ready to hunt Khan down from his discussion with Marcus, and he was persistent to the point where he let Scotty resign.

Marcus undoubtebly knows Kirk’s profile and his history. He knew that Pike was the one who encouraged him to join Starfleet, and he probably knew the story behind it. So, if Marcus is looking at his profile, and it says, “Juvenile delinquent, dead father, raised by uncle he couldn’t stand, has issues with authority, encouraged to join Starfleet by Captain Pike, mentored by Pike, willing to break the rules when he feels things are necessary (Nibiru), why would he think Kirk would change his mind? But he did, and that’s what threw a kink in his plans. That’s why he had to go personally deal with Kirk.

*******************************

The reality was that in the case of going after Khan, Kirk did abide by certain Starfleet protocols and was resolved about following, the ones that Marcus had ordered him to go against. This is what I am trying to point out – that nobody seems to understand. Kirk is NOT irreverent at all…
This is why Marcus told Kirk that he was never going to spare Kirk or his crew. Marcus realized that Kirk and co. were not “Yes, Sir. Three bags full, Sir” kind of people who he could easily manipulate or get to do stuff that is morally untenable.

***********************************

Kirk is irreverent of Starfleet protocols. That’s proven by cheating on the simulator, the Nibiru incident, and his subsequent arguments to defend his decisions. However, I WILL say that Kirk is not completely irreverent, and perhaps less than some would think. Its more like Kirk has his own moral compass, which sometimes agrees or conflicts with Starfleet protocol. In this case, I think Marcus and everyone failed to recognize what Pike instilled in Kirk, and what his own crew, especially Spock, instilled in him. Failing to realize that is what caused Marcus’s plan to backfire, and he had to kill Kirk and his crew to cover it all up.

109. TUP - June 30, 2014

Lots to address here minus the bickering.

While we never saw TOS Kirk at the same age as Abrams Kirk, I think it’s a bit of a cop out to use that as an excuse for Abrams Kirk being almost unrecognizable to us. We can see glimpses of the Kirk we know but he’s poorly written. I’d actually credit Chris Pine’s portrayal for giving us even a tiny bit of joy at seeing the character we know because he occasionally interjects a classic Kirk mannerism (the bridge scene at the end of Star Trek being a particularly fantastic example).

TOS Kirk beds a lot of women translates to Abrams Kirk being a womanizing jerk. TOS Kirk being confident translates to Abrams Kirk being arrogant. TOS Kirk being a master tactician translates to Abrams Kirk cheating his way to success. TOS Kirk bending the rules when its for the greater good translates to Abrams Kirk being a brash rebel who ignores the rules and has no time for authority.

Just a poor understanding of the character of James Kirk. Its like the writers watched the TOS films and extrapolated a young Kirk based on that whereas the character was so much deeper and more complex than what six movies showed.

Pike shouldnt have been killed in the way he was. STID had several key faults that hindered any effort to recover. Using Khan in the way they did was one (remember, I’ve admitted I was pro-Khan before I saw what they did). Characterizing Kirk as a jerk was another. Killing Pike was another too.

Kirk didnt really learn anything. He was demoted while arguing in favour of his actions and blaming Spock for ratting him out. He didnt understand what Pike’s point was. He never learned the lesson. He was immediately promoted again so, again, he never learned that lesson. In fact, his quest for revenge instead of “law” was reinforced with the promotion. It disregarded exactly what Pike was trying to teach him. Even his “death” was a lesson not learned. We are to believe Kirk finally accepted the true risk and responsibility of being a Captain…except the death never really happened.

The real problem with the modern films is nothing is real, the stakes dont exist and there are no consequences. In the end, we dont care and have been given no reason to care.

We talk a lot about Kirk. Let’s talk about Spock and how these writers dont understand his character either. Again, it seems they watched the TOS films and went from there. They clearly didnt watch the TV series.

I couldnt believe it when young Spock got the talk from Sarek after the fight with the bullies. Sarek was understanding, reinforced Spock’s mixed heritage and counselled that he would have to make a choice one day. That is not in keeping with established canon. Sarek wanted Spock to embrace his Vulcan side and was disappointed when he went to Starfleet.

I liked the idea that Spock chose to explore his humanity as sort of a sign of respect for his mother even if the scene of him showing anger was out of character. But Sarek should have been disappointed. They actually missed a golden opportunity to unite Kirk & Spock through their unfortunate daddy issues. And when Sarek finally gives Spock that speech about why he married Amanda, it would have meant a lot more had their relationship been strained. And to fans, it would have meant more because we know their relationship was strained or at best, cordial, far into the future and the death of Amanda would have bridged that earlier in this “universe”.

What these guys need desperately is a long time fan with a true deep understanding of the characters to sit in on production meetings to say “that makes no sense, he wouldnt act that way, that sucks” and force them to be better and not lazy.

And thats what i take away from these movies. I believe Orci et all tried. but they were lazy.

110. Keachick (Rose) - June 30, 2014

If this is all you took away from these movies, then I feel sorry for you.

However, much of your (and others) problems comes from way too much projection, making negative assumptions about these characters and situations. I think this may have to do with how the story is told and what is shown, or not shown or explained well enough (one could describe that as bad writing, etc). But, it cannot be denied, that much of the problems you have with these movies, lie with you. It is the fact that so many, like you, are all too happy to leap to the most cynical and negative assumptions about a character from the tiniest amount revealed, which in itself, is general neutral.

You say that the writers have made this Kirk a womanizing jerk, as opposed to prime Kirk. There is no evidence one way or another. The fact that he is seen sharing bed time with a willing Gaila or later with two “Caitian” females just means that he enjoys the intimate company of females and so do they. What about their manernizing? Yet here you are calling Kirk a jerk and the writers lazy because you see a short snapshot of a lead character engaging one of the many types of normal, healthy human behaviour. Really?

I frankly doubt that you or others here necessarily have any more true or deep understanding of these characters than I or the writers seem to have. No, it is more like something does not make sense to you, so you think it has to suck.

111. Keachick (Rose) - June 30, 2014

Darn it – should read, “…that he enjoys the intimate company of females and so do they ENJOY HIS COMPANY”.

112. LogicalLeopard - June 30, 2014

109. TUP – June 30, 2014
Lots to address here minus the bickering.

While we never saw TOS Kirk at the same age as Abrams Kirk, I think it’s a bit of a cop out to use that as an excuse for Abrams Kirk being almost unrecognizable to us. We can see glimpses of the Kirk we know but he’s poorly written. I’d actually credit Chris Pine’s portrayal for giving us even a tiny bit of joy at seeing the character we know because he occasionally interjects a classic Kirk mannerism (the bridge scene at the end of Star Trek being a particularly fantastic example).

************************

That’s not the “excuse” or reason, I’d say that Kirk is different (not almost unrecognizable, in my opinion). The reason why that is, is because Kirk has had a fundamentally different life than the Kirk of the prime timeline. You cannot confuse him not being the Kirk you’d like to see with him being poorly written.

**************************

TOS Kirk beds a lot of women translates to Abrams Kirk being a womanizing jerk. TOS Kirk being confident translates to Abrams Kirk being arrogant. TOS Kirk being a master tactician translates to Abrams Kirk cheating his way to success. TOS Kirk bending the rules when its for the greater good translates to Abrams Kirk being a brash rebel who ignores the rules and has no time for authority.

****************************

From what I understand, Kirk didn’t actually BED a lot of women in TOS, but he did have a reputation for being a ladies man. nu-Kirk is a womanizing jerk because of his background – probably some negative feelings regarding his mother “abandoning” him to his uncle, if I were to play Counselor Troi for a minute. Master tactician/cheating his way to success? Did you forget that they BOTH cheated on the SAME test? *LOL* Kirk bending the rules translates to nu-Kirk ignoring the rules with no time for authority? Like I said, LOOK at his upbringing and the negative feelings he was obviously harboring. nu-Kirk is Kirk without a governor, and it’s hardly as outrageous as Mirror Universe Kirk. It’s actually very realistic. How many people have you known, including yourself, who look at someone who has had personal issues, trouble with the law, etc, and say, “Man….if it wasn’t for my family, I could have easily been like that.” It’s actually a very good projection of what the death of a father and absentee mother would have done to Kirk. You see that nu-Kirk has raw ability, but not the internal governors and maturity that Prime Kirk has. And lets remember, Prime Kirk isn’t that far from nu-Kirk. One of the funny things about the issue is that no one really called Prime Kirk out on his nonsense. He cheats on a test, he gets a medal. nu-Kirk cheats on the same test, he gets put on academic probation or what have you. Prime Kirk falsifies reports, no problem, eventual promotion. Nu-Kirk falsifies reports, demotion.

***********************************

Just a poor understanding of the character of James Kirk. Its like the writers watched the TOS films and extrapolated a young Kirk based on that whereas the character was so much deeper and more complex than what six movies showed.

****************************

Like I said, you fail to understand (or articulate, that is) what the extrapolation is based on. It’s not based on “young Kirk” it’s based on “young Kirk who have gone through these particular set of circumstances.” In other words, “What happens when you take an extremely intelligent and gifted person and you kick their foundation out from underneath them?”

****************************

Pike shouldnt have been killed in the way he was. STID had several key faults that hindered any effort to recover. Using Khan in the way they did was one (remember, I’ve admitted I was pro-Khan before I saw what they did). Characterizing Kirk as a jerk was another. Killing Pike was another too.
*****************************

All opinion.

******************************

Kirk didnt really learn anything. He was demoted while arguing in favour of his actions and blaming Spock for ratting him out. He didnt understand what Pike’s point was. He never learned the lesson. He was immediately promoted again so, again, he never learned that lesson. In fact, his quest for revenge instead of “law” was reinforced with the promotion. It disregarded exactly what Pike was trying to teach him. Even his “death” was a lesson not learned. We are to believe Kirk finally accepted the true risk and responsibility of being a Captain…except the death never really happened.

*************************************

Kirk really didn’t learn anything IN THE FIRST PART OF THE MOVIE. I’d say he learned a lot by the time Marcus is going to kill his whole crew. He learned that he wasn’t invincible, and his decisions could REALLY kill his whole crew, and there’s nothing he’d be able to say but I’m sorry. Some people may say, “Oh, but he didn’t die, so he didn’t learn anything.” If you indulge in a little road rage this afternoon, chase someone down, and find your car, with your kids inside, shot up, it doesn’t matter if none of you are hit. You learn something. And regarding Pike, Kirk did learn something from Pike, I’d like to think, when he decided NOT to go on a quest for revenge and bring Khan to justice instead. If he hadn’t learned anything, he would have said, “Shut up Spock, I’m firing these torpedoes” and that would have been it.

*************************************

The real problem with the modern films is nothing is real, the stakes dont exist and there are no consequences. In the end, we dont care and have been given no reason to care.

**************************************

Wow. Nothing is real, no consequences? You mean like the “no consequences” Kirk had for stealing a ship, going after his dead buddy, BLOWING UP THE SAME SHIP, and stealing another ship from a hostile nation? And don’t tell me being demoted to the same position he actually wanted, and having a BRAND NEW SHIP BUILT for him is a consequence.

This is a personal opinion, but I can’t understand how a person can go in and not care about the Kirk character, especially a Star Trek fan that knows his natural potential.

**********************************

We talk a lot about Kirk. Let’s talk about Spock and how these writers dont understand his character either. Again, it seems they watched the TOS films and went from there. They clearly didnt watch the TV series.

I couldnt believe it when young Spock got the talk from Sarek after the fight with the bullies. Sarek was understanding, reinforced Spock’s mixed heritage and counselled that he would have to make a choice one day. That is not in keeping with established canon. Sarek wanted Spock to embrace his Vulcan side and was disappointed when he went to Starfleet.

********************************

*shrugs* You may have a point there regarding Sarek. I would think that Sarek would be harder on Spock, but then again, we don’t know when the rift actually started. Did Sarek hound Spock to be Vulcan all throughout his childhood? Or was he somewhat understanding that he had to make a choice, then disappointed when he decided to go into Starfleet? And was he disappointed that he went into Starfleet because it “wasn’t Vulcan” or was he upset (like parents normally are) because he felt it was beneath his abilities?

***********************************

I liked the idea that Spock chose to explore his humanity as sort of a sign of respect for his mother even if the scene of him showing anger was out of character. But Sarek should have been disappointed. They actually missed a golden opportunity to unite Kirk & Spock through their unfortunate daddy issues. And when Sarek finally gives Spock that speech about why he married Amanda, it would have meant a lot more had their relationship been strained. And to fans, it would have meant more because we know their relationship was strained or at best, cordial, far into the future and the death of Amanda would have bridged that earlier in this “universe”.

**************************************

The anger is out of character for Spock of TOS. Maybe not out of character for a young Spock. I’m on board with you about wanting to see Spock’s relationship with Sarek strained, but….I just don’t think they had enough room for that in the movie. There were so many cut scenes back and forth between young Spock and Kirk, I don’t know if we could have taken another one. It would have happened after the barfight scene, and would have messed up the rhythm. Still, would have been nice to see.

I don’t think that Spock and Kirk would have united over daddy issues because Spock wouldn’t discuss his emotions with anyone at that stage in the game. It actually might be an interesting reference if the now much more buddy-buddy Spock and Kirk discussed it. Maybe Kirk is estranged from his brother George, and Spock points out how he was estranged from his father prior to joining Starfleet, but it was repaired much too late after the death of his father.

*************************

What these guys need desperately is a long time fan with a true deep understanding of the characters to sit in on production meetings to say “that makes no sense, he wouldnt act that way, that sucks” and force them to be better and not lazy.

****************************

I think you’d be surprised if you heard the discussions that went around those meetings. That’s not laziness. Like I said before, the whole point of this universe is that everyone’s lives are different. What happens when you take the same person and put them in different circumstances? My own parents divorced when I was two, and my father wasn’t around for a good portion of my younger life. We reconnected a bit before he died when I was 14. What would my life have been like if he was a constant presence? I was reading a comment from one of my teachers in my high school yearbook yesterday. I hadn’t remembered it, but he said that he thought I was going to fall by the wayside my freshman year. I had horrible grades my freshman and sophomore year, my father had died the first month of my freshman year. I didn’t notice the effect then, but it’s hard to explain any other way now. What would things have been like if he hadn’t? Maybe you’ve never asked yourself these deep questions about your own life, but I have. So that’s how I can appreciate this storyline. If you really ask yourself what makes people who they are, I think you’d enjoy the characterization a little better.

113. TUP - June 30, 2014

@keachick – Well I think we’ve established long ago my understanding of the characters goes far deeper than yours. I feel sorry for you in fact that everything is so personal to you. obviously, my statement prior is not *all* I took away from the films. it was merely my opinion on the subjects being discussed.

Shatner Kirk was always more charming than smarmy. To be fair, I didnt have a problem with Kirk’s relations with women. I thought the threesome scene was silly. I didnt *really* have the problem with the underwear scene either though I do agree that it was needlessly gratuitous, raising again the question of the laziness of the writers. if you really wanted the very hot actress in her underwear, there were far more organic ways to do it. I also dont see it reasonable that Kirk would stand there staring slack-jawed like he’s never seen a woman in underwear before. Just silly.

114. TUP - June 30, 2014

@ Logical Leopard – I absolutely see your point. I think what my perspective really comes down to is disappointment in the vision these film-makers had for the classic characters.

Its too easy to dismiss every change as “well they are different because they’ve been subject to different experiences”. Ofcourse that is true, but then dont make a movie about James Kirk if hes not James Kirk.

To be perfectly honest, after seeing the two films, I almost wished they did a full re-boot and showed us the origins of OUR characters from the beginning.

But again, the writers need to watch Days Of Future Past to learn how to do it right.

I feel that more thoughtful writers would have treated the source material with more respect. Kirk’s destiny should always have been pulling him to the stars, not any eye-rolling twist of fate that sees him in a bar fight at the right moment to be lectured to by Pike.

I just shudder when I think of the production meetings where they are spitballing ideas and its “Kirk’s dad dies in the beginning! YEAH! And that changes Kirk! Yeah! Now he’s brash, and a rebel without a cause, he’s a jerk! He’s coasting through life! He’s a womanizer! He doesnt care about anything!” It just all seems so paint-by-numbers.

Show me a Kirk who’s absolute destiny is to save the universe countless times but the dead of his father interjected to give him obstacles to over-come. Real emotional tests not just gee can ge get over himself long enough to listen to pike? I imagine a young Kirk with a poster of Cochran on his wall, stargazing at night. Maybe a Kirk turning away from Starfleet to help his mother or through fear of what killed his father. The fact these guys didnt have his mother involved in the film past his birth is ridiculous. ZERO strong females in either film (Uhura wasnt really a strong character, she was a so-so character given the occasional strong dialogue to utter).

But I digress.

Oh and the consequences Kirk faced in TOS was that there truly was a no-win scenario when Spock sacrificed himself to save them all. Yes I know that was undone in the third movie but again, at least those writers didnt undo Spock’s emotional death ten minutes later. Kirk was rewarded with demotion for saving the world. Starfleet both rewarded him and politically flipped the bird to the Klingons.

115. IDIC Lives! - June 30, 2014

TUP, I could not agree with you more!

You know, I have decided that the ending of STID sums it up: Here we have Kirk delivering a 2 or 3 sentence speech (that’s as intelligent as STID’s gonna get), while everyone else sits there wearing those big Nazi-like hats and old fashioned pompous military uniforms (how I love TOS’s light-heartedness and lack of militarism in their uniforms), and suddenly Kirk is talking about the Captain’s Oath (?) and then Chris Pine delivers a spirit-less, flat rendition of “Space: the Final Frontier.

How can this be the Captain’s Oath? Ok, it is not the Captain’s Oath, then why did he mention the Captain’s Oath at all? Someone said it is the Mission Statement.

No, it’s not! It is a dramatic, emotional, poetic, piece of Gene Roddenberry writing which sets the stage for Star Trek. The only mission statement in it is simply in broad, poetic terms (“to explore strange new worlds…”)

All in all, a mucked up mess of an ending. And a mucked up mess of a film and it begins with the mischaracterization of Kirk, as you say, TUP.

TUP, you say, “I just shudder when I think of the production meetings where they are spitballing ideas and its “Kirk’s dad dies in the beginning! YEAH! And that changes Kirk! Yeah! Now he’s brash, and a rebel without a cause, he’s a jerk! He’s coasting through life! He’s a womanizer! He doesn”t care about anything!” It just all seems so paint-by numbers.”

ABSOLUTELY. Can’t say it better myself!

116. IDIC Lives! - June 30, 2014

Keachick says to TUP, “If this is all you took away from these movies, then I feel sorry for you.”

Let me say, Keachick, that I feel sorry for you, because of the limited vista you have of STID and Star Trek.

There, you see, all is relative and it all depends on your POV.

117. Keachick (Rose) - June 30, 2014

I disagree with elements of both posts above – by LogicalLeopold and TUP.

