Star Trek: No Subtitle

[Nate the Great]

"It may be a sign of the decadence of modern life that I don't enjoy things as much without expensive production values, neat special effects and copious lens flares."

Yes, it is. Very much. All that stuff means absolutely nothing without a compelling plot and characters you can relate to.

Things like "CG is better than animation or traditional special effects", "big name stars are always better for any part", "action is better than talking", "sex is better than actual romance", and other such morals of the modern cinematic mentality really get my goat.

Just taking my collection of DVDs, ask me what's the most recent live-action movie that I own. X-Men 3. By any critical judgment, X-Men 3 is subpar, perhaps even horrible. But guess what? I'd watch it over any Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, or Indiana Jones movie any day of the week. I enjoy X-Men 3 because even though there are umpteen unnecessary characters shoehorned in, even though they spit in the face of comic canon, even though the plot is uneven at best, I ENJOY WATCHING IT. It's a fun movie.

"But despite all the problems with the movie, I love it! For me, this movie is the first time the original series crew and their world seems real and relatable for me."

I won't begrudge anyone their opinion, but I question your reasoning for saying that the original cast wasn't relatable.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

From startrek.com's article on the ship:

"Voyager's folding wing-and-nacelle warp drive system allows the starship to exceed the warp 5 "speed limit" without polluting the space continuum."

And I think we can all agree that in-universe information at startrek.com is at least beta canon.

Thanks for bringing up StarTrek.com. That gives me the opportunity to quote them saying: nope.

You might also want to take a look at memory-alpha's canon policy, which (like every other self-proclaimed canon lawyer) puts ST.com on a par with "producer interviews" -- producer interviews which include this one. So if StarTrek.com has authority, then of course Trek XI is canon. And doesn't that pretty completely undermine your own position?

Romulans appeared in The Original Series and looked identical to Vulcans except for haircuts and uniforms, and NOBODY confused them!

Newbies not only confused them in the past; they still do. Try sitting a complete Trek newbie down in front of "The Enterprise Incident" and see whether you confuse him/her or not. My experience is: yes, they get confused. Multiply that by Abrams' hyper-fast pace and new makeup schemes not just for the Romulans but for the Vulcans, and you have a great opportunity to lose your entire audience.

This is why all fans always recommend that newbies see "Balance of Terror" before later Romulan episodes. But since Abrams could not require all Americans to watch "Balance of Terror" before seeing his movie, he went with a slightly different makeup scheme, consistent with but additional to the original.

Oh, the humanity. Makeup changes. We've certainly never does that before.

Now, if you don't think the characters of the new movie are relatable or interesting, that's fine, and I honestly don't begrudge you not liking this movie. I object only to the nasty and often personal attacks on the motivations and logic of the new movie team.

[Nate the Great]

Trek 11 is canon, but a different universe. One that I don't particularly care for. If they're going to cover their butts and say that all the old stuff is still canon, I'm going to take them at their word and treat all the old stuff as canon.

And by the by, even if people get confused and think that Nero is an "evil Vulcan", does that undermine any part of the plot, particularly? How much time does 11 spend on the Vulcan culture itself, particularly?

It still annoys me that Vulcans MUST be seen as "good" at all times and such a concept as an "evil Vulcan" must never EVER enter people's heads. Vulcan's aren't allowed to be evil? Klingons are allowed to have both good and evil portions to their society, Romulans are allowed to have both good and evil portions to their society, HUMANS are allowed to have both good and evil portions to their society! Why not Vulcans? Since when does "logical" mean "good"? Does nobody remember T'Pring?

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

Trek 11 is canon, but a different universe. One that I don't particularly care for. If they're going to cover their butts and say that all the old stuff is still canon, I'm going to take them at their word and treat all the old stuff as canon.

Oh. Well, then. I don't object to that. In fact, though not to the same degree, I believe I agree.

And by the by, even if people get confused and think that Nero is an "evil Vulcan", does that undermine any part of the plot, particularly? How much time does 11 spend on the Vulcan culture itself, particularly?

