The Campaign Builder's Guild

I really avoid a lot of the pop-culture threads, since that is not normally why I am here.  I generally avoid movies, to be honest.  
I do try to post and help out on as many threads as I can, and I have a huge amount of respect for the average intellect and and discerning nature of the crew that ends up sticking around here.  Even our avatar of 4chan.
And while there are things I am dialed into, movies are not one of them.  SO I had no idea this was coming out, as I am no totalfanboyworshipper of this or any movie/tv phenomena.

I do, however, have a LONG history understanding the affect on culture that certain things have.  And I am in the camp that believes that despite the many shoertcomings of Roddenberry's idea, it has lodged into the long-term psyche of our people.  All odf us geeks grew up somewhat surrounded by this, watching various versions of imperfect people placed in difficult moral dilemma, and backed by a federation and philosophy that resonated with any forward-looking person.
So I hear that they are taking the cheap-ass way out in changing canon and creating an alternate timeline.  And I think this is somehwat bullshit.  Is there anyone else out there with strong feelings?

LV,
I haven't seen the movie yet, and refuse to watch the leaked one, because I've very excited about this movie.  I will say, according to the spoiler-free reviews I have read, that from what I've heard about the changing canon, the time-travel thing is not so much "cheap-ass," as it is just "to-the-point."  A lot of serious ST fans (myself included) have felt the series to be in decline for quite some time now (though a lot of other serious fans find it perfectly acceptable how Enterprise and Voyager went).  With every new movie that has come out, they have "changed cannon" in some way - First Contact introduced basically a completely different borg than we had seen up to that point, which was a major foul cry from me (though I still enjoy the movie).  The entirety of Enterprise changed everything we know about Trek, including (but not limited to) the introduction of hundreds of new species that were never heard from again in chronologically later series.  

I think every now and then, things are in need of a major overhaul, and sometimes, that involves changing staples that we've all come to love.  From what I hear, the changes are not major time-line-altering changes, but rather, just enough to give them a bit more creative license so they can start anew, without having to worry about every detail of every green-skinned alien Kirk slept with in the original series.  

Personally, I'm very much looking forward to this movie, and I will go ahead and make the statement that any spoiling of this movie for me results in an automatic ban!











(I kid, I kid, but seriously, make sure you guys discuss this in spoilers once you've seen the movie, because I won't get to see it for another week)

Honestly, Voyager killed the old Star Trek. The show took everything cool about Star Trek, stuffed it into a corner and played with the worst bits. The show had few redeeming qualities and needlessly hastened the end of the old canon.

Now some would say Enterprise was the show that killed Star Trek. And, if not for the 4th Season, I would agree with you. However, said season completely redeemed the show and allowed it to take its place amongst the top 4 Star Trek TV shows. It gathered up many of the loose threads lying around since the original Star Trek and answered them! I loved that season so much...

At any rate, from what I've read there wouldn't be a new Trek TV show or Movie without a reboot. For all intents and purposes Trek was dead. So, I'm quite happy to see it rise from the ashes into a major Hollywood movie. Further, JJ Abrams (who writes Lost) is directing and writing, so I'm sure at the very least the movie will be entertaining (something Nemesis forgot!).

Unfortunately I won't be able to see it until next week, after my finals...

I just got back from it, and I have to say that it is beautifully done.

That said, as a Trekkie, I'm conflicted. I agree that a reboot was probably required, but that means throwing out DS9 and Next Gen, which I'm less-than-happy about. On the plus, Scotty's back, Bones is far more entertaining, and Jim's arrogance is completely justified.

I also disagree that the canon change was 'cheap-ass.' There is certainly precedent for it, as I don't think a single Trek series hasn't gone back and/or forward in time at one point. It's done somewhat logically, although the setup of exactly who does the time-travel is a bit wonky to me.

In all, I think that if trekkies go into it with an open mind, we'll be pleasantly surprised. The enterprise sure looks a whole hell of a lot better, that's for sure.

From what I've read, as a SciFi movie it's very good but as a real Star Trek movie it fails horribly. Time travel is already overdone imho in Star Trek, and Star Trek XI just adds insult to injury.

There would have been a so much better way to revive the franchise than butcher it into a cheap action movie ripoff. According to Memory Alpha there's a new animated series (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Untitled_Star_Trek_animated_series) in the work. So, why not take a step forward and set a new series in the 26th century on the Enterprise-J (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Enterprise_J) with a multi-cultured crew (klingon as chief of security, vulcan as science officer, romulan as tactical officer, etc.) and just the movie as the kickoff for the series?

This way they could have left all the old stuff (and problems) behind and make a new start without invalidating the complete known history. It's similar to what WotC did with the FR in 4e - only much much worse. :-/ Imagine how the fans would have reacted if WotC had sent Elminster and the Simbul back in time 20k years to change history. Nothing that was written about the FR would have ever happened. The Crown Wars, Drizzt, Cormyr - all that would have never happened or existed.

And exactly this is what Abrams has done to Star Trek - from now on, nothing that was ever produced has actually ever happened in the current universe. From now on, 5 series with over 700 episodes, countless books and novells, and ten movies can be stuffed right into the trash can. :(

Have you seen the movie yet Ra? I don't think it was any worse than Nemesis, and at least the thing MOVED. Nemesis, and to a lesser extent Insurrection suffered from a massively slow plot. And I wouldn't discount the remainder of the series' yet as far as timeline goes; the timeline of star trek has suffered from many, many time travel incidents without much of a problem. The presence of STar Trek Online and the New animated series being set in the current timeline is also a positive sign that the majority of the new timeline remains unaffected, or at least only mildly changed by XI.