What we have been shown are snapshots of Kirk’s personal life and this time we see him in bed with woman. Unfortunately, the writers have not written much about the two relationships that this nuKirk has been shown to be in, ie first of all, Gaila (who, unfortunately, may have died) and then these two Caitian women, whose names the writers could not be bothered telling us.

Of course, there are fans like IDIC who do not want to see any kind of romantic/intimate relationships, nor mention of family, that these perfectly normal healthy human beings would naturally have anyway…how unnatural is that? oh but this is science-fiction – what – as if scientists don’t have sex, get married, have children, whatever? God forbid, Star Trek could be deemed to have some so-called “soap opera” elements contained within it.

(I hate the stupid term “soap opera” and the ludicrous notion that writing contains “Mary Sue” – these terms have become idiotic cliches and critic tropes which serve to undermine legitimate writing options and audience appreciation)

It is an unfair and stupid comparison to make because, when TOS was being made, TV could not show male and female in bed together. I recall seeing shows where the MARRIED couple had single beds – for goodness sake. Any sex was just hinted at, maybe. So, of course, Kirk did not bed women because they could not show that. Now they can and that is what the present film makers are doing, except that they appear to get shy and not give exposition (like the cat-ladies scene being abruptly cut – it felt almost rude, discourteous to all three characters).

(If TUP actually had the courtesy to read and pay attention to my posts, he would also realize that I have, on more than one occasion, brought this problem I have with the way Kirk and the cat-ladies scene was edited to Bob Orci, and have explained why.)

Both posters are making assumptions about this nuKirk (as well as with Prime Kirk) and how he relates to women that does not bear up under analysis because of lack of genuine evidence. Some of these negative, cynical assumptions towards nuKirk may have something to do with attitudes toward sexuality and how it can or should or should not be shown, which also relates to how it is thought of what constitutes a *proper* relationship (narrowly defined) and how that should be told/shown.

The mention of the underwear scene is irrelevant and I suggest that the only people ogling Carol Marcus were males in the audience. Kirk just looked surprised and it was Carol who was inappropriate in this and the preceding scene. And what has a woman in her underwear got to do with sex and/or romance, per se? Kirk was discussing the structure/nature of the new torpedoes. Carol got unprofessional, personal and snotty with it…

“I imagine a young Kirk with a poster of Cochran on his wall, stargazing at night. Maybe a Kirk turning away from Starfleet to help his mother or through fear of what killed his father. ”

How do you know that it is not what happened? In fact, I think that was young Kirk’s dilemma. Apart from the bar probably being his local “watering hole”, he was also drawn to it at that particular time, because it was full of Starfleet cadets and he did know exactly what xenolinguistics meant, much to Uhura’s surprise. I would suggest that this “genius-level repeat offender” just needed the right push from the right person…He got it from Captain Pike. Pike also mentioned Kirk’s father and Jim’s need to re-evaluate, understand the meaning of the whole no-win scenario that George Kirk believed in (funny that so many naysayers appear to have forgotten that line from Pike). Young Kirk commented something like – “Yeah, and look where that got him” to which Pike replied, “Well, you’re here, aren’t you?”

Maybe nuKirk appeared to not care about much, but he did and does.

118. Keachick (Rose) - June 30, 2014

IDIC – My limited vista? Oh dear…doh. More like the reverse…

“How can this be the Captain’s Oath? Ok, it is not the Captain’s Oath, then why did he mention the Captain’s Oath at all? Someone said it is the Mission Statement.
No, it’s not! It is a dramatic, emotional, poetic, piece of Gene Roddenberry writing which sets the stage for Star Trek. The only mission statement in it is simply in broad, poetic terms (“to explore strange new worlds…”)”

Did you not see the cinematic version of STID?

No, the words, “Space, the final frontier…” is not the Captain’s Oath. I have read this poetic wording being described as a broad mission statement, because it is heard at the beginning of every TOS episode, explained the basic theme and mission of what was to be shown in the television programme.

STID clearly has flaws and I have pointed out to the resident writer/producer what I see those flaws as being. One such flaw is the fact the actual Captain’s Oath, which (Pine)Kirk spoke, was actually deleted from the DVD/blu-ray versions of the movie. However, I do clearly remember hearing the Oath read out (I saw the movie four times at the cinema), but was shocked and disappointed not to have that part of the speech that Kirk gave at the end of the film on my DVD copy.

This I have mentioned to Roberto Orci and have yet to received a reply as to why this brilliant speech was deleted. It is beyond me. It is one of those WTF moments in relation to what Paramount/Bad Robot ended up putting on the DVD/blu-ray versions. Frankly, I expect to see ALL of the film that was screened at the cinema on my DVD or blu-ray copy!

Please, Bob Orci, why is that part of the speech deleted? Has it been put back in?

119. Cygnus-X1 - June 30, 2014

109. TUP – June 30, 2014

I agree with all of your points.

I believe Orci et all tried. but they were lazy.

It does come across as lazy, but I’m not sure that it’s actually laziness. I think that Orci works hard at what he does, but he just as set of artistic values and sensibilities which differ significantly from those that we see as having made Trek great.

Ronald D. Moore said that his own writing sessions for DS9 comprised much arguing back and forth about who the characters really were and how they’d really behave. I don’t get the impression that Orci et al engage in that kind of process.

Also, I think that Orci’s idea of “good” is more…how to put this…more “poppy” as opposed to more “artistic.” Sure, Trek ain’t Kubrick or von Trier, but I think it’s fair to say that the BR movies have taken Trek to new heights (or lows) of audience-pandering…except in terms of clarity, oddly enough.

They’ve managed to simplify just about everything except for the plots. My impression is that Orci et al have been trying to pass off confusing, convoluted plots as “depth” of meaning—or, maybe they really don’t see a difference. “If these movies are so lazy and dumbed-down, then how come you can’t even understand them?”

120. IDIC Lives! - July 1, 2014

IMO, Spock’s character is also skewered in STID and the 2009 reboot. No point to debate that more than it has been but, I do have a concern for this nuSpock:

Perhaps we should be worried or elated (depending on your preference) regarding Spock having an unexpected child with someone. Why always figure this happens to Kirk?

I figure, Kirk knows what he’s doing, has human *ahem* experience. Carol was a long-term or at least serious affair and maybe she tricked him, maybe they got careless, that has never been addressed. I doubt that Kirk planned David.

But poor nuSpock, since he has been un-Spocked in character and now indulges in apparently the most open, passionate kissing affair on the ship (I don’t see crew members kissing each other in the background and even Kirk ‘n’ Carol didn’t steal a kiss), is Spock also kissing and loving other human women as well as Uhura?

Oh, that’s not what Spock would do, is it! But you speak of Original Spock.

Gawd knows what this nu-guy is gonna do because he is no longer Spock, IMO. Will he make someone pregnant?

In TOS, Spock had known (damn names)–the blonde pod woman who was presently on Omicron Ceti. Lela, I think? She went out of her way to say he did not return her affection then – and we have the intrigue of the fact he WANTED to. This is part of the mystique and dignity of TOS Spock, take this away from him and you have just another guy with an huge anger problem who is indulging in a typical shipboard affair.

Before my thoughts are pronounced as “Nonsense” yet again, I hasten to add that I am writing this tongue in cheek but there are valid points herein, I do believe.

Why think Kirk spins off children? Yes, there was David who was quickly written out. Me, I’m kinda worried about Spock.

I also think if Spock felt like giving a big yell (??) right after Kirk “died,” he should’ve screamed , “Admiral Marcus!!!!” MARCCCCUUUSSSS!!!!
After all, who was surprised that this superman Khan did wild things?

But, the disillusionment, the anger, the frustration, the pain at Kirk’s “death,” should have been directed at Marcus who was their super officer and whom they had looked up to.

Yes, Keachick, save your over-worked fingers, I know this is all nonsense, so don’t bother to tell me. Thanks. A lot.

121. LogicalLeopard - July 1, 2014

114. TUP – June 30, 2014
@ Logical Leopard – I absolutely see your point. I think what my perspective really comes down to is disappointment in the vision these film-makers had for the classic characters.

Its too easy to dismiss every change as “well they are different because they’ve been subject to different experiences”. Ofcourse that is true, but then dont make a movie about James Kirk if hes not James Kirk.

**************************************

Well, technically it’s a movie about nu-Kirk, not prime Kirk. It’s really very important to grasp that….this is no different than if they would have made a series about the Mirror Universe. If that’s not your preference, you have two choices – either don’t watch it, or adjust your mentality to consider it an interesting “What If” story, or a Mirror Universe story. This, in my opinion, is a brilliant stroke by the writers. It doesn’t do anything to tarnish the TOS universe, because it’s separate. Kirk still had every adventure we’ve seen, nothing is affected. However, it allows them to take a fresh and new take on the characters, that is both interesting to fans like myself, and non-fans.

*************************

To be perfectly honest, after seeing the two films, I almost wished they did a full re-boot and showed us the origins of OUR characters from the beginning.

******************************

When you say reboot, do you mean a reboot like Battlestar Galactica, or just replicate TOS? Both of those could spell disaster, in my opinion.

****************************

But again, the writers need to watch Days Of Future Past to learn how to do it right.

****************************

Haven’t seen it yet. As an X men fan growing up, though, I can say that I’m SO GLAD that Star Trek isn’t like that series, because it’s an absolute mess, in my opinion. From the very first film, you’ve got weird things going on with the ages of the characters. Why is Iceman, one of the original X-Men, like 10-15 years younger than Cyclops, when he’s actually only maybe 2 years younger? Then, as the series progressed, why is Beast like 20-25 years older than Cylcops, when he’s at most one or two years older? Then it just got weirder with First Class….Cyclops’s YOUNGER brother Havok, is old enough to be his father. There are established comic book characters that could have fit well into a First Class…..Banshee and Mystique were good choices….but Beast? Darwin? The butterfly winged girl? She was introduced in the 90’s I think, and was younger than any of the other characters in the books. Like an earlier article mentioned, they know they’re going to take my money anyway at the theatre, and my wife likes them, but those are the kind of nagging problems that really DIDN”T have to be done that can really annoy a fan. Abrams and Co have NOTHING on who wrote that interpretations. I hope they reboot the whole thing soon.

****************************************

I feel that more thoughtful writers would have treated the source material with more respect. Kirk’s destiny should always have been pulling him to the stars, not any eye-rolling twist of fate that sees him in a bar fight at the right moment to be lectured to by Pike.

*********************************************

Why? We don’t even know when Kirk Prime made the decision. And we don’t even know if he wanted to get out there prior to him meeting Pike. But like we’ve said before, little instances like that make it seem more like fate, like a famous actor getting dragged as a kid to a certain movie and becoming so enthralled with the performance that they want to become an actor.

*************************************************

I just shudder when I think of the production meetings where they are spitballing ideas and its “Kirk’s dad dies in the beginning! YEAH! And that changes Kirk! Yeah! Now he’s brash, and a rebel without a cause, he’s a jerk! He’s coasting through life! He’s a womanizer! He doesnt care about anything!” It just all seems so paint-by-numbers.

************************************

*LOL* Don’t think it went like that. Although I’ve given similar accounts of Star Trek Into Darkness “So we’re going to take Spock and put in him…..quicksand? No…..a giant venus flytrap? Good, but no…..how about a VOLCANO! YEAH! But what’s he doing in the volcano? Saving lives, dummy! With…..with a SUPER ICE CUBE! Yeah! *LOL*

**************************************
Show me a Kirk who’s absolute destiny is to save the universe countless times but the dead of his father interjected to give him obstacles to over-come. Real emotional tests not just gee can ge get over himself long enough to listen to pike? I imagine a young Kirk with a poster of Cochran on his wall, stargazing at night. Maybe a Kirk turning away from Starfleet to help his mother or through fear of what killed his father. The fact these guys didnt have his mother involved in the film past his birth is ridiculous. ZERO strong females in either film (Uhura wasnt really a strong character, she was a so-so character given the occasional strong dialogue to utter).

*************************************

Different people have different motivations. And this one was pretty solid. It may not be what you chose, but it is good, and very engaging. Plus, people can relate to it. I’ve never stared at posters on my wall for inspiration, but I have wanted to be a good man, and a better man than my father, and I want my sons to be better men than I am. As far as Uhura, I thought she was plenty strong. Why do you believe she wasn’t, when you admit she had “strong dialogue?” That strong dialogue displays a strong person.
*******************************

But I digress.

Oh and the consequences Kirk faced in TOS was that there truly was a no-win scenario when Spock sacrificed himself to save them all. Yes I know that was undone in the third movie but again, at least those writers didnt undo Spock’s emotional death ten minutes later. Kirk was rewarded with demotion for saving the world. Starfleet both rewarded him and politically flipped the bird to the Klingons.

*******************************************************

Not really. I wouldn’t call Spock’s sacrifice as a no-win Scenario, because it occurred after he WON. It saddened him immensely, sure, but it’s a pyrrhic victory, not a no-win scenario. As far as Kirk’s death being undone ten minutes later, I gather you weren’t invested in the story at that point, but let me tell you, from a person that was, they didn’t need to let that last ten minutes more *LOL* I was pretty messed up in the theatre, which I credit to the excellent writing. The sad part of Kirk’s “death” at the time wasn’t that he died, but that he died with so much potential on the board. It’s a painful reminder of the differences between nu-Kirk and Prime Kirk. Prime Kirk is a hero and would sacrifice his own life for his crew, but he’d think through every opportunity. Like he said, he doesn’t believe in no-win scenarios. Nu-Kirk, however, after receiving Pike’s warning on getting everyone killed and actually believing that he had for a few TERRIBLE seconds, I think his confidence was shaken. He was broken. He acted on impulse. It didn’t feel like Spock’s sacrifice…..it felt ten times worse, like if a kid ran in there. A kid who had the rest of his life ahead of him. I’m VERY glad they didn’t do “A Search For Kirk” because I needed that taken care of RIGHT THEN. Good thing I’m a manly man, so I didn’t cry. I just had to do like the character from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs “TEAR! GET BACK IN THERE!!!”

122. LogicalLeopard - July 1, 2014

117. Keachick (Rose) – June 30, 2014
I disagree with elements of both posts above – by LogicalLeopold and TUP.

**********************

Let me clarify. I am not refuting some people’s statements that Kirk is a “womanizing jerk” because of his relationships portrayed on screen, as with the “Caitians”, attempts on Uhura, etc.

Kirk can accurately be described as a womanizing jerk, or more appropriately, a jerk, because he did two extremely jerky things – he manipulated his relationship with Gaila to get access to the simulator so he could hack it, and he apparently was jerky to Chapel, which caused her to request a transfer. Take those for what you will, because the Gaila thing happened in a deleted scene, so technically it’s not canon. And we dont’ know exactly what he did to Chapel, but the impression was that he was kind of a jerk there. So that’s why I didn’t refute the point of him being a womanizing jerk, because he kind of is. Hitting on Uhura is no crime. Attempting to hit on the woman in the bar in STID is no crime. Being in bed with two “caitans” is no crime. I would even submit that we don’t know if they were “women” in the popular sense. But nobody puts Chapel in the corner! Except, well, y’know….Spock….who was a non-womanizing jerk to Chapel all throughout TOS….*LOL*

123. LogicalLeopard - July 1, 2014

120. IDIC Lives! – July 1, 2014

Perhaps we should be worried or elated (depending on your preference) regarding Spock having an unexpected child with someone. Why always figure this happens to Kirk?

*****************************

That’s a stretch. Nothing about nu-Spock’s character suggests that. Just because he has a relationship with Uhura doesn’t mean that he’s been going around with everything and everyone. Kirk is brought up in that conversation because 1) Prime Kirk had a child he didn’t know about, and 2) Kirk appears to engage in, or attempt to engage in, sexual relations with quite a few people.
****************************************

But poor nuSpock, since he has been un-Spocked in character and now indulges in apparently the most open, passionate kissing affair on the ship (I don’t see crew members kissing each other in the background and even Kirk ‘n’ Carol didn’t steal a kiss), is Spock also kissing and loving other human women as well as Uhura?

Oh, that’s not what Spock would do, is it! But you speak of Original Spock.

Gawd knows what this nu-guy is gonna do because he is no longer Spock, IMO. Will he make someone pregnant?
*********************************

He had one kiss, and that was after quite a bit of emotional upheaval. His whole world (literally) was shattered. Uhura was there to confort him, and he accepted that comfort. He might have even been thinking of embracing the human side of himself more at that point, since his mother died.

It’s kind of a petulant complaint you’re making. You’re essentially saying, “Spock isn’t Spock so he could do anything,” but you’re ignoring that this new Spock does have some sort of parameters, and he’s not doing things willy nilly, he’s doing things as a RESULT of what is happening to him.

******************************************

In TOS, Spock had known (damn names)–the blonde pod woman who was presently on Omicron Ceti. Lela, I think? She went out of her way to say he did not return her affection then – and we have the intrigue of the fact he WANTED to. This is part of the mystique and dignity of TOS Spock, take this away from him and you have just another guy with an huge anger problem who is indulging in a typical shipboard affair.

************************************

Like I said, just because you don’t like this Spock, or this series, you’re projecting nonsense on him. Spock has ALWAYS had a huge anger problem. He’s a Vulcan. Vulcans have HUGE anger problems. They just control their emotions through suppression. But you have a young, half human, half Vulcan man who was present when his planet died and right there when his mother died. Know how much that would mess with emotional control? Then again, he’s inside of Pike’s head when he dies, and then he sees Kirk die in the same manner, when he was finally able to suss out their relationship. This is six months after all the rest of that stuff. If you don’t like something, that’s fine, but at least look at why things are occurring, instead of saying “Hmmmph! MY SPOCK would never act like that. He’s NOT TOS Spock, but just because he’s not TOS Spock doesn’t mean that there aren’t definite character traits. I’d like to think that my Spock would never lie, or violently mind meld with someone (which is kind of like mental rape) but he did in TUC. But when I look at the course of the character, I realize that he has progressed to the point where in his old age he’s learned to flow with some human customs. And as for the mind meld, I have no idea how Vulcans think about that.

**********************************

Before my thoughts are pronounced as “Nonsense” yet again, I hasten to add that I am writing this tongue in cheek but there are valid points herein, I do believe.

************************************

I think your points would be more valid if presented within the frame of what has occurred in the movies.

**********************************

Why think Kirk spins off children? Yes, there was David who was quickly written out. Me, I’m kinda worried about Spock.

I also think if Spock felt like giving a big yell (??) right after Kirk “died,” he should’ve screamed , “Admiral Marcus!!!!” MARCCCCUUUSSSS!!!!
After all, who was surprised that this superman Khan did wild things?

But, the disillusionment, the anger, the frustration, the pain at Kirk’s “death,” should have been directed at Marcus who was their super officer and whom they had looked up to.
*******************************************************

Why would he scream Admiral Marcus? Khan was the person who caused the damage. Marcus was a part of it, but Marcus was also missing an intact cranium at that point. Khan was running the show when Kirk got hurt, so it’s natural that he screams Khan. He can be mad at a dead guy later. Did Kirk scream, CAPTAIN TERELLLLL!!!!!!!! when he was stranded at the Regula lab, because Captain Terrell lost his ship to Khan?

