Star Trek (Page 4 of 9)

You're mistaking my point.

I don't mean that these things (Kirk getting the Enterprise, Luke getting the X-Wing) shouldn't happen. I mean that they should be better JUSTIFIED.

The way in which they happen should make more sense. The cause and effect of the human interactions should make more sense. Sometimes doing that is a line of dialogue, a small scene, and sometimes it's scrapping the entire sequence of events and starting over.

Star Wars needed one of the first two (and actually has something like it in the deleted scenes). Trek09 needed the third.

Hmm. That's a valid point, Kyle. So how do we write around all the implausibilities while keeping the good stuff?

Kirk's class is on their training cruise, which is aboard the Enterprise which is still on shakedown. The distress call comes in, every available ship makes best speed for Vulcan. Enterprise stays behind because duh, they're crewed by midshipmen and a handful of instructors. Then … well, actually then the rest of the movie happens pretty much unchanged. Kirk learns of the "lightning storm in space" thing, gets his cuh-razy conspiracy theory, implores Pike to set sail for Vulcan, Pike refuses until the flotilla goes unexpectedly radio-silent forcing his hand, movie proceeds as written.

And Kirk ends up in command because he's legitimately in the chain of command, not because of plot contrivances that strain credibility.

The down side? There's probably no good way to shoehorn Spock Prime into the story, since that required Kirk getting thrown bodily overboard. Whether this is a flaw or a virtue is up to you to decide. Also, we're basically retelling the story of "The Wrath of Khan" here except from the cadets' point of view … which I don't really see as a bad thing. The best retcons are the ones that put previous events in a new context. It'd have been incredibly cool if we could have watched "Star Trek," then re-watched "Wrath of Khan" and seen it through new eyes. Lines like Kirk's "boatload of children" and Spock's "each according to his gifts" could have taken on new resonance.

But instead we got felony after felony after felony. And yes, ass was kicked, and the movie was fun, but it could've been better, goddammit.

Touché.

Listen, man.  I like you, I generally like your opinions and go "yay, Brian's talking" when that happens, but I have as much trouble understanding what you mean by "it doesn't make sense" as I have understanding what drives the minds of republicans.  It just doesn't click with me.

There was absolutely noooothing in that movie that made me go "wait, that makes no sense" in any of my three viewings of it.  Sure, some things made movie sense, but in a world where we have A.I. Star Trek makes PERFECT sense to me.

I know your nitpicks with narrative, but if you want to you can nitpick the plot points of just about any movie.  Why the hell didn't the eagles just drop Frodo off in Mordor?  Are we willing to write off those movies completely (and the source material, which is about as "hard" fantasy as you can ask for) just because there's a foundational plot point that makes no sense?  LOTR ends with a giant deus ex machina.  LOTR is fucking brilliant.  Star Trek involves a lot of movie logic, but it doesn't lose me at any point.

It's not like the real world makes sense most of the time.

Kyle, I've pointed out specifically the sequences of events that don't add up. So has Jeffrey. And I've fully admitted that none of them grabbed me sufficiently to make me come out of the movie going, "That was awful!" I LIKED it when I first walked out of the theater.

But you're correct, the Eagles ARE a HUGE deus ex machina. Do I still enjoy those movies? Sure. But it's still a bad way to end. On Tolkien's part as well as Jackson, though I could be mistaken, but doesn't Tolkien justify it in some way? Like the Eagles had fled Middle Earth because of the growing evil or something like that? I don't remember.

And you can nitpick the plots of almost any narrative. Because almost all narratives aren't perfect. Because narrative is really hard to do. Doesn't mean I'm going to give anybody a pass (which includes myself by the way).

But it's a movie commentary podcast, so I'm going to call out failings in movies where I see them.

EDIT: Oh, I'm actually leaving the computer for awhile, to have dinner, watch Lost, and interact with humans in person. So you'll have full reign to bash me for being a nerd for several hours. Enjoy.

Last edited by Brian (2010-04-21 02:08:47)

Agreed. Much better to have them start walking down the mountain, cut to them at the bottom with Aragorn et al. waiting for them. No more screen time taken up and much less of a contrivance.

Don't get defensive on me, sir.  I would never bash you for being a nerd- Teague and I were best friends in high school, and that was BEFORE Teague lost weight, died his hair, and started getting laid.  In fact, the only girl Fig could get in his nerdiest era is the girl I'm proooobably going to wind up marrying.  C'mon.  I'm not bashing you for being a nerd.

