Went to see it last night. Wow. I was not expecting it to be this good!
Don't get me wrong, it's not the best Star Trek film ever made (but then, I consider Generations to hold that title, so...), but it did something which is a welcome change from the first two Kelvin films: it felt like Star Trek.
It had that sense of wonder and optimism. It had the sense of camaraderie between the cast members (beyond Kirk/Spock/McCoy), which even some of the original films failed to capture. With Yorktown's violations of the Laws of physics not withstanding - and quite frankly we should be used to that by now as Star Trek fans - it was a great Star Trek film.
Okay, the solution to the swarm was a little cheesy, but in a good way I think (even if it does remind me of They Came from Mars, a movie which if I never have to watch again will be too soon!). It was also nice to see a female supporting cast member who didn't exist for Kirk to flirt with her. I liked the U.S.S. Franklin as well, and I also liked how they didn't try to change anything from the Enterprise era (besides updating the uniforms etc. as Federation instead of United Earth).
With that said, there were a few flaws: the pacing for the first part of the movie seemed a little... off... to me. I think if they slowed it down just a little it would have been a lot better, but that's just me. Also, Scotty states that the Franklin is the Federation's first Warp Four ship! Okay, technically this could be considered true since we know NX-01 was decommissioned before the Federation was founded (by maybe an hour) and we don't know the fate of the other NX-Class ships. Still, it seemed odd that they'd go with that line, since they must have realised the mistake.
All in all, if you're a Star Trek fan, regardless of whether you liked the first two Kelvin-verse films, I think you'll like this movie. It feels a lot like the franchise is moving back in the right direction.
1) A commodore can't offer you a Vice Admiral (three star) position.
You missed out the part where you can't promote someone past two grades! (Captain -> Commodore -> Rear Admiral -> Vice Admiral)
I read it as meaning a vice admiral position with lower case letters, rather than uppercase. As in, if Commodore Paris was admiral for Yorktown, that would make Kirk her XO as vice admiral. Similar to how a Lieutenant can be given the position of captain without being promoted to the rank of Captain. Admiral, Vice Admiral and Captain are roles as well as ranks (and the roles are not necessarily directly associated with the corresponding ranks).
Personally I don't think a trek film will ever be a 5/5
You guys voting 5's are waaaaaay too generous. Seriously.
For those voting 5/5 .... Are you comparing this "Only to other Trek movies" ?
Or Movies in general ?
Because there is no way this movie is perfect if you compare it to other great films..
Pulp fiction is like 4/5
Shawshank Redemtion is like a 4/5
Casablanca is like a 4/5
and ST Beyond...is a 5/5.... uhhhmmmmm no. LOL
I smell Fanboy.
If you're scoring films on an absolute scale you're doing it wrong.
Are you implying that a Sci-Fi flick can't be taken as seriously as other genres ?
Because I'd strongly disagree with that assertion.
Any story, movie, book, novel, play, whatever, are all based around the ancient Greek concept of Comedy & Tragedy.
Any film, no matter the genre is capable of delivering stunning irony, comedy and tragedy.
Every story worth telling is a subset or combination of the two.
So yes, one can indeed rate any movie on an absolute scale, (if this is what you're referring to when you say absolute scale).
No, I'm saying scoring films as wildly different as Star Trek Beyond and Pulp Fiction on the same scale and with the same criteria is pointless. When you review something you score it against things similar to it, be they previous entries in the series or other media like it. In this instance you'd score Star Trek compared to other Star Trek or sci-fi films. Also, saying those films are 4's so Beyond can't possibly be a 5 implies there's some ultimate truth in reviews, which is nonsense. All reviews are is matters of opinion. It's not a science.
Well if I'm comparing to other Trek, I'd bump it to 3.5 - 4.
And fair enough.
Again, still haven't seen it - but was both surprised and pleased to hear some colleagues at my workplace discussing this movie (and in a positive light too). These are NOT Trek fans; they are people who like to go to the cinema.
Sorry - whether the 'fan' element think it’s good or not notwithstanding, the fact that it appeals to a wider audience is a BIG win in my book.
^ Well said. I'm delighted to see this film getting such positive reviews. Goodbye JJTrek... welcome PeggTrek.
^^^
You do realize that JJ Abrams still Executive Produced the film right. He approved the story and gave input (much like say GR did during the run of TOS and the first 2 1/2 seasons of TNG.) It's still 'JJ Trek'. Just saying.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I never was a fan on the JJ Trek but he is right. It is Pegg Trek and Pegg is a Trekker. It shows. Kirk is Kirk once again. The chess player is back. Keeps his cool.