124. TUP - July 1, 2014

Keachick – sorry but I dont have the courtesy to read your posts. I usually skip them now. Nothing really interesting coming from you though I find it odd you’re so obsessed with Kirk’s romantic relationships.

When writers take on a franchise, they MUST show the respect to learn everything about the characters. And what I gather most from Star Trek and STID is that these writers chose to do their own thing rather than respect the characters.

We’ve talked a lot about how this Kirk isnt “our Kirk” – and honestly, I dont care for the excuse that its a new Kirk. This is Star Trek. If Orci wanted to write sci fi, create his own and then he can have his characters do whatever he wants. We’ve talked a bit about Spock and even Sarek. But McCoy also did not escape these writers’ lack of understanding.

I mentioned before his initial introduction when he references a divorce which seems to be his reason for entering Star Fleet. It really makes little sense. But whatever. Urban’s portrayal was so good we over-looked it. But by STID, McCoy is a parody. I CANNOT stop myself from rolling my eyes during the “one liners” scene which was such a childish thing for the writers to include…all setting up Kirk to tell McCoy to knock it off. GAWD that was bad. I cant fathom how that scene even made it to filming let alone made it through the editing process.

The fact Spock is so damned emotional makes McCoy’s character rather moot. It never comes across that he’s the moral voice of reason. How many times in TOS did Kirk sit back and watch McCoy and Spock argue? THat was the visual representation of exactly what those characters represented to Kirk. THey were, in essence, the devil and angel on his shoulders. We never get that sense in the modern films.

The rare times Spock was shown to be emotional in TOS was interesting because it was the exception. Now, if Spock is actually the unemotional logical cold Vulcan we know, it’s a nice change of pace. When Spock slapped the phaser out of Valaris’ hand in TUC, that was powerful. NuSpock would have probably punched her in the face, screamed “how could you?!” and then sobbed in a corner over her betrayal.

These writers are surface fans. They never took the time or effort to really truly get to the depth of the characters and that comes across. These films are big budget blow em ups, not deep, emotional character studies. Star Trek was a franchise that BEGGED for the perfect combination of big budget blow em up with a deeply emotional heart-felt story. And they missed the beat in just about every regard.

The only thing they got right was Pike…because we have such little to go on from canon, they couldnt really screw him up. Though they did manage to neuter the Pike/Spock relationship. When Kirk stole the ENerprise and risked his career to save Spock he said Spock would do the same for him. Ofcourse he would – Kirk was right there when Spock did the exact same thing for Pike. But in this new universe, that gets in the way of the story so they changed it.

125. IDIC Lives! - July 1, 2014

TUP, I fully agree, and if I hadn’t just written a long post another thread of trekmovie, I’d say more…maybe later.

I also am now just skipping over Keachick. My previous mistake was giving her the time and respect of bothering to read what she said.

Logical Leopard’s posts are long and repetitive to me, so he or she might want to save the old fingers if addressing me. Don’t bother.

However, there are some very interesting people on trekmovie, glad I stayed!

126. Keachick (Rose) - July 1, 2014

“Except, well, y’know….Spock….who was a non-womanizing jerk to Chapel all throughout TOS….*LOL*”

So if Spock had properly acknowledged Nurse Chapel’s affections and was prepared to see if a relationship could work between them, as nuSpock obviously did with Uhura in this alternate universe, that would make him a “womanizing jerk”?

So what are you saying here?

127. Marja - July 1, 2014

123 Logical Leopard, Well, technically it’s a movie about nu-Kirk, not prime Kirk. It’s really very important to grasp that….this is no different than if they would have made a series about the Mirror Universe. If that’s not your preference, you have two choices – either don’t watch it, or adjust your mentality to consider it an interesting “What If” story, or a Mirror Universe story. This, in my opinion, is a brilliant stroke by the writers. It doesn’t do anything to tarnish the TOS universe, because it’s separate. Kirk still had every adventure we’ve seen, nothing is affected. However, it allows them to take a fresh and new take on the characters, that is both interesting to fans like myself, and non-fans.

I cannot agree more. Fans who insist that the original characterizations continue in a new, “what-if” universe, should enjoy both Phase II and STC; these stay as true as possible to TOS. However insulted they feel about the “violation of THEIR characters” in BR Trek, that’s the Trek that’s being produced now. Call it crap, call it genius, or call it something in-between, but for heaven’s sake, the original characters are safe in their timeline.

Personally I enjoy them all, and am so tired of reading how Spock is “crying all the time” and how “Uhura is a whiny bitch” I can only respond that neither is true, based on the movies, and how people view this is due to their personal issues with TOS and BR Trek. [Shrug] I enjoy all of them, except for the excessive violence and super action action! in the new movies.

If that makes me a disloyal Trek fan in the eyes of some, so be it.

128. Marja - July 1, 2014

126 Rose, I’m going to quote some TOS re: Logical Leopard’s “Except, well, y’know….Spock….who was a non-womanizing jerk to Chapel all throughout TOS….*LOL*”

CHEKOV: It was a leetle joke, Meester Spock.

SPOCK: Extremely little, Ensign.

[The Trouble with Tribbles]

129. Marja - July 1, 2014

119 Cygnus, Ronald D. Moore said that his own writing sessions for DS9 comprised much arguing back and forth about who the characters really were and how they’d really behave. I don’t get the impression that Orci et al engage in that kind of process.

These were characters they had established in DS9, and were setting further characteristics for to carry through the series. Changes happened in those characters too, which is what made DS9 rewarding.

I think Orci and Co. argued back and forth or discussed what NEW versions of the Magnificent 7 woud be. That they fell short on the trio is too bad, but I expect that will be corrected in the third movie.

My personal opinion is that Uhura should be part of that, and make it a … quartet versus a trio, but I’m sure that opinion is anathema to some. These are the ’10s, not the ’60s, so I expect and hope [in the "meta" view] that a woman [and a woman of color] would have some valuable contribution, because her role in the new crew is more important than in TOS. Some may shudder in revulsion, but I welcome the idea. [So far, it's my idea, I don't know what the writers are going to do.]

130. Keachick (Rose) - July 1, 2014

Comments from IDIC –

#51`- “Excuse me?? This thread is very interesting, I am truly enjoying what Cygnus X1, TUP, and others are discussing. How rude you are, Keachick, to interrupt with your sarcasm..”

52. IDIC Lives! – June 27, 2014
“I am tired of being bullied off this site by someone who purposely picks fights, who insults us and then whines if she is insulted back. Let’s see if we can IGNORE and continue to enjoy the discussion.”

I had not said anything at all to IDIC at this point, as this was only her third post to this site in quite a while. However, the first thing she does is to accuse of interrupting (a comment I find not only ridiculous, but offensive), with sarcasm. How can anyone interrupt? This is an open, public forum.

I apologized in a later post to Cygnus, in particular, for my comment referring to some as being like rabid dogs etc. I am sorry but that is how some of the posters here come across as a little rabid, with their repetitive nastiness expressed toward writers and producers, how they portray various characters and story in this film series, especially Kirk, and others.

Clearly, none of you are rabid dogs gnawing on an old bone and I apologize. All I ask is that you ease back on the constant criticisms made about STID, as what is done is done already, and the negative bias can and does cloud the possibility of looking at something/anything from another perspective.

I have another, different perspective and once again IDIC comes here calling me out vehemently and is now inciting other readers and posters to actually ignore anything/everything that I have to say. Similar happened some time back on this site. That is being a bully.

#125 IDIC – “I also am now just skipping over Keachick. My previous mistake was giving her the time and respect of bothering to read what she said.
Logical Leopard’s posts are long and repetitive to me, so he or she might want to save the old fingers if addressing me. Don’t bother.”

I would suggest that IDIC has never had much, if any, respect for me for a very long time, if ever. She has shown a level of intolerance towards much of I have written in the past that is both astonishing, inherently irrational and even frightening. She has also viciously harassed another poster for agreeing with some of my ideas.

IDIC she ain’t!

Maybe some of you do not believe me, but go back far enough and perhaps you may just see what I mean. Now she is back, doing it all over again…:(

131. Marja - July 1, 2014

118 Keachick, I’m not quite sure what you mean by “The Captain’s Oath.”

What they had Kirk say at the ceremony at the end of STiD is more akin to a Mission Statement than a captain’s oath. “To explore strange new worlds ….”
is not exactly an oath, it is a mission.

A contemporary Captain’s Oath would be along these lines, and that is why so many people complained about a “mission statement” being referred to as a “captain’s oath” ….

“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service) [Federation Starfleet], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States [Federation] against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

132. Marja - July 1, 2014

124 TUP When writers take on a franchise, they MUST show the respect to learn everything about the characters. And what I gather most from Star Trek and STID is that these writers chose to do their own thing rather than respect the characters.

That is why they created a different universe for these characters to inhabit. Orci has stated this a number of times. They didn’t want to violate the canon previously established so they made their own. They respect the characters they have established.

They have kept some basic characteristics but added new twists onto them that many people don’t happen to like. And perhaps in the view of some they have done outrageous things. Some things I found outrageous myself. I mean, they blew up Vulcan, for pete’s sake. But that’s the new ‘verse. Vulcan is still safe and sound in the TOS ‘verse.

133. Marja - July 1, 2014

109 TUP, I couldnt believe it when young Spock got the talk from Sarek after the fight with the bullies. Sarek was understanding, reinforced Spock’s mixed heritage and counselled that he would have to make a choice one day. That is not in keeping with established canon. Sarek wanted Spock to embrace his Vulcan side and was disappointed when he went to Starfleet.

Star Trek 2009
[1] Spock gets into a fight with his classmates
[2] Sarek gives him “the talk”
[3] Spock has apparently chosen the Vulcan path through his youth and young adulthood, because he asks Amanda, “should I choose to go through Kohlinar, I hope you will not take that as a reflection on you” [quote not exact] and she tells him she will always be a proud mother.
[4] Spock goes before the Admissions Board of the Science Academy. Up until the Vulcan Elder insults his human heritage, Spock is ready to attend the VSA.
[5] Spock thanks them for the opportunity and says he is going to Starfleet, because he thought it wise to cultivate multiple options. [And it was, because why would he want to deal with prejudice all his life on Vulcan when he can join multi-species Starfleet and be done with that stuff?]
[6] Sarek looks stern and shocked, and says, “I thought you had chosen the Vulcan way.”
[7] Spock says to everyone, “LLAP” and bugs off.

We can interpret this as Spock’s division from Sarek, and that perhaps they did not speak for the years Spock was attending and teaching at Starfleet Academy.

Or we can interpret this differently, per your post.

134. Cygnus-X1 - July 1, 2014

127. Marja – July 1, 2014

123 Logical Leopard, However, it allows them to take a fresh and new take on the characters, that is both interesting to fans like myself, and non-fans.

I cannot agree more. Fans who insist that the original characterizations continue in a new, “what-if” universe, should enjoy both Phase II and STC;

The problem with that reasoning is that the BR writers clearly derived the personalities of their Alt Timeline characters from the Prime Timeline TOS characters. In the Mirror Trek episodes, the Mirror characters were each written a definite slant on their Prime Universe counterparts—generally speaking, they were all evil and/or more severely “flawed” (in terms of morality/ethics/character). The Mirror characters were desperate people living in a cruel, barbarous Federation setting.

You’re right that the BR characters should be judged on their own merits, being alternate reality variations on the TOS characters. But, that is largely the basis on which people (myself included) criticize the way that they’re written.

I’m not complaining because Alt Kirk is different from Kirk Prime; I’m complaining because Alt Kirk is a lame, shallow caricature of Kirk Prime, who never really learns anything meaningful through the story and has no real arc.

I’m complaining because the original, social dynamics and human-study that Kirk, Spock and McCoy comprised in TOS has been nullified by the way that the BR writers have written Alt Spock, and the formerly meaningful troika dynamic has been replaced with nothing; it’s just gone, and now the Alt versions of those characters are lame and uninteresting.

The Khan character was likewise altered by the BR writers, but his former attributes—that which made him such a compelling character—were replaced with nothing of interest. If you judge STID’s Khan as a stand-alone character, what have you got?

A whiny crybaby who’s supposed to be a super intelligent, uber strategist leader of men, but behaves illogically, ambivalently and contrary to his own alleged motive throughout the movie. You can attribute Khan’s inconsistency to the writers making him that way on purpose, but it’s pretty clear to me, given the other flaws in the movie, that the flaws in the writing of Khan are of the same kind and cause as the flaws Kirk, Spock and McCoy as well as in the messy, convoluted plot.

People tried to rationalize Nero this same way last time around—it’s not that he has a weak motive; it’s that he’s supposed to be irrational—but, at some point, when every character by the same writers behaves irrationally and contrary to his own supposed motives and beliefs, it seems probable that it’s just consistently bad writing that you’re trying to make sense of.

Look, you want a story that’ll confuse you and make no sense? I can do that. Anybody can do that. Writing a story that teaches you something or, at least, makes you think…now that is a thing of value.

And, generally speaking, when you’re trying to teach somebody something (as in a literary theme), or get them to think a certain way or consider a certain moral dilemma or proposition, the means to your end is clarity in your story as opposed to confusion—Generally speaking. Sure, there are auteur filmmakers (David Lynch) who thrive on exactly the opposite—painting a surrealistic, abstract work of art and daring you to try to make sense of it. But, Bad Robot—poppy and eager to please Papa Paramount as we know them to be—are absolutely, positively, unambiguously not going for surrealistic, post-modern, abstract expressionism.

STID makes sense sometimes, but doesn’t make sense other times…like, wow, man…it’s such a paradoxical mind-f*ck. It’s a revolution in film!

135. Disinvited - July 1, 2014

#133. Marja – July 1, 2014

“…why would he want to deal with prejudice all his life on Vulcan when he can join multi-species Starfleet and be done with that stuff?…” — Marja

I don’t know about that. I think we could make a pretty good drinking game out of taking a sip every time someone in the first series’ starfleet says something inappropriate to Mr. Spock — not to omit every time Spock, himself, flat out states he’s insulted.

136. Marja - July 2, 2014

134. Cygnus, I get that you seem to think every time a man sheds a tear in a Trek movie, he’s a “whiny crybaby.” Don’t men get to feel? Do they not get to emote [ACTing!]? Do they not get any sympathy when they have a life crisis?[JK] [Do you like John Wayne movies? I'm gettin' a sneakin' sneakin' that you like the "strong, silent type" of hero. I can recommend "Longmire."]

Sure, it’s a manipulative tactic on the part of the screenwriters, but I’m willing to go with it, because I don’t think men who weep are “whiny crybabies,” I just think they’re deeply moved for a reason given [sometimes forced] in the plot.

But I do think Khan’s weeping was classic sociopathic manipulativeness. He knew of Kirk’s story [and of Spock's]; he insulted Spock with the “breaking rules” thing and then wept to manipulate Kirk with his “deep family feelings.” I suppose Khan had them, but I don’t think a man like Khan weeps over such things. I still object to the casting, but that’s done. As is the movie ….

Messy, convoluted plot: agreed, they could have done away with the “Khan” element altogether and had a good flick. Marcus sending Enterprise off on a seemingly exploratory or otherwise innocuous mission, Pike getting suspicious [because of course, he is Captain and Spock is First Officer and Kirk is ... tactical or something, demoted to LT to learn from his cover-up after Nibiru, anyway], a Section 31 operative ‘taking out’ Pike [for the duration of the mission, not forever!], Spock and Kirk working together with McCoy and Uhura to thwart “the evil that Marcus do,” Kirk getting to be the tactical genius hero and getting re-promoted to Captain at the end. And Pike goes back to the Admiralty, maybe replacing that crook Marcus.

Anyway, it could have gone so many different ways, and we all know that. We’re hoping it improves in the next movie, but who can say what will happen. I just try to extract the good that I see, and [perhaps, to you, in my own convoluted way] extract from what I’ve seen the lessons the characters have learned. As you’ve said, I work pretty hard at it. Retcon is the province of the fanfic writer and the devoted fan.

I’m a fan of the TOS characters and I’m a fan of the BR characters as well. I don’t see the BR characters as a “violation” or a “cheat,” I don’t think the movies are as well-written as they could have been [had they been anything other than Summer Blockbusters], but I like the changes in the characters as Alt’verse characters. It brings something new to a new Trek, it’s not the same Trek as before, and for me that’s okay. I’d just like less violence and action with my order of Trek, please.

Again, I wish they’d market Trek for Thanksgiving or so, then maybe it could be a little less Marvel Rocket Racoon and a little more Roddenberry and Coon, but there we are. Paramount has made their choices and we have to live with them, like TOS Spock’s “self-made purgatories” ….

One thing I would NOT like to see a return to, for McCoy: all the racial remarks TOS McCoy used to hurl at Spock. That was the ’60s, and McCoy was showing that contemporary suspicion of others, and it was an object lesson now absorbed by most everyone in American society ….

We’ve had the discussion of AltKirk v. PrimeKirk before; I think they should’ve left him dead at the end of Movie Two and opened Movie Three with ["Eight Months Later"] or something. Either way, people would b*tch: “trying to emulate the TOS movies again! Users!” or [a]“What a cheat, having him just wake up months later! How’d that happen?!”[b]“Remember McCoy and the tribble?” and we’d have had the whole magic blood discussion then.

At any rate, this Kirk is ten years younger than TOS Kirk. I still think comparing and finding AltKirk a faulty character on the basis of his immaturity is not germane to any discussion. The reasons for his behavior are clearly established in Trek 09. But, and I have agreed with you on this, the arc for AltKirk in the first movie was all wrong, it was forced, and then they tried to make up for it in the beginning [with Kirk's near-instant re-promotion] of STiD.

At any rate, I think having been dead will have taught Kirk something. But who am I to say. Pine definitely brought a more mature air to Kirk in the last scene of STiD. [Shrug. We'll see.]

And, generally speaking, when you’re trying to teach somebody something (as in a literary theme), or get them to think a certain way or consider a certain moral dilemma or proposition, the means to your end is clarity in your story as opposed to confusion—Generally speaking.

Okay, I definitely agree with that. But how much time did the writers have, in between action set-pieces, to say much that was meaningful or instructive? The action set-pieces are probably not going away, not as long as Trek is a movie series.

It needs to be a TELEVISION series, and they should [seriously!] hire you as a script advisor.

137. Marja - July 2, 2014

135 Disinvited, Well, Spock did say he was insulted a time or two as a barb at McCoy [insulted to be thought "Human" and so on].

And McCoy and others threw the racial epithets and insults to his personal character because it was the ’60s and we Amurcans were learning to live in better racial harmony.

But we should do a re-watch “insult” drinking game, that’d be almost as fun as the one where you take a sip every time someone says “Brain” in that infamous TOS Season 3 episode, “Spock’s Brain.” Plus we could make up insults for Spock to throw back at them ….

138. Keachick (Rose) - July 2, 2014

One of the comments being made about Kirk in STID by Cygnus and others is that by the end of the movie, he did seem to have learned anything.

Well, that is not true.

