View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Jul 24, 2017 2:39 pm



Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
The second nuTrek movie : Into Dorkness 
Author Message
Security Officer

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 646
Reply with quote
Lucky wrote:
snip


It's not me creating faults so much as me listing the flaws I found with the movie, and they are the flaws that I felt impacted it. I don't think it is a good trek movie and coming up with explanations to handwave them away, even after I said, "presuming no handwavium," doesn't invalidate the fact that these were detrimental to my enjoyment of it.

If other people enjoy it as a trek film so be it, I'm not gonna say they can't and I am not going to tell people to not go see it or anything like that. It won't change the fact that for me it just wasn't that good, and honestly I wouldn't have even listed the reasons I don't like it if I hadn't been asked to since I don't really feel a need to defend my opinion. I loved 2009, and ultimately I just don't think 2013 was even half as good as a trek film... It's certainly not the worst trek film, but it isn't on the high side on my personal list.


Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Please specify a ship model or registry number.
Thank you.


NCC-1701-J ^_^


Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:30 am
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 2239
Reply with quote
Trinoya wrote:
Lucky wrote:
snip


It's not me creating faults so much as me listing the flaws I found with the movie, and they are the flaws that I felt impacted it. I don't think it is a good trek movie and coming up with explanations to handwave them away, even after I said, "presuming no handwavium," doesn't invalidate the fact that these were detrimental to my enjoyment of it.

If other people enjoy it as a trek film so be it, I'm not gonna say they can't and I am not going to tell people to not go see it or anything like that. It won't change the fact that for me it just wasn't that good, and honestly I wouldn't have even listed the reasons I don't like it if I hadn't been asked to since I don't really feel a need to defend my opinion. I loved 2009, and ultimately I just don't think 2013 was even half as good as a trek film... It's certainly not the worst trek film, but it isn't on the high side on my personal list.

If you are going to criticize a work you shouldn't make stuff up. It makes you appear to have not been paying attention. What you said you didn't like did not happen in the movie I saw, and that leads me to conclude your real complaint was the movie's pacing was too fast for your tastes?


Fri Jun 14, 2013 5:07 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Trinoya wrote:
It's not me creating faults so much as me listing the flaws I found with the movie, and they are the flaws that I felt impacted it. I don't think it is a good trek movie and coming up with explanations to handwave them away, even after I said, "presuming no handwavium," doesn't invalidate the fact that these were detrimental to my enjoyment of it.

If other people enjoy it as a trek film so be it, I'm not gonna say they can't and I am not going to tell people to not go see it or anything like that. It won't change the fact that for me it just wasn't that good, and honestly I wouldn't have even listed the reasons I don't like it if I hadn't been asked to since I don't really feel a need to defend my opinion. I loved 2009, and ultimately I just don't think 2013 was even half as good as a trek film... It's certainly not the worst trek film, but it isn't on the high side on my personal list.


It's like in the 2009', when Captain Middle East gets into an elevator which goes down, yet the shuttle he uses takes off from the upper section of the ship.
That kind of glaring detail is important. It's not being picky to notice it because it breaks suspension of disbelief.
Fortunately the rest of the intro was fantastic so it wasn't too detrimental. But still glaring.

Quote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Please specify a ship model or registry number.
Thank you.


NCC-1701-J ^_^


Thank you.
Have a good day.


Fri Jun 14, 2013 9:17 am
Profile
Security Officer

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 646
Reply with quote
Lucky wrote:
If you are going to criticize a work you shouldn't make stuff up. It makes you appear to have not been paying attention. What you said you didn't like did not happen in the movie I saw, and that leads me to conclude your real complaint was the movie's pacing was too fast for your tastes?


Now you've lost me. I'm not sure what part I 'made up.' The plot holes I listed did occur, and the 'timeline is repeating' stuff did occur. What part did I make up that didn't happen in the movie? Are you referring to my desire for them to have kept Kirk dead until the next film, which was simply something I had implied I thought would be a good plot direction?

Additionally I even said I could come up with solutions to all their plot holes, much like you did after I listed them, and I said there were just too many for me to handle it and I was trying to avoid such a large amount of handwavium.

Honestly it seems like you're upset because I didn't like the movie as much as everyone else even though I gave it an 8/10 as a science fiction movie AND an 8/10 as an action movie and am only feeling 'disappoint' in one aspect... Honestly I've been trying to avoid talking about my feelings on the movie specifically because I know people who really did enjoy the aspects, even the trek aspects, were going to attack me because of it. There is some idea prevailing around that people can't complain about this movie if they were a trekkie, and that if they do they are 'going out of their way to find faults and problems' or they just can't stand to have it 'rebooted.'

I fit neither of those categories. I love the reboot, and I want it to succeed, I love JJ Abrams and I like his writing, and for the most part the cast and crew on these films are excellent... Yet here I am finding that I can't voice a complaint, a personal opinion no less, on what I felt was wrong, and apparently me giving it an 8/10 as a science fiction film isn't enough for people because I couldn't give it a high rating as a trek film.

I guess it doesn't occur to people that just because I have a different taste and a style, and just because I find something that I couldn't look past, doesn't mean I'm saying they are wrong if they liked it and could look past it. Like I said, if you enjoyed the movie so much the better, but telling me how I'm wrong, how the plot-holes didn't matter, and then saying that the pacing was far too fast for someone like me? That's low, and honestly undeserved. I'm allowed to not like aspects of something and like other things about it, and I'm allowed to not say it, "wasn't the greatest movie I ever saw and this is why I believe that."