After 2 movies of him and crew acting the same way. I basically just decided its not worth watching. I'm not watching bad acting and horrible character development. Along with horrible story.
So, you have never fully watched TNG Seasons 1 or 2 - or the entirety of Star Trek:Voyager, eh?
(That's the only logical conclusion I can draw given your statement above.)
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
1) A commodore can't offer you a Vice Admiral (three star) position.
You missed out the part where you can't promote someone past two grades! (Captain -> Commodore -> Rear Admiral -> Vice Admiral)
I read it as meaning a vice admiral position with lower case letters, rather than uppercase. As in, if Commodore Paris was admiral for Yorktown, that would make Kirk her XO as vice admiral. Similar to how a Lieutenant can be given the position of captain without being promoted to the rank of Captain. Admiral, Vice Admiral and Captain are roles as well as ranks (and the roles are not necessarily directly associated with the corresponding ranks).
Wouldn't it have been somebody really high up in Star Fleet who decided to make Kirk an Admiral and the Lady Commodore at Yorktown Station just happened to be the first "Commanding Officer" Kirk met after the promotion was decided upon?
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
1) A commodore can't offer you a Vice Admiral (three star) position.
You missed out the part where you can't promote someone past two grades! (Captain -> Commodore -> Rear Admiral -> Vice Admiral)
I read it as meaning a vice admiral position with lower case letters, rather than uppercase. As in, if Commodore Paris was admiral for Yorktown, that would make Kirk her XO as vice admiral. Similar to how a Lieutenant can be given the position of captain without being promoted to the rank of Captain. Admiral, Vice Admiral and Captain are roles as well as ranks (and the roles are not necessarily directly associated with the corresponding ranks).
Wouldn't it have been somebody really high up in Star Fleet who decided to make Kirk an Admiral and the Lady Commodore at Yorktown Station just happened to be the first "Commanding Officer" Kirk met after the promotion was decided upon?
1) A commodore can't offer you a Vice Admiral (three star) position.
You missed out the part where you can't promote someone past two grades! (Captain -> Commodore -> Rear Admiral -> Vice Admiral)
I read it as meaning a vice admiral position with lower case letters, rather than uppercase. As in, if Commodore Paris was admiral for Yorktown, that would make Kirk her XO as vice admiral. Similar to how a Lieutenant can be given the position of captain without being promoted to the rank of Captain. Admiral, Vice Admiral and Captain are roles as well as ranks (and the roles are not necessarily directly associated with the corresponding ranks).
Wouldn't it have been somebody really high up in Star Fleet who decided to make Kirk an Admiral and the Lady Commodore at Yorktown Station just happened to be the first "Commanding Officer" Kirk met after the promotion was decided upon?
That's what I figured as well. The way my mind filled in the blanks is like this: Yorktown vice admiral position is open, Commodore Paris is the station's interim commander, Kirk applies for the full-time position.
But of course that's just my headcanon, so I could be wrong.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I never was a fan on the JJ Trek but he is right. It is Pegg Trek and Pegg is a Trekker. It shows. Kirk is Kirk once again. The chess player is back. Keeps his cool.
After 2 movies of him and crew acting the same way. I basically just decided its not worth watching. I'm not watching bad acting and horrible character development. Along with horrible story.
So, you have never fully watched TNG Seasons 1 or 2 - or the entirety of Star Trek:Voyager, eh?
(That's the only logical conclusion I can draw given your statement above.)
The Motion Picture was better than what JJ brings out. Its bad when I turn it off when its not even half way through the movie. That is what I did on JJ's. Like Popeye says: I all I can stand and I can't stand no more.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Hey, they killed the JJprise so I'm happy. Hell, it could have been that followed by 90 minutes of Kirk, Spock and McCoy making out and I still would have been happy.
A much better film than previous efforts, but not quite perfect imo. Idris Elba was wasted in that really flat villain, a villain who had no development until the last 10 minutes. Right before the end, I had visions of him dragging himself off the floor, pushing Kirk out to safety and sacrificing himself to save the (IMO ugly as sin) station after a sudden change of heart where his old personality has started to re-emerge. Little things throughout the film could have pointed to the old, honourable warrior side of him not quite being dead and still popping up from time to time. Instead, we just got a "RAAAAAAARGH ME KILL YU DED NAO!" villain who had no rhyme, no reason, no development and no depth.