Pike called Kirk out for lying on his report by calling what happened on Nibiru as “uneventful” when clearly it was not and not detailing exactly what did take place. Kirk realized that he had really disappointed Pike and I think that must have preyed on him as much as being demoted and sent back to the Academy.

I say this because later, when Kirk does get command again, he asks that Spock be reassigned as his first officer again on the Enterprise, something which surprised Spock a bit. He knew that Spock was Spock, ie he would not *lie, *deceive…not even for his captain. When Kirk began explaining the mission and giving various orders, most of it was done ship wide communication channels and would be heard by all the crew. When he captured Khan, he ordered that Starfleet be immediately informed …in other words, everything Kirk said and did went on record, nothing was hidden or omitted.

He had learned an important lesson – to tell the truth and to acknowledge his responsibilities. He tells Marcus later that Marcus should take him and spare the crew because they were only acting under his orders. That was when Marcus revealed his treachery, in saying that he never intended to spare Kirk or any of his crew.

Kirk had changed. Whether he will be exactly like his prime counterpart, who knows, but then again, does he have to be?

139. Keachick (Rose) - July 2, 2014

oh for an edit feature: I think the word as I type the next word
This should read – “he did NOT seem to have learned anything.”

140. LogicalLeopard - July 2, 2014

126. Keachick (Rose) – July 1, 2014
128. Marja – July 1, 2014
126 Rose, I’m going to quote some TOS re: Logical Leopard’s “Except, well, y’know….Spock….who was a non-womanizing jerk to Chapel all throughout TOS….*LOL*”

CHEKOV: It was a leetle joke, Meester Spock.

SPOCK: Extremely little, Ensign.

[The Trouble with Tribbles]

**************************

*LOL* That was it exactly….. *cue Spock eyebrow lift and lilting music before the credits roll*

141. LogicalLeopard - July 2, 2014

134. Cygnus-X1 – July 1, 2014

The problem with that reasoning is that the BR writers clearly derived the personalities of their Alt Timeline characters from the Prime Timeline TOS characters. In the Mirror Trek episodes, the Mirror characters were each written a definite slant on their Prime Universe counterparts—generally speaking, they were all evil and/or more severely “flawed” (in terms of morality/ethics/character). The Mirror characters were desperate people living in a cruel, barbarous Federation setting.

*******************************

Which should be more questionable than nu-Trek. True, they were living in a cruel, barbarous Federation setting, but does that mean that they would be cruel and barbarous? Couldn’t they also be victims, or reformers? Do you think knowing what you know about Kirk’s personality, he would be an “evil” version of himself? If so, what life issues would effect that change? This is where nu-Trek wins, and the Mirror Universe fails – it never provides a legitimate reason why Kirk came out the way he did, whereas nu-Trek provides a completely logical and totally relatable reason for why he is the way he is.

************************************

You’re right that the BR characters should be judged on their own merits, being alternate reality variations on the TOS characters. But, that is largely the basis on which people (myself included) criticize the way that they’re written.

***************************************

But what is the criticism, essentially? Do you NOT think that the removal of a father and absenteeism of a mother would produce a child who although brilliant, was undisciplined, ungoverned, angry, and a bit of a jerk? How on earth is that bad writing when the SAME thing happens every day in reality?

****************************************
I’m not complaining because Alt Kirk is different from Kirk Prime; I’m complaining because Alt Kirk is a lame, shallow caricature of Kirk Prime, who never really learns anything meaningful through the story and has no real arc.

***************************************
Mirror Kirk is a lame, shallow caricature of Kirk Prime. I’ve already talked at length before about how Prime Kirk never really learns ANYTHING from his own recklessness, and is patted on the back for it all the time. Cheat on a test? Here’s a medal. Blow up a stolen Starfleet vessel? Here’s a new and improved one!

On the other hand, nu-Kirk learns a good amount. He learns that he is destined for greater things. He learns that there are consequences to his arrogance (demotion, which was only restored so he could be manipulated into a death trap). He learned that command is not as easy as he thinks its going to be, and there is a such thing as a no-win scenario, when
Marcus almost kills him. You might complain that there’s an “almost” there, but look at Kirk’s attitude afterward. He’s not gloating, or anything, he’s trying his best to keep everything afloat. He learned about giving the last measure for your crew. But even if he DIDN”T learn anything, the suggestion that he should grow as a character and learn something is a little disingenuous, because Kirk Prime never really grew all that much as a character throughout TOS and the movies, until maybe TUC, when he gets over his prejudices and learns he’s old machinery, so to speak.

************************************

I’m complaining because the original, social dynamics and human-study that Kirk, Spock and McCoy comprised in TOS has been nullified by the way that the BR writers have written Alt Spock, and the formerly meaningful troika dynamic has been replaced with nothing; it’s just gone, and now the Alt versions of those characters are lame and uninteresting.

**************************************

So there’s no solid troika. That’s a personal preference, but it doesn’t reflect upon the writers. The characters are not the same as TOS right now, so there’s no troika. It seemed that Spock was the cold, logical voice, McCoy was the emotional, passionate voice, and Kirk was the balance in between. But look at the development of the characters to this point? Spock is still having issues with emotion, given his life situations, McCoy is McCoy, and Kirk is still kind of reckless during the first two movies. So no troika. Those are the types of things you have to look at as a writer? Where is TOS, where are these characters right now, and where are they going? Some things may NEVER develop, some things may, some things may happen differently.

************************************

The Khan character was likewise altered by the BR writers, but his former attributes—that which made him such a compelling character—were replaced with nothing of interest. If you judge STID’s Khan as a stand-alone character, what have you got?

************************************

What do you have? A cold, calculating, manipulative, extremely intelligent superman. Any difference between BC and RM’s versions of Khan, not attributable to their particular acting style is attributable to their situations. RM’s Khan acted the way he did because he was attempting to manipulate the Enterprise crew. BC’s Khan was well past that stage and was already a known dangerous man before he encountered the Enterprise crew, so he didn’t have to put on a charming, regal exterior. He was all about business. Yet AGAIN this is a situation of the writers realizing where a character IS and writing accordingly.

*********************************

A whiny crybaby who’s supposed to be a super intelligent, uber strategist leader of men, but behaves illogically, ambivalently and contrary to his own alleged motive throughout the movie. You can attribute Khan’s inconsistency to the writers making him that way on purpose, but it’s pretty clear to me, given the other flaws in the movie, that the flaws in the writing of Khan are of the same kind and cause as the flaws Kirk, Spock and McCoy as well as in the messy, convoluted plot.

**************************************

Whiny crybaby. Here we are again. He was clearly manipulating Kirk. It’s not inconsistency, you just didn’t notice what was going on because you were too busy hating it. Just like it’s not a “flaw” in the writing of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, it’s just not what you want. Eventually, you’re going to have to come to that realization – it’s NOT a writing problem. Describing the Federation as a peacekeeping force? THATS a writing problem. Reasonably projecting how characters would act in different circumstances given their past, that’s GOOD writing.

*********************************

People tried to rationalize Nero this same way last time around—it’s not that he has a weak motive; it’s that he’s supposed to be irrational—but, at some point, when every character by the same writers behaves irrationally and contrary to his own supposed motives and beliefs, it seems probable that it’s just consistently bad writing that you’re trying to make sense of.

*************************************

I’ll give you five fake internet dollars if you can give me ONE example of a character behaving irrationally and contrary to his own supposed motives and beliefs.

**************************************
Look, you want a story that’ll confuse you and make no sense? I can do that. Anybody can do that. Writing a story that teaches you something or, at least, makes you think…now that is a thing of value.

*****************************************

You missed some golden opportunities about being taught lessons and being made to think in both of those movies, moreso the first. I’ve said this before, but the first movie I showed to a friend because of all of the lessons about life and loss it featured. She benefited from it.

142. LogicalLeopard - July 2, 2014

136. Marja – July 2, 2014

At any rate, this Kirk is ten years younger than TOS Kirk. I still think comparing and finding AltKirk a faulty character on the basis of his immaturity is not germane to any discussion. The reasons for his behavior are clearly established in Trek 09. But, and I have agreed with you on this, the arc for AltKirk in the first movie was all wrong, it was forced, and then they tried to make up for it in the beginning [with Kirk's near-instant re-promotion] of STiD.
************************************

So I’m watching TNG’s “Tapestry” last night. That’s a pretty powerful example to reinforce the point you’ve made and the point I’ve been trying to make as well. Young Picard is a NIGHT and DAY difference from the Picard we know and love. He’s arrogant, he’s reckless, he’s violent (described by Batanides as normally being the FIRST person to plot revenge), he’s a womanizer (two dates on the same day with different women, a string of “conquests”, etc). NOTHING like serious, orderly, stiff, cautious, reasonable Picard, who you’d have no problem thinking slept in his unform, sat straight up at exactly 0655 hrs, tugged his uniform down, and walked to the bridge to begin his shift each morning.

But 40 years can change a LOT in a person. So can 10. So can 1. Most of us know this, because we know the same thing has happened to friends, family members, associates, or even ourselves.

143. TUP - July 2, 2014

This is the problem.

Some of us say, these new characters are nothing like the old. others say, well ofcourse that is true since these are new characters. Then some of us say but they were in the same universe until Nero came. Then others say, ten years can make a big difference.

Well which is it? Are these new characters or are they the same characters, just younger?

The writers themselves have described Trek 3 as the characters being just about at the point we remember them from TOS. My point is always, they cant have their cake and eat it too. They cant pat themselves on the back when they get it right and use the draw of the “Kirk, Spock et al you remember” while also bristling under the criticism by saying “its a new universe, these are different characters”.

I also never understood what they meant by unburdening themselves from Canon with the Universe split. They have gone out of their way to invoke canon. I appreciate that. But it makes the lack of understanding of the characters that much more glaring.

The only character that should have been really changed by Nero’s arrival is James Kirk. So why is everyone else different too? Did Nero’s arrival make Chekov’s parents put off having a kid for ten years? Thats one of the biggestn examples of the film-makers not getting it. Did they not have a “bible” on these characters and the established Star Trek universe? If so, when Kirk and Spock are 24, Chekov would be, what, 9? So why put him in the movie? There was no point to doing it other than their desire to race to the finish and have the crew all together at the end of the first movie. Ill advised, to say the least.

144. Logicalleopard - July 2, 2014

143. TUP – July 2, 2014
This is the problem.

Some of us say, these new characters are nothing like the old. others say, well ofcourse that is true since these are new characters. Then some of us say but they were in the same universe until Nero came. Then others say, ten years can make a big difference.

Well which is it? Are these new characters or are they the same characters, just younger?

********************************

THAT’s the part I’ve been trying to explain. They are the SAME characters who have been through DIFFERENT life paths, for the most part, with Kirk being the most dramatically affected. Kirk was at ground zero of the time changes -his father died. Other people caught ripples of it – Carol Marcus was raised in England rather than wherever she was before (due to changes within Starfleet), I don’t know if Spock Prime was an instructor at the Academy as a commander, but this Spock was, etc.

They have also been affected by the effects of the Nero within the confines of the movie. Spock has had several psychological blows pretty early in his life, his mother dying in front of him, his planet being destroyed, his captain dying in front of him (while mind melded), and his friend dying in front of him, about five seconds after he realized that he WAS his friend.

The effects on the characters can be subtle for some, dramatic for others, but with the deaths of hundreds of people, shuffling of Starfleet patrol patterns, Klingon patrol patterns, armament races, etc, everyone’s lives could have been effected to some extent. Some people probably flat out don’t exist, because that freighter captain who met the waiter on Rigel VII and fell in love, never met the waiter because her shipping pattern was changed and delayed before the waiter got back together with his girlfriend. Some things are dramtically different, some things are the same. That’s the whole import of what Nero did. Compare it to the TNG Episode Tapestry. In order for Picard to even CONSIDER not getting stabbed by the Nausicaan, Q at first lies and says Picard isn’t that important to the time stream, then agrees to make it so that no changes that Picard makes affects anyone else. That’s only within the power of a godlike individual to do, because through Picard’s life, countless things would have happened. As a Starfleet Captain, Picard was in the position to save lives, and take lives – lives of people under his command who died in the performance of duty (like Jack Crusher) or lives of enemies he deliberately took (take any ship blown up by the Enterprise or Stargazer, like that Ferengi’s son).

************************************
The writers themselves have described Trek 3 as the characters being just about at the point we remember them from TOS. My point is always, they cant have their cake and eat it too. They cant pat themselves on the back when they get it right and use the draw of the “Kirk, Spock et al you remember” while also bristling under the criticism by saying “its a new universe, these are different characters”.
******************************************

Just about may be true. There is the subtheme of the universe working to align itself, like destiny. Kirk is the most substantially different of all of the characters, but he’s becoming more on track as he progresses through the two movies. Spock may arguably be the most advanced, even though he appears to be the most regressed. I think he’s going to progress past the cold Spock of TOS, who drew offense at being called human, to the Spock of TUC who has not strayed from logic, but values his relationship with humans and has come to terms with his human side. Other characters may have been less affected, like Bones, who seems like he’s pretty much at TOS level. I predict that you’ll see them at their closest in the next movie.

****************************************

I also never understood what they meant by unburdening themselves from Canon with the Universe split. They have gone out of their way to invoke canon. I appreciate that. But it makes the lack of understanding of the characters that much more glaring.

************************************************

That’s very simple to understand. If this movie took place during the TOS timeline, they would be burdened with all of the canon of TOS, meaning that they would have left themselves open to slipups that have to be explained later like Khan saying to Chekov “I never forget a face” when Chekov wasn’t even a character in Season 1 of TOS. They would have had to slip it in between certain things, like “Does this take place between “For the World is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky” and “Amok Time?”

Now things are more fluid. They can involve canonical events and characters like Khan, but take a new spin on them. Like STID. The Botany bay is still floating out there, so who finds it? Kirk? Some other ship? The Metrons are out there, will Kirk run into them? He’s obviously run into Mudd at this point, What if they run into the Guardian of Forever and it drops them in amongst the Dinosaurs instead of near Edith Keeler? You see, the same canon stuff may be there, but you can weave it into different forms.

**************************************

The only character that should have been really changed by Nero’s arrival is James Kirk. So why is everyone else different too? Did Nero’s arrival make Chekov’s parents put off having a kid for ten years? Thats one of the biggestn examples of the film-makers not getting it. Did they not have a “bible” on these characters and the established Star Trek universe? If so, when Kirk and Spock are 24, Chekov would be, what, 9? So why put him in the movie? There was no point to doing it other than their desire to race to the finish and have the crew all together at the end of the first movie. Ill advised, to say the least.

*********************************

I addressed what you said about Kirk being the only character that should have been changed earlier. That’s probably why you’re not understanding this movie, because you don’t understand the impact of what Nero did. There are dozens or more people who died, Robau, George Kirk, etc. Any effect those people had on Starfleet, and thus the universe, is null and void. A ship was destroyed. An unknown enemy with superior technology was unveiled. Which is why the technology probably looks so different, because instead of focusing on exploration, they might have focused more on technology. Not only was the Federation effected, but the Klingons as well. They lost ships, captured Nero, tried to learn about their tech, and their tech was presumably improved. They were probably on high alert as well. I doubt Nero told him he was from the future, and I doubt they’d believe him if he did. So the Klingons were probably on alert as well. Praxis seemed like an in joke, but did it really explode? Was it overmined decades earlier in response to Nero? Are the Klingons dying earlier? Is that why there are whole abandoned provinces? I mean, the questions are ENDLESS and the possibilities as well.

Chekov is not an example of the filmmakers not getting it, but it is a valid mistake. He was shoehorned in simply because he’s one of the original characters, and fans want to see him. It’s possible that Chekov’s parents had him earlier as a result of the Nero incident, but like I said, it’s pretty much a shoehorn. To hardcore fans, we know we didn’t have to see Chekov, cause he wasn’t even a character in the first season of TOS, but *shrugs* They made a judgement call, and I can’t argue for or against it. I thought he was amusing, but I certainly get your point.

145. Keachick (Rose) - July 2, 2014

#141 – “Whiny crybaby. Here we are again. He was clearly manipulating Kirk. It’s not inconsistency”

I am not sure if Khan was necessarily manipulating Kirk by his weeping. Bear in mind that while Khan was telling Kirk and Spock about his crew/family, he had his back to them, so neither could see him being tearful. This was something the audience saw, not the two main characters. If Khan had been attempting to manipulate Kirk, I think, he quickly realized that it was not going to work because, as Kirk said, *”I saw you. I saw what you did…” and was left in no doubt about Kirk’s resolve to see Khan stand trial for his crimes.

*Kirk looked this Harrison/Khan guy in the face as H/K was firing on Starfleet Headquarters and Kirk also knew that one of those firings mortally wounded Pike. For Kirk, this was not just a case of evidence being compiled by some CSI-type unit. Kirk was an actual witness, probably one of the few actual witnesses who could properly identify that the man calling himself Khan actually did the crime. That makes a difference and Khan knew it.

146. Keachick (Rose) - July 2, 2014

#144 LogicalLeopold – Thank you.

It is comforting to know that there are others who see that TUP is not “getting it”. I have tried to explain things to him but he has tended to dismiss what I say.

Some say it is my style. Sometimes yes, it could be, but not always, or even most of the time.

It will be interesting to see how TUP responds to your explanations, which certainly make sense to me.

147. Cygnus-X1 - July 2, 2014

136. Marja – July 2, 2014

134. Cygnus, I get that you seem to think every time a man sheds a tear in a Trek movie, he’s a “whiny crybaby.” Don’t men get to feel?

Well, it’s two things. It’s that the Khan in STID has been changed from the Khan in TWOK, and the changes were not particularly relevant or called for. Turn Khan from a Type A uberman into a whiny complainer was an arbitrary decision on the part of the writers, and the result was not a particularly compelling character nor one whose idiosyncrasies were at all meaningful with respect to the story. There’s a difference between a character taking on certain attributes and those attributes contributing to a theme in the story, and just changing a character to make him more emotional for the sake of making him more emotional, because you think that more emotional characters will attract a younger demographic, female demographic, or whatever.

Of course, men get to “feel” in movies, but their feelings should be for some greater purpose other than just having them emote. Kirk got choked up at the end of TWOK, and it worked extremely well—it’s become a classic scene in American film. Kirk getting choked up was consequent to a 25-year friendship with the deceased Spock. Kirk’s eulogy revealed thoughts of his about Spock which had hitherto gone unexpressed and were perhaps in question. Finally, when his first officer dies, Kirk reveals how he really feels about him—and, of course, his compliment that Spock is “…the most human” is laden with irony.

That’s different than just having some guy cry and complain because you want more emotionalism in the movie. They made Spock more emotional for the same reason—just to have more emotionalism and attract certain demographics to these movies. And in both cases, Alt Spock and Alt Khan, they’re not compelling in their emotionalism. I’m not sitting there thinking, Oh, sure…I can see why he’d react that way.

