test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Star trek 2009

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited February 2012 in Ten Forward
I'm watching this on fx.

I was wondering why uhura and the rest of the starfleet cadets would happen to be in Iowa. And why the enterprise just happened to be being built in Iowa. And why the shuttle for new recruits would be lifting off from Iowa. What's so special about iowa? And were uhura and the rest of the red-uniformed cadets already a year into the academy? They were already dressed in uniforms. So, if the shuttle is for new recruits, why were they already dressed but Kirk and bones weren't? At first I thought uhura and the other red shirts were already a year in, and Kirk graduated in years, hence everyone graduating at the same time. But this doesn't explain bones in 3 years. Was this all for plot convenience?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Was this all for plot convenience?

    Yes. yes it was. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'm watching this on fx.

    I was wondering why uhura and the rest of the starfleet cadets would happen to be in Iowa. And why the enterprise just happened to be being built in Iowa. And why the shuttle for new recruits would be lifting off from Iowa. What's so special about iowa? And were uhura and the rest of the red-uniformed cadets already a year into the academy? They were already dressed in uniforms. So, if the shuttle is for new recruits, why were they already dressed but Kirk and bones weren't? At first I thought uhura and the other red shirts were already a year in, and Kirk graduated in years, hence everyone graduating at the same time. But this doesn't explain bones in 3 years. Was this all for plot convenience?

    Different universe. 2009 has about nothing to do with Star Trek other than names and certain characters.

    This is all plot convenience if that's what you want to call it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    thats because star trek 2009 had absolutly nothing to do with... wait for it... Star Trek. Not sure what it was but it wasnt star trek.

    As far as im concerned JJ Abrams owes me money for watching that garbage.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Of course it is star trek. That's a huge overstatement.

    And:

    If Vulcan was destroyed, whatever planet or moon Spock and Kirk ended up on, which was close enough to view Vulcan disappear, it doesn't seem to have suffered any effects from the gravitational forces that would've been thrown out of wack in that system.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I was born and raised in Iowa...I just don't ever remember any canyons to drive Corvettes off of...LOL
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cryptiecop wrote:
    I was born and raised in Iowa...I just don't ever remember any canyons to drive Corvettes off of...LOL

    Haha no cliffs in Iowa? Maybe it was a man made quarry or somethin.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cryptiecop wrote:
    I was born and raised in Iowa...I just don't ever remember any canyons to drive Corvettes off of...LOL

    I believe there is something in the Star Trek lore about an earthquake that opens up some chasm in Iowa. Times change.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    The fact that they built the Enterprise on ground is a huge plot hole. Such a waste of resources to build that sort of spaceframe on the ground then have to launch it into orbit (it's not even remotely aerodynamic or feasible even with technobabble enhanced space tech)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Scotty just beamed the ship into orbit.

    Hey- nobody's ever beamed a ship before!!! I better patten that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Of course it is star trek. That's a huge overstatement.

    And:

    If Vulcan was destroyed, whatever planet or moon Spock and Kirk ended up on, which was close enough to view Vulcan disappear, it doesn't seem to have suffered any effects from the gravitational forces that would've been thrown out of wack in that system.

    You'd think there might be a few meteorites heading that way, wouldn't you.

    But, at the risk of being banned from 10f, I'm absolutely going to see Star Trek 2013 3D!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Senechall wrote:

    But, at the risk of being banned from 10f, I'm absolutely going to see Star Trek 2013 3D!

    Please. we both know that everyone is going to go see it. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Of course it is star trek. That's a huge overstatement.

    And:

    If Vulcan was destroyed, whatever planet or moon Spock and Kirk ended up on, which was close enough to view Vulcan disappear, it doesn't seem to have suffered any effects from the gravitational forces that would've been thrown out of wack in that system.

    Its because the destruction of Vulcan was JJ. Abrams giving the proverbial finger to all that represent Star Trek - In essence its stating, "This is now my UNIVERSE people, to hell with Star Trek logic."

    I view it as JJ Abrams creative expressionism in regards to pooping on everything Star Trek, including the Star Trek logic behind it.