My point is that I SEE all your nitpicks but I don't see why you say this movie makes no sense when using the same microscope you're looking at this one, I can't think of ANY movies that make sense.  I understand you want a perfect Star Wars movie- I fucking love Superman and half of DIF thinks Superman is a dumb character and a dumb story because of the sub-par movies that have been made about him.  You give me some money and I'll make a Superman movie that will make any human being with a soul cry.  But if someone makes a Superman movie that is as true to the spirit of Superman as JJ's Trek is true to the spirit of Trek, with as much passion and emotion as JJ's Trek has, I would dance naked in the streets out of happiness. 

I guess my point is that yes- dumb things happen in Trek 09, but it captures Kirk and Spock and Bones, looks incredible, and your main nitpicks about the mechanations of the narrative could be equally applied to nearly every version of Star Trek that has ever existed.

I should point out that on no level am I feeling any hostility for anyone here that disagrees.  I take it we're all seasoned forumers here and I know that sometimes shit gets heated for no reason because tone is hard to read through the internet.  I don't intend to get into a Dark City fight with any of you, because at the end of the day I've listened to more hours of you guys sharing your opinions than I've listened to MUSIC in the last year, so there's no lack of respect intended here.

Last edited by Kyle (2010-04-21 02:22:05)

Sort of.  It's never specifically explained in either the book or the movie, but the answer that makes sense to me is:  The eagles could cruise to Mordor any old time... once Sauron was dead and his armies of archers and Fell Beasts weren't swarming all over the place.     

For what it's worth, that's Filippa Boyens' answer in the movie commentary: Sauron had an air force too, duh.  I figure she's given more thought to the plot than I have, so I'm good with it. 

There's also some implication that the eagles only got involved when it suited their own unknown agenda to do it.   Earlier, when Gandalf sends out his moth-message seeking help to escape Saruman's tower, he seems genuinely surprised when an eagle shows up. 

So even before hearing Boyens' justification,  I just figgered it wasn't a guarantee that the eagles were at Gandalf's beck and call.     Maybe if you're lucky they'll help you, but more likely you're gonna be totin' that package to Mordor yourself, pal.   I'm an eagle, not a goddam OWL, so piss off. 

Oh, you killed Sauron?   All right, I guess we can make one run for you.  ONE.

Anyway.  What was that about pie?

EDIT: Something else occured to me after first posting this: it isn't all that shocking that they can't just order the eagles around - in Middle Earth you can get in heaps of trouble if you piss off the TREES.

Last edited by Trey (2010-04-21 02:44:10)

*breathes in-* Yea I was going to say a few things about this commentary....then I figured nah me and Jeffery Harrel already talked about Star Wars and Star Trek

On another note, just because I like a little chaos, I want to throw this out there.

What in THIS MOVIE gives any indication that Starfleet hierarchical system is in anyway at all similar to any system we know or recognize?? Yes i know that whatever, you have your own ideas of what a military system looks like, but fuck that. What in THIS MOVIE gives you any indication that this is abnormal or out of the ordinary?? Cause no one else seems to mind.

Discuss.

And on a separate more closely related to what I actually think, note.

I forget who said it, and I'm too tired to go check. But someone said something about them being on there own, god only knows where without back up or support and how that changes the situation. I agree. So thats all now think back, Pike KNOWS WHO KIRK IS, when he meets him in the bar (After the bar tender tells him, but still, he's got a repuatation). Thats big dudes. Pike seems to have a certain connection with Kirk that transcends Teacher/Cadet. And don't you think that would carry through the Academy? I'm sure Pike kept a very close eye on Kirk throughout his schooling, and saw something he liked (Kobiyashi Murru anyone? I know I spelt that wrong, shut the fuck up). So when he's in a sticky situation, he wants someone who can get the job done, enter Kirk. Bam, Pike promotes him and the story continues. So in the end Kirk is not the only one breaking a few rules.
I think this makes alot of sense, but unforunatly it isn't really portrayed this way in the movie. How would we fix this? fairly simply really, all it would take would be a few short scenes of Kirk at the Academy impressing Pike and them establishing this sort of a relationship so that when we get to the end it makes sense why Pike would promote him over someone else on the ship.

And all of a sudden, all we have is McCoy breaking a few rules to get Kirk on board (If you notice, Kirk was just going to stay behind as far as we know, it's Mccoy that sneaks him on board, Kirk just goes along with it.), it's Pike that breaks the rules to promote him over someone else, and then Kirk just assumes the position he's required to when Spock steps down. Fairly reasonable I would think, as far as his accension to power goes.

Alright I am ready for the massive hail of hate that's sure to arise...bring it on.

Last edited by BigDamnArtist (2010-04-21 04:00:50)

oh my god its a different timeline the butterfly effect or whatever jesus