I'd also like to know what you think Starfleet could possibly be doing in the 26th century. They've defeated the borg, and by all accounts they have time-traveling ships, meaning any series set that far ahead is just going to turn into a badly done knock-off of Dr. Who.

By the by, did you READ the blurb about the animated series? It's doing exactly what you advocate regarding the time in which it's set.

@Stargate525:



Regarding the movie and the ST timeline

No, I haven't seen the movie yet - and probably won't until in two or three days. I know that the time line in the ST universe has been raped to hell and back, which is why I'm severly disappointed by yet another time-travelling plot. :-/ Somehow it seems so horribly uncreative and just begs to be used as a lame excuse to throw the "canon" overboard.



Regarding what Starfleet could do in the 26th century

I think there are several aspects that could be covered:
* more diplomacy/intrique stuff (including character development and crew-internal problems like rivalries and friendships) and not only zapp-pew-fizz some aliens/machines/asteroids
* exploring unchartered regions of space (*the* thing ST was basically all about), encountering and analyzing strange stellar phenomena and life forms (in the Milky Way); considering the number of solar systems and stars in the Milky Way (200 to 400 billion) there's no way Starfleet could have astrographed and analyzed everything in it even by the 26th century
* further, there are still other galaxies to be explored (after all, afaik no Starfleet vessel has ever left Milky Way) - not mentioning stellar superstructures like the Sloan Great Wall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloan_Great_Wall) which spans a distance larger than 1.3 billion lightyears and contains an unimaginable number of unique galaxies
* if you absolutely need a war/combat-driven story arc, you can elaborate the Sphere Builder (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Sphere_Builder) plot or even make some ties to the Mirror Universe (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Mirror_universe)



Regarding the animated series

I know, and I suggested that scenario to be used as the setting for a ST movie instead of "let's got back to the beginning and make everything different from how it was before". The ST franchise is declining, there's no doubt about it. There are no fresh ideas, no new series. Just rehashing old stuff over and over again (like, time-travelling x(). A movie with a setup like I suggested could have been the perfect starting point for a new arc of the ST plot in the 26th century - far away all the Picards and Janeways who messed up things so horribly. ;) It could have restarted the franchise without invalidating the previous metaplot and background.

The problem is that you're building on a huge, and by your admission flawed, foundation. Watch the movie, then tell me if you think they raped the canon. In my mind, it's entirely possible that all they did was tweak it a bit.

Shiny lens flare everywhere. Hurts my head a little.

Sylar as Spock. Every bit as awesome as I had hoped*.

Whoever as Kirk. Not as awesome as Sylar as Spock, but who cares?

The Canon. Not familiar. Can't comment.

Black holes don't work that way. Not a huge problem.

Funny pan shots. Sometimes a little silly, but didn't detract. Sometimes a plus... gets across the idea that stuff is BIG.

*Spock as Ender (sometimes) is an added bonus.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film

Just seen it with my friend. Comments in the spoiler to avoid a ban!!!

[spoiler]
1. A surprising amount of underwear. Hawt green chick.
2. Screen writer had a ledge fetish, I think there are 3-4 scenes with people hanging off ledges.
3. Nero, the bad-guy. A tattoo'd PTSD-sufferent Romular miner is a horrible evil genius. A blackhole at the center of the planet is clearly much better then the surface of the planet....
4. Bad guys who act like complete idiots, have bad ship design and don't believe in drains.
5. Mining ship with tons of missles... clearly space pirates are a serious threat in 25XX.
6. Spock in love.... weird.

The worst for is the time travel. I *HATE* time travel. More then anything. The meeting of the Spocks made my soul cry.

That all being said. The reboot was needed and I'm fine, its not like Star Trek doesn't have enough problems with time travel anyway (see Voyager series finale). It's not a bad movie, but it has it flaws.

Also, black hole physics aren't that mysterious. I mean seriously? Blackhole+stuff = space lightning+time travel? Common!

Red matter while not... "real" was visually appealing, so I guess that's the reason.
[/spoiler]

Quote from: V - L0Xhttp://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film

If you hadn't posted that link, I would have. Best movie review ever!

Quote from: V - L0Xhttp://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film

Very funny and very true!

[spoiler]
While not the biggest fan of the changes they have made to the time line, and yes I know the prefaced it by saying that it was in an alternate time line, they were still interesting.

was any one else annoyed by Chekov accent, yes I know he is Russian and they were trying to play that up, but every time he spoke I was just really annoyed.

Bones and Scotty were by far my favorite characters. They had some of the best lines in the whole movie.

also I was a little disappointed that I did not see a single double axe handle used in any of the fights scenes. it is like a staple of original star trek fights.
[/spoiler]

It was pretty much a lot of fun. It was just a little goofy at times--not a lot, but it wasn't "Terminator/Alien serious" by any means. But honestly that's kinda in the theme of Star Trek in my mind anyway. Honestly, it's the first time i've been to the movie theatre in a while and not been disappointed at least a little bit.

Whoever wrote/directed this movie also watched a LOT of star trek. I mean that would make sense, but I felt the need to point that out anyways.