To put bluntly I am allowed to have my personal opinion on the subject. Saying I'm making up reasons to fault the movie because I ran into some problems with the plot seems like reaching at best to me... and seems like a far worse nitpick than any plot hole I ever listed. If you really enjoyed it AND you could look past the plot holes I listed, please, go back and see it, go back and see it on my behalf even. Enjoy every single second of the movie, love it, and tell the writers everything you liked. Express what gave you joy and what gave you sadness, explain those things which you loved and take as many people with you as you can to see it. It's, after all, a good science fiction film.

But please don't tell me I'm making up reasons to hate it when I am trying so desperately to look past those and like it on its other merits, when I even stop myself from writing on those things that I didn't like because it was just making me feel down and negative... and when I already found the parts, the science fiction and action, that I could really enjoy.

All you're going to do is make someone focus on those things they didn't like, and polarize them further in that direction... and I really really don't want to do that. I don't want to be 'that' guy who has to find everything wrong with this movie and completely suck my enjoyment out of it for all time as I carry that banner to the grave.

I think I rather like being the guy who says, "go on, watch it once more for me."

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's like in the 2009', when Captain Middle East gets into an elevator which goes down, yet the shuttle he uses takes off from the upper section of the ship.
That kind of glaring detail is important. It's not being picky to notice it because it breaks suspension of disbelief.
Fortunately the rest of the intro was fantastic so it wasn't too detrimental. But still glaring.


You summed up my feelings perfectly. It's likely why the first 20 minutes of the new movie I love to death, inspite of the plot holes there. They were all cute, funny bits, they didn't feel 'in the way.' Of course then I just feel the movie crashes off the rails entirely and plows through a city.

Literally.


Fri Jun 14, 2013 11:18 am
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 3872
Location: Quebec City
Reply with quote
Trinoya wrote:
Lucky wrote:
snip


It's not me creating faults so much as me listing the flaws I found with the movie, and they are the flaws that I felt impacted it. I don't think it is a good trek movie and coming up with explanations to handwave them away, even after I said, "presuming no handwavium," doesn't invalidate the fact that these were detrimental to my enjoyment of it.

If other people enjoy it as a trek film so be it, I'm not gonna say they can't and I am not going to tell people to not go see it or anything like that. It won't change the fact that for me it just wasn't that good, and honestly I wouldn't have even listed the reasons I don't like it if I hadn't been asked to since I don't really feel a need to defend my opinion. I loved 2009, and ultimately I just don't think 2013 was even half as good as a trek film... It's certainly not the worst trek film, but it isn't on the high side on my personal list.

NCC-1701-J ^_^


And you have every right not to like it as a Trek film, and indeed, you don't need to defend your opinion of it...
I felt it was a Trek film, and a good one at that, so I was genuinely curious as to why you didn't like it (as a Trek film)...
:)


Fri Jun 14, 2013 10:29 pm
Profile
Security Officer

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 646
Reply with quote
Daww, I knew you were cool with me Praeothmin ^_^ And hey, if you go see it again enjoy it even more ^__^


Sat Jun 15, 2013 12:55 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
If you can stomach the shitty humour and voice fluctuation, here's something interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... M3lcHv4dI8


Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:04 pm
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 2239
Reply with quote
Trinoya wrote:
Now you've lost me. I'm not sure what part I 'made up.' The plot holes I listed did occur, and the 'timeline is repeating' stuff did occur. What part did I make up that didn't happen in the movie? Are you referring to my desire for them to have kept Kirk dead until the next film, which was simply something I had implied I thought would be a good plot direction?

Additionally I even said I could come up with solutions to all their plot holes, much like you did after I listed them, and I said there were just too many for me to handle it and I was trying to avoid such a large amount of handwavium.

Honestly it seems like you're upset because I didn't like the movie as much as everyone else even though I gave it an 8/10 as a science fiction movie AND an 8/10 as an action movie and am only feeling 'disappoint' in one aspect... Honestly I've been trying to avoid talking about my feelings on the movie specifically because I know people who really did enjoy the aspects, even the trek aspects, were going to attack me because of it. There is some idea prevailing around that people can't complain about this movie if they were a trekkie, and that if they do they are 'going out of their way to find faults and problems' or they just can't stand to have it 'rebooted.'

I fit neither of those categories. I love the reboot, and I want it to succeed, I love JJ Abrams and I like his writing, and for the most part the cast and crew on these films are excellent... Yet here I am finding that I can't voice a complaint, a personal opinion no less, on what I felt was wrong, and apparently me giving it an 8/10 as a science fiction film isn't enough for people because I couldn't give it a high rating as a trek film.

I guess it doesn't occur to people that just because I have a different taste and a style, and just because I find something that I couldn't look past, doesn't mean I'm saying they are wrong if they liked it and could look past it. Like I said, if you enjoyed the movie so much the better, but telling me how I'm wrong, how the plot-holes didn't matter, and then saying that the pacing was far too fast for someone like me? That's low, and honestly undeserved. I'm allowed to not like aspects of something and like other things about it, and I'm allowed to not say it, "wasn't the greatest movie I ever saw and this is why I believe that."