Other than the odd canon goof, that was my only major gripe. Good heavens, a JJverse film that was actually as good as the casting!
we get a JJ trek movie without JJ and it's actually a good movie. Concept! Can we have Justin Lin direct the rest of the trek films going forward with Pegg doing the script writing please ?. You'd have better movies as Beyond has shown.
Visuals: ... The hallways of the Enterprise still look like Captain Antilles corvette from ANH and the Yorktown, although refreshingly mid-20th century sci-fi is just a huge goofy ball of nonsense. It looks like those over the top space cities we see in Guardians of the Galaxy, Thor and similiar movies (which I like). But keep in mind I also do not like Dyson spheres, if you are a fan of this concept maybe the Yorktown thrills you more.
Consider that the KT Federation studied technology from the future: Abrams mentioned that the Federation incorporated stuff it learned from sensor data from Kelvin's encounter with Narada into the design of the KT Enterprise (and I would add to that what Enterprise herself learned, and that they probably recovered the severed drill from the bottom of San Francisco Bay). Also consider the mentions in Beyond that Yorktown is the Federation's newest starbase, and the political reasons for its construction in interstellar space to avoid showing apparent favoritism to any new member world.
I think it's likely the Federation is deliberately pulling out all the stops with Yorktown's design, flexing its muscles to really show off its technology and power to neighboring states. "Join up, and you can be a part of this awesome thing!" Doesn't hurt that the station is also a good stronghold against conventional adversaries as well as a shipyard.
One of my uncle's best friends during the Vietnam war became a serial arsonist following the war, specifically targeting the homes of his former friends. Point being, sometimes soldiers return from war really messed up, mentally and emotionally, and thus the motivations for Krall fall squarely in the plausible category.
And that's before he ended up marooned on a planet in the TRIBBLE end of nowhere, thinking the Federation had literally abandoned him instead of just figuratively, and started TRIBBLE around with alien technology.
I never was a fan on the JJ Trek but he is right. It is Pegg Trek and Pegg is a Trekker. It shows. Kirk is Kirk once again. The chess player is back. Keeps his cool.
After 2 movies of him and crew acting the same way. I basically just decided its not worth watching. I'm not watching bad acting and horrible character development. Along with horrible story.
So, you have never fully watched TNG Seasons 1 or 2 - or the entirety of Star Trek:Voyager, eh?
(That's the only logical conclusion I can draw given your statement above.)
The Motion Picture was better than what JJ brings out. Its bad when I turn it off when its not even half way through the movie. That is what I did on JJ's. Like Popeye says: I all I can stand and I can't stand no more.
Then why do you keep showing up here?
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
I'm on a personal crusade to dub it PeggTrek. JJ-Trek has so much negative connotation, but Simon Pegg has the fandom's blessing and so the moniker just has a more positive vibe overall. Even though yes, JJ Abrams is still involved, it's different. This difference is underscored by Simon Pegg's work on this film. PeggTrek! It has such a nice ring to it.
I never was a fan on the JJ Trek but he is right. It is Pegg Trek and Pegg is a Trekker. It shows. Kirk is Kirk once again. The chess player is back. Keeps his cool.
After 2 movies of him and crew acting the same way. I basically just decided its not worth watching. I'm not watching bad acting and horrible character development. Along with horrible story.
So, you have never fully watched TNG Seasons 1 or 2 - or the entirety of Star Trek:Voyager, eh?
(That's the only logical conclusion I can draw given your statement above.)
So, I just went to the cinema and watched ST:Beyond for the second time. All I can say is that I'm sticking with my original assessment and review/answer on this poll here.
It's one hell of a Star Trek movie - it's a great movie overall but it also has all the necessary Trek elements that I found somewhat lacking in "Into Darkness" & "2009" and that makes it an awesome Star Trek movie as well. To me, it has just the right combination of ingredients necessary for a Trek movie to be successful for the hardcore fans as well as the general public. And from what I see and hear, that's the general impression of this movie overall - that makes me happy as a fan. Much more stoked about the potential of a fourth movie now that I've seen Beyond.
Like I said - I have gone to the cinema twice to watch Beyond, before this I have watched only one movie more than once in the cinema - that was three times and it was "Pirates of the Caribbean: The curse of the Black Pearl". Now people around that know me know my relationship with the Pirates franchise and what that means.
Believe it or not, I'm even considering doing the same again. Full on entertainment, easily the best Star Trek movie so far.