I loved it. I've never been a huge Trekkie but this movie is seriously making me consider becoming one... although I can't stand Shatner. My dad liked it too, and he was a big Star Trek fan in the first few series. The way it was executed was a lot more inviting than what I've seen from previous incarnations has been - it seemed to stray just far enough from a scientific/philosophical theory (and/or "What if") exhibition while keeping that feeling intact to make it the kind of adaptation someone completely new to ST could enjoy.

Just saw it: I loved it. Much more accessible, too.

well, based on the the critiques of people I respect, I will probably break my bigscreen moratorium and go see this.
In my head there is this thing about either stay within the bounds of what a creator did or write your own damn story, don't try to take advantage of both...But as SG525 mentioned, reserve judgement until you have experienced it yourself.  

I liked it very much.  If you're torn between this and Wolverine, see Star Trek.

I don't really think canon issues should be a worry.  The old series(es) are still there, they can still be watched, they're just as legitimate as the new movie.  Arguments about canonicity have always struck me as a tad silly, personally.

[spoiler]Chekov was somehow both stupid and hilarious.  Like a funnier Jar Jar Binks who's actually halfway competent.  I think he's more or less like that in the original series, though??[/spoiler]

[blockquote=Steerpike]I don't really think canon issues should be a worry. The old series(es) are still there, they can still be watched, they're just as legitimate as the new movie. Arguments about canonicity have always struck me as a tad silly, personally.[/blockquote]
I'm actually surprised to hear you say that.  I am liking the comments I am reading and as I said, I have a lot of respect for the writers of these posts here, yourself very much included.  And everything I have read says that the movie is well written and canon was looked at carefully deviation was carefully thought out, not haphazard.  

But it is here amongst creators that I expected canon to mean a little more.  Somehow, I am always thinking of what the viewpoint would be from there.  I care not a whit for the rest.
Ah well.  This is why I wanted to get the opinons.
 

I think continuity issues should be clear, as far as possible, and internal contradictions are bad, but I don't understand the issue of one version of the show/film/franchise "superseding" another.  Like, say in the James Bond series, I don't feel that say Sean Connery's Bond is any more or less "real" or "the real Bond" or "definitive" than Daniel Craig's.  They're just different, and both perfectly valid, and should be judged as separate entities, by their own merits.  Just as this movie doesn't mean that the original series or TNG/DS9 etc are lost or "thrown out" because of continuity changes; the episodes still exist, they're still watchable and enjoyable, and can be appreciated on their own merits.  Insofar as that sort of thing goes, I don't really understand fan canon anxieties.

That said, for those that are worried about the new film screwing with the canon/continuity, I think it did a very good, careful job, rather than a haphazard one (so, you're completely right, Vreeg).

Anyone who has spoken to me of Star Trek knows that I'm a big Trek fan, specifically DS9. If you prefer any other Trek series you're wrong and you can go sit in the corner and feel bad.

I'm kidding.

Seriously.

Anyway. I really liked the movie. I've been a Trek fan all my life. My dad loved it, he's been a big fan since the original series. The characters all had their moments to shine and the casting was excellent. The plot was respectful and mixed with just the right amount of nostalgia to appeal to the core Trek fans as well as general audiences.

I'm keeping this spoiler-free so that I can say: don't expect any mind-blowing philosophy or anything, but go see this movie. It's a good film, it's fun, and it brings the feeling, if not the specifics, of the classic franchise to a new audience.

And there's no way I can dislike that.

Quote from: beejazzSylar as Spock. Every bit as awesome as I had hoped*.

  And that is why I am going to see the movie.

I thought it was amazing. Especially since my local theater just opened up an Imax screen :P
 [spoiler WARNING] [spoiler SPOILER] [spoiler ALERT]Now, as far as changing the other series goes, old Spock said Romulan blew up 129 years in the future. Is that within Enterprise's Timeline?

Also, in the opening scene before it was explicitly stated they were Romulans, were you guys getting that vibe/immediately new it?[/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler]

EDIT: Also, the way this Star Trek is being seen by younger people not usually interested in it seeing it (i.e. most of my friends have never seen a star trek episode in their life, but really want to see it), I think (and this may be heresy to some here) if it is followed up by a new series, then it has a good chance to reglorify science through mass media, thus helping increase the general smartness that the U.S. seems to lack in school districts.

EDIT 2:  [spoiler SPOILER]As my understanding goes, Black Holes do not work that way!!!!

Also, red matter? seriously?

And "OMGEEEEE THEIRZ SPACE LIGHTNINGZ!!! WE R DOOMED!!!!"[/spoiler]

Just got back from the movie... As a Treker/Trekie all I can say is 'WOW!'

I loved everything about the movie and am looking forward to see it again on Sunday!

[spoiler]The movie hit all the right bells that made TOS great. The movie had camp, comedy, drama, sex... It had everything!

The only plot hole I could see would be that in the original continuity, the Federation of the 29th and 31st centuries had the mandate to keep the timeline safe. They often interfered in the affairs of Voyager and the NX Enterprise. However, I'm willing to let that issue slide since I never liked the concept.

I love the fact that Starfleet appears more diverse with Orions and other races, like that little guy hanging out with Scotty and the Denobulan(?) that helped birth Kirk.