To put bluntly I am allowed to have my personal opinion on the subject. Saying I'm making up reasons to fault the movie because I ran into some problems with the plot seems like reaching at best to me... and seems like a far worse nitpick than any plot hole I ever listed. If you really enjoyed it AND you could look past the plot holes I listed, please, go back and see it, go back and see it on my behalf even. Enjoy every single second of the movie, love it, and tell the writers everything you liked. Express what gave you joy and what gave you sadness, explain those things which you loved and take as many people with you as you can to see it. It's, after all, a good science fiction film.

But please don't tell me I'm making up reasons to hate it when I am trying so desperately to look past those and like it on its other merits, when I even stop myself from writing on those things that I didn't like because it was just making me feel down and negative... and when I already found the parts, the science fiction and action, that I could really enjoy.

All you're going to do is make someone focus on those things they didn't like, and polarize them further in that direction... and I really really don't want to do that. I don't want to be 'that' guy who has to find everything wrong with this movie and completely suck my enjoyment out of it for all time as I carry that banner to the grave.

I think I rather like being the guy who says, "go on, watch it once more for me."
Whether you liked the movie or not is irrelevant to my point, nor does it bother me whether you like a particular movie. What bothers me is when you stated things explained in the movie were not explained.

There are flaws to the movie in question, but what bothers me is people claiming there are flaws that don't exist in reality.


Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:33 pm
Profile
Security Officer

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 646
Reply with quote
Lucky wrote:
whether you liked the movie or not is irrelevant to my point, nor does it bother me whether you like a particular movie. What bothers me is when you stated things explained in the movie were not explained.

There are flaws to the movie in question, but what bothers me is people claiming there are flaws that don't exist in reality.



Every last flaw I made in my list existed so I still am not getting your point. If you wanted me to refute your fan theories or at least point out why they still don't solve the problem and remain flaws so be it.

Quote:
This assumes the Klingons saw the launch. Space is big remember. Even if the Klingons are looking for ships they still have a large area to look, and they were trying to not be noticed.


I'm gonna group this and the escape into one thing:

The shuttle the enterprise launched didn't just cross into Klingon territory, it went straight to their homeworld. It then was actively engaged by klingon forces. Even if we presume the klingons are not on par with the federation for some reason and have no security grids (which would be yet another plot hole) we know that they had engaged the shuttle. It makes basically no sense for that shuttle to ever successfully get off the ground, and if it did get off the ground the klingons should have imediately dispatched a ship to follow it.

Now if they had given a throw away line about, "sir they are stopping at the neutral zone" or "we are jamming their communications" or something like, "no other ships in the area, we have to move fast before they dispatch more" then I'll revoke it, as it stands space being big isn't a big enough excuse for me when this is civilization with several hundred years of advanced interstellar flight, is established to have protocols and scientists, and is even capable of encoding secret messages in their very blood. At the end of the day I have to accept they are idiots who can not police their own homeworld, or that they cared so little about the incursion that the entire plan wouldn't have ever achieved its intended goals of war in the first place. That's my opinion of course.

Quote:
The only known person to have the magical healing blood is Khan, and if all augments had it, i doubt it would have been a surprise.


All we know is Khan has 72 genetically enhanced augments and we've seen other augments take and give blows just the same as him. We know these 72 augments were capable of surviving in conditions on a near barren planet along side him as well, and we know that these augments are the exact same ones from the OTL with no additional modifications mentioned on screen. Now for all we know khan could be the only augment ever created with super magic blood, but it would have been really nice to have had that throw away line to tell us that. As such it remains a plot hole for me.

Quote:
Nothing new to Star Trek. It happens in Voyager, Deep Space Nine, and Generations as well.


I remain entirely unaware where the gravity alone of a planet dragged a ship 384,400 miles on its own. I'm not sure of which crash you speak of in DS9, but in Voyager they had just left QSS drive, and in Generations had just had the stern of the ship explode behind them while trying to move away, implying they already had thrust.

Regardless, even if I am not remembering it from an early star trek episode or movie that doesn't disregard or forgive it here. It's bad science and EXTREMELY lazy writing that could have been dealt with once more with a single throw away line of, "sir that last impact did X" or "we are being dragged along towards Y because of X" Simply being caught in the gravity of earth should have been meaningless, especially considering howh close they were to the moon. That plot hole still stands.

Quote:
was there time? The entire thing happens in minutes doesn't it?


Earth to Vulcan is a mere several minute drive and we saw starships AT the starbasein orbit of earth before they left for the klingon homeworld. We know several captains and admirals were at earth and earth keeps at least some starships around even if the fleet is off doing something important thanks to the last movie. I might have been able to forgive this in the old movies where the Enterprise was always the only ship in the sector/quadrant/universe... but this one has clearly established that Starbase has ships in a scene earlier. Again a single throw away line of, "Kirk, I've sent the entire starfleet away, no one is coming to save you." would have helped.

It's made that much worse when they actually contact Spock, who even knows the theory of transwarp beaming, something apparently easy enough that Scotty did it with a shuttles transporters.


Quote:
I seem to recall Kirk pointing out how stupid it was in the movie, and that the attack was likely carried out in order to cause the meeting to happen.


Yes, he did point out how stupid it was. That didn't make it any less stupid or less of a plot hole. Modern day government does not engage in activity so stupid and even if we did we'd have some sort of security you'd have to get past. I could have forgiven the entire thing if we saw Khan blow up or disable a security system or some such but again we don't. Modern day terrorists could have pulled a 9/11 on starfleet and succeeded.

Quote:
You do realize that the entire point of the Enterprise's mission was to start a war with the Klingons? If the Klingons don't know who bombed them then they can not know to go to war with the Federation. The crazy admiral wanted to start a war with the Klingons. This is a major plot point in the movie!