In the case of Spock, they keep cashing the same check of Spock’s mother dying (presumably) as the premise for him acting so anti-Vulcan. We don’t see Alt Spock struggling with his anti-Vulcan behavior, nor trying to reign it in, we just see him acting like an overly emotional human. So, why have a Vulcan character at all, then, if you’re not going to treat him as a Vulcan? Because Spock’s a member of the TOS crew, that’s why. It’s just lame.

148. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

145. Keachick (Rose) – July 2, 2014
#141 – “Whiny crybaby. Here we are again. He was clearly manipulating Kirk. It’s not inconsistency”

I am not sure if Khan was necessarily manipulating Kirk by his weeping. Bear in mind that while Khan was telling Kirk and Spock about his crew/family, he had his back to them, so neither could see him being tearful. This was something the audience saw, not the two main characters. If Khan had been attempting to manipulate Kirk, I think, he quickly realized that it was not going to work because, as Kirk said, *”I saw you. I saw what you did…” and was left in no doubt about Kirk’s resolve to see Khan stand trial for his crimes.

**********************

He had his back to him, yes, but he had to turn around, didn’t he? So Kirk would have seen the tears, or he would have seen him wiping them away, if he did in fact do so. This lends reality to the manipulation, it makes it appear that he’s attempting to preserve his dignity. Now, Khan knew he couldn’t outright manipulate Kirk, because being punched 8,000 times in the face pretty much told Khan that Kirk wasn’t fond of him *LOL* Khan’s job is to humanize himself, and actually chameleon himself to Kirk.

Really take a moment to look at the beautiful way this manipulation laid out….Kirk meets Khan, puts him under arrest, and punches him in the face 8,582 times. Khan, whilst being punched in the face, is probably taking in his surroundings and analyzing the situation. Kirk is obviously emotional to the point that it compromises his ethics as a Starfleet officer. Was he related to anyone who died in London? (I forget if Kirk actually mentioned Pike at this point) He’s obviously in charge of the Away team, because he’s making the arrest. But when Uhura drops the C-bomb, Khan withers him with a simple word…..”Captain?” He attempts to work in a little shame into Kirk for his actions. Then on the ship, he throws in a little monkey wrench – he talks about the ship being stopped at warp, making it seem like he knows more than they do (which he does). This makes him needed. Then he goes into this whole schpiel, ending with a few tear drops, to make himself seem emotional and passionate, like Kirk is. But that’s just to break the ice. He then puts Kirk SQUARELY in his shoes by comparing his situation directly to his. Is there anything you wouldn’t do for your family? Oh, and of course he makes Marcus the bad guy, which he is, but draws no attention to himself.

That whole exchange proves Khan’s genius like no other in Star Trek. He excellently manipulated Kirk. The time was eventually going to come when Kirk needed him and came to him. If it didn’t, he would have probably done the same thing all villains do, petition him to get out because of some reason, real or imaginary. Once he’s out of the brig, all bets are off. That’s why I have such a problem with him being dismissed as a whiny brat, when that whole scene is genius.

*******************************************

*Kirk looked this Harrison/Khan guy in the face as H/K was firing on Starfleet Headquarters and Kirk also knew that one of those firings mortally wounded Pike. For Kirk, this was not just a case of evidence being compiled by some CSI-type unit. Kirk was an actual witness, probably one of the few actual witnesses who could properly identify that the man calling himself Khan actually did the crime. That makes a difference and Khan knew it.

***********************************************

Khan could care less about a trial, because Khan was going to find a way off that ship (or in control of that ship) before he was ever brought before a judge. Khan needed to find a way to get the captain to trust him. I submit that he did it by humanizing himself to Kirk, and putting Kirk “in his shoes” so that Kirk would be somewhat sympathetic to him. It makes Khan look that much more like a person capable of controlling 1/4th of the world. If you can shoot someone’s mentor in the back, look at them face to face, and convince them to give you some sort of parole so that you can help them do anything, AFTER they punched you 9,489 times in the face, you’re a pretty bad boy. *LOL*
************************************************

146. Keachick (Rose) – July 2, 2014
#144 LogicalLeopold – Thank you.

It is comforting to know that there are others who see that TUP is not “getting it”. I have tried to explain things to him but he has tended to dismiss what I say.

Some say it is my style. Sometimes yes, it could be, but not always, or even most of the time.

It will be interesting to see how TUP responds to your explanations, which certainly make sense to me.

************************************

Well, here’s the thing about communication. People may not always agree with what you say, but if you don’t say it in an agreeable fashion, you’re wasting your breath, because they will be inclined not to agree with you. Like Mary Poppins said, a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. We human beings have natural defense mechanisms, that work against us even when they shouldn’t. You tell me I should stop drinking, I may consider it, I may not. You say I’m a loser drunk who needs to get his act together? Well, I may curse you out, and drink another glass for you on top of what I’m already doing, even if I agree with you. I haven’t followed your interactions closely, but it’s always good to be civil. Even as I say that, I hope I haven’t said anything to offend anyone in my comments as well.

149. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

145. Keachick (Rose) – July 2, 2014

Sorry, I forgot…..Khan never forgets a face. He probably recognized Kirk, and could have even assumed “correctly” that he was the first officer of someone killed there, because he would be familiar with the policies that drew them all to the conference room. He just didn’t know he was captain, or, like I said, he was just driving the shame home by saying “Captain…”

150. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

147. Cygnus-X1 – July 2, 2014

A uberman into a whiny complainer was an arbitrary decision on the part of the writers, and the result was not a particularly compelling character nor one whose idiosyncrasies were at all meaningful with respect to the story.

***************************

At some point, you’re going to have to confront your logic on calling nuKhan a “whiny complainer.” Shedding a tear doesn’t make you whiny. Whiny is saying, “Oh, why are you hasslin’ me, Kirk….all I want to do is save my family! Why won’t you let me save my family!” Complainer? When did Khan EVER complain? He didn’t even complain about being punched in the face a billion times by Kirk, but instead used it to provoke shame.

It appears that your prejudice toward this version of Khan is warping your assessment of the issue. I say that without malice, because you’re not required to like the movie or the character. It’s all a matter of opinion. However, I am confronting you on your views not for opinion’s sake, but because you’re making statements like “whiny complainer” that are no where near the reality of how he was presented.

Now, it’s up to you how much you want to invest in this movie, but if you are interested in taking a second look, read my above post to Keachick on Khan’s manipulation of Kirk. Then watch the scene again and see if it bears up. You can find the whole scene on YouTube. Hopefully you’ll see what I’m talking about.

If not, well, hey, this is Star Trek. Maybe you’ll enjoy it 10 years from now, should you have the blessing of long life. I know the same thing is going on with me and Voyager now. During it’s first run, I flat out stopped watching it. Then I tuned in to a few episodes in the 7 of 9 era that I thought were pretty good, but still thought the first seasons were garbage. I watched Season 1 on DVD not too long ago, and said to myself, “Wow…..this show is great!” *LOL* Sometimes you just need to give things a second chance.

151. TUP - July 3, 2014

Logical – I totally understand your position, I just disagree with the vision.

Its like if they had cast Denzel Washington as James Kirk. Or decided to make Spock a Klingon. Well, this is a new universe now. Those would be extreme cases but the point is the same. The reason the films ring hollow for me is because its like watching a parody. Its a new character names Kirk, a new character named Spock.

When Bad Robot angled for the gig, why did they want it? The money? Because creatively they changed the characters. You, me and many other people far, far, far less talented than Orci et al could come up with ideas and adventures that kept the characters true to their established personalities while also making them interesting.

This wasnt TOS they were remaking. I dare say, had the producers done a study group and the questions were:

1) do you want to see your classic TOS characters BEFORE Season 1, to learn what shaped them and brougt them together or

2) do you want some convoluted time travel techique that splits the story into a new universe with characters that look similar, have the same names but act different because they have been “changed” by events?

Most people would select (1). I think it was arrogance on the part of the filmmakers, whether intentionally or not I dont know. But they didnt want to write someone else’s characters so they made their own.

152. Cygnus-X1 - July 3, 2014

149. LogicalLeopard – July 3, 2014

Shedding a tear doesn’t make you whiny. Complainer? When did Khan EVER complain?

When he’s in the brig crying about the mere recollection of the thought that his buddies might have been killed, and that’s why he just had to go and murder so many people, when in fact he knows that his buddies are alive in the next room. Oh, woe is me!…(sniffle, sniffle)…my dear, dear, DEAR friends…they’re like FAMILY to me (take note, audience; this is as close to a “theme” as you’re gonna get in this one)…perish the thought that harm might have come to them!

153. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

#151 TOS

TOS established the characters, and the entire planet accepts and loves them. James T. Kirk. Mr. Spock, and the others, too. They are within our cultural base, we know and love them.

Let’s look at an analogy: “Dallas” had established characters, the world knew and loved them. JR. (Ok, not nearly as well established and loved as Trek but I will get on with my analogy):

So due to some “focus group” manipulations and the desire for summer box office fortunes, “Dallas” is made into a new summer movie blockbuster. We see “the new J.R.” not as we know him, but perhaps as a shy little boy who grows up to try to be entrepreneur of a pizza parlor but it goes belly up. He is left an oil well by his long lost uncle, but loses it too. He has no knack for business. Then he gets his oil well back somehow. This new J.R. has a different personality, is really a very bad business man, although he keeps getting his oil well back. He makes huge mistakes any of us would in the cut-throat oil business (or commanding a starship), and we NEVER see the assured, confident, intelligent JR who is the JR of Dallas.

The “alternate reality” excuse doesn’t cut it. “Dallas” is a dramatic, soap opera, “Big Bang Theory” is a comedy (not a dramatic soap opera), and (you see where I am going with this), Star Trek is science fiction, not a dramatic soap opera nor a super-hero rockem sockem.

Kirk and Spock are/were well established characters across the entire planet. Why in the world would this not be a given?? It is an artistic insult and travesty to have them NOT as they ARE.

No wonder STID got no awards and was not a box office smash.

154. TUP - July 3, 2014

The Khan character was just so flawed from the beginning. It was a trend though to make the characters less brainy and more brawny. Same thing with Kirk.

I come back to the KM test scene. A great opportunity to show this young, brash, jerk Kirk as a master tactician. We kept hearing how smart he was, show us. Instead, he flaunts professionalism and respect. When I watched WOK and Kirk explained how he “cheated”, he recounted the story with pride, not arrogance. He was clearly proud to have been awarded a commendation…whereas in this new goofy universe, he is almost kicked out of Starfleet.

And here’s the other thing. In TOS, there is NEVER a moment when you wonder why, of all the characters, Kirk is captain. He is the best of the emotional McCoy and the logical Spock. In the new universe, Spock should be captain. They’ve switched roles. Spock is the best of the emotional Kirk and his own internal logic.

155. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

#154 TUP
Well, I disagree because in the nu-universe, Spock is not fit to be captain either. He has some really dangerous anger issues. Yes, his mother was killed and planet blown up but he as a Vulcan would handle it with dignity, quietly, broodingly, instead to trying to strangle (kill) someone (Kirk) when all the guy was doing was verbally disagreeing (2009 film). In today’s society, Spock would be charged with attempted murder.

In STID, even though jerky Kirk was way in the wrong by not even issuing a report on Nibiru to Star Fleet (???huh? like, he forgot his homework??), Spock goofed up by just handing in his detailed report, not correlated with his captain first.

Did these two never sit down and compose their reports, share, discuss, or at least read the other guy’s command memo??? What a couple of idiots!

We have no likely captain in STID. How about let’s put poor Chekov in The Chair. It was absolutely incredible that he was sent down to run the highly advanced, complicated Engineering Section (how about finding another engineer in that section?? perhaps Scotty had an assistant??) TOS, for all its taking liberties with stuff, would never send Chekov to be in control of Engineering. This is not a freight train with a furnace that needs shoveling!!
Chekov was not in that department. Oh, I see, one line of dialogue in which Kirk says, “Chekov, you’ve been helping Mr. Scott, yes?” Talk about contrived!

Yes, how did that friggin ship get so big? You could fit a brewery in there, ya know??!

156. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

#154, TUP, I also disagree about Spock’s fitness for command in STID because he shot an insubordinate ensign out the airlock in a capsule, loosely aimed at a hostile planet except for one/2 man, remote Star Fleet installation. Did the Enterprise not have a brig?

This is analogous to President Obama ordering a disagreeing intern to be taken to a chopper over the Mojave Desert and dumped out while in flight with a parachute and sunblock. In fact, Spock’s decision was MORE hazardous for Kirk than the Obama analogy.

Spock is not anyone who should be in command, ever, or at least, any military or quasi-military would see it this way. What a blotch on his record! And then he tried to kill Kirk, next movie, and Kirk was not attacking him.

Of course the Star Fleet and Federation of STID is not the Star Fleet and Federation of TOS. STID gives us a juvenile delinquent’s view of our future Earth’s governing powers. What a joke – it is the Wild West.

Star Fleet didn’t know they had a dissident contingent in their library in the middle of San Francisco, making gigantic weapons? The working area blown up by the ring in the water, was enormous. Anyone wonder before that, where the library went??

TOS gave us a look at a structured government of future Earth and Star Fleet’s rules and regulations were THERE, if not always followed. Star Fleet was indeed functional, powerful, and structured.

STID creators did not care enough to think it through or to even follow what had already been created for them to fit their story into. And so, STID is fantasy at best, without the fun. Other super-hero popcorn fantasy films are more fun.

TOS and subsequent Star Trek creators did care, followed a paradigm and in the process, gave us hope for the future – what our form of planetary government could be. Not perfect. But generally intelligent – and so were its Star Fleet officers.

Calling Chekov to The Chair….

157. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

I should’ve said, the air lock caper was in the 2009 reboot (TUP’s point was about STID).

158. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

Actually, Spock shot his First Officer out the airlock, not an ensign. I forgot, Pike had made Kirk – First Officer even though he was a stowaway and had been in trouble……………never mind.

That’s even a bigger blotch Spock’s command record.

159. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

151. TUP – July 3, 2014
Logical – I totally understand your position, I just disagree with the vision.

*************************

And that’s totally fine….but realize that you can’t criticize a film because you disagree with the vision. Or, better said, make it clear that your criticism is with the vision itself. Because it gets kind of…I don’t know, unnecessarily repetitive? And what I mean by unnecessarily repetitive is that your complaints about any part of the film really boil down to just one point – you don’t like the vision. Remember that version of Romeo and Juliet with Leonardo Dicaprio? What I mean by unnecessarily repetitive is that if you were to talk about the movie and say, “Hey, Mercutio used a GUN in this movie, not a sword. It wasn’t even a musket, it was a Glock.” and “There were electric lights in the movie. Pretty sure Verona didn’t have electric power in the era when Romeo and Juliet lived” and “They’re driving CARS! Cars! There were NO cars back then, there would be horses…” You can eliminate all of the criticism by going back to the root problem of your issue – you don’t like the vision the producers had.

Like I said, that’s totally fine, but that ship has kind of sailed. We’re not going to get a TOS before Where No Man Has Gone Before movie right now. The best way to get those things are from books and some of the fan films.

160. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

152. Cygnus-X1 – July 3, 2014

When he’s in the brig crying about the mere recollection of the thought that his buddies might have been killed, and that’s why he just had to go and murder so many people, when in fact he knows that his buddies are alive in the next room. Oh, woe is me!…(sniffle, sniffle)…my dear, dear, DEAR friends…they’re like FAMILY to me (take note, audience; this is as close to a “theme” as you’re gonna get in this one)…perish the thought that harm might have come to them

*****************************

I’ve explained that at length before. He was clearly manipulating Kirk. By your own admission, he had no reason to cry, they were all safe and sound. So why did he? Masterful manipulation of Kirk

161. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

153. IDIC Lives! – July 3, 2014
#151 TOS

So due to some “focus group” manipulations and the desire for summer box office fortunes, “Dallas” is made into a new summer movie blockbuster. We see “the new J.R.” not as we know him, but perhaps as a shy little boy who grows up to try to be entrepreneur of a pizza parlor but it goes belly up. He is left an oil well by his long lost uncle, but loses it too. He has no knack for business. Then he gets his oil well back somehow. This new J.R. has a different personality, is really a very bad business man, although he keeps getting his oil well back. He makes huge mistakes any of us would in the cut-throat oil business (or commanding a starship), and we NEVER see the assured, confident, intelligent JR who is the JR of Dallas.

*****************************

I’d go see that movie! *LOL* It’s kind of like the Godfather II, they show him at a time when he’s not a cool, smart, confident Capo, but a minor thug who is trying to advance. People think the Godfather II is the best of the series, and it frequently makes people’s favorite movie lists. Why, because we’re interested in the way people become who they were. So if this Dallas was a series of movies, I’d be interested in it, and seeing the development of the character.

**************************************

The “alternate reality” excuse doesn’t cut it. “Dallas” is a dramatic, soap opera, “Big Bang Theory” is a comedy (not a dramatic soap opera), and (you see where I am going with this), Star Trek is science fiction, not a dramatic soap opera nor a super-hero rockem sockem.

********************************

Beg to differ. Some of the scenes between Kirk and his love interests, or even Spock and Chapel could have been directly lifted from soap operas. And as for rock-em, sockem, they got into a fight like almost EVERY WEEK! *LOL* A fistfight, usually, or a gunfight, at SOME POINT.

But on the Dallas angle, this is a science fiction show which can feature alternate realities. Dallas could have been just a strict reboot.

*********************************************

Kirk and Spock are/were well established characters across the entire planet. Why in the world would this not be a given?? It is an artistic insult and travesty to have them NOT as they ARE.
*****************************

Was the mirror universe an artistic insult and travesty?
******************************************
No wonder STID got no awards and was not a box office smash.
*********************************************

Did well enough at the box office to merit a second and third movie. But how can you say “No wonder STID got no awards” when neither did ANY of the TOS movies? At least for acting, script, that sort of thing, I’m assuming you’re talking about. And if the complaint is that they didn’t receive any awards because they weren’t like the original characters, why didn’t THE ORIGINAL CHARACTERS get the awards?

162. TUP - July 3, 2014

IDIC – Absolutely I agree that neither were fit for command. Thats probably why in the “real” universe, Spock was science officer under Pike (not command) and Kirk was on his way to the Farragut as a Lieutenant. At this rate of advancement, Nurse Chapel will have her own ship by the time we get to the third movie.

So much was contrived like you said. Also, the fact the entire fleet was getting together somewhere else leaving only the Enterprise to save the day. The fact that they *needed* one of their best Captains to take out a ship of cadets, which just happened to be the flagship. Like come on.

in WOK it was contrived that the Enterprise was being used as a cadet training ship not long after its major refit. But this was WAY worse. Like have these writers never heard of the concept of foreshadowing…?

163. LogicalLeopard - July 3, 2014

156. IDIC Lives! – July 3, 2014
#154, TUP, I also disagree about Spock’s fitness for command in STID because he shot an insubordinate ensign out the airlock in a capsule, loosely aimed at a hostile planet except for one/2 man, remote Star Fleet installation. Did the Enterprise not have a brig?