Quick question, what do we call the alternate timeline? [/spoiler]

[spoiler]I say that continuity issues be fixed with another time travel movie, this time where new cast of TNG goes back in time in order to prevent that movie from ever happening! problem solved.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]I agree to an extent on the black holes bit, but if naturally-forming wormholes DO occur, the odds are at least there...

And red matter, well, the Romulans have to have some way to generate those micro-singularities they use in their engines. Although it's somewhat ironic the big deal they make at the end that the Romulan ship has a black hole in it when, in reality, it could very well have had one in its engine the entire time.[/spoiler]

Quote from: Higgs Boson[spoiler]I say that continuity issues be fixed with another time travel movie, this time where new cast of TNG goes back in time in order to prevent that movie from ever happening! problem solved.[/spoiler]

How about we don't do that and let JJ Abrams make another stellar movie!

Quote from: Stargate525[spoiler]I agree to an extent on the black holes bit, but if naturally-forming wormholes DO occur, the odds are at least there...[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Very true, very true. I don't think the black hole is the correct term, since it did have electricity/lightning (at least on the other end). So it isn't a pure Black Hole, thus can have strange properties (such as this whole time travel stuff). [/spoiler]

Quote from: Elemental_Elf

Quote from: Stargate525[spoiler]I agree to an extent on the black holes bit, but if naturally-forming wormholes DO occur, the odds are at least there...[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Very true, very true. I don't think the black hole is the correct term, since it did have electricity/lightning (at least on the other end). So it isn't a pure Black Hole, thus can have strange properties (such as this whole time travel stuff). [/spoiler]

[spoiler]And, unless I'm mistaken, lightning can happen in a vacuum if you build up enough of a charge. DUnno really WHY it would happen, but it sure as hell looked cool.[/spoiler]

Quote from: Stargate525

Quote from: Elemental_Elf

Quote from: Stargate525[spoiler]I agree to an extent on the black holes bit, but if naturally-forming wormholes DO occur, the odds are at least there...[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Very true, very true. I don't think the black hole is the correct term, since it did have electricity/lightning (at least on the other end). So it isn't a pure Black Hole, thus can have strange properties (such as this whole time travel stuff). [/spoiler]

[spoiler]And, unless I'm mistaken, lightning can happen in a vacuum if you build up enough of a charge. DUnno really WHY it would happen, but it sure as hell looked cool.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Damn Straight![/spoiler]

Quote from: Higgs BosonAlso, the way this Star Trek is being seen by younger people not usually interested in it seeing it (i.e. most of my friends have never seen a star trek episode in their life, but really want to see it), I think (and this may be heresy to some here) if it is followed up by a new series, then it has a good chance to reglorify science through mass media, thus helping increase the general smartness that the U.S. seems to lack in school districts.

If the youth of today learn science from star trek I would be very afraid for our future. You couldn't fill a thimble with the amount of hard, non-techno babble science that is found in trek. Regardless I still love it. Though I love it for the very thing that seems to be in less supply in this film, namely the philosophical concepts.

Quote from: Nomadic

Quote from: Higgs BosonAlso, the way this Star Trek is being seen by younger people not usually interested in it seeing it (i.e. most of my friends have never seen a star trek episode in their life, but really want to see it), I think (and this may be heresy to some here) if it is followed up by a new series, then it has a good chance to reglorify science through mass media, thus helping increase the general smartness that the U.S. seems to lack in school districts.

Work gets in the way of me being around a lot.  

But both of these posts hit a lot of really resonant issues to me.  
1) Aside from canon or non canon, anything that puts value back into education is a good thing.  Period.  Anyone in business understands that R&D is the future, and in the business of goverrning, education is R&D!  I don't think anyone will learn any science from Trek, but they may be energized to learn more.
2) Nomadic touches on a very critical issue for me and GR's original ideas.  Trek episodes were often specifically designed to be parables, hidden by a smokescreen of SF.  One of the things that continued in the later series was this focus.  And many of the canonical 'big-picture' themes, such as the integration of the Federation vs. racial/governmental xenophobia, the Prime Directive, and the search for knowledge (the Final Frontier), to name just a few, are central in determining how this movie should be judged.  Not to the exclusion of other factors, but this should be part of the overall judgement.  
But if Eldo says it was fun...

When i say reglorify science, i mean make kids interested in science and math stuff. Not learn from it. Ohhhh no. That would be very bad. But just get them interested in it.

Has anyone watched "How William Shatner Changed the World?"

Indeed.

I thought it should have been how Roddenbury changed the world.

Quote from: Stargate525Indeed.

I thought it should have been how Roddenbury changed the world.

It should have been titled "How a hack actor is claiming he changed the world when really it had very little to do with him, the TV show or its creator.' That show was nothing more than a cheap gimmick to get ratings from star trek fans.

Finally saw the movie.  I'm not posting a full review.  But it was the best and most entertaining movie I've seen since TDK.  And it probably gave me the most exhilarating high I've had since seeing Fellowship of the Ring in the theater on opening night.  Absolutely fantastic movie.

Agreed. And I think I have to add a separate section to the movie ratings. It just feels unfair to rate this one as part of the old series.

Just saw the movie for the second time. I really missed a lot of little things the first time around... Also, the movie was just as exhilarating and amazing as the first.

I agree. I watched it again as well. In imax again. It was just as awesome. And to me, those guys still didn't look like romulans.