And that... is actually a pretty good point. Anyone who knows anything about Star Trek will be able to tell the difference between Vulcans and Romulans, and anyone who doesn't know enough about Star Trek to know that isn't going to know enough about Vulcans to see a problem there. And, even if they did, they could always just chalk it up to this movie's outrageously bad plotting.

Vulcan's aren't allowed to be evil? Does nobody remember T'Pring?

Or Stonn? Or V'Las? Or Tolaris? Or Valeris? Another valid point -- though I'm not sure it's all that relevant to the thought process Abrams & Co. had.

Hunh. And here I'd resigned myself to permanently disagreeing with you.

[Nate the Great]

Many people have complained that far too many alien races are treated as homogeneous so that writers don't have to worry about creating individual characterizations. And yet humans are presented as having many different cultural and religious beliefs. Blatant hypocrisy.

That's another reason why I like the novels so much. In the novels writers can get away with differing personalities and mindsets for the alien races. They can have entire planets of Klingon farmers who have no particular bloodlust for the Federation, but prefer to wage war against the elements and battle to make things grow. They can have Romulans who work in secret to aid Spock's dreams of reunification while still defending the accomplishments of Romulan culture. They can have mercenary humans working for Section 31 or along the lines of Vash. They can have races who prefer to spend their entire lives on their own planets or races who never ever want to set foot on solid ground.

This is what Star Trek is supposed to be about, right? New life and new civilizations. Not just big splashy loud action sequences!

[Tate]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

It still annoys me that Vulcans MUST be seen as "good" at all times and such a concept as an "evil Vulcan" must never EVER enter people's heads.

Actually, there are some evil Vulcans in the movie. At least, there were some Vulcan bullies who pushed young Spock around and insulted his mother. And there were some older Vulcans who subtly insulted grown-up Spock. So Vulcans aren't exactly portrayed as monolithic in the movie.

[Nate the Great]

I'm watching a series of YouTube videos called "100 Reasons Star Trek XI Sucked", and...

McCoy got the nickname "Bones" from an insult by Kirk?

WHAT? The term "sawbones" as a synonym for "surgeon" is hundreds of years old! This nickname did not need an explanation! Furthermore, what with the recent popularity of everything pirate-related, "sawbones" is NOT an obscure word! Come on!

[NAHTMMM]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

McCoy got the nickname "Bones" from an insult by Kirk?

Actually, it was worse than that.

McCoy made it clear that he wasn't happy about going into space (reasonably in line with canon), but he felt the need to get away from Earth after his marriage ended in divorce (again, in line with canon, or at least with widely-held beliefs). He says something to the effect that his ex-wife took everything and left him with nothing but his bones.

Now, McCoy can get ornery and argumentative, and even fatalistic, but if I had to describe his character in one word, "bitter" would not be in the running. It's one thing to have your own little explanation for how Kirk came to refer to McCoy as "Bones", but I don't care for how this warps my perception of the character.

[Wowbagger]

Oh, for Sybok's sake, Nate. At least read the gorram transcript of the movie, so you stop making blindingly obvious discoveries we all learned back in May.

http://www.chakoteya.net/movies/movie11.htm

For the record, I loved the "Bones" bit. The old "sawbones" explanation was fine, of course, but never canonized, and I always thought it was a bit generic. Now we've got an individualized anecdote based on a pretty funny line that summarizes a great deal of his character. I don't see the bitterness NAHTMMM speaks of -- but I do see a cantankerous, wisecracking country doctor still reeling from a painful divorce and forced separation from his daughter, no longer certain how he fits into a wide and scary universe.

Now, go read that transcript, Nate. At least then you'll be up to speed about the movie you think you despise (but haven't even seen).

[Nate the Great]

Okay, I’ve read it.