This is analogous to President Obama ordering a disagreeing intern to be taken to a chopper over the Mojave Desert and dumped out while in flight with a parachute and sunblock. In fact, Spock’s decision was MORE hazardous for Kirk than the Obama analogy.

*******************

*LOL* That’s a funny mental image there!

I do have to point out, AGAIN, that it is slightly less unprofessional than we all think, once you look at the situation.

Kirk was not supposed to be on the ship. He was NOT an ensign (Or, as I think, a Lt. Jg at least), he was a cadet on academic probation. So basically, he wasn’t supposed to be there. The brig would have been fine for him until they got to Earth, but they weren’t GOING to Earth, they were going to the Laurentian system, and then into combat. If you’re going into combat, and there’s a GOOD chance that your ship is going to be destroyed, why would you keep a cadet on your ship who wasn’t supposed to be there?

Solution: Drop him off at the nearest Starbase. He was safe. He only started his problems because he got out of the pod against the recommendation of…er…the pod. Scotty would have eventually come out and recovered him, had he stayed there.

But mind you, you’d probably be able to come up with a better way of dealing with the situation, but Spock, who was already emotionally compromised, probably had his thinking processes influenced by his emotions. Which is why he probably ignored Pike making him the Second Officer. He probably thought that Pike didn’t have the authority to do that, and shipped him out.

So, it’s less like Obama dropping an intern over the Mogave Desert, and more like a US naval ship discovering a stowaway cadet from California on its way to a situation in North Korea, and dropping the cadet off at Okinawa.

164. Cygnus-X1 - July 3, 2014

154. TUP – July 3, 2014

The Khan character was just so flawed from the beginning. It was a trend though to make the characters less brainy and more brawny. Same thing with Kirk.

I come back to the KM test scene. A great opportunity to show this young, brash, jerk Kirk as a master tactician. We kept hearing how smart he was, show us. Instead, he flaunts professionalism and respect. When I watched WOK and Kirk explained how he “cheated”, he recounted the story with pride, not arrogance. He was clearly proud to have been awarded a commendation…whereas in this new goofy universe, he is almost kicked out of Starfleet.

155. IDIC Lives! – July 3, 2014

Well, I disagree because in the nu-universe, Spock is not fit to be captain either. He has some really dangerous anger issues.

You’re both right.

McCoy is actually the only grown-up on the crew. He’s extremely cranky and has no stomach for command, but at least he’s prudent and circumspect enough to be trusted with equipment as expensive and powerful as the Enterprise and her crew. And since BR have made Spock and Kirk both overly emotional—because that’s what the global focus groups show that audiences around the world want—there’s no more troika, so why not have a Captain McCoy. He’s not serving any other thematic purpose in these movies.

My god, these movies are badly written. I thought I’d complained about everything there was to complain about, but people keep mentioning new problems in the writing that I was only subconsciously aware of. It’s all of these unrealistic things—like the main characters being totally unbelievable as Star Fleet command officers—that add up to the “comic-book movie” overall impression that I’m always complaining about.

165. Cygnus-X1 - July 3, 2014

160. LogicalLeopard – July 3, 2014

I’ve explained that at length before. He was clearly manipulating Kirk. By your own admission, he had no reason to cry, they were all safe and sound. So why did he? Masterful manipulation of Kirk

You haven’t explained anything. In fact, you’ve changed your opinion about Khan’s motives from a few threads back where you and someone else…I think TUP…disagreed about it. He said that Khan did think that his friends had really been killed, whereas you said that he knew the whole time that they hadn’t been killed.

I said a while back that it was ambiguous—he kinda seems like he’s manipulating Kirk, but Kirk never buys it (not very “masterful” being that Kirk shoots Khan on the Vengeance as soon as he’s gotten what he needed out of him), and the writing never really deals with the would-be manipulation, or Khan’s possible sociopathy, nor does it flesh out his character in any meaningful way—What kind of a leader was he? How did he get people to follow him? He seems very different from Khan Prime, but how do these differences manifest in terms of his global conquest? Did this crybaby that we see in the brig convince legions of brave men to follow him into battle? Not only does he not seem the least bit charismatic (like Khan Prime), but he seem overly emotional, just like every other character in these movies. If Khan is the type to turn on the water-works as a means of manipulation, then why didn’t he shed some tears and ask Star Fleet command for help instead of murdering them all? He could have brought the entirety of Star Fleet to bear on Marcus, which would have been much more likely to neutralize him than Khan, alone, even magical as he is. And then, having gained the trust of Star Fleet, after Marcus was locked up, Khan could have done what he wanted—convinced Star Fleet to thaw out his 72 buddies, then the 73 of them could begin their global conquest, go off to found an isolated colony or whatever. For a super genius, Khan sure is bad at thinking up the most practicable way of getting what he wants.

Every single issue relating to Khan is left ambiguous and unexplored. His motive is weak and confused, just like Nero in ST09. It’s just stupid. And the result is not a character that you root against but admire for his attributes, like Montalban’s Khan, but rather just a sort of creepy, lame bad guy.

166. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

#163 Logical Leopard

See, I am reading your comments and you are wrong :-) but I was wrong too. Kirk was not an ensign, he was Spock’s First Officer (even worse of Spock!)

I get your point if he were just a stowaway except it was too dangerous a thing to do to a stowaway.

I did add a comment earlier than I had forgotten Kirk was First Officer when he was shot to hell/Delta Vega but I don’t think it has manifested.

167. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

#163 logical Leopard

I see you did address the First Officer rank which Kirk had been given by Pike. Why in the world would Spock not respect Pike’s last order before he went to be tortured most awfully? Spock respected Pike and though he did not like Kirk, he still could not – well – should not – disregard Pike’s order and shoot Kirk out the airlock. Spock follows orders, certainly that was emphasized in STID.

168. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

Also, my friend Logical Leopard, how is getting shot out an airlock in space, as the ship moves, and crashing into a planet which has really bad weather, like being dropped off by a ship at Okinawa?? poor Kirk was kind of shaken up, it was not a pleasant landing, certainly it was dangerous.

169. IDIC Lives! - July 3, 2014

IMO, these 2 nufilms are just not well written. Neither were all TOS episodes but these nu people had gobs of $$ and relatively lots of time.

With TOS Kirk and Spock (and all of them), there was a feeling of excellence.

With STID, there is none. To me, that is a basic difference.

170. Keachick (Rose) - July 3, 2014

Kirk would have been placed in an escape pod with enough to survive on – life support, shielding, energy/food packs, water… (how long is not stated). I think that we can assume that these escape pods would also have some kind of simple navigation and propulsion system which can be programmed and guide the pod to a destination. Kirk was rendered unconscious by Spock’s nerve pinch, so I guess the programming would have been done by the security officers, one of whom was Hendorff (Cupcake)….hmmm

I think some of you are seeing the character of Khan in STID in a more convoluted way than you need to.

Remember that Kirk and Spock did NOT see Khan’s tears as he talked about his crew/family. This is what we, the audience, saw…

Also, until Khan heard Sulu warn that he would fire long range torpedoes at him, John Harrison, unless he immediately surrendered, Khan had believed that his crew had been killed by Marcus, just as Marcus threatened he would do if Khan did not comply. Khan realized the probability that his crew were still be alive/in cryostasis, after he asked how many of these particular torpedoes were on the Enterprise and Spock answered “72”.

Khan could be a brutal monster – this he clearly proved later in the film. This does not mean that he could not be genuinely tearful at the thought of what he had lost or came so very close to losing. He was out of time and place and those were his only family/crew, people who had any meaning for him. His genetic engineering did not give much scope when it came to being to care about much or anyone at all. I also suspect that his caring could only go so far with regard to his crew, but at least, it was something.

@ Cygnus and others
Why all this unsympathetic calling out of human beings (males in this case, ie Khan and Spock) who are reduced to shedding a few tears because of the difficult, even horrendous, circumstances they may find themselves in? Why do such scenes seem to bother you so much?

“Big boys” can and do cry as well, because, well just because… just as women can and do. It is just that women are more likely, able to do so because they have more of a hormone called prolactin, but men also have the same hormone but in much smaller quantities, just as they have estrogen, like women, but in much smaller quantities.

Human Biology 101 – Khan is a genetically engineered human being.

171. Keachick (Rose) - July 3, 2014

Please excuse my silly little typos – omission of words…Ugh!

172. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

Why oh why oh why did Spock not have Kirk put in the transporter and beamed to Delta Vega????

Spock wasted a Star Fleet capsule. This was a silly idea someone had in a studio meeting one morning while chewing their gum, “Hey, a capsule is real different, and we can show it in CGI and, hey, I’m a genius!”

Spock must have known Kirk landed on a planet or planetoid which had at least 2 kinds of large man-eating life-forms in plentiful abundance. What were the odds Kirk would be eaten fairly quickly? Apparently, quite high.

Spock apparently did not let the Star Fleet remote installation know that he had exiled someone, on his authority only, to Delta Vega so Scotty would not be “eventually coming to get Kirk” as Logical Leopard suggested.
Scotty was just a sittin’ there a dreamin’ of sandwiches and was surprised to see Kirk and Prime Spock.

How’s about Spock putting his First Officer/stowaway in the brig? If the transporter was not working from the skirmish with Nero above Vulcan, then keep Kirk in the brig and then, if this must happen, beam him to Delta Vega when transporter fixed (there is a small chance that there is a convenient statement in the dialogue that the transporter isn’t working and I don’t remember it, but I don’t want to watch the reboot to double check :-))

The transporter was working a brief time later when Kirk and Scotty beamed back to the Enterprise when she was at warp (a stretch of the teleporting process which is a stretch too far, but anyway–)

Was this Mirror nu-Spock?? No? In the Prime Universe, even Mirror Spock would probably not do this.

Yes, nuSpock lost his mother and his planet, then is this how grieving Vulcans act? If your loved ones die is it in your nature to go out and maybe beat someone to a pulp or condemn then to a likely death? Someone who only opposed you verbally?

Kirk had been right about “the lightning storm” on Vulcan, he was a fellow Academy colleague and Spock knew he was supposedly intelligent and supposedly had potential. It is ridiculous that Spock would shoot him out the airlock. It is gratuitous, stupid, bad writing.

Prime Spock was not just a guy with funny ears who couldn’t or wouldn’t kiss Nurse Chapel and cried when he caught the “Naked Times” virus.

Prime Spock treasured life. He had depth, integrity and dignity which was/is an inspiration. His high intelligence showed us a peaceful way.

Spock is written as badly as Kirk is in the nuUniverse and both are unlovable, IMO. Spock has to give a speech in the Mud shuttle that he really cares so much he just cannot show it at all, but where is the larger Vulcan philosophy? It’s not about just Spock and his turbulent emotions, it’s about how Spock regards all life.

173. TUP - July 4, 2014

Was it the fact transport technology wasnt advanced enough to beam from the Enterprise to Delta Vega? At least until Spock Prime gave Scotty the forumla for trans-warp beaming. And ofcourse, Khan was able to beam from Earth to Kronos. Heck, we dont even need ships anymore (saw a hilarious spoof online somewhere that had Starfleet not using ships anymore since you can beam everywhere…oh and ofcourse, death has been cured too).

Regarding Spock, I know im in the minority but I’m not a big fan of Quinto. Ill admit he was far better in STID than he was in Star Trek. They cast an actor who was the right age and look. He’s not nearly the actor Nimoy was or at the very least the directing is bad. He plays everything with either sadness or anger. He needs to watch some classic TOS Spock and stop being so determined to “act” and “emote” in every scene.

TOS Khan was sympathetic because of Montalban’s charisma. And because he believed in his position so strongly, it almost made you believe too. They created a character to be Kirk’s equal and cast an actor that could convey that. In STID, I wouldnt follow *that* Khan into a Burger King, let alone a war. Montalban made Khan sympathetic. In STID, they tried to write Khan as sympathetic using every trick in the book from the crying to the being manipulated to the saving the little girl to his friends in danger to teaming him with Kirk.

Again, the writers just didnt GET Khan. And in fact, they admitted they wanted a character that worked as an original character and then called him Khan. What a shame they’d have so little regard for these characters. I was a Khan-supporter before the movie. But they blundered it. Big time. Their only hope was, in post-production, have the camera linger on Montalban’s face during the pan over the cryo tubes at the end…to indicate that Harrison wasn’t actually Khan at all.

174. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

TOS, are you kidding?? It shows The Enterprise sailing right past Delta Vega and the capsule being spit out. If the beaming process wasn’t up to it (but all those other incredible beaming feats are possible, Kahn to Kronos, Scotty and Kirk back to the Enterprise at warp), then all Spock had to do was stop the Enterprise for a microsecond and beam Kirk to Delta Vega. the Enterprise was right near Delta Vega.

175. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

If Spock had stopped the Enterprise, then, for a second, Kirk could have been beamed to right outside or inside the Star Fleet station where Scotty was, not lost in an ice and snow desert with man-eating beasts. Wasn’t Spock just on his way to confer with the fleet in the Laurentian System??

176. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

Speaking of Khan, something that bothers me: Ok, he gave his magic blood to save the little girl. Her father did a deal with the devil and he was to blow up the library/giant weapons factory.

Khan did watch him and I guess it is assumed that Khan would kill the guy’s family (wife and little girl in hospital) of the guy didn’t blow up the “library.”

But that Star Fleet soldier was a bit passive to just march in there and DO IT. Certainly his family could have been moved to safety if he had told Star Fleet AFTER his girl got the magic blood. Have a unit of security men move the family, Khan is only one person.

I realize that is a whole movie in itself and we had to move on to the rest of STID, but– it is a bit of bad writing to leave that gaping there. Apparently hundreds of people were killed and injured in that explosion, though it did not dampen Marcus’ nefarious scheme one bit, which maybe it would have.

Oh well— logic and STID do not mix.

177. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

TOS, I agree regarding Quinto. I don’t want to tread on anyone else’s opinions but part of the STID problem is most of the actors. I don’t think it is their fault, they do what they are given and told but—many of them lack presence. There seems not to be a mind/spirit there, working behind the dialogue and making it LIVE. Just my opinion.

TOS Scotty is a military man, more than Kirk or Spock. Give Doohan the con and he tells it like it is, he shoots phasers, he causes black-outs, he follows the military rules but has a Scottish fighting spirit. Doohan’s Scotty is eccentric but is not a character who is there for the laughs. He is real and he is eccentric. He loves his phasers as well as his ship.

I like Simon Pegg and I know he likes Trek. But his role? — Comic relief. And the Scotty we knew for 50 years would not “quit” and actually, could not just “quit” Star Fleet. He went AWOL?? Yes, it was a black ops mission but can you use an entire Fleet starship and have it NOT Star Fleet at all? Another crazy problem. How off the books could it have been? It was on Kirk’s authority alone, not the Fleets, but— just really murky territory. Marcus ordered it.

The Enterprise was full of crew members who did not agree to go NOT under Star Fleet’s auspices. They knew nothing about it until Kirk announced it. If I were those crew members, as I went sailing out the hole in the hull to my death, I’d be pissed off.

178. TUP - July 4, 2014

The Scotty quit BS was another example of contrivance. They needed Scotty off the ship so they shoe-horned in a scene that just didnt work. Scotty would have followed Kirk’s orders. Period. And Kirk would have respected Scotty’s opinion. I appreciate that it was showing an immature Kirk but it didnt work. The person most likely to blast those torpedoes at Krones on Marcus’ orders was in fact Scotty, the military man.

Also, its a damn travesty that we havent had Scotty in command yet. That was always a highlight for TOS for me, when he was left in command.

Its easy to defend the shooting of Kirk out of the Enterprise in a lifeboat because its easy to defend anything with “yeah but…” lots of yabbits here. The real reason it was done was to get Kirk to THAT particular place at THAT particular time. Same reason why Delta Vega was suddenly moved into Vulcan orbit. Same reason why Scotty just happened to be there. All contrivances to connect the dots of the main plot. Very tenuous threads and if you pulled on any of them, the entire plot unravels which is, I suspect, why they didnt over-think all those issues…had someone gone through this script and pointed out everything that didnt work, they would have had to start from scratch.

179. Cygnus-X1 - July 4, 2014

172. IDIC Lives! – July 4, 2014

Why oh why oh why did Spock not have Kirk put in the transporter and beamed to Delta Vega????

I guess because Spock was in a hurry and didn’t want to drop out of warp to beam Kirk down. Also, maybe he figured that the capsule would give Kirk a bit of shelter and protection from the elements for a while on the freezing, inhospitable planet. Presumably, Kirk was supposed to just lie in his capsule like mummy and wait for Spock to send someone for him in a few days or weeks. Hey, Star Fleet Command? Acting Captain Spock here. Yeah, I just marooned my First Officer on an uninhabited, inhospitable planet because he was pissing me off. Would you mind sending someone to rescue him or at least retrieve his corpse for burial Kthanks!

180. Cygnus-X1 - July 4, 2014

173. TUP – July 4, 2014

He’s not nearly the actor Nimoy was or at the very least the directing is bad. He plays everything with either sadness or anger. He needs to watch some classic TOS Spock and stop being so determined to “act” and “emote” in every scene.

JJ’s probably been telling him to play it that way. Making the characters more emotional for the sake of emotionalism has been deliberate on the part of BR.

Their only hope was, in post-production, have the camera linger on Montalban’s face during the pan over the cryo tubes at the end…to indicate that Harrison wasn’t actually Khan at all.

That would have been an awesome twist!

And it would have totally redeemed the character.

181. IDIC Lives! - July 4, 2014

#178 and 179 CygnusX1 and TUP,
Yes, Delta Vega is no where near Vulcan and you are both spot-on, as they say across the pond in these comments.

I would say, with all respect (not trying to be mean or irreverent, truly)–that if Bob Orci is the dyed in the wool Trek fan which publicity says (and I guess he is–), why would he not set those giant mistakes and plot holes correct AS THEY HAPPENED (were written)?? Just do not let them be written that way–then the whole thing would not be made of a fabric which collapses entirely when one pulls this loose thread or that one.

182. Cygnus-X1 - July 4, 2014

178. TUP – July 4, 2014

The Scotty quit BS was another example of contrivance. They needed Scotty off the ship so they shoe-horned in a scene that just didnt work. Scotty would have followed Kirk’s orders. Period. And Kirk would have respected Scotty’s opinion. I appreciate that it was showing an immature Kirk but it didnt work.

The whole premise of the argument that leads to Scotty resigning is goofy— Why would launching the 72 torpedoes pose any threat to the Enterprise?

Scotty says that launching them would adversely affect the warp core with a “subtle shift in magnetic output” due to the “payload” of the torpedoes being “unknown.” This really doesn’t make sense. Why would the warp core, the most volatile and dangerous component of the ship, be located anywhere near torpedo exhaust? And why would the torpedo exhaust be dangerous just because the torpedo had a certain payload as opposed to another?