The whole start war with Klingons plan was ruined do to Kirk disobeying orders remember.


Of course, but the whole lot of the Enterprise crew apparently forgets that they don't have to travel there via starship. Additionally apparently the klingons have no sensors, border defense, or even starships to pursue escaping shuttles, so the entire plan to start a war is clearly another plot hole... now I've found another one. Great.


Quote:
We don't know what Scotty did, or how he did it.


Yes, he clearly would have cast magic spells to get through. Scotty being a wizard does not justify starfleet missing an entire extra shuttle. You can't just land a plane on an aircraft carrier because it was busy. In fact it should have been that much harder to do because it was.

Would it have been so hard to show Scotty stealth docking on the side of the ship? Plot hole still stands here.

Quote:
You're displeased that a Mexican was not playing the part of a genetically engineered Indian? Heck, given the magically cosmetic surgery we see in Star Trek this is one of the silliest complaints I've ever heard. Khan not changing his face would have been stupider.


No, I'm displeased they didn't give me a line explaining why he is suddenly white... and English. This has to be the most often defense of this plot hole, "well the original actor was blah blah blah" and that isn't what anyone is targeting. Were targeting the fact that they offer us no explanation when one literally IS as easy as you say. It remains lazy writing and a plot hole. In fact, for my own personal head canon I'm just gonna say it wasn't Khan and instead is one of his fellow augments lying his ass off in an effort to save the real Khan... at least the facts add up considering starfleet has demonstrated themselves stupid enough to not bother to fact check anything. Kirk and spock should have at the very least done that.



So yeah, I'm not creating faults, the faults exist. They vary in degree and importance and for you it is clear you don't care about them, and that's fine... but saying that I'm lying about them and making them up when your explanations are fan theory and speculation only? That's wrong. It doesn't forgive the faults more so when they are so readily and easily explained, and I simply can't handwave any of it away just because the writers were lazy.

They specifically said they were making a trek film for people who had never seen star trek... it'd be nice if they could have at least explained a bit. If i had never seen star trek as far as I'm concerned it's about a defensless paramilitary orginization who is genocidal and ignores its own treaties and rules while clearly only allowing the most perfect of specimens to serve (with fanservice at that) in an effort to weed out the weak and unworthy, to the point that inter-universe conflict is a near constant.

Huh...

This would have made a great Mirror Universe movie.


Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:33 am
Profile
Jedi Master

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 2239
Reply with quote
Thank you for responding.

Trinoya wrote:
I'm gonna group this and the escape into one thing:

The shuttle the enterprise launched didn't just cross into Klingon territory, it went straight to their homeworld. It then was actively engaged by klingon forces. Even if we presume the klingons are not on par with the federation for some reason and have no security grids (which would be yet another plot hole) we know that they had engaged the shuttle. It makes basically no sense for that shuttle to ever successfully get off the ground, and if it did get off the ground the klingons should have imediately dispatched a ship to follow it.

Now if they had given a throw away line about, "sir they are stopping at the neutral zone" or "we are jamming their communications" or something like, "no other ships in the area, we have to move fast before they dispatch more" then I'll revoke it, as it stands space being big isn't a big enough excuse for me when this is civilization with several hundred years of advanced interstellar flight, is established to have protocols and scientists, and is even capable of encoding secret messages in their very blood. At the end of the day I have to accept they are idiots who can not police their own homeworld, or that they cared so little about the incursion that the entire plan wouldn't have ever achieved its intended goals of war in the first place. That's my opinion of course.
1) The problem is that we do not see things from the Klingon point of view, and all we know the Klingons knew was that some Federation citizens were chasing a criminal they believed to be in the area, and that catching him was a matter of honor and duty to them, but we don't know what the Klingons were doing off screen. For all we know the Klingons had both the Enterprise and Vengeance surrounded by thousands of cloaked warships that never showed themselves.

The Klingons let Kirk's party leave, for what ever reason, but it doesn't matter to the story. The writer doesn't need to spoon feed the audience every little unimportant detail, and if they did do that the story would be too long.

2) That wasn't a shuttle, but Mudd's starship, and Kirk and company tried to pose as traders at first. It was a fully warp capable ship.

3) Given the Enterprise had broken down the Klingons may have had a wait and see attitude. No honor in attacking an enemy that can't fight back, nor has attacked.

Trinoya wrote:
All we know is Khan has 72 genetically enhanced augments and we've seen other augments take and give blows just the same as him. We know these 72 augments were capable of surviving in conditions on a near barren planet along side him as well, and we know that these augments are the exact same ones from the OTL with no additional modifications mentioned on screen. Now for all we know khan could be the only augment ever created with super magic blood, but it would have been really nice to have had that throw away line to tell us that. As such it remains a plot hole for me.
None of which necessitates magical powers.

NuTrek Khan =/= Old/Prime Trek Khan

We have no way of knowing whether or not the other NuTrek augments had all of Khan's abilities, and given no one knew of the healing blood Khan had, it is likely a rare ability if not 100% unique to Khan.

Not wanting to wake up the other augments makes perfect sense as well.


Trinoya wrote:
I remain entirely unaware where the gravity alone of a planet dragged a ship 384,400 miles on its own. I'm not sure of which crash you speak of in DS9, but in Voyager they had just left QSS drive, and in Generations had just had the stern of the ship explode behind them while trying to move away, implying they already had thrust.