I actually like giving romulans a different look.  They've always just looked like Vulcans, so giving them not-bowl-cuts, and curving their ears a bit, giving them face art, I thought it was all good ideas.

Quote from: IshmaylI actually like giving romulans a different look.  They've always just looked like Vulcans, so giving them not-bowl-cuts, and curving their ears a bit, giving them face art, I thought it was all good ideas.

I love the new look, minus the fact they don't have those forehead protrusions.

God, I love the musicality of the movie. Listening to the sound track on Youtube makes me want to go out and buy it tomorrow...

Hmmm... if anything about the movie was a bit disappointing to me, it was actually the music.  It's not that it was bad by any means, but it just wasn't as grand as I was expecting.  It also resolved very fast.  The main motif was only about 2 measures long, and you would hear that main riff once in an entire musical piece.  But then again, it could just because I'm used to TOS and TNG.

Ok, I finally saw the movie today.

So, finally, Star Trek transformed from
[spoiler=this](http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1526/philosophyo.jpg)[/spoiler]
into a heavily mainstreamed version of
[spoiler=that](http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/4281/attention20whore3lm9.jpg)[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Rating]
As an ordinary and vanilla sci-fi movie I'd give it 7/10 points.

As a Star Trek movie, however, I'll give it 2/10 points - Leonard Nimoy being the movie's only saving grace.
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Issues, Problems, logical impossibilities]
Sigh, I really don't know where to start.

(1) The ship being built on the ground. Considering the basics of mechanic and logic, why the heck would you build a starship on the surface of the planet instead of a dry dock in space? The components are much harder to move around, the whole structure of the starship must be built in a way to support its own frame and weight, and you'll need to finally beat the escape velocity of the planet to get the thing where it belongs.

(2) Red matter and black holes. Seriously, of all the technological and physical shenanigans ST has pulled in its life, red matter (and its acompanying way of time travel) is definitivly on top of the BS-hill. While the Borg in Nemesis at least used something that could theoretically enable time travelling (tachyons - particles that cannot move slower than the speed of light while all other particles cannot move faster than the speed of light and thus seriously mess up relativistic physics), singularities and black holes just don't work the way. Never. Ever.

(3) The Narada, a mining vessel. Of course. It looked more than the bastard child of a Babylon 5 shadow crab and a Perry Rhodan sphere ship than anything else. Also, why the heck was that thing practically hollow inside? Shouldn't there have been - as it's typical for mining ships - storage rooms and processing facilities for the mined ore?

(4) Vulcan and a blue sky. FYI, Vulcan is a desert planet with only minor bodies of water. Considering that the blue color of earth's sky result from light being reflected by the oceans, it's pretty obvious that Vulcan cannot possibly have a horizon spanning blue firmament.

(5) Delta Vega. Sure, a so far unknown stellar body in the Vulcan system (and coincidentally orbiting right next to Vulcan and even more coincidentally currently so aligned that you could watch Vulcan's destruction from its surface) has a Federation research outpost on it and bears a non-vulcan name. No logical or other problems with that. No, of course not. Never mind.
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Plot]
Let me get that right. Yet another revenge-driven unforgiving romulan villain with yet another unstoppable-once-fired planet-destroying superweapon sets out to destroy the UFP. Someone please show the director and screenwriters the way to Plotstorming.com - they seem to need professional help.

Also, good to know that UFP starships don't have a brig or holding cells but instead must jettison every bad guy into space. Why merely restrict Kirk to his quarters or stuff him into a cell when you can maroon him on a to human life hostile ice world with predators that eat dire bears for breakfast.

Prime Spock's ship's payload of red matter. Sure, you need only a drop of Unobtainium (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unobtainium) to stop the galaxy-devestating (!) supernova but nonetheless fit the ship with a whole frigging metric ton of it - just in case, of course.

And please, for the sake of all that's holy and good, don't get me started on the love story between Uhura and Spock. There was basically no build up leading to the almost rape in the turbolift where she jumped on him like a bitch in heat - completely out of the blue.
[/spoiler]

If you excuse me now, I'm going to wash my eyes with bleach to forget that godawful movie and the wasted time in the cinema. Star Trek was the first movie for over a year when I left the theatre before the endcredits were done and the curtain fell, because nothing - absolutely nothing - that could have possibly come after the credits would have saved the film.

[spoiler=Though I fear the bleach may not work...](http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/66/catkittyseendemotivatio.jpg)[/spoiler]

[spoiler=]

Quote from: Ra-Tiel(1) The ship being built on the ground. Considering the basics of mechanic and logic, why the heck would you build a starship on the surface of the planet instead of a dry dock in space? The components are much harder to move around, the whole structure of the starship must be built in a way to support its own frame and weight, and you'll need to finally beat the escape velocity of the planet to get the thing where it belongs.

IIRC, the TOS Enterprise was constructed in San Francisco...

Quote from: Ra-Tiel(2) Red matter and black holes. Seriously, of all the technological and physical shenanigans ST has pulled in its life, red matter (and its acompanying way of time travel) is definitivly on top of the BS-hill. While the Borg in Nemesis at least used something that could theoretically enable time travelling (tachyons - particles that cannot move slower than the speed of light while all other particles cannot move faster than the speed of light and thus seriously mess up relativistic physics), singularities and black holes just don't work the way. Never. Ever.