Though, I do buy that Scotty, protective and proud of his ship as he is, might refuse to go against regulations if doing so would put his ship in jeopardy, I agree that a responsible captain would never have had that falling out with his chief engineer over such an issue. I think the intention of the writers was for Kirk to be so emotionally overwrought in his desire to avenge the murder of Pike that he just can’t see straight and follows Marcus’s instructions without question. They show McCoy nagging Kirk for not showing up for his physical, and Kirk stressed out, implying that he’s preoccupied with the mission.

Kirk’s little speech at the end, about the desire for revenge turning you as evil as your enemy, was supposed to be a denouement and statement of the main theme or moral of the story. But, of course, like everything else in these movies, that potential character arc for Kirk, as well as the whole revenge them, were merely shallow, superficial gestures of an arc and a theme that were never explored in any depth.

STID wasn’t really about “revenge.” It wasn’t really about “family,” either. These were just gestures of themes, not even half-baked. STID wasn’t really “about” anything. And neither was ST09. Both movies are basically just plots peppered with some character moments that don’t add up to anything meaningful or cohesive.

183. Cygnus-X1 - July 4, 2014

181. IDIC Lives! – July 4, 2014

I would say, with all respect (not trying to be mean or irreverent, truly)–that if Bob Orci is the dyed in the wool Trek fan which publicity says (and I guess he is–), why would he not set those giant mistakes and plot holes correct AS THEY HAPPENED (were written)?? Just do not let them be written that way–then the whole thing would not be made of a fabric which collapses entirely when one pulls this loose thread or that one.

Well, the hopeful are hoping that the bad writing in ST09 and STID (especially the latter) was due to JJ messing it up and/or the effect of too many chefs in the kitchen.

For my part, I don’t see any reason for defending Orci’s writing, as I’m not aware of him having written anything that has been better than the two BR Trek scripts. If his body of work were great except for the two BR Trek movies, then I could understand viewing them as aberrations whose flaws were entirely attributable to other people. Being a Trek fan obviously doesn’t guarantee that you make a good Trek writer. BR Trek 3 is again being written by three writers, of which Orci is just one. So, again, if there are problems with the script, we’ll have no way of knowing exactly who is at fault.

184. Keachick (Rose) - July 4, 2014

#180 – “JJ’s probably been telling him to play it that way. Making the characters more emotional for the sake of emotionalism has been deliberate on the part of BR.”

I cannot believe what I read sometimes. Emotional for the sake of emotionalism? Did you not see what had just happened to Vulcan, something that both Kirk and Sulu risked their lives for and desperately tried to prevent from happening but were too late?

An entire planet from imploding. Spock managed to get his parents and other elders out of the Katric Arc- barely, but he watched his mother die before his eyes, and got beamed back with his father and some Vulcan elders in time, but only just.

Please – just think, feel – imagine if something similar had just happened to you – would you not be in shock, or perhaps tearful, angry, inconsolable, sometimes people might even faint, experience heart attacks as a result, ie emotionally compromised? Human beings do get emotional over far less…truly, what is going on with some of you?

Actually, I think that (Quinto)Spock held it together pretty well, until Kirk mentioned his mother…(kind of karmic balance, in some ways – because Spock had mentioned Kirk’s father as a way of getting Kirk off balance).

Bear in mind, that it is doubtful that Kirk himself would have mentioned Spock’s mother or much else in this context..*this was prime Spock’s suggestion* as how to get his own counterpart to reveal his compromised state, ie lose it.

No, Vulcan may not be that close to Delta Vega because the Enterprise had to go to warp in order not be pulled in by the black hole that red matter created in order to destroy Vulcan and anything within its orbit. So did the Narada move fast…Delta Vega is in the vicinity. Obviously, it is an ice planet in the vicinity of the Vulcan world (that was) and on the way to the Laurentian system, which is where Spock was headed when he had Kirk ejected from the Enterprise.

Scotty said that he had asked for supplies and equipment and had not seen or heard from anyone. It is quite possible that some of his communications equipment was not working (properly) and when prime Spock and Kirk met him, he seemed rather hungry and desperate. He thought that Kirk and Spock had come with much needed supplies, which could have included equipment/parts to fix his faulty communications and sensors.

Although the film did not state as much in so many words, it was the most likely of conclusions that I drew, very early on, based on the evidence of Scotty’s own words and predicament.

The other issue here is – if in fact the sensors have been working properly and picked up the fact of someone landing on the planet in a Starfleet issue escape pod, what exactly could he do about it? It is a given that Scotty would have known that the pod would be equipped with a basic computer with navigation etc along with survival rations…It is not like he was in much of position to offer any help really, since he was low on everything himself…Either way, Scotty was the one who was stuck/marooned. Starfleet, it seemed, had neglected, abandoned Scotty, at that point.

*yet another important point that naysayers of these movies overlook

185. Disinvited - July 4, 2014

#179. Cygnus-X1 – July 4, 2014

A few days? Or WEEKS? Any fan worth a Vulcan salute has to ask, “Where’s the restroom?

186. Keachick (Rose) - July 4, 2014

Kirk, in his seeking revenge for what this H/K whoever guy had done, especially in firing on SFHQ and killing Pike, did starting changing Kirk into someone more akin to the person he sought revenge against.

He was broody and angry. He dismissed Dr McCoy’s ministrations. He disregarded Scotty’s legitimate concerns about the safety of the new torpedoes that were being loaded on to the Enterprise. He was prepared to do as Marcus ordered – hunt down and kill a criminal thereby affording him no trial and firing torpedoes on another world, even though these actions went against Starfleet regulations. In other words, his need for revenge made him careless and arbitrary. Fortunately, Spock pointed out the wrongness of what Marcus had ordered, which was further “backed up” by Dr McCoy’s dismay and disgust heard in his words, “What? We’re firing on the Klingons?” (words to that affect) (ref. the scene in the shuttlecraft taking them to the Enterprise, just before Carol Wallace introduced herself)

Kirk had a little time to calm down and reflect and realized that what Spock was saying to him in the shuttle was right and when he gave his speech to the crew about the mission, he included Spock’s suggestion, which had the effect of countermanding Admiral Marcus’s orders. Kirk was caught between a rock and hard place – ie the rock of solid, ethical Starfleet regulations and protocols and the hard place – an admiral who was a hard man who would not take well at all to being disobeyed (even if his orders were illegitimate, especially then actually).

Once Kirk had decided to do the right thing and thereby earned the respect and backing of his first officer and other bridge crew and his friend and chief medical officer, Dr McCoy, his resolve was absolute. Khan learned this. Kirk, from that point on, was out to seek justice, not revenge. He grew past his vengeful state of mind, which is where Khan got stuck, and that was the point/the moral of the story.

CygnusX1 and others – I am sorry that you have not gained or understood what I have gleaned from this movie, despite its level of what could be described as too much action – “relentless” is how Chris Pine described this film, although I doubt he meant it in a particularly negative way.

Kirk’s speech, at the end of the movie, was about his own journey as much as anything else. Unfortunately, the essential parts were deleted from the DVD and blu-ray copies. Maybe it is back in the latest compendium compromising the last two movies, special features etc, but I am not holding my breath.

I suspect the main part of the speech turned out to be more “controversial”, too much of a game changer, for much of the public and for Paramount and Bad Robot than they first realized, so it got dropped…we still have a ways to go…:(

187. Harry Ballz - July 4, 2014

@173 TUP “have the camera linger on Montalban’s face during the pan over the cryo tubes at the end…to indicate that Harrison wasn’t actually Khan at all”

Brilliant!

BOB ORCI, are you reading this? If so, pay close attention. Unless your two new hacks are showing this kind of imagination, fire them, and have TUP flown to L.A. for a brainstorming session!

Please, no more shallow turd-like convoluted messes like STID!

188. Keachick (Rose) - July 4, 2014

With TUP, a convoluted and shallow mess is exactly what you would get…

What’s with the “hack” insult made against two writers we know little about, in terms of their work?

Harry Ballz – you were never this belligerent in the past. What is going on?

189. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

How we respond to grief varies. Some people cry and cry, others seem cold but are handling it in their way.

But, I have never heard of someone who is so grief-strickened that they send a colleague to almost certain death (who says that capsule had a survival kit??) or try to strangle him to death. Yes, Prime Spock suggested the strategy to nuKirk of making nuSpock super-angry but that was written by the same writers who wrote the rest of STID, it is not in TOS.

In “This Side of Paradise” when he attacked Kirk, Spock was not grieving and he was affected by the pods which apparently made people want to fight as a side affect of being rid of them (the pods). McCoy and others also snapped momentarily as they “came down” from the pods.

Ok, maybe Vulcans (or just Spock?) get dangerous when they are grieving in the nu-world, I can accept that as a new concept, but then, Spock (I say again) is as unfit for command as Kirk. A starship captain loses men and women (usually who are wearing red shirts), and grief is going to happen to said captain.

If Captain Spock loses several hundred people, as happened to other captains, what is he going to do?? Commander Decker was nasty and endangered the entire Enterprise but he wasn’t dangerous physically to individuals. Captains are used to taking chances with the entire ship and thus all its crew but to take grief out on one particular guy?? Not a good command qualification.

If this issue were examined somehow, it would be interesting Trek but in nuTrek, Spock simply got away with it. No question, not even the realization of what he had just done. It is just a handy way of trying to make the plot work. It doesn’t work–

I can’t understand that the huge degree of grief (to lose his planet and his mother) is justification for Spock being dangerous to relatively innocent crewmates. Kirk had just been a hero, too, when he shot Nero’s bizarre drill.

This is hard to word, but in science fiction, I don’t want to do what I do when I catch “The Young and the Restless” soap oepra as I eat lunch. In it, the viewer goes back and says, “Well, Victoria was married to JC long ago and so she might feel that so and so, and then when Jack married Phyllis and they had Summer, his feelings blossomed but he has closed up and–we must remember that Sharon went a bit nuts when she realized childhood trauma with her mother…yada”

Perhaps science fiction in film has been more of a male field because it is about concepts more than melodrama or (to be polite)– drama —as pertains to the characters’ long histories.

I expect to have to think through the fact that the torpedoes were armed when Spock sent them over, for instance–that kind of thought about the plot. But to have to stop and think, “Well Kirk had to calm down a little because he probably didn’t get any sleep and then Bones pissed him off and then Kirk felt……….. but then Kirk felt the other way…and that is why he lost his good sense and agreed with what Marcus wanted him to do.”

(The above is not actual dialogue or anyone’s literal wording, these are exaggerated examples to get my point across).

Hey, maybe I am being closed minded. If the STID plot had worked, maybe I shouldn’t make this point about science fiction.

Trek is science fiction but if we could live with them 24/7 like a “reality show,” maybe we could delve into their every emotional motivation but in a film a little over 2 hours which is SCIENCE FICTION, the STORY needs to work, needs to move, needs to entice us and hold up!

I offer these thoughts as simply how I feel and see it.

190. Disinvited - July 5, 2014

#189. IDIC Lives! – July 5, 2014

‘If Captain Spock loses several hundred people, as happened to other captains, what is he going to do??” — IDIC Lives!

We probably have a pretty good idea given that First Officer Spock (Prime) experienced the death of an entire Federation starship crewed exclusively by hundreds of Vulcans, USS Intrepid, in THE IMMUNITY SYNDROME episode of the first series.

191. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

#190 Disinvited
Yes, I forgot the USS Intrepid. Spock’s reaction was what we would expect. His ability as First Officer was not in jeopardy. After a short while, he got himself together and functioned as usual – and in this episode, with great valor.

192. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

And yes, the “itching powder’ sonics were involved in the angry come-downs from the pods too.

193. Keachick (Rose) - July 5, 2014

“(who says that capsule had a survival kit??)”

The pod computer told Kirk to wait until he got rescued, which could be quite some time depending. When he did leave the pod, against instructions, he had a very warm coat to wear. It is a good bet that these pods are outfitted with a survival kit as a matter of course. I mean – why wouldn’t they be? It does not make sense for them not to be.

Think about it – a ship is going down (like the Kelvin or the Enterprise) and suddenly the crew, with only seconds, have to think about loading the escape pods with essential supplies. Now that would not only be very dumb but also negligent and dangerous, on the part of ship/pod designers and maintenance crew…

Another factor to consider here is that Kirk was not escaping in the pod for his life, with only seconds to spare, there was time for the security crew to ensure that the pod did contain what was necessary for his short term survival, at least. Perhaps navigation co-ordinates were a bit off, but that could also have been due to Delta Vega’s difficult environment, which threw the pod off course by 14 kms.

“but then, Spock (I say again) is as unfit for command as Kirk.”
Of course, Spock was, at that point, because he was so emotionally compromised by the sequence of events (nothing so extreme, so shocking and so personal (world and mother annihilated) had happened before to either Spocks). nuSpock, after his father called out “Spock!”, became properly aware of what he was doing (ie strangling a person) and that he was unfit to command and resigned (as acting captain) right there and then.

“But to have to stop and think, “Well Kirk had to calm down a little because he probably didn’t get any sleep and then Bones pissed him off and then Kirk felt……….. but then Kirk felt the other way…and that is why he lost his good sense and agreed with what Marcus wanted him to do.””

Why shouldn’t you have to think through this as well? It all goes to understanding the characters and their motivations. This is as important, perhaps more important in some ways, than working out why torpedoes do or don’t have whatever.

Star Trek is not a soap opera where meddlesome gossip and bitchiness are the main items on the menu which we are expected to order. This is about understanding how reflection on the part of our protagonist could lead to a change of heart and therefore what orders he gives to his crew, whether he chooses to ignore regulations and follow the illegitimate orders of a senior officer or follow Starfleet regulations and protocols, as best as he can, given the circumstances.

What – The Young and Restless is still being made and is on TV? I stopped watching that and other soap opera crap when I was 17. I sometimes watched the British soaps like Eastenders, but even that got too much for me – talk about dire.

194. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

Keachick,
Yes the pod had a coat.
No, the pod said nothing about a revival kit.
Yes, it told Kirk to wait.
Wait for what??????

I am glad you stopped watching crap, I was concerned. Sorry, sarcasm.

Calling Star Trek Good Behavior Anonymous, I am falling off the wagon here…

195. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

Sorry, that should say “survival” kit. I need a revival kit or a good old fashioned revival meeting to recover from your “Uncle Alan” remark on the other thread. Keachick, you jumbled my quantum particles that time. I can only hope you were joking.

Star Trek Good Behavior Anonymous,
My name is IDIC Lives and I need a drink.

196. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

Keachick, did you REALLY say on the “Star Trek Into Darkness-No Awards thread, that William Shatner should play “Uncle Alan”???????????????????????????????????????????????????

197. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

Here’s an idea: They fall in a wormhole, William Shatner is, of course, James T. Kirk and Chris Pine can play Cousin Willy.

198. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

No, sorry, you said it on the post about the 2 new writers. THIS is the “Star Trek Into darkness-No Awards” post. You truly have me all shook up, Keachick. Do you say these things on purpose?? Is this a game?

199. Keachick (Rose) - July 5, 2014

Yes, I did suggest that William Shatner could play an uncle of alt James Kirk (played by Chris Pine) and the name could be Alan. Do you have a problem with the name, Alan? A fairly common name now and quite probably in the future as well, just like the name James/Jim.

It is me who may need a drink at the suggestion that Chris Pine play cousin Willy(?) though.

Not a lot is known about George Kirk Snr’s father, so it is legitimate that he may have an older brother or cousin who goes by the name of Alan Kirk. Sometimes a second cousin might refer to his parent’s cousin as “Uncle” or “Aunt(y)”.

It was a suggestion and what’s more, no crude innuendo could be gleaned from this suggestion, unlike yours, “Chris Pine can play cousin Willy”.

(BTW, Bill Shatner’s full name is William Alan Shatner, born in Montreal on 22 March 1931).

Perhaps a “survival kit” may not have been actually mentioned, but surely common sense tells us that these (emergency) escape pods would have such. Also you’d be amazed at how much you can fit into a small space if you know how to pack it correctly – ask any experienced tramper.

I am sorry, but what you have written is just, well – unbelievable and defy common sense or imagination.

200. Keachick (Rose) - July 5, 2014

Darn it – I meant to write “George Kirk Snr” only – DELETE the word “FATHER”. For some reason, I had in my mind George Kirk Jnr, who was Jim Kirk’s older brother.

201. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

So tell me, why is your innuendo not cruel–regarding William Shatner who created and played Captain Kirk, you announce he is now to play some uncle (yes I know Shatner’s middle name, so the F what ??)–just because he is older now??

How insulting to this man’s age you are! How insulting you are to him! He can no longer, according to you, be the individual he is and the character which is his? How cruel and how ageist of you!

And then you say my suggestion regarding Cousin Willy/Chris Pine is a cruel innuendo??? Well, Chris is middle aged, he can drink off the insult since he does drink and he isn’t old yet.

What’s a trained tramper? Are you one?

202. Keachick (Rose) - July 5, 2014

You may need to order a bottle, not just a glass, IDIC –

It is also possible that this scene, mentioned in the other thread, could include another member of James Kirk’s extended family – Jennifer Whitelaw (nee Riker), who could be either a sister or cousin of Winona Kirk (nee Riker), James Kirk’s mother.

I am uncertain as to the circumstances that would bring both Uncle Alan Kirk and Aunt Jenny Whitelaw together – maybe it could be the death of Winona and the subsequent funeral (a bit too sad perhaps?) or for some other happier reason. I am sure that the writers could work on the idea, if they choose, and come up with a legitimate reason, other than family just actually getting together for once and saying “hi!”…

Who these two people do have in common is their biological relationship with one James T Kirk, who has made quite a name for himself in and out of Starfleet…

203. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

Gee, thanks, I didn’t know I could fit a lot of things in a small space.

Do you think you are humoring Shatner to let him be an uncle with his own middle name or what????

Tell ya what, you send your little suggestion here right to Shatner. Yes, I know we don’t know how to contact him because he is admired the world over, mostly for the role he created and which is partly him. No one can play a role for 3 hectic, low budget, chaotic years and not put himself into the role.

But if you can, you send Mr. Shatner your bright little idea, Keachick, and you will be wishing for my responses because his response will burn your ears. You insult him.

204. Keachick (Rose) - July 5, 2014

I have done no such thing. I have not insulted William Shatner. I leave that to others, who manage to do so without any urging from me.

I love William Shatner because of his playing of this wonderful character, James T Kirk. I have done so since I first saw him/Kirk on television in 1967/68.

William Shatner is first and foremost an actor, and has proven himself to be a damned fine one at times. He is a talented and experienced actor, so playing an uncle of this alternate young James T Kirk could be something he may like to do, if he is given good dialogue etc to work with and the encouragement to make it happen, make it work. This is anything but an insult, because his playing a member of James Kirk’s extended family coming (back) into the young captain’s life may be what is needed, given that Jim has lost his father and now mentor, Christopher Pike.

It is also about the fact that families can become quite fragmented and people can lose touch with even their parents, siblings, grandparents sometimes, let alone extended family members. This can be a problem today and I can see how it would/could be a problem in a 23rd century Star Trek world as well. There are issues that could be touched on, even explored, here with the introduction of Uncle Alan and Aunt Jenny.