    Since Vulcans is a staple of Star Trek, why not kill it altogether.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Haha no cliffs in Iowa? Maybe it was a man made quarry or somethin.

    maybe the xindi got bored and blew another chasm in the earth.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Zodi-emish wrote:
    Please. we both know that everyone is going to go see it. :D

    Not me. I haven't been to a cinema since I moved away from my WoW-guild a few years ago. And if I don't go for Captain Jack Sparrow I most certainly won't do it for Abrams-TRIBBLE.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    The timeline of the film is distorted because the romulan appearence in the Kirk's born day.

    sorry for my english.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    No need to launch the ship into orbit, the ship has antigravity technology and it floats to the sky.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I liked it as scifi-action entertainment. But as a Star Trek movie? Not really. Lacks any substance. ST6 IMO is still a reference movie for a perfect mix of intelligent story, interesting characters and still has a very good deal of action in it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I liked it as scifi-action entertainment. But as a Star Trek movie? Not really. Lacks any substance. ST6 IMO is still a reference movie for a perfect mix of intelligent story, interesting characters and still has a very good deal of action in it.

    I agree. I missed the briefing time, the calm moment before the action. The sequence where everything makes sense.

    But i understand the film is in a different time line and it explains the difference between the new and old universe.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I liked some aspects of it, but I did feel that some parts needed more work before it was even released.

    For instance, I didn't really like Uhura hooking up with spock. It just felt awkard and I don't foresee the two of them ever having a long-term relationship. and everyone knows that Vulcans are big on long-term relationships.

    and also the way she was SOOO *****y half the time. the only time when she didn't act stuck-up was when she was comforting Spock during that one scene. She just doesn't compare to the oringal Uhura. The oringal Uhura was a super-classy lady and didn't act *****y over every little thing like this one does. Now if She had some backstory to explain why she acted the way she did, then maybe it would be more acceptable.
    In fact.... I've wondered if the producers was throwing in some mild Black-exploitation thing... you know, the sterotyping of black men and women. They all always HAVE to act a certain way in movies, TV shows and there can NEVER be a wide diservse of black personalities. Nah, they're just all rappers, Disco men, and so on forth. Black women are always depecited as super *****y, etc. There can never be a black person who's actually genuinely nice, is well-off in the surbubs without having been a rapper or a comedian and doesn't talk "like this dawg, yo!"

    that aside, I thought everyone else acted their parts perfectly, it was more or less close to the original characters.

    I just thought they overdid the tragedy. It's not enough that spock's planet blew up, he lost his friggin' mom?? He was never that close with his father, so now he's basically alone if that whole thing with Uhura doesn't work out at all. They should had let his mom live, maybe have Kirk save her somehow... this would certainly help smooth over things with Spock and their working relationship later on. :P

    I just can't help but think that in any later new movies spock's going to lose it and go competely Sylar on everyone because he didn't have much in the way of family support and the support of friends. Having Uhura will not be enough, as seeing she's way too highly emtional. And he won't be magically be BFFs with Jim Kirk thanks to the fact that they got off to a super rocky start. :P that life-altering friendship of theirs will take forever to form, if at all.

    In all, the idea itself is good... but they sorta made it too depressing when you think about how things for them would be like long term.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I'm watching this on fx.

    I was wondering why uhura and the rest of the starfleet cadets would happen to be in Iowa. And why the enterprise just happened to be being built in Iowa. And why the shuttle for new recruits would be lifting off from Iowa. What's so special about iowa? And were uhura and the rest of the red-uniformed cadets already a year into the academy? They were already dressed in uniforms. So, if the shuttle is for new recruits, why were they already dressed but Kirk and bones weren't? At first I thought uhura and the other red shirts were already a year in, and Kirk graduated in years, hence everyone graduating at the same time. But this doesn't explain bones in 3 years. Was this all for plot convenience?

    Iowa was the site Abrams decided to use for Starfleet's shipyard. This was for the convenience of having it also be where Kirk grew up.