1. Do people watch Star Trek to see children born during an alien attack? I don’t think so.
2. Does abandoning a ship really need a specific General Order?
3. Time is precious, does the origin of Kirk’s middle name need explanation? Furthermore, has George failed to notice that they’re UNDER ATTACK? Try defending your ship now, worrying about names later!
4. Was that driving scene really necessary? And really, the Beastie Boys? In the 23rd century that would be beyond “oldie” and not cool or rebellious at all!
5. “You’re neither Human nor Vulcan and therefore have no place in this universe?” What happened to Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations?
6. “Human whore?” How is Amanda Grayson a whore? That’s not logical at all. Human scum, human trash, human whatever; there are umpteen insults available that would be better.
7. “As Ambassador to Earth, it is my duty to observe and understand human behavior. Marrying your mother was logical.” How does that follow ANY definition of logic?
8. Spock asks if he can ask a question, then makes a rhetorical statement. That’s not a question!
9. So the Vulcan Council considers having a human parent to be a “disadvantage,” but they still let Spock in. Then they rub it in his face that they’re letting him in despite said “disadvantage.” That’s called spite and condescension. Spock should’ve called these guys on this one.
10. Kirk gives his full name to Uhura, but she won’t give her first name? That’s petty beyond belief.
11. “Well, not only [farm animals].” Ugh. Kirk, I know you supposed to like a good roll in the hay every now and then, but I thought you respected your lovers unless you’re seducing in the line of duty.
12. George Kirk didn’t believe in no-win scenarios? Talk about blatant fanservice. Heaven forbid they actually have George SAY that he doesn’t believe in no-win scenarios, perhaps to Winona so she’ll instill this lesson in James, AKA character development?
13. So McCoy is a divorced veteran doctor, yet he’s afraid of the dangers of space travel? So he’s going into space…because? Being a few thousand miles away from his ex-wife isn’t ENOUGH?
14. “All I’ve got left is my bones.” That’s a stupid line that nobody would say. The line is “All I’ve got is the clothes on my back.”
15. Seriously, Nero and company have been doing NOTHING for twenty-five years? Could they not get trapped in the event horizon and be spat out again twenty-five years later?
16. Kirk took the Kobayashi Maru test three times? A test that’s deliberately designed to make you face loss? How does winning the third time validate your stubbornness? That’s not ingenuity, that’s a refusal to learn your lesson and face reality!
17. How is Kirk supposed to be in trouble? I don’t think anyone said “you can’t reprogram the simulation.”
18. Spock tried to keep Uhura away from Enterprise to avoid accusations of favoritism? If she’s the best person for the job, she’s the best person for the job. How can anyone be accused of favoritism?
19. “External inertial dampener?” What the photon is that supposed to be? Something to make the ship unable to move? That’s what stationkeeping thrusters are for!
20. Chekov has the conn? In a Red Alert situation? Yeah, um, what? He’s supposed to be seventeen, right?
21. The nature of Kirk’s promotion to First Officer still mystifies me. He’s on probation, he’s not supposed to be on board, he should be in a brig cell, etc. so WHY is he a serving member of the crew?
22. “You are clear from USS Enterprise airspace.” Airspace, really? Ugh.
23. “Centaurian slugs?” Why invent a new creature when they could just use Ceti Eels? It’d be a good reference for the fans, too!
24. Nero is the last of the Romulan Empire? Since when were all Romulans other than miners living on Romulus? You can’t call one (or two if you want to include Remus) planet an Empire! That doesn’t work! And even if you buy this ridiculous premise that Romulans only live on one planet, what about the fleet?
25. “The Enterprise has had its maiden voyage, has it? She is one well endowed lady. I’d like to get my hands on her ample nacelles, if you’ll pardon the engineering parlance.” NO NO NO! Scotty does not see the big E as a sex object! Kirk may see it that way, but to Scotty she is a lady, a work of art, and NOT a sex object!

[Tate]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

15. Seriously, Nero and company have been doing NOTHING for twenty-five years? Could they not get trapped in the event horizon and be spat out again twenty-five years later?

Actually, Nero and his crew were imprisoned by the Klingons for the twenty-five years. The director just cut that part out of the movie so as not to confuse viewers. (Insert criticism of viewers here)

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

24. Nero is the last of the Romulan Empire? Since when were all Romulans other than miners living on Romulus? You can’t call one (or two if you want to include Remus) planet an Empire! That doesn’t work! And even if you buy this ridiculous premise that Romulans only live on one planet, what about the fleet?

I know. That's where the movie really doesn't make sense. I would have preferred for them to just stay vague on the subject of the main Trek timeline rather than making statements that don't mesh with established fact.