Regardless, even if I am not remembering it from an early star trek episode or movie that doesn't disregard or forgive it here. It's bad science and EXTREMELY lazy writing that could have been dealt with once more with a single throw away line of, "sir that last impact did X" or "we are being dragged along towards Y because of X" Simply being caught in the gravity of earth should have been meaningless, especially considering howh close they were to the moon. That plot hole still stands.
You weren't paying attention. The Enterprise never stops moving towards Earth. You actually see the Enterprise passing the Moon at high speed (though likely not what would be needed as usual).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDiHmBykaYQ
Kirk: Where are we?
Crewman: We're 237,000 kilometers from Earth.
-=-=-=-=-=-
Kirk: Evasive maneuvers, get us to Earth right now!

The Enterprise never stops moving towards the Earth because of Newton's laws of motion. By dialog we know that Enterprise came out of warp between the Earth and the Moon, and Kirk never orders the Enterprise to stop, and in fact orders them to get to Earth. Your lazy writing is a lazy viewer who can't fill in the blanks and lazy visual effects crew. Visual effects mistakes are nothing new to the movie industry Nothing is really stationary in space.

Even when they give you the information it isn't good enough because the idiots making some of the meaningless eye candy made a mistake.


Trinoya wrote:
Earth to Vulcan is a mere several minute drive and we saw starships AT the starbasein orbit of earth before they left for the klingon homeworld. We know several captains and admirals were at earth and earth keeps at least some starships around even if the fleet is off doing something important thanks to the last movie. I might have been able to forgive this in the old movies where the Enterprise was always the only ship in the sector/quadrant/universe... but this one has clearly established that Starbase has ships in a scene earlier. Again a single throw away line of, "Kirk, I've sent the entire starfleet away, no one is coming to save you." would have helped.

It's made that much worse when they actually contact Spock, who even knows the theory of transwarp beaming, something apparently easy enough that Scotty did it with a shuttles transporters.

1) Vulcan was destroyed last movie, and does not seem to be minutes away, but rather hours at high warp.

2) The crazy admiral was in charge after Khan killed almost everyone else at that meeting. Do you really think he would not give orders and lie off screen in order to make his insane and illegal plan work?

3) When the Enterprise enters the Sol System it was already between the Earth and the Moon, the communication system were down, and the ship heading towards Earth as per Kirks orders.

4) By the time the communication system was fixed the Admiral was no longer a problem, but Khan was the threat, and things happen rather quickly from there on out.

5) I have no idea as to what transporters have to do with anything else in this.

Trinoya wrote:
Yes, he did point out how stupid it was. That didn't make it any less stupid or less of a plot hole. Modern day government does not engage in activity so stupid and even if we did we'd have some sort of security you'd have to get past. I could have forgiven the entire thing if we saw Khan blow up or disable a security system or some such but again we don't. Modern day terrorists could have pulled a 9/11 on starfleet and succeeded.
Stupid, but hardly unrealistic.


Trinoya wrote:
Of course, but the whole lot of the Enterprise crew apparently forgets that they don't have to travel there via starship. Additionally apparently the klingons have no sensors, border defense, or even starships to pursue escaping shuttles, so the entire plan to start a war is clearly another plot hole... now I've found another one. Great.
1) Mudd's ship was a full on starship made for interplanetary trips. I don't know how you missed this part. Just because it was small does not make it any less warp capable, or a shuttle. You seem to be working under the assumption Kirk was limited to sub-light.

2) The Enterprise was broken down in/near the Federation/Klingon Neutral Zone. Why would the Klingons show themselves, and how would we know whether there was a million cloaked ships there or not?

3) Why should they think to use transporters? First and foremost they need to know where they are transporting to. You need detailed information about the location after all, and they lacked that, and coupled with emotions running high it isn't a plot hole at all.


Trinoya wrote:
Yes, he clearly would have cast magic spells to get through. Scotty being a wizard does not justify starfleet missing an entire extra shuttle. You can't just land a plane on an aircraft carrier because it was busy. In fact it should have been that much harder to do because it was.

Would it have been so hard to show Scotty stealth docking on the side of the ship? Plot hole still stands here.
1) Those weren't Starfleet personnel. They weren't wearing Starfleet uniforms, and they are poorly trained given they couldn't take Kirk down with numbers

2) Admiral Marcus seemed to have only a tiny number of men on the Vengeance as Khan and Kirk seem to kill his entire crew while traveling to the bridge, and that may imply Scotty didn't have much in the way of security to deal with. Scotty is good with tech.


Trinoya wrote:
No, I'm displeased they didn't give me a line explaining why he is suddenly white... and English. This has to be the most often defense of this plot hole, "well the original actor was blah blah blah" and that isn't what anyone is targeting. Were targeting the fact that they offer us no explanation when one literally IS as easy as you say. It remains lazy writing and a plot hole. In fact, for my own personal head canon I'm just gonna say it wasn't Khan and instead is one of his fellow augments lying his ass off in an effort to save the real Khan... at least the facts add up considering starfleet has demonstrated themselves stupid enough to not bother to fact check anything. Kirk and spock should have at the very least done that.
1) A quick google search shows Indians can have extremely light skin tones, and I seem to often hear Indians having British sounding accents when they speak English do to where they learn.

2) Khan is a genetically engineered superhuman. He could have been green if the scientists want to make him such. Complaining that such a character doesn't look"right" is just silly. Do you honestly want an Indian character played by a Mexican just so he will look like he did in TOS?