    To deal with the cadet vs. new recruit thing ... you have a series of cadets already in school (Uhura, the security doods that beat the stuffing out of Kirk) who are down at the shipyard, accompanying Pike. This isn't because they are new recruits. This is because they are probably visiting the shipyard on some sort of field trip or on Pike's orders. And this is probably because the new flagship is being built right there.

    Fast forward, as the movie did, to their graduation at around the same time ... Bones graduating quickly or early probably has something to do with his age and medical experience giving him a leg up. Uhura graduating probably right on time at the top of her class. The security guy may have already been graduated earlier. Kirk graduating early because ... 1- He said he would. 2- He's Kirk.

    I didn't really see any conflict with the way it was presented in the film. I guess I should simply wait for Red Letter Media to pick it apart, he's way better at that than I will ever be.

    ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    1. The chasm in Iowa was a quarry, there was a sign at the fence
    2. Enterprise-D was built planetside, although on Mars. Considering the amount of power availble from a Warp engine, and imulse drive, being built planetside makes things alot easier than building things in Space.
    3. The rest of my points were beaten to by Superchum
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    i know there r some folks who actually happen to like the jj-film.

    i dislike it. it's unpalatable, and unlike data, i do NOT want more :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    AuroraMoon wrote:
    that aside, I thought everyone else acted their parts perfectly, it was more or less close to the original characters.

    Every time I see it, I find Bones to be more and more awesome.
    I just thought they overdid the tragedy. It's not enough that spock's planet blew up, he lost his friggin' mom?? He was never that close with his father, so now he's basically alone if that whole thing with Uhura doesn't work out at all. They should had let his mom live, maybe have Kirk save her somehow... this would certainly help smooth over things with Spock and their working relationship later on. :P

    I think it was them really over-doing it to Spock just to force Spock to logically accept Kirk's friendship. As you point out, he's got very few places to turn at the end of the movie and his older out of time self keeps harping on how important Kirk is. So he kind of has to turn to Kirk at that point?
    And he won't be magically be BFFs with Jim Kirk thanks to the fact that they got off to a super rocky start. :P that life-altering friendship of theirs will take forever to form, if at all.

    He kind of has to be BFFs with Kirk as the plot trapped them together. As you point out, he's got no one else left, heh.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Yeah but Kirk wouldn't feel trapped unlike spock. He just basically became the hero of starfleet, and I think he would feel pretty uncomfortable around spock at first. after all, spock did try to get him expelled from starfleet, and then tried to kill him when he provked spock.

    For this reason I think thiers would be a pretty cold proffesional relationship at first. They won't instantly warm up to each other.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    2. Enterprise-D was built planetside, although on Mars. Considering the amount of power availble from a Warp engine, and imulse drive, being built planetside makes things alot easier than building things in Space.

    Appearently they only build parts of the ships on the ground

    http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070602013151/memoryalpha/en/images/c/cc/Utopia_Planitia.jpg

    which are then put together in space

    http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080916224830/memoryalpha/en/images/e/ea/UtopiaPlanitiaFleetYards.jpg

    also Mars has only 0.377 of Earth's gravity making it easier to get stuff into orbit.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    They movie came out 3 years ago. Why are people still complaining about it? I get that you don't like it, but come on its been 3 years and all your doing is repeating the same thing over and over again. Is this really necessary? Especiallly on a forum for a game that USES stuff from this film.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    AuroraMoon wrote:
    Yeah but Kirk wouldn't feel trapped unlike spock. He just basically became the hero of starfleet, and I think he would feel pretty uncomfortable around spock at first. after all, spock did try to get him expelled from starfleet, and then tried to kill him when he provked spock.

    For this reason I think thiers would be a pretty cold proffesional relationship at first. They won't instantly warm up to each other.

    Kirk seemed to warm up to him at the very end there. Which felt like, thematically, the point of the film. It was all build up to that very last scene where we got the crew we all remember all together at once. You'll note it's the only time in the film that Kirk is in full uniform, yellow shirt intact, and sitting comfortably in the chair. Visually it seemed to bring the entirety of Star Trek together, like, "Hey, here's Uhura, Bones, Scotty, Chekov, Sulu Kirk and Spock, TOGETHER, for the first time! Let's Boldly GO!"