Technically, it was First Contact you are thinking of, not Nemesis. :)

Second, is Red Matter and 'Black Holes' any less BS that revolving around a sun to go back in time?

Quote from: Ra-Tiel(4) Vulcan and a blue sky. FYI, Vulcan is a desert planet with only minor bodies of water. Considering that the blue color of earth's sky result from light being reflected by the oceans, it's pretty obvious that Vulcan cannot possibly have a horizon spanning blue firmament.

Didn't notice the problem, though I do acknowledge it, it does not lessen the movie for me.

Quote from: Ra-Tiel(5) Delta Vega. Sure, a so far unknown stellar body in the Vulcan system (and coincidentally orbiting right next to Vulcan and even more coincidentally currently so aligned that you could watch Vulcan's destruction from its surface) has a Federation research outpost on it and bears a non-vulcan name. No logical or other problems with that. No, of course not. Never mind.

Delta Vega could just be the official term for the planet, just was Earth is Sol III. Also, given that Nero marooned Spock on the planet to watch Vulcan crumble, it seems logical that Nero would put Spock on the right side. Further, if Delta Vega had not been in the right place, then I am sure Nero would have marooned Spock in a small escape pod far enough away to be safe, close enough to watch.
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Plot]

Quote from: Ra-TielLet me get that right. Yet another revenge-driven unforgiving romulan villain with yet another unstoppable-once-fired planet-destroying superweapon sets out to destroy the UFP. Someone please show the director and screenwriters the way to Plotstorming.com - they seem to need professional help.

Shinzon was NOT Romulan, he was human, a clone of Picard. Also, the Romulans are deceitful and prone to the trope of the evil genius, which means doomsday weapons and horribly convoluted plans to disintegrate friendships between species are common.

Quote from: Ra-TielAlso, good to know that UFP starships don't have a brig or holding cells but instead must jettison every bad guy into space. Why merely restrict Kirk to his quarters or stuff him into a cell when you can maroon him on a to human life hostile ice world with predators that eat dire bears for breakfast.

Actually, Spock wanted Kirk off the ship because Kirk posed a problem for morale. His very presence was a beacon for those who questioned Spock's command. Further, as was proven in the movie, Spock was emotionally unstable and thus prone to giving weird commands.

Quote from: Ra-TielPrime Spock's ship's payload of red matter. Sure, you need only a drop of Unobtainium (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unobtainium) to stop the galaxy-devestating (!) supernova but nonetheless fit the ship with a whole frigging metric ton of it - just in case, of course.

Why go small when you can go BIG?

Quote from: Ra-TielAnd please, for the sake of all that's holy and good, don't get me started on the love story between Uhura and Spock. There was basically no build up leading to the almost rape in the turbolift where she jumped on him like a bitch in heat - completely out of the blue.

It was alluded to through out the movie, including the bit about Uhura not being assigned to the Enterprise because it would show 'favoritism.' There could have been deleted scenes where their love was emphasized more, perhaps they cut that along with the Klingon fleet being destroyed.
[/spoiler]

Quote from: Ra-Tiel(4) Vulcan and a blue sky. FYI, Vulcan is a desert planet with only minor bodies of water. Considering that the blue color of earth's sky result from light being reflected by the oceans, it's pretty obvious that Vulcan cannot possibly have a horizon spanning blue firmament.

Errr, not to be a bastard nit-picker, but that (^) ain't why the sky is blue... Look up "Rayleigh scattering."  

[spoiler]

Quote from: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701)[...] According to The Making of Star Trek, the Enterprise was built on Earth but assembled in space. [...]

Second, is Red Matter and 'Black Holes' any less BS that revolving around a sun to go back in time? [/quote][...] The Star Trek novel Spock's World offers the explanation that the "moon" appearing in the Vulcan sky in "Yesteryear" and the original cut of Star Trek: The Motion Picture was actually the sister planet of Vulcan, called T'Khut. This theory is widespread in other non-canonical works like Star Trek Maps, Star Trek: Star Charts and The Worlds of the Federation. [...][/quote]

[spoiler=Plot]

Quote from: Elemental_ElfActually, Spock wanted Kirk off the ship because Kirk posed a problem for morale. His very presence was a beacon for those who questioned Spock's command. Further, as was proven in the movie, Spock was emotionally unstable and thus prone to giving weird commands.

supermassive black hole[/url] that eats the galaxy?

On a further note: the paragraph about the weak tidal in a supermassive black hole don't apply to the black holes shown in the movie. These are simply not of sufficient size (which is required to reduce the tidal forces on entering objects).

An additional glitch in the last scene: the Enterprise is already torn apart by the gravitational pull of the black hole, but no character experiences any inconvenience of any sort? :huh:

Quote from: Elemental_ElfIt was alluded to through out the movie, including the bit about Uhura not being assigned to the Enterprise because it would show 'favoritism.' There could have been deleted scenes where their love was emphasized more, perhaps they cut that along with the Klingon fleet being destroyed.

Quote from: IshmaylErrr, not to be a bastard nit-picker, but that (^) ain't why the sky is blue... Look up "Rayleigh scattering."

I stand corrected.

However, even then Vulcan's sky prolly won't be blue because of

a) continuity (afaik in no show Vulcan's sky has been shown as blue at daytime)

b) a different composition of atmosphere



EDIT: And even in a thinner atmosphere, Kirk and Zulu would have been burned to ashes by the unprotected atmospheric entry. After all, there was enough air to allow parachutes to work (not to mention that the jerk when the parachutes finally opened should have probably broken their spines/necks or at least given them a lethal trauma - after all, they were falling at what, 1000m/s?).