The overabundance of full captains for ships that are essentially frigates and destroyers (i.e. Mirandas, Excelsiors, Defiants in TNG era). Ships of that nature are usually commanded by a mere lieutenant commander, like USS Defiant under LCDR. Jadzia Dax in "A Time to Stand". I blame it on confusion between the rank of captain and the title of captain or more formally commanding officer, a concept only DS9 remotely seemed to have a handle on.
No apparent division between line and staff officers, such that a psychologist is permitted to take command of the ship before a command-track ensign (TNG: "Disaster", where Troi assumes command ahead of Ro Laren while Picard is stuck in the elevator).
Sending two married senior officers, one of them a science officer, to exfiltrate a defector (DS9: "Change of Heart").
Ditto "Valiant", where an officially commissioned officer, Nog, should take priority in command over a jumped-up cadet with a provisional commission, Watters.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
The overabundance of full captains for ships that are essentially frigates and destroyers (i.e. Mirandas, Excelsiors, Defiants in TNG era). Ships of that nature are usually commanded by a mere lieutenant commander, like USS Defiant under LCDR. Jadzia Dax in "A Time to Stand". I blame it on confusion between the rank of captain and the title of captain or more formally commanding officer, a concept only DS9 remotely seemed to have a handle on.
Across Trek History, ships (regardless of size/type) were always commanded by full captains. (I understand the real-world distinction, but it's simply not so in Trek) When Dax was put in command of the Defiant, that could be considered an example of necessity for 'bums on seats', rather than her rank being considered as suitable for command. Same with when Worf was put in charge... (necessity rather than true qualification) In fact, the times Worf was put in charge of the Defiant he often did something unacceptable for a command officer (ie not checking his target before ordering opening fire, and ordering a collision course (which the helmsman rightly ignored, in favor of rational behaviour)
[*] No apparent division between line and staff officers, such that a psychologist is permitted to take command of the ship before a command-track ensign (TNG: "Disaster", where Troi assumes command ahead of Ro Laren while Picard is stuck in the elevator).[/list]
I forget if this was before or after Troi took the Bridge Officer Exam... Regardless of division, she was the senior ranking officer... If you want to argue division over rank, then Dax should never have been in command of the Defiant...
[*] Sending two married senior officers, one of them a science officer, to exfiltrate a defector (DS9: "Change of Heart").
[/list]
Agreed, this was a massive error due to the potential conflict of interest/emotional compromise by mission circumstances... On the plus side, this mission made Sisko openly acknowledge that Worf would now likely never be given a command of his own...
[*] Ditto "Valiant", where an officially commissioned officer, Nog, should take priority in command over a jumped-up cadet with a provisional commission, Watters.
[/list]
This is again, the issue of rank, over division... Yes, Nog was the senior officer, in so much as he was commissioned, but again, Watters was command-division... So if your stance is that command division trumps rank (ie the idea of Ro having command over Troi) it also applies for Watters to have command over Nog
The overabundance of full captains for ships that are essentially frigates and destroyers (i.e. Mirandas, Excelsiors, Defiants in TNG era). Ships of that nature are usually commanded by a mere lieutenant commander, like USS Defiant under LCDR. Jadzia Dax in "A Time to Stand". I blame it on confusion between the rank of captain and the title of captain or more formally commanding officer, a concept only DS9 remotely seemed to have a handle on.
Across Trek History, ships (regardless of size/type) were always commanded by full captains. (I understand the real-world distinction, but it's simply not so in Trek) When Dax was put in command of the Defiant, that could be considered an example of necessity for 'bums on seats', rather than her rank being considered as suitable for command. Same with when Worf was put in charge... (necessity rather than true qualification) In fact, the times Worf was put in charge of the Defiant he often did something unacceptable for a command officer (ie not checking his target before ordering opening fire, and ordering a collision course (which the helmsman rightly ignored, in favor of rational behaviour)
And yet Sisko commanded both Deep Space 9 and USS Defiant as a mere O-5 until he was promoted at the end of season 3.
The thing is that the shows focus very heavily on ship classes equivalent to heavy cruisers (Constitution-class, Excelsior-class when it was old, Intrepid-class) or battleships (Galaxy-class, Excelsior-class when it was new, Federation-class), ships with crews in the high hundreds to low thousands, because it's glamorous and so forth. These are places where it would be logical to have a commander or captain in charge. We don't see the little Saladin- or Cheyenne-class tin-can, or Nova-class survey ship, puttering around the quadrant doing the minor things that Constitution- or Galaxy-class ships, not to mention O-6-ranked officers, are too few in number to deal with/too expensive to risk/too busy to bother with.