Trinoya wrote:
So yeah, I'm not creating faults, the faults exist. They vary in degree and importance and for you it is clear you don't care about them, and that's fine... but saying that I'm lying about them and making them up when your explanations are fan theory and speculation only? That's wrong. It doesn't forgive the faults more so when they are so readily and easily explained, and I simply can't handwave any of it away just because the writers were lazy.
Your complaint seem to be how they did certain things rather then that they didn't do it.


Trinoya wrote:
They specifically said they were making a trek film for people who had never seen star trek... it'd be nice if they could have at least explained a bit. If i had never seen star trek as far as I'm concerned it's about a defensless paramilitary orginization who is genocidal and ignores its own treaties and rules while clearly only allowing the most perfect of specimens to serve (with fanservice at that) in an effort to weed out the weak and unworthy, to the point that inter-universe conflict is a near constant.

Huh...
1) They used a number of plots used repeatedly in Star Trek. A rouge and possibly insane minority of well intentioned extremists sets up a plan to do something that is at best unethical, and the main characters somehow gets involved, and stops them. It was the plot of one TOS movie, and a number of TV episodes like The Pegasus.

2) Some people honestly see this as what Star Trek is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzjzu8BTcaU, and to an extent they are correct.



Trinoya wrote:
This would have made a great Mirror Universe movie.
Mirror Kirk would have happily fired the torpedos, and then done something like crown himself empeor. He would have happily destroyed the planet.


Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:04 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
LOL so they put Hitler back into the fridge. That's the point of the movie. He wasn't such a bad man, just superior and a bad wolf to be left alone wandering around. And he loved his people. :D


Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:11 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Lucky wrote:
1) A quick google search shows Indians can have extremely light skin tones, and I seem to often hear Indians having British sounding accents when they speak English do to where they learn.


The white Indians are generally of the superior caste. This is the legacy of the arrival of white people in India, who kicked the dark skinned ones who already lived there, more than six millennia ago, and despite the disruption caused by the arrival of England in recent times, their society hasn't changed too much regarding its core organization.

Quote:
2) Khan is a genetically engineered superhuman. He could have been green if the scientists want to make him such. Complaining that such a character doesn't look"right" is just silly. Do you honestly want an Indian character played by a Mexican just so he will look like he did in TOS?


Actually he looks awesome in nuTrek.
Merely seeing that moment when he reveals his identity has me want to watch the movie. Much more efficient than any stupid trailer, unfortunately too short for any efficient commercial purpose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW8JQu23CXo


Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:18 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Lucky, it is the responsibility of the director to make sure that visuals and dialogue combine.
If JJ Abrams believes he is a modern director who can refresh Trek, that with all his more realistic fights and fast weapons, why can't he uphold the latest expectations in terms of credibility regarding the simple fact that minutes of visual effects which depict a given reality will leave a stronger impression on the minds of the audience than one short line thrown off by a character at "some" point in the movie?

Why leave the ships slowly orbit the Moon, as to mirror the fight in WoK with the tension around the asteroid, if it were to imply that the Enterprise was actually moving fast enough towards Earth so much as that nothing could be done to stop the ship in time?

That is quite stupid. So obviously this movie seems largely supported by actor performance, which is a good thing as it is the basic of good cinema, but unfortunately, the coating, which can enhance the product, can also damage it, because it is a whole construction and you shouldn't neglect crucial elements.


Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:29 am
Profile
Security Officer

Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 646
Reply with quote
Lucky wrote:
Thank you for responding.


I do what I can.

Quote:
1) The problem is that we do not see things from the Klingon point of view, and all we know the Klingons knew was that some Federation citizens were chasing a criminal they believed to be in the area, and that catching him was a matter of honor and duty to them, but we don't know what the Klingons were doing off screen. For all we know the Klingons had both the Enterprise and Vengeance surrounded by thousands of cloaked warships that never showed themselves.


While entirely true that we don't see what was going on from their perspective this is an era when the klingons were not known for their honor, and certainly didn't seem to be demonstrating it in the movie when they actually do try to play it. Nonetheless I really doubt the Klingons wouldn't have interfered at the point they were at (Honestly I would have liked to see them interfere since it would have really shown that there was a real threat of war).

Quote:
The Klingons let Kirk's party leave, for what ever reason, but it doesn't matter to the story. The writer doesn't need to spoon feed the audience every little unimportant detail, and if they did do that the story would be too long.


When a major part of the plot is for them to get discovered to cause a war and we then see no klingon response at all I'd say it did matter to the story. Roboadmirals plan looses a lot of credibility.

Quote:
2) That wasn't a shuttle, but Mudd's starship, and Kirk and company tried to pose as traders at first. It was a fully warp capable ship.


I did not mean to imply it wasn't warp capable, but it is small enough to fit in their shuttle bay so I figured calling it a shuttle would be more appropriate. It doesn't really matter for the point I was making. It goes straight to the homeworld, they kill a bunch of klingons, then they take off again even though security forces should have been all over them (or at the very least in pursuit).

Quote:
3) Given the Enterprise had broken down the Klingons may have had a wait and see attitude. No honor in attacking an enemy that can't fight back, nor has attacked.


This presumes the Klingons are aware that the enterprise is in trouble, and that they would have the honor to not just attack, something the klingons of this era (and even universe) have not demonstrated, and something that wouldn't be an obstacle (considering the incursion and attack on their people).

Quote:
None of which necessitates magical powers.