Ra-Tiel:
Dude, I get that you didn't like the relationship in the movie, but please tone down your language--you're crossing over from "heartfelt rant" to "crass" here.
[/mod hat]

[spoiler]
Alright, a refutation:

On Vulcan's sky: It's been red, yellow, and non-exiastent in respective showings. There has never been a consistency here, so why don't we just chalk it up to yet another of the choices for its possible composition?

I can't really remember how much of it intact you see in the movie while it's on the ground, but really? They have inertial dampeners, artificial gravity, etcetera. Is a little thing like structural integrity a problem? Not to mention that you don't have to bother with spacewalks, containing the atmosphere, blah blah blah.

On Black Holes: Sorry, you're wrong. A wormhole is two black hole geometries attached at their bottoms. It's highly unlikely that this could happen, but it is possible. Unfortunately again for your rants, Red Matter has a precedent, as Romulan ships are POWERED BY ARTIFICIAL SINGULARITIES. Again, you're complaining about the dust in a septic tank, as far as technological bull.

On the Narada: Do you know what a storage facility is? Why yes, it's a large hollow space inside the ship! Who would have thunk it? As a mining vessel, it does not necessarily have to have its own processors; it's a mining ship, not a smelter. But then again, we don't see toilets on any of the ships; does that mean they aren't there?

On Delta Vega: Yes, they did move it, but no, it's not a problem:

[ic]According to writer Roberto Orci, the part of the mind meld sequence in which Prime Spock sees the destruction of Vulcan was meant to be "as impressionistic for a general audience." The idea was that Spock saw the planet's destruction through "a telescope or some other type of measuring device," but showing it that was on-screen "isn't very cinematic."[/ic]

On Jettisoning: Spock is pissed. Kirk has demonstrated that he can get to places where he shouldn't be (on a ship in orbit, for instance, and this is later confirmed by beaming in). Logically, the best way to ensure that Kirk does not interfere is to get him off the ship.

He's also not supposed to be ON the ship, thereby making him, technically, an intruder.

On Uhura and Spock: That was a kiss, for God's sake. Have you been watching mass media recently? I've seen more explicit stuff on evening TV. Consider how Uhura got onto the ship, and there is your leadup.

On Tearing apart: Where does it say the ship is being torn apart? It's merely slightly past the hole's gravity well where it can't get out.

On The spacejump: Those are futuristic spacesuits. Those flames on them? That's friction. They're obviously able to withstand the heat, and the friction reduces them to terminal velocity.  
[/spoiler]

This is a really weird argument.  I mean, I get being annoyed that they're breaking the laws of traditional physics, but when it comes to black holes, wormholes, and warp speed, guess what?  We're long past traditional physics and moving solidly into theoretical physics.  Which, really, I think gives a bit of license to play with for the sake of drama.  Do you get this pissed off with every sci-fi book you read?  That's not meant to be bastardly, I just get the feeling that you're not much one for sci-fi "implausible but not impossible" scenarios....

I do wish they would use some other motivations/plotlines  than "Bad Guys tries to Destroy the Earth". Star Trek wasn't just about "Saving the World" it was about saving/preserving the "higher" principles of Humanity.



.

Quote from: LathI do wish they would use some other motivations/plotlines  than "Bad Guys tries to Destroy the Earth". Star Trek wasn't just about "Saving the World" it was about saving/preserving the "higher" principles of Humanity.

Well, Generations didn't. Khan didn't. Search for Spock Didn't. Final Frontier and Undiscovered Country didn't. Insurrection didn't.

In fact, the majority of them don't involve Earth peril at all.

First of all, I found a very good site summarizing all my issues with the movie far better than I could have: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/inconsistencies-trekxi.htm

[spoiler=Anyway...]

Quote from: Stargate525On Vulcan's sky: It's been red, yellow, and non-exiastent in respective showings. There has never been a consistency here, so why don't we just chalk it up to yet another of the choices for its possible composition?

If you take a look at the pictures of Vulcan in the Memory Alpha article you can see that while the individual color varies the general theme stays the same. Reds and other sand tones are dominant. And a clear blue sky just doesn't fit in. If we go by what Ishmayl posted earlier we must conclude that the atmospheric composition of Vulcan must be identical to Earth's - otherwise the sky would need to be a different color. However, this clearly contradicts the fact that Vulcan has a thinner atmosphere.

Quote from: Stargate525I can't really remember how much of it intact you see in the movie while it's on the ground, but really? They have inertial dampeners, artificial gravity, etcetera. Is a little thing like structural integrity a problem? Not to mention that you don't have to bother with spacewalks, containing the atmosphere, blah blah blah.

[spoiler=Pretty much the whole ship](http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2310/38180795.jpg)[/spoiler]

And yes, structural integrity is a problem, considering how often it fails in the various shows from even the slightest problems. Would you really want to risk the construction of the whole ship? What do you thing would happen to the saucer section and the internal structure of the ship if the artificial gravity only failed for 10s? How about the warp nacelles and the pylons? A power outage or field generator failure for even a few seconds could ruin weeks or months of construction work.