The closest we ever got to what a high-level command crew would look like IRL is in the TOS movies where we had IIRC four ranked captains on Enterprise (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Sulu) but only one commanding officer, a situation resembling a modern aircraft carrier where the CO is a captain (designator of naval aviator), the XO is a captain (surface warfare officer with nuke certification), the CAG is a captain (naval aviator again, though technically the CAG is in a different chain of command than that of the ship itself), and probably also the chief engineer.
I forget if this was before or after Troi took the Bridge Officer Exam... Regardless of division, she was the senior ranking officer... If you want to argue division over rank, then Dax should never have been in command of the Defiant...
This is again, the issue of rank, over division... Yes, Nog was the senior officer, in so much as he was commissioned, but again, Watters was command-division... So if your stance is that command division trumps rank (ie the idea of Ro having command over Troi) it also applies for Watters to have command over Nog
Yes, but since Starfleet as previously mentioned doesn't draw a hard line between line and staff officers in terms of who is allowed to command combatant ships (instead they have that Bridge Officer Test thing), Nog is the senior officer both positionally and in terms of rank. Basically they dodge one mistake by creating an in-universe justification, only to make a different one entirely.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
And that's why some people think that when Picard say's Starfleet is not a military, he is right. They do things very differently from any military.
There is an over-abandunce of officers in Starfleet, too. There are basically what - 2 enlisted or non-comissioned officers we see in the entirety of Star Trek canon? That poor Quarter-Romulan in TNG and Chief O'Brien?
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
And that's why some people think that when Picard say's Starfleet is not a military, he is right. They do things very differently from any military.
There is an over-abandunce of officers in Starfleet, too. There are basically what - 2 enlisted or non-comissioned officers we see in the entirety of Star Trek canon? That poor Quarter-Romulan in TNG and Chief O'Brien?
It's a bit more like this, enlisted personnel is usually only referred to as "crewman" and that happened frequently in VOY at least. But the whole military discussion comes down to bringing enough fantasy to the table to understand where they go with it. Of course Starfleet acts as a military but the mindset behind it is a different one in a fictional world. I suspect for many people it's a ideological/political block not being able to get over it.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I thought the Franklin was a ship that predates the NX-01, but it seems to have been built after? Doesn't make sense if it was the first Warp 4 ship.
I had the same trouble but... okay I think I have a way round this.
Perhaps it was a pre NX-01 ship that didn't have a registry, but that when Star Fleet started stretching out, it began pressing older ships into service and it came at a time before they adopted NCC as the standard and reserved NX's for prototypes. If you think about the Enterprise intro, there's an Emmette class starship which is a predecessor of NX and that seems to have a similar design too... just with conventional thrusters instead of impulse.
The only thing that hinders this theory working is a single line by Archer in an episode when he tells an alien that "this is an NX class ship and you'd better get used to seeing it because more will be coming". But then 1)Archer doesn't know how the naming and registry conventions are going to work years down the line and 2) he may have been referring to NX more generically of Earth ships. I think this theory will hold up to scrutiny.
I thought the Franklin was a ship that predates the NX-01, but it seems to have been built after? Doesn't make sense if it was the first Warp 4 ship.
I had the same trouble but... okay I think I have a way round this.
Perhaps it was a pre NX-01 ship that didn't have a registry, but that when Star Fleet started stretching out, it began pressing older ships into service and it came at a time before they adopted NCC as the standard and reserved NX's for prototypes. If you think about the Enterprise intro, there's an Emmette class starship which is a predecessor of NX and that seems to have a similar design too... just with conventional thrusters instead of impulse.
The only thing that hinders this theory working is a single line by Archer in an episode when he tells an alien that "this is an NX class ship and you'd better get used to seeing it because more will be coming". But then 1)Archer doesn't know how the naming and registry conventions are going to work years down the line and 2) he may have been referring to NX more generically of Earth ships. I think this theory will hold up to scrutiny.
That's what I figured as well. The Franklin was an older United Earth Starfleet ship that was pressed into service when the Federation Starfleet was formed. And since it's weapons are listed as phased pulse cannons and spatial torpedoes, it sounds like it got a refit around that time.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
The overabundance of full captains for ships that are essentially frigates and destroyers (i.e. Mirandas, Excelsiors, Defiants in TNG era). Ships of that nature are usually commanded by a mere lieutenant commander, like USS Defiant under LCDR. Jadzia Dax in "A Time to Stand". I blame it on confusion between the rank of captain and the title of captain or more formally commanding officer, a concept only DS9 remotely seemed to have a handle on.