Having William Shatner play Uncle ALAN was an acknowledgement and my respect for him…How sad it is that you, IDIC, would immediately come to the conclusion that I was being insulting, when I was being anything, everything but.

Are you going to say that I was somehow humouring, perhaps even insulting, to Chris Pine as well? Believe me, I am being anything but insulting to either of these actors, whom I love, because they both play “my captain” a bit differently, but still as great as ever.

I would love to see both William Shatner and Chris Pine in the same scene playing a Kirk – two members of the same Kirk family, exhibiting energy, intellect, quirkiness, humour and familial affection…Is that such a terrible thing to wish to see in a Star Trek film?

I hope that both William Shatner and Chris Pine read this, but especially the third film’s producer, writer and director, who actually has the most capability of bringing this about.

BTW – I have written a suggestion, way back before the release of STID, of how William Shatner could appearing playing Captain Kirk and also have Chris Pine play the same younger character. However, I think that it may not work so well…

205. IDIC Lives! - July 5, 2014

And then Leonard Nimoy can be his Uncle T’Chop from Vulcan.

Am sure of all the honors Shatner has received, you calling him by his middle name in the role of Uncle Alan– is his greatest honor of all.

I see you are pussy footing in #203 – Yes, you did insult Shatner. Be very afraid.

I was stupid to read your post. It won’t happen again.

206. Keachick (Rose) - July 6, 2014

No pussy footing on my part, but clearly there is facetious sarcasm on your part.

What makes you such an expert on what could insult William Shatner?

I was stupid to read your posts #210 and #203 and attempt to give a courteous reply (#204).

207. Tom - July 6, 2014

Keachick (Rose)

I know you mentioned it would be convoluted to include TOS characters. I think Bob had it right with that scene he wrote for Shatner. Not convoluted at all. No crazy explanations.I am sure he could come up with more. Nothing wrong with thinking of ideas of the best way to include them. I think if you are going to get Shatner it should be as Kirk. The relative idea could work but i just think that there is so much more emotional impact as Prime Kirk. I also would like to see him in a scene with Pine(even though that may be harder to do it is still possible alternate universe and all)). We’ll see what happens!

208. IDIC Lives! - July 6, 2014

#207 Tom

The “relative idea” would not work, Tom, it would be laughed out of the theaters and well it should be.

209. Curious Cadet - July 6, 2014

@178. TUP,
“Also, its a damn travesty that we havent had Scotty in command yet. That was always a highlight for TOS for me, when he was left in command.”

I agree. But they haven’t laid the groundwork for that. This is a different Scotty than the one we saw in TOS. I’m not sure Orci agrees with you. This Scotty is a smart-ass jokester more in keeping with the actor’s strengths than the characters. When Scotty was in charge of the Enterprise, you really felt like he was a badass. This one would waffle his way through an improvised bluff that would read as comedic as Orci and Abrams would intend it to be.

Sulu is the badass here … And in case you didn’t figure it out from his performance, they had Bones point it out. I sort of doubt then that Scotty will find his way into that seat with that set-up, unless they need Sulu off the ship. But considering Pegg’s position in the cast, he’s most likely to stay with the featured group than back on the ship with the supporting bunch.

Ah, to have a movie where Scotty is in command and the ship is in peril, and he has to crawl into a Jeffries tube to fix it, while Kirk and crew are fighting for their lives off the ship somewhere.

210. TUP - July 6, 2014

As I wrote in another thread, the idea that theyd cast William Shatner and have him NOT play James Kirk is so stupid that anyone suggesting it should immediately stop talking about, watching, thinking of Star Trek.

Regarding my idea of Khan, I appreciate the props. I have actually been pitching that idea since STID came out. If Harrison is actually Jochin who, for whatever reason (and they should have shown this actually), is awakened first from the Botony Bay, it would make sense to me for him to pretend to be Khan to protect the real Khan at least until he knows whats going on. Ofcourse, when Jochin realises what Marcus’ plan is, he would continue the ruse until he could rescue his leader.

It also allows the film makers to have their cake and eat it too. They “never” lied about Harrison being Khan and they still get the big reveal of “I am Khan”. The fact this guy looks and acts nothing like him ends up being part of the story. It makes Jochin’s motivations more understandable. It links a parallel between Kirk’s quest to avenge his mentor and Jochin’s quest to protect his.

It also gives Spock Prime a real reason to show up. “That is *not* Khan” he says as Quinto Spock gets a subtle look of sudden realization on his face before we cut away. It allows for a scene between Harrison and Spock that isnt just a fist fight (which, by the way, I loved – that whole foot chase scene was filled with intense energy and was very well done), but a pyschological battle between an increasingly erratic and desperate Jochin and the coldly logical, subtly tinged desperation to save Kirk, Spock.

On a side note, the only problem is Kirk shouldnt have died at all. It should have been Pike. It mirrors WOK a bit less which probably serves the story better. There was a stronger emotional connection between Pike and Kirk in these films than Kirk and Spock. the WOK scene in WOK worked because of the connection between them and us. That didnt exist in STID. Pike going into the eradiated chamber and dying teaches Kirk a lot more about death and sacrifice than he himself dying does. Plus, its an awesome nod to canon.

In fact, if you really want to get “dark”, and insist on the magic blood nonsense, play it out the same (with Pike dying), with Spock going after Jochin (the filmmakers terribly under-served the Pike/Spock relationship btw) while Kirk, in command of the Enterprise desperately tries to save it (or something)…cutting back and forth between the two scenes. Kirk saves the ship, Spock gets Jochin and they use the blood on a “dead’ and terribly disfigured/damaged Pike.

Imagine the emotions of a scene where Pike is seen looking a lot like he did in the Managerie. Kirk suddenly questioning his “saving” of Pike “What have I done?” “You saved him,” McCoy responds. “Did I…?” Kirk replies. And suddenly the brash Kirk is gone. Now he truly knows what sacrifice is, what the dangers of space are and the consequences to decisions. Its black & white to do anything to save your mentor and yet the decision rendered Pike into a state he might otherwise have preferred not to have lived through.

Now we’re talking deep human issues. And thats what Star Trek was always about. And ofcourse, we still end it with the camera pan over the tubes on Montalban’s face (probably with some tremendous Kirk voice over talking about sacrifice and consequences and leadership etc. Foreshadow? Maybe. Who knows. And thats the best ending to have.

211. TUP - July 6, 2014

Also, allow me to add, the above changes serves canon better and serves the idea of a brash demoted Kirk better. Rather than being immediately promoted again, he stays demoted, under Pike, who takes the Enterprise to find Jochin. It also allows for an idea I mentioned previously where Marcus has a bigger role and is a secondary mentor to Kirk with Marcus and Pike as two sides of the same coin. Marcus giving a deflated Kirk a “son, let me tell you…” speech, playing on what he knows of Kirks growing up without a father and planting the seed that Pike is a great man but not what the “new” Starfleet facing “new modern threats” needs. That there might come a moment when Kirk, as first officer, must do what needs to be done (ie. launch the torpedoes). Kirks motivation can still come from a sense of revenge but rather than blind revenge, a sense of duty (you can see the parallels to issues of todays world).

And ofcourse, the plot then comes down to what will Kirk do, who’s lesson (Pike or Marcus’) will he learn. It puts off Kirk stepping up to command (and since they cut out his Farragut history, this actually parallels that to a degree) and Kirk steps up, takes command and saves the shit when Pike sacrifices himself in the chamber. Remember, the lessons of command werent between Spock and Kirk, it was Pike and Kirk so homaging WOK with Pike & Kirk and Kirk finally learning in the death of his mentor is way more emotional.

This also fixes the issues with magic blood. Instead of being a cure for death, it’s more a tool to help the dead or dying and rather than restore Pike to tip top shape, it rendered him alive in the damaged state he was when he “died”.

And ultimately this sets up multiple potential story ideas for future movies/tv or books – a Menagerie story, a Khan story etc.

And yes, I am prepared to fly to LA or wherever Trek 3 is being produced at Bobs request!! ;-)

212. Curious Cadet - July 6, 2014

@210 & 211 TUP,

I would have LOVED that movie.

You summarize nicely all the little debates I’ve had since last Summer about each of these mangled issues.

They really screwed the pooch, here.

I don’t hate that they tried to use Khan again, but to waste him in such a pointless way in a story where he didn’t fit. Joachim would have made the fans giddy with delight of Orci’s masterful understanding of Trek lore (cast any way they wanted), and would have made a much more effective story, indeed saving Khan for a reprise now that the groundwork has been laid.

213. Keachick (Rose) - July 6, 2014

#208 – No, it would obviously be laughed out of the theatre by you, as well it probably shouldn’t be, given that the actor, William Shatner, will no doubt be giving fine, believable performance portraying a relative of James T Kirk.

How insulting of you and others like you that you would automatically assume (even put the idea out) that others will not appreciate this actor’s performance and make fun of whoever he plays.

Which brings me to another point, that regular posters have pointed out – (and a view I do not agree with) and that is they don’t see William Shatner as being able to play James T Kirk again, that he does not look and sound the part (too fat etc) and will make the mess of prime Kirk. This is NOT ME saying this, but quite a number of other posters who have made these remarks over time on this and other sites. They believe that William Shatner trying to play James T Kirk again is what will get laughed out of any theatre.

Before dumping all over me (I know – and I really shouldn’t deprive you of your hobby, given that you appear to have little else), perhaps you should find out just what has been expressed in this respect over the last five years or so…

I find the attitudes insulting and snarky, not only towards me, my suggestions and others who think as I do, but more importantly, towards the actor, William Shatner himself.

SHAME ON YOU BOTH, IDIC LIVES! and TUP!…:(((

214. Tom - July 6, 2014

I know many of us would like a generations spanning story featuring all incarnations of Trek. I think while that would cetainly be fun it is not practical for the general movie going audience. They seem to be like how Skyfall was done without overusing past references. I do think that a Shatner and Nimoy appearance as Kirk and Spock would be a great way to acknowledge the anniversary. I mean the Shatner appearance has been talked about back in the early stages of the 09 movie. It does not have to right the wrongs of Generations as that may require too much doing. Something poignant that they could pull off where it is important to the story yet not asking them to do too much

215. Cygnus-X1 - July 6, 2014

212. Curious Cadet – July 6, 2014

@210 & 211 TUP, I would have LOVED that movie.

Ditto.

The Joachim pretending to be Khan twist, with the reveal coming at the end of the movie, is brilliant. And the other ideas re: Pike, etc. complement it well.

I split with TUP on the Spock/Khan chase/fight scene. For me, it was just too ridiculous and too much a perversion and misuse of the Spock character, even for an Alt version him.

It’s not enough for BR to have a fight scene; they have to make the characters leap hundreds of feet onto flying cars below that may or may not be there to catch them (just like the assassin-chase scene in SW ep.2, and no surprise there given JJ’s tendency to make ST more like SW) and the whole thing play out like a cartoon, with Khan getting stunned by Uhurua multiple times as he keeps plodding forward a la T-1000 in Terminator 2 and then punched in the face by Spock A MILLION TIMES after being stunned by Uhura multiple times and then hit in the face by Spock with a hunk of metal, and still be just barely stunned (Kirk’s punches in the beginning of the movie didn’t even cause Khan to blink).

The Vulcan neck pinch was invented by Nimoy after protesting his character being written to be involved in fist-fights. TOS Spock never punched anyone, and if he ever used a phaser on anyone it was extremely rare. BR has taken so much liberty with the Spock character that it seems a perversion to even call him Spock. Why even have a Vulcan character if his typical behavior is the exact opposite of how Vulcans typically behave? Alt Spock behaves out of character at almost every possible opportunity. Why, because his Mommy died in the first movie? Vulcans are Vulcans precisely because of their dispassion in the face of jeopardy, adversity, loss, etc… Alt Spock becomes uncontrollably consumed with rage at Khan…why, exactly? Because his crew-mate, whom he hasn’t known for all that long, just got killed?

For me, everything that takes place in STID after the WOK death-scene rip-off is an unmitigated travesty—the WOK rip-offs are in poor taste; the cartoon-like chase/fight scenes; the gaping plot hole of why McCoy doesn’t think to use the magic blood from one of the other 72 super men that he’s got handy; Kirk being resurrected 10 min after the rip-off death scene—the lot of it.

216. Harry Ballz - July 7, 2014

Yes, we’ve all come to recognize the inherent drawbacks and weaknesses to STID.

The funniest part is, whenever Bob Orci has deemed us worthy to visit here, and we finally pin him into a corner about the flaws to said film, he pulls the trump card of saying, “well, I guess that’s why we get to make movies and you don’t”

Uh, it’s pretty sad when one of the posters here (TUP) came up with a better plotline than the garbage we saw in STID.

In a fair world TUP would be cranking out the scripts and Orci et al would be parking cars in Beverley Hills, but, hey, who said life was fair?

217. Harry Ballz - July 7, 2014

Beverly….damn typos!

218. Disinvited - July 7, 2014

#215. Cygnus-X1 – July 6, 2014

I believe if you re-watch THIS SIDE OF PARADISE, you will be pleasantly surprised to see that Spock, indeed, uses his fists and not one nerve pinch when Kirk picks a fight trying to piss him off to expel the spores.

I also recall that Nimoy/Spock seemed to favor the clenched fist backhand punch when he is similarly out of sorts in other episodes.

219. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

218. Disinvited – July 7, 2014

I do need to re-watch TOS (as soon as I’ve finished this run-through of DS9).

Until then, you’ve got me trumped on TOS.

Spock gives Kirk the back of his hand in The Naked Time, after Kirk has slapped him a couple of times.

“Never” was a slight overstatement, but you know what I meant. Spock behaving that way in TOS was very rare, and when he did behave that way it was an event precisely because it was so out of character for him. Alt Spock, on the other hand, acts like he’s only there to chew bubble gum and come unglued, and he’s all out bubble gum by the climax of every movie.

220. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

…all out of bubble gum…

221. Uncle Alan - July 7, 2014

James T. Kirk would get fat in retirement, I’ll wager. Good food, wine, ain’t nothin wrong with that, babe!

For this “sin,” you would not allow Shatner to be “Old Kirk” just like Nimoy is “Old Spock?”

The only difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits. So says your Uncle Alan.

222. TUP - July 7, 2014

I have no doubt I would enjoy William Shatner’s performance as Uncle Allan (lol). The peformance is unlikely to be laughed out of the theatre, the fact Shatner would be anything but PRIME KIRK would be.

Shatner *is* too old and out of shape to play a 50 year old Kirk. He just happens to be perfect to play an 85 year old Kirk. Sure, I’d give him the Star Wars treatment and set him up with a personal trainer etc Knock 20 lbs off, use good make up and lighting, good costuming and you’ve got him.

On the subject of the Spock chase – actually the parts I didnt like were the hopping around on the flying contraptions that seemed to only exist for Spock and Khan to jump around on. The chase was well done with the actors in full hard sprints (as opposed to jogging), smashing through windows etc. it would have been nice to see a better choreographed fight showing off some Starfleet hand to hand training, some Vulcan martial arts etc but I did think it was well done. Uhura showing up in the nick of time was silly and done only to service the character. That was Spock’s fight to win, not Uhura’s.

Also they retconned Khan to be a superhero rather than a human geneticially altered to be the height of human strenths etc. It was also a silly change that showed the writers didnt understand the character (and supports my belief they only watched the TOS movies and not the TOS epsiodes)

223. Cygnus-X1 - July 7, 2014

222. TUP – July 7, 2014

Also they retconned Khan to be a superhero rather than a human geneticially altered to be the height of human strenths etc.

Right, and they even gave Khan a superhero headcrusher move. It goes along with all of the other comic-book-movie qualities of the BR Trek movies. They rewrote Khan as INDESTRUCTO! I also agree that it was lame to have Uhura show up. The whole point of the fight was to be a mano-a-mano duel between the good guy and the bad guy. They built Spock up with all of this arbitrary rage against Khan, only to have his girlfriend show up and save his ass from Khan’s head-crush.

Sure, I’d give him the Star Wars treatment and set him up with a personal trainer etc Knock 20 lbs off,

Fat chance. (bada-bing)

224. Uncle Alan - July 7, 2014

Dear, do you have anyone but yourself championing Uncle Alan? Let’s not be shy now….

My name may be Uncle Alan but I think your idea is patently idiotic.

225. Keachick (Rose) - July 7, 2014

Others have championed the idea of having the Shat play grandfather Tiberius Kirk. What’s the difference?

How can you have an 84 year old prime Kirk in this timeline? I guess you could have some convoluted time travel scene where we get to meet the older version (WS) alongside the same younger person (CP), but then there are also so many people who vehemently oppose the idea of this Star Trek movie series having any more time travel. So what to do?

Could there be a sockpuppet in our midst? Matt?

226. TUP - July 8, 2014

using Star Trek as an example of how to produce a messy and convoluted plot, you have Shatner’s Kirk Prime appear and then Spock Prime breaks the fourth wall while explaining the back story of the Nexus yadda yadda yadda.

Which is far better of an idea than Uncle Alan. lol

227. Uncle Alan - July 8, 2014

Mr. TUP,

A far better idea than Uncle Alan? Does a better idea exist in all the galaxy than Uncle Alan? I have grown attached to myself.

228. Harry Ballz - July 8, 2014

@227

“don’t bury yourself in the part!”

229. LogicalLeopard - July 9, 2014

Sorry I haven’t been able to keep up with the threads, it was both the July 4th weekend and my wedding anniversary weekend, so I”ve been busy. To reiterate my point in the conversations I was having with TUP and Cygnus, I just think you cannot judge these movies on the strength of what you were looking for, or what you would have preferred. You have to ultimately judge it on what it is by itself.

I understand what you’re going through, in some cases, because that’s hard to do. I’ve talked about the X-men movie series, and the liberties taken with it, and although I’ve got serious reservations about them, I can’t really say they’re “bad movies” because they’re not what I wanted. Or….what makes sense. *LOL* People go and enjoy them, I went, I enjoyed some aspects, and that’s they way it’s going to be until someone reboots it.

230. Keachick (Rose) - July 9, 2014

#227 – No! There can be no better part!…/: except, perhaps, Uncle Bill.

231. Disinvited - July 10, 2014

#230. Keachick (Rose) – July 9, 2014

How about Mister Bill? Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Leonard can be Mister Hands.

232. IDIC Lives! - July 10, 2014

Who the heck is Uncle Bill???

Mister Bill, I do remember– yuck, yuck.

233. Disinvited - July 10, 2014

#232. IDIC Lives! – July 10, 2014

Good lord, I just out olded you: I remember Uncle Bill, Mr. French, Buffy and Jodie…

234. IDIC Lives! - July 10, 2014

#233 Disinvited
If I don’t remember those characters it is because I didn’t happen to watch them. :-)

Mister Bill was Saturday Night Live, wasn’t he?

Leonard does have lovely hands. (Not relevant but thought I’d add it).

235. Disinvited - July 17, 2014

#234. IDIC Lives! – July 10, 2014

I beg to differ; on THE MR. BILL SHOW, Mr. Hands was always smooth.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.