NuTrek Khan =/= Old/Prime Trek Khan


Khan came from earth in the 1990s. Unless otherwise stated the only difference between OTL khan and this one is cosmetic. His feats, as well as OTL khans feats, should both apply to one another as the incursion into the timeline doesn't occur until the Kelvin Incident, unless we presume all the other timeline incidents are also completely altered by this going all the way back to the formation of life of Earth... but that just seems like a stretch by any imagination (and honestly ruins all of 'nutrek' for me in one swoop).

Quote:
We have no way of knowing whether or not the other NuTrek augments had all of Khan's abilities, and given no one knew of the healing blood Khan had, it is likely a rare ability if not 100% unique to Khan.


It isn't stated on screen to be rare, and no one knew of a lot of things regarding augments as the knowledge (per enterprise) was suppressed to an extremely large degree. We had them specifically state on screen the reason they couldn't remove people from the pods is it could kill them and that would have been a reasonable explanation for why they needed khans magical blood specifically...

You know, until they removed one of them from the pod anyway.

Quote:
Not wanting to wake up the other augments makes perfect sense as well.


Man, sucks they risked that.


Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDiHmBykaYQ
Kirk: Where are we?
Crewman: We're 237,000 kilometers from Earth.
-=-=-=-=-=-
Kirk: Evasive maneuvers, get us to Earth right now!

The Enterprise never stops moving towards the Earth because of Newton's laws of motion. By dialog we know that Enterprise came out of warp between the Earth and the Moon, and Kirk never orders the Enterprise to stop, and in fact orders them to get to Earth. Your lazy writing is a lazy viewer who can't fill in the blanks and lazy visual effects crew. Visual effects mistakes are nothing new to the movie industry Nothing is really stationary in space.


I don't question that they could still be moving... but moving so fast as to clear a good fraction of the earth/moon distance (while still moving slow enough to not break apart against the atmosphere, as well as have time to recover?). The science remains bad, and lazy, especially considering they could have just had them stop in orbit of Earth... or had them fall to the moon instead, or any number of other thematic decisions. The writers went a specific direction, the effects team went a specific direction, and ultimately gave us a scene that makes little to no sense. So we have lazy writing, lazy effects, and a lazy production team who can't work together it seems. Not the first thing in trek to suffer from that certainly, but considering I complain when it happens in other trek movies and shows as well I'm not going to give them a pass.


Quote:
Even when they give you the information it isn't good enough because the idiots making some of the meaningless eye candy made a mistake.


The information they give still doesn't add up, and considering how big a scene it is, how much of the movie it encompasses, and how critical it was to their film so as to even be a center piece on the production art... yeah, I'm calling them lazy, they could have fixed it at any point, replacing the moon in a shot with Earth wouldn't be difficult.


Quote:
1) Vulcan was destroyed last movie, and does not seem to be minutes away, but rather hours at high warp.


Vulcan wasn't demonstrated to be hours away in the previous movie (which is the point I'm making on distance/speed), and I would presume that New Vulcan isn't considering the real time communication with Spock even though they had communication problems. Someone, somewhere, could have had a ship to them in seconds from Mars, or Jupiter, or even the moon or earth.

Quote:
2) The crazy admiral was in charge after Khan killed almost everyone else at that meeting. Do you really think he would not give orders and lie off screen in order to make his insane and illegal plan work?


I would have loved to have seen those orders, or have him at least say, "Kirk.. now really, do you think I wouldn't have lied and given orders to not make my plan work?"

Quote:
3) When the Enterprise enters the Sol System it was already between the Earth and the Moon, the communication system were down, and the ship heading towards Earth as per Kirks orders.


Well when it entered Sol System it would have been on the 'edge' of sol system technically, but I get what you're trying to say.

It still doesn't change the apparent time frames involved or the bad writing/effects chosen though.


Quote:
4) By the time the communication system was fixed the Admiral was no longer a problem, but Khan was the threat, and things happen rather quickly from there on out.


Would have been great to have any other starship get involved then...


Quote:
5) I have no idea as to what transporters have to do with anything else in this.


That any number of individuals, from section 31 to spock, should have been able to just beam aboard to help (or at least beam the crew off to safety when they were approaching earth). Although technically I can see this not being a plot hole. There are no other ships anywhere because starfleet has only a handful of them left, and I have no reason to presume starfleet in this universe has a transporter on anything other than starships considering their total absence on any non-vehicle.

So I'll just have to presume starfleet has virtually no ships, no captains with the foresight to make a decision to intervene, the security of a kidergarten class, and the military intelligence of Mexico circa 1899 in regards to the protection of Sol, and the response readiness of a drunken cat in a fire helmet during the Sanfransico Earthquake in 1906.

I don't think I like that option better than just presuming it's a plot hole though.


Quote:
Stupid, but hardly unrealistic.


It is unrealistic. Presuming no total corruption of the timeline (IE: Wiping everything that ever happened in Enterprise and prior to it) Earth has been attacked three times now, and Vulcan had been destroyed... They should have long since taken some security measures to prevent a decapitation strike from ruining their day...

Quote:
1) Mudd's ship was a full on starship made for interplanetary trips. I don't know how you missed this part. Just because it was small does not make it any less warp capable, or a shuttle. You seem to be working under the assumption Kirk was limited to sub-light.


As I said, my use of the word shuttle is in error, but the klingons still shouldn't have any difficult pursuing it. I have also not asserted they were limited to sub-light.