Across Trek History, ships (regardless of size/type) were always commanded by full captains. (I understand the real-world distinction, but it's simply not so in Trek) When Dax was put in command of the Defiant, that could be considered an example of necessity for 'bums on seats', rather than her rank being considered as suitable for command. Same with when Worf was put in charge... (necessity rather than true qualification) In fact, the times Worf was put in charge of the Defiant he often did something unacceptable for a command officer (ie not checking his target before ordering opening fire, and ordering a collision course (which the helmsman rightly ignored, in favor of rational behaviour)
And yet Sisko commanded both Deep Space 9 and USS Defiant as a mere O-5 until he was promoted at the end of season 3.
The thing is that the shows focus very heavily on ship classes equivalent to heavy cruisers (Constitution-class, Excelsior-class when it was old, Intrepid-class) or battleships (Galaxy-class, Excelsior-class when it was new, Federation-class), ships with crews in the high hundreds to low thousands, because it's glamorous and so forth. These are places where it would be logical to have a commander or captain in charge. We don't see the little Saladin- or Cheyenne-class tin-can, or Nova-class survey ship, puttering around the quadrant doing the minor things that Constitution- or Galaxy-class ships, not to mention O-6-ranked officers, are too few in number to deal with/too expensive to risk/too busy to bother with.
The closest we ever got to what a high-level command crew would look like IRL is in the TOS movies where we had IIRC four ranked captains on Enterprise (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Sulu) but only one commanding officer, a situation resembling a modern aircraft carrier where the CO is a captain (designator of naval aviator), the XO is a captain (surface warfare officer with nuke certification), the CAG is a captain (naval aviator again, though technically the CAG is in a different chain of command than that of the ship itself), and probably also the chief engineer.
Absolutely, a combination of the magic of Plot Necessity, and the theft of ideas from the Babylon 5 proposal... Sisko is indeed an exception, as was Commodore Decker, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, ships were commanded by captains, not commanders, lt.commanders or otherwise... Ransom was as much a captain as Kirk or Picard or any other, and was graded by rank, not by the size of his ship... The thing is, what a high-level crew would look like IRL, doesn't really translate into easily understandable tv/movie presentation... When I watched Search For Spock/Voyage Home the other day, I noticed that when Kirk and crew stand before the president, Scotty has been demoted back to the rank of commander, rather than his promotion to captain in SFS... I'm guessing his sabotage of the Excelsior was considered (reasonably so) more serious than Kirk punching the guard, Uhura making the dude get in the closet, or Sulu trashing the console with his sonic screwdriver, so he got busted back to commander... But to get back on point, many viewers may not understand why there are two or three captains aboard a ship, or how that determines who's in charge... I can see why Trek handled it the way it did (with a few exceptions like Sisko, or the temporary situational commands of Data, Dax and Worf)
Yes, but since Starfleet as previously mentioned doesn't draw a hard line between line and staff officers in terms of who is allowed to command combatant ships (instead they have that Bridge Officer Test thing), Nog is the senior officer both positionally and in terms of rank. Basically they dodge one mistake by creating an in-universe justification, only to make a different one entirely.
My personal take on the situation, is that while Starfleet officer do specialize in a career path, there is also a degree of cross training in some areas.
Nog wasn't senior officer in terms of position, he was only the chief engineer. He was indeed a senior officer in terms of rank, but as before, Watters was command track, so his training was what qualified him to be in command (and again, Plot Necessity meant that the command structure be what it was) That ties in to your notion that Ro should have had command over Troi (also, a comment Picard made at Geordi and Ro's funeral, he specifically said that had she not lost her rank, she would have been a lt.commander, so equally, she would have been qualified to take command, even if her rank did not reflect that) It would, however, then make the time Dax sat in the command chair an error, because any other command officer should have taken precedent over her...
Comments
Don't get me wrong, it's not the best Star Trek film ever made (but then, I consider Generations to hold that title, so...), but it did something which is a welcome change from the first two Kelvin films: it felt like Star Trek.
Okay, the solution to the swarm was a little cheesy, but in a good way I think (even if it does remind me of They Came from Mars, a movie which if I never have to watch again will be too soon!). It was also nice to see a female supporting cast member who didn't exist for Kirk to flirt with her. I liked the U.S.S. Franklin as well, and I also liked how they didn't try to change anything from the Enterprise era (besides updating the uniforms etc. as Federation instead of United Earth).