    Considering how much "plot convenience" took place that you've already pointed out, I'd venture to say that the plot conveniently moves forward with Kirk and Spock being friends or friendly, but still playing off of that Kirk-Gut-Level-Intuition-Emotional thing and Spock playing that Logic thing. That's the trope they're building off of. It won't be End of Wrath of Khan level closeness where Spock sacrifices himself for Scotty and Bones because of his friendship for Jim and Kirk won't be all "He was the most, DOT, DOT, DOT, HUMAN!" eulogy.

    But it'll be that season one TOS familiarity, I'd say. Since that seemed to be one of the primary themes of the film outside of lensflares.

    ;)

    BTW, I loved the JJ-Trek movie. And want to see the story continue. But I'm just glad to have the original Kirk-Spock dynamic back.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I could about live with the changes to the timeline, even though I don't consider some of the changes particularly plausible, such as Chekov's parents concieving little Pavel 4 yeras earler, and official the size chart that came out which more than doubled the length of the Enterprise, seemingly purely to have it look less pitiful next to a Star Destroyer. I like to assume that size chart doesn't exist most of the time.

    But Kirk from Cadet to Captain... Okay, I know effectively the same thing happens to all of our characters in STO, but we accept that (or at least I do) as a method of selling games. Here it doesn't make any sense. Had Kirk been listened to immediately after the destruction of Vulcan, he'd have led the entire crew to a pointless death. It wasn't until he met Scotty, future Spock and his magic transporter formula that getting aboard the Narada became possible. He has no experience and most of the Enterprise crew don't even like him that much.

    Plus it meant taking Pike, who was probably the best character in the movie, has effectively been taken out of any sort of main role in the next movie.

    If they had been clever, they could have ended this one with Pike still in command and Kirk and Spock as his executive officer and science officer. Then, part of the plot of the next movie could be Pike a few years up the road, with an Admiral's promotion on his desk, deciding whether Kirk or Spock gets the Enterprise once he accepts his promotion, with Kirk eventually proving that he's the better man for the job.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cryptiecop wrote:
    I was born and raised in Iowa...I just don't ever remember any canyons to drive Corvettes off of...LOL

    "Iowa" was the entirety of the US by that point, obviously.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Hot-Cancer wrote: »
    I could about live with the changes to the timeline, even though I don't consider some of the changes particularly plausible, such as Chekov's parents concieving little Pavel 4 yeras earler, and official the size chart that came out which more than doubled the length of the Enterprise, seemingly purely to have it look less pitiful next to a Star Destroyer. I like to assume that size chart doesn't exist most of the time.

    But Kirk from Cadet to Captain... Okay, I know effectively the same thing happens to all of our characters in STO, but we accept that (or at least I do) as a method of selling games. Here it doesn't make any sense. Had Kirk been listened to immediately after the destruction of Vulcan, he'd have led the entire crew to a pointless death. It wasn't until he met Scotty, future Spock and his magic transporter formula that getting aboard the Narada became possible. He has no experience and most of the Enterprise crew don't even like him that much.

    Plus it meant taking Pike, who was probably the best character in the movie, has effectively been taken out of any sort of main role in the next movie.

    If they had been clever, they could have ended this one with Pike still in command and Kirk and Spock as his executive officer and science officer. Then, part of the plot of the next movie could be Pike a few years up the road, with an Admiral's promotion on his desk, deciding whether Kirk or Spock gets the Enterprise once he accepts his promotion, with Kirk eventually proving that he's the better man for the job.

    Yeah, that was a sticking point I had withthe movie. No Navy in the current world would promote a Midshipman/Cadet instantly to Captain, no matter how heroic his/her actions were. You may have the "stuff" to command a ship/starship, but you don't have the training and experience to do it properly. Being a ship's CO is 99% paperwork and administration while the rest of the crew actually runs the ship, and learning all that paperwork/administration takes time.
Sign In or Register to comment.