[NAHTMMM]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

Okay, I’ve read it.

1. Do people watch Star Trek to see children born during an alien attack? I don’t think so.

And yet, I think I saw more genuine, heartfelt emotion during that sequence than in all of Nemesis.

I think ST is perceived as having a problem with getting too much into the technical details and letting the human part of the story suffer. Hence "Treknobabble" and "deflector dish" jokes. Right or wrong, I suspect that sequence was partly intended to make it clear to the audience that this movie wouldn't be like that.

3. Time is precious, does the origin of Kirk’s middle name need explanation? Furthermore, has George failed to notice that they’re UNDER ATTACK? Try defending your ship now, worrying about names later!

This sort of thing happens all the time, where an impending blow takes forever to fall so that we can get all the characters' reactions. I can just about guarantee that there's a name for it on the TV Tropes website somewhere.

I trust I needn't point out that there wasn't going to be a later for George.

4. Was that driving scene really necessary? And really, the Beastie Boys?

I sympathize on this.

5. “You’re neither Human nor Vulcan and therefore have no place in this universe?” What happened to Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations?
6. “Human whore?” How is Amanda Grayson a whore? That’s not logical at all. Human scum, human trash, human whatever; there are umpteen insults available that would be better.

Given that the purpose was to test Spock's reactions, presumably they had already tried the "better" insults.

10. Kirk gives his full name to Uhura, but she won’t give her first name? That’s petty beyond belief.

As KJ says, that may have been a nod to the fact that we didn't officially know her first name for a loooong time.

16. Kirk took the Kobayashi Maru test three times? A test that’s deliberately designed to make you face loss? How does winning the third time validate your stubbornness? That’s not ingenuity, that’s a refusal to learn your lesson and face reality!

How is this directed at this particular movie?

17. How is Kirk supposed to be in trouble? I don’t think anyone said “you can’t reprogram the simulation.”

I agree that, if anything, he should be in trouble for violating whatever security measures he had to violate.

18. Spock tried to keep Uhura away from Enterprise to avoid accusations of favoritism? If she’s the best person for the job, she’s the best person for the job. How can anyone be accused of favoritism?

Spock is undoubtedly still having a difficult time predicting humans' reactions. And humans aren't logical anyway.

19. “External inertial dampener?” What the photon is that supposed to be? Something to make the ship unable to move? That’s what stationkeeping thrusters are for!

I dunno. That may have been the jargon at that point in time.

20. Chekov has the conn? In a Red Alert situation? Yeah, um, what? He’s supposed to be seventeen, right?

He's supposed to be in grade school, dagnabbit[/canon-grumble]

21. The nature of Kirk’s promotion to First Officer still mystifies me. He’s on probation, he’s not supposed to be on board, he should be in a brig cell, etc. so WHY is he a serving member of the crew?

Just one of those crazy things that strong-willed Starfleet captains do, I guess.

24. Nero is the last of the Romulan Empire? Since when were all Romulans other than miners living on Romulus? You can’t call one (or two if you want to include Remus) planet an Empire! That doesn’t work! And even if you buy this ridiculous premise that Romulans only live on one planet, what about the fleet?

I hope Nero said that, and not Spock. Nero is a little unhinged and possibly prone to deliberate exaggeration.

25. “The Enterprise has had its maiden voyage, has it? She is one well endowed lady. I’d like to get my hands on her ample nacelles, if you’ll pardon the engineering parlance.” NO NO NO! Scotty does not see the big E as a sex object! Kirk may see it that way, but to Scotty she is a lady, a work of art, and NOT a sex object!

Yeah, that was probably a little over-the-top.

[Nate the Great]

"How is this directed at this particular movie?"

In the Wrath of Khan there is no mention of Kirk taking it three times. If he heard about the test being a no-win scenario and then reprogrammed the computer to allow for a win scenario, that's forcing reality to conform to his ideals. Failing twice and then cheating is petty.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

In the Wrath of Khan there is no mention of Kirk taking it three times. If he heard about the test being a no-win scenario and then reprogrammed the computer to allow for a win scenario, that's forcing reality to conform to his ideals. Failing twice and then cheating is petty.