With that said, there were a few flaws: the pacing for the first part of the movie seemed a little... off... to me. I think if they slowed it down just a little it would have been a lot better, but that's just me. Also, Scotty states that the Franklin is the Federation's first Warp Four ship! Okay, technically this could be considered true since we know NX-01 was decommissioned before the Federation was founded (by maybe an hour) and we don't know the fate of the other NX-Class ships. Still, it seemed odd that they'd go with that line, since they must have realised the mistake.
All in all, if you're a Star Trek fan, regardless of whether you liked the first two Kelvin-verse films, I think you'll like this movie. It feels a lot like the franchise is moving back in the right direction.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
You missed out the part where you can't promote someone past two grades! (Captain -> Commodore -> Rear Admiral -> Vice Admiral)
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Well if I'm comparing to other Trek, I'd bump it to 3.5 - 4.
And fair enough.
^^^
You do realize that JJ Abrams still Executive Produced the film right. He approved the story and gave input (much like say GR did during the run of TOS and the first 2 1/2 seasons of TNG.) It's still 'JJ Trek'. Just saying.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
So, you have never fully watched TNG Seasons 1 or 2 - or the entirety of Star Trek:Voyager, eh?
(That's the only logical conclusion I can draw given your statement above.)
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Wouldn't it have been somebody really high up in Star Fleet who decided to make Kirk an Admiral and the Lady Commodore at Yorktown Station just happened to be the first "Commanding Officer" Kirk met after the promotion was decided upon?
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
That's also a possibility.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
That's what I figured as well. The way my mind filled in the blanks is like this: Yorktown vice admiral position is open, Commodore Paris is the station's interim commander, Kirk applies for the full-time position.
But of course that's just my headcanon, so I could be wrong.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
The Motion Picture was better than what JJ brings out. Its bad when I turn it off when its not even half way through the movie. That is what I did on JJ's. Like Popeye says: I all I can stand and I can't stand no more.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
A much better film than previous efforts, but not quite perfect imo. Idris Elba was wasted in that really flat villain, a villain who had no development until the last 10 minutes. Right before the end, I had visions of him dragging himself off the floor, pushing Kirk out to safety and sacrificing himself to save the (IMO ugly as sin) station after a sudden change of heart where his old personality has started to re-emerge. Little things throughout the film could have pointed to the old, honourable warrior side of him not quite being dead and still popping up from time to time. Instead, we just got a "RAAAAAAARGH ME KILL YU DED NAO!" villain who had no rhyme, no reason, no development and no depth.
Other than the odd canon goof, that was my only major gripe. Good heavens, a JJverse film that was actually as good as the casting!
I think it's likely the Federation is deliberately pulling out all the stops with Yorktown's design, flexing its muscles to really show off its technology and power to neighboring states. "Join up, and you can be a part of this awesome thing!" Doesn't hurt that the station is also a good stronghold against conventional adversaries as well as a shipyard.
And that's before he ended up marooned on a planet in the TRIBBLE end of nowhere, thinking the Federation had literally abandoned him instead of just figuratively, and started TRIBBLE around with alien technology.
Then why do you keep showing up here?
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Cause people keep wanting me back. By making comments on what I said. Where I been trying to leave this alone for the JJ fans.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I'm on a personal crusade to dub it PeggTrek. JJ-Trek has so much negative connotation, but Simon Pegg has the fandom's blessing and so the moniker just has a more positive vibe overall. Even though yes, JJ Abrams is still involved, it's different. This difference is underscored by Simon Pegg's work on this film. PeggTrek! It has such a nice ring to it.
My character Tsin'xing
It's one hell of a Star Trek movie - it's a great movie overall but it also has all the necessary Trek elements that I found somewhat lacking in "Into Darkness" & "2009" and that makes it an awesome Star Trek movie as well. To me, it has just the right combination of ingredients necessary for a Trek movie to be successful for the hardcore fans as well as the general public. And from what I see and hear, that's the general impression of this movie overall - that makes me happy as a fan. Much more stoked about the potential of a fourth movie now that I've seen Beyond.
Like I said - I have gone to the cinema twice to watch Beyond, before this I have watched only one movie more than once in the cinema - that was three times and it was "Pirates of the Caribbean: The curse of the Black Pearl". Now people around that know me know my relationship with the Pirates franchise and what that means.
Believe it or not, I'm even considering doing the same again. Full on entertainment, easily the best Star Trek movie so far.
