Re: Star Trek

Lamer wrote:

BTW: If anyone knows the title of the movie/tv show ep where this idea comes from let me know.

http://www.zarban.com/pics/kith-citizen-kane.jpg

http://www.zarban.com/pics/house-citizen-kane.jpg

Warning: I'm probably rewriting this post as you read it.

Zarban's House of Commentaries

202

Re: Star Trek

bullet3 wrote:

It's interesting to see how much of the plot-issues were addressed in the comics but left out of the movie, and in general I agree with the analysis that the reboot really betrays a lot of what I love about Star Trek, while still being a pretty entertaining movie on it's own terms. http://hollywoodsaloon.com/podcast/STAR_TREK_ZER0.mp3

Dammit, I just listened to that and now I like the movie less  neutral

Thumbs up Thumbs down

203

Re: Star Trek

bullet3 wrote:

It's funny you mention that, because I just watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture for the first time last week, expecting to hate it, and I actually really, really dug it. I can completely see where people wouldn't like it as it really doesn't have a lot of character work, but what it is, is a genuinely good honest to god hard-sci-fi flick.

You are now watching the "directors cut", otherwise known as the version that's just not boring 2001 type shots. I am amused at having something Roddenberry wrote called "hard-sci fi", though smile

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Star Trek

Actually, I think I saw the theatrical. I have the original series movie collection on blu-ray, and I believe they are all the theatrical versions (My understanding is that the director's cut is only available on dvd).

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Star Trek

Wow. Listened to the DiF on this one again, and this time I read through these posts....
Fun times. I clearly missed some of the more contentious ages of this community.

One thing that nobody in the discussion (DiF or forum) talks about is how wrong everyone was about Nero's motivations: he explicitly tells them to Pike while torturing him, and it makes sense.

Nero tells pike about how torn up he is that his family died, and then he got wormholed back in time. Pike tells him Romulus is still there. Nero screams at him because "I saw it happen!"
I understand this might be where the confusion comes from, but I see it as 1) an emotional outburst which even normal people have, and 2) even though Nero KNOWS that Romulus is fine in this timeline, he STILL WILL NEVER SEE HIS FAMILY again, since they're a century in his future now. From his (reasonable) perspective, his beloved wife and child are dead. THIS is why he wants to hurt Spock Prime (sure, Spock was trying, but again, Nero is allowed a little senseless rage).

So that explains his emotional moment there.
More importantly, what follows is Nero's self-explanation: he knows he now has a century to save Romulus. He's not concerned about that. He's torturing Pike so he can get the codes to shutdown federation defenses or whatever. Why?
"To create a new future for Romulus, one free from the Federation."
That's it. Right there. Literally in the movie. Even aside from Romulus Prime blowing up, the Romulans and Federation have mostly hated each other, and Nero has decided to kill everyone so that his home Empire will be able to expand unchecked into the next century. This (while definitely a bit megalomaniacal) is a perfectly good motive for everything Nero does as a villain. After he blows up Vulcan (to punish Spock Prime AND to remove Romulus' enemy) he goes to earth to do the same thing. Nero has a century to save Romulus, and he's going to change its future into a Glorious, unopposed Empire "free of the Federation."

TL;DR I think Brian's main story critique (and the other guys agreed on this point mostly) is actually groundless. The villain's motivation is totally explained, by the guy, in the movie, clearly: he has all the time in the galaxy to save Romulus, but he's going even further, freeing it from the Federation so the Romulan Empire can grow unchecked in the new timeline.

Last edited by Writhyn (2017-01-11 18:05:32)

Witness me!

Thumbs up +2 Thumbs down

Re: Star Trek

Just a heads up, the link to this episode seems to be broken.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Star Trek

1) Thanks for mentioning it.

2) I'm an idiot.

3) The link has been pointing to [whatever].mp3. The file on the server has been named [whatever].mp3.mp3.

4) Fixed.

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Star Trek

Writhyn wrote:

One thing that nobody in the discussion (DiF or forum) talks about is how wrong everyone was about Nero's motivations: he explicitly tells them to Pike while torturing him, and it makes sense.

I feel bad for Brian on this one because his passion shows through.

That said, I could not agree with you more. Every time I would see that pointed out (not just here, but many other reviews) that Nero's motivation made no sense I would nearly cry in frustration. It is in the film, I think that Sarek's comment to Spock about emotions running deep in the Vulcan race is a wonderful way to flesh out a possible aspect of Romulans as well. Romulans may be as passionate as Vulcans, but have channeled it to a more militarized society. Nero doesn't benefit from discipline and thus goes mad.

Nero is one of my favorite Trek villains.

God loves you!

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down

209

Re: Star Trek

Brian is basically Spock—usually tries to be a voice of reason and logic, but if you piss him off about the thing he loves he starts yelling and backhanding people. tongue I'm bummed there was never an Into Darkness episode so he could have taken his anger out on a deserving target.

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down