Quote:
2) The Enterprise was broken down in/near the Federation/Klingon Neutral Zone. Why would the Klingons show themselves, and how would we know whether there was a million cloaked ships there or not?


Because their enemy just parked two ships on your boarder, one clearly a warship, the other clearly dispatching other craft into your territory and it was all part of the admirals plan in the first place? I could presume that the Klingons really didn't want a war (which is counter intuitive to their actions in the OTL, but they did supposedly loose a fleet) but it still doesn't explain the total no reaction. It's just another thing not explained or touched upon and that doesn't fit in with the established story they were going for... They could have even had the klingons RESCUE the enterprise from the vengeance (giving them the time to get away) or any number of other scenarios to play up the admirals plan not working... I digress, as I said I'm trying to avoid speculation and handwavium as much as possible. I personally would have expected a response, any response, and since none is given, even though Kirk is entirely freaked out about one and the Admirals plan rests upon it, I am left with a hanging plot hole, albeit a small one, but one that still nags at the end of the day.

Quote:
3) Why should they think to use transporters? First and foremost they need to know where they are transporting to. You need detailed information about the location after all, and they lacked that, and coupled with emotions running high it isn't a plot hole at all.


They had enough information to know he went to the klingon homeworld and get a general idea of where... Since no one brings up transporters at all it seems a bit odd.

"Sir, why don't we send in an extraction team to go get him, transwarp transporters could let us get in and out with less chance of detection"

"no, we can't risk that technology falling into their hands. Even khans transporter was left behind."

Done, a throwaway line would solve another plot hole.



Trinoya wrote:
Yes, he clearly would have cast magic spells to get through. Scotty being a wizard does not justify starfleet missing an entire extra shuttle. You can't just land a plane on an aircraft carrier because it was busy. In fact it should have been that much harder to do because it was.

Would it have been so hard to show Scotty stealth docking on the side of the ship? Plot hole still stands here.


Quote:
1) Those weren't Starfleet personnel. They weren't wearing Starfleet uniforms, and they are poorly trained given they couldn't take Kirk down with numbers


They were, supposedly, members of section 31, a super intelligence agency and a branch of starfleet, just because you don't have the uniform doesn't mean much.

Quote:
2) Admiral Marcus seemed to have only a tiny number of men on the Vengeance as Khan and Kirk seem to kill his entire crew while traveling to the bridge, and that may imply Scotty didn't have much in the way of security to deal with. Scotty is good with tech.


You still need people to conduct operations, pilot shuttles, land them, etc. They could have departed with a small crew, but you would expect them to notice the full mass of an extra shuttle landing on board. Even the connie in the previous timeline could detect the heartbeats of every crew member.

Really, at the end of the day it's just reeks of bad security. It'd be like walking into a hanger with a new fighter project going on at area 51 and then just hobnobbing about for a bit.

Quote:
1) A quick google search shows Indians can have extremely light skin tones, and I seem to often hear Indians having British sounding accents when they speak English do to where they learn.


Khan did not have a light skin tone.

Quote:
2) Khan is a genetically engineered superhuman. He could have been green if the scientists want to make him such. Complaining that such a character doesn't look"right" is just silly. Do you honestly want an Indian character played by a Mexican just so he will look like he did in TOS?


You're dodging the issue I presented. I don't care if the female korean from Gangnam Style played Khan as long as they said, "yeah, we totally gave him a make over and now he is FABULOUS!"

Quote:
Your complaint seem to be how they did certain things rather then that they didn't do it.


Part of it is. The other part is that it is so trivially easy to fix so many of these holes that I can't forgive them for existing in the first place. As an action science fiction flick all of these are forgivable.


Quote:
1) They used a number of plots used repeatedly in Star Trek. A rouge and possibly insane minority of well intentioned extremists sets up a plan to do something that is at best unethical, and the main characters somehow gets involved, and stops them. It was the plot of one TOS movie, and a number of TV episodes like The Pegasus.


That doesn't revoke my point that it had plot holes that ruined it as a trek movie for me.

Quote:
2) Some people honestly see this as what Star Trek is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzjzu8BTcaU, and to an extent they are correct.


You'll need to forgive me on this one: I am at work and do not have access to Youtube.

Quote:
Mirror Kirk would have happily fired the torpedos, and then done something like crown himself empeor. He would have happily destroyed the planet.


I don't doubt this.


Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:07 pm
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6811
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Trinoya wrote:

Because their enemy just parked two ships on your boarder, one clearly a warship, the other clearly dispatching other craft into your territory and it was all part of the admirals plan in the first place? I could presume that the Klingons really didn't want a war (which is counter intuitive to their actions in the OTL, but they did supposedly loose a fleet) but it still doesn't explain the total no reaction. It's just another thing not explained or touched upon and that doesn't fit in with the established story they were going for... They could have even had the klingons RESCUE the enterprise from the vengeance (giving them the time to get away) or any number of other scenarios to play up the admirals plan not working... I digress, as I said I'm trying to avoid speculation and handwavium as much as possible. I personally would have expected a response, any response, and since none is given, even though Kirk is entirely freaked out about one and the Admirals plan rests upon it, I am left with a hanging plot hole, albeit a small one, but one that still nags at the end of the day.


If you take a look at geopolitical events nowadays, you'll find some countries being attacked by a couple crafts and not lifting a finger.
The Klingons wouldn't need to send ships if they wanted to declare any war on the basis of data gathered. Because that it is clear that they have knowledge and proof of that event.


Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:42 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.