And Starfleets/rank/command structure is odd.
No kidding. My favorites are:
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Across Trek History, ships (regardless of size/type) were always commanded by full captains. (I understand the real-world distinction, but it's simply not so in Trek) When Dax was put in command of the Defiant, that could be considered an example of necessity for 'bums on seats', rather than her rank being considered as suitable for command. Same with when Worf was put in charge... (necessity rather than true qualification) In fact, the times Worf was put in charge of the Defiant he often did something unacceptable for a command officer (ie not checking his target before ordering opening fire, and ordering a collision course (which the helmsman rightly ignored, in favor of rational behaviour)
I forget if this was before or after Troi took the Bridge Officer Exam... Regardless of division, she was the senior ranking officer... If you want to argue division over rank, then Dax should never have been in command of the Defiant...
Agreed, this was a massive error due to the potential conflict of interest/emotional compromise by mission circumstances... On the plus side, this mission made Sisko openly acknowledge that Worf would now likely never be given a command of his own...
This is again, the issue of rank, over division... Yes, Nog was the senior officer, in so much as he was commissioned, but again, Watters was command-division... So if your stance is that command division trumps rank (ie the idea of Ro having command over Troi) it also applies for Watters to have command over Nog
The thing is that the shows focus very heavily on ship classes equivalent to heavy cruisers (Constitution-class, Excelsior-class when it was old, Intrepid-class) or battleships (Galaxy-class, Excelsior-class when it was new, Federation-class), ships with crews in the high hundreds to low thousands, because it's glamorous and so forth. These are places where it would be logical to have a commander or captain in charge. We don't see the little Saladin- or Cheyenne-class tin-can, or Nova-class survey ship, puttering around the quadrant doing the minor things that Constitution- or Galaxy-class ships, not to mention O-6-ranked officers, are too few in number to deal with/too expensive to risk/too busy to bother with.
The closest we ever got to what a high-level command crew would look like IRL is in the TOS movies where we had IIRC four ranked captains on Enterprise (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Sulu) but only one commanding officer, a situation resembling a modern aircraft carrier where the CO is a captain (designator of naval aviator), the XO is a captain (surface warfare officer with nuke certification), the CAG is a captain (naval aviator again, though technically the CAG is in a different chain of command than that of the ship itself), and probably also the chief engineer.
Yes, but since Starfleet as previously mentioned doesn't draw a hard line between line and staff officers in terms of who is allowed to command combatant ships (instead they have that Bridge Officer Test thing), Nog is the senior officer both positionally and in terms of rank. Basically they dodge one mistake by creating an in-universe justification, only to make a different one entirely.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
There is an over-abandunce of officers in Starfleet, too. There are basically what - 2 enlisted or non-comissioned officers we see in the entirety of Star Trek canon? That poor Quarter-Romulan in TNG and Chief O'Brien?
It's a bit more like this, enlisted personnel is usually only referred to as "crewman" and that happened frequently in VOY at least. But the whole military discussion comes down to bringing enough fantasy to the table to understand where they go with it. Of course Starfleet acts as a military but the mindset behind it is a different one in a fictional world. I suspect for many people it's a ideological/political block not being able to get over it.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I had the same trouble but... okay I think I have a way round this.
The only thing that hinders this theory working is a single line by Archer in an episode when he tells an alien that "this is an NX class ship and you'd better get used to seeing it because more will be coming". But then 1)Archer doesn't know how the naming and registry conventions are going to work years down the line and 2) he may have been referring to NX more generically of Earth ships. I think this theory will hold up to scrutiny.
That's what I figured as well. The Franklin was an older United Earth Starfleet ship that was pressed into service when the Federation Starfleet was formed. And since it's weapons are listed as phased pulse cannons and spatial torpedoes, it sounds like it got a refit around that time.
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.
I dare you to do better.
My personal take on the situation, is that while Starfleet officer do specialize in a career path, there is also a degree of cross training in some areas.
Nog wasn't senior officer in terms of position, he was only the chief engineer. He was indeed a senior officer in terms of rank, but as before, Watters was command track, so his training was what qualified him to be in command (and again, Plot Necessity meant that the command structure be what it was) That ties in to your notion that Ro should have had command over Troi (also, a comment Picard made at Geordi and Ro's funeral, he specifically said that had she not lost her rank, she would have been a lt.commander, so equally, she would have been qualified to take command, even if her rank did not reflect that) It would, however, then make the time Dax sat in the command chair an error, because any other command officer should have taken precedent over her...