Originally Posted by The Wrath of Khan

SPOCK: The Kobayashi Maru scenario frequently wreaks havoc with students and equipment. As I recall you took the test three times yourself. Your final solution was, shall we say, unique?

.

[Nate the Great]

Oh, I'm so ashamed. How can I ever look at myself in a mirror again? My Trek cred is officially history! Boo hoo!

Where would I be without sarcasm?

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

Where would I be without sarcasm?

Wiser.

Of course, what I want to know is: since all that stuff actually did happen in TWOK, do you now believe (consistently) that TOS Kirk was a petty stubborn fool all along, or did that criticism only apply when it was directed at the new movie and the new Kirk?

[Nate the Great]

Wisdom is overrated. And rereading the transcript, I find the apple bit over the top.

If you want a penitent apology from me you're barking up the wrong tree.

And if you want to throw TWOK lines at me, Kirk also says "I changed the conditions of the test. I got a commendation for original thinking." I don't recall any mention of academic probation in there, do you? In fact, I see the exact OPPOSITE of him getting into trouble.

[Wowbagger]

I am not at all looking for an apology from you. Putting on sackcloth and ashes about a canon error would actually be a little weird, even in Lent. I simply want to know whether you apply the same extremely high critical standards to TWOK and old Trek as you do to the new movie.

So I'll ask you again: in your judgment, does TOS-Kirk's taking the test three times make him into a petty, stubborn idiot as you suggested? Or do you hold TOS and the TOS movie canon to a lower standard?

Interesting but irrelevant tidbit: in the original draft of the new movie, Kirk did win his commendation for original thinking in the KM scenario. This was scripted to take place during the final promotion ceremony at the end of the movie, simultaneous with the lifting of Kirk's academic probation. The sequence was cut for pacing reasons, and (as I understand it) because it was seen as overly fanboyish.

[Nate the Great]

I apply higher standards to Trek 11, yes. We are far, FAR past the point where it should be a given that the opinions of Trekkies of all stripes (from casual to rabid fanatic) should be taken into consideration. I understand the desire for a wider viewerbase (look at the success of Trek 4), but studios of all kinds (film, television, gaming), need to get it through their heads that you need to respect your older fans AS you try to attract new ones, not DISCARD one fanbase in the vain hope that the new one is larger and more profitable.

You know what happens when you discard one fanbase to try to attract a larger one? A disaster, almost every time. One key reason why Pixar does so well is that it never insults the fans or tries to forcefeed them subpar media and treat it like the greatest thing ever. And say what you will about Apple, they know how to let their product line evolve without spitting in the face of everything that came before and try to pretend that it never happened.

They're having a new crew direct new actors on new sets in a new timeline. The sheer number of things that can go wrong with this scenario are Brobdingnagian. Furthermore, I really don't see anything in that script that require this to be the "Star Trek" universe, per se. Sure, we got characters, costumes, and ships that are vaguely familiar, but you could tweak everything and get a completely new setting very easily.

I'm of the opinion that if you're going to tell a Star Trek story, you should tell a Star Trek story. What is this story? A few shovelfuls of references tossed into a plot that has very little to do with what Star Trek is all about. What strange new worlds were explored? What new life or new civilizations were sought out? When did we have people going where no man has gone before?

[NAHTMMM]

Originally Posted by Nate the Great

"How is this directed at this particular movie?"

In the Wrath of Khan there is no mention of Kirk taking it three times. If he heard about the test being a no-win scenario and then reprogrammed the computer to allow for a win scenario, that's forcing reality to conform to his ideals. Failing twice and then cheating is petty.

I always figured that this was about how it happened, albeit with less of the overt smugness on Kirk's part during the rigged attempt.

In fact, I'm not sure whether it's Explicit Canon or not, but you're not supposed to know going into the Kobayashi Maru that it is impossible to "win".

It's never occured to me to think of Kirk's cheating as "petty". Interesting thought.

Originally Posted by Wowbagger

The sequence was cut for pacing reasons, and (as I understand it) because it was seen as overly fanboyish.

Good move there. It would have been absurdly fanboyish.