True, there are support beams. But the proportions of the ship don't lend themselves to the conclusion that the weight and structure is distributed in a way so that the whole ship can be supported on only like nine points.

Quote from: Stargate525On Black Holes: Sorry, you're wrong. A wormhole is two black hole geometries attached at their bottoms. It's highly unlikely that this could happen, but it is possible.

No, no, and no again. You need to connect a black hole and a white hole. However, these so called "Schwarzschild wormholes" are highly unstable, only existing for as long as they don't interact with any matter:

Quote from: Stargate525Unfortunately again for your rants, Red Matter has a precedent, as Romulan ships are POWERED BY ARTIFICIAL SINGULARITIES. Again, you're complaining about the dust in a septic tank, as far as technological bull.

Which, however, is not the same. The black holes generated by red matter are not permanent and seem to disappear shortly after they swallowed their "intended target" (as can be seen by the lack of any lingering effects after Vulcan is destroyed). The artificial quantum singularities (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Artificial_quantum_singularity) used by Romulan capital starships cannot be deactivated and further aren't shown to swallow its surroundings on destruction (or have you seen a single D'deridex being swallowed by its engine in any of the TV shows?).

Quote from: Stargate525On the Narada: Do you know what a storage facility is? Why yes, it's a large hollow space inside the ship! Who would have thunk it? As a mining vessel, it does not necessarily have to have its own processors; it's a mining ship, not a smelter. But then again, we don't see toilets on any of the ships; does that mean they aren't there?

First, in the Star Trek universe capital mining ships (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Mining_vessel) generally do have facilities to process the mined materials. After all, if the ship processed the materials on site it can achieve a much higher efficiency because unwanted products can be instantly eliminated and the whole "harvest" can be refined into a denser form or one that's easier to transport.

Second, I meant the massive empty space inside the Narada containing all those small platforms. The platforms where Nero and Kirk fought. This was basically dead space that couldn't be used for anything else. Why would an engineer that wanted to build a highly efficient mining vessel waste so much space - even more, dead space that would still have to be supported by the ship's life support systems (atmosphere, pressure, temperature, radiation shielding, etc. etc.)?

Quote from: Stargate525On Delta Vega: Yes, they did move it, but no, it's not a problem: [...]

This explaination is even more dumb than I could ever imagine. There are misleading and confusing the audience on purpose. Why didn't they just show the scene on a monitor or something? Or from space (again)?

Quote from: Stargate525On Jettisoning: Spock is pissed. Kirk has demonstrated that he can get to places where he shouldn't be (on a ship in orbit, for instance, and this is later confirmed by beaming in). Logically, the best way to ensure that Kirk does not interfere is to get him off the ship.

And to remove him from where you can have an eye on him? That's not logic, that's stupid. If you are suspicious of someone you want to keep him someplace where you can observe him, and not put him somewhere where he can do something that you can't observe or control. And last but not least, what would have happened to Spock if Kirk had died on Delta Vega?

Quote from: Stargate525He's also not supposed to be ON the ship, thereby making him, technically, an intruder.

And what do you do with intruders? You put them under arrest and interrogate them later. But you do not maroon them in a lethal environment. I can see the Klingons doing that ("if you survive this trial you can walk away") or the Romulans ("aren't we being nice? instead of putting you in a dark prison cell we allow you to freely walk around on this planet"). But not the fancy pants goody-two-shoes UFP.

Quote from: Stargate525On Uhura and Spock: That was a kiss, for God's sake. Have you been watching mass media recently? I've seen more explicit stuff on evening TV. Consider how Uhura got onto the ship, and there is your leadup.

I haven't watched almost any TV for almost 2 years now and really, I don't miss it. Still, when she's kissing and caressing Spock in the turbolift the state of intimacy in which their relationship already is comes to the viewer as a complete surprise. There hasn't been any obvious indication before that there might be anything more than a healthy friendship going on between them.

Quote from: Stargate525On Tearing apart: Where does it say the ship is being torn apart? It's merely slightly past the hole's gravity well where it can't get out.

Where does it say that? How about the walls, frontpanel and ceiling being ripped open by the black hole's gravitational pull? :?:

Quote from: Stargate525On The spacejump: Those are futuristic spacesuits. Those flames on them? That's friction. They're obviously able to withstand the heat, and the friction reduces them to terminal velocity.

They are so futuristic that they don't even generate the typical plasma screen around the entry body? Hardly.

Today the best reentry angle is between 5° and 7° - and even then the temperatures at the thermal shield reach in excess of 1000°C. Even with Vulcan's thinner atmosphere the temperatures would be significantly higher, considering that the reentry angle for Kirk and the others was a nice 90°. Further, they were already in an atmospheric region with probably comparable properties as Earth's, considering that the air was thick enough to allow them to talk and fight without problems and to carry their parachutes.
[/spoiler]

Quote from: IshmaylThis is a really weird argument.  I mean, I get being annoyed that they're breaking the laws of traditional physics, but when it comes to black holes, wormholes, and warp speed, guess what?  We're long past traditional physics and moving solidly into theoretical physics.  Which, really, I think gives a bit of license to play with for the sake of drama.  Do you get this pissed off with every sci-fi book you read?  That's not meant to be bastardly, I just get the feeling that you're not much one for sci-fi "implausible but not impossible" scenarios....

The problem is lack of consistency. One moment the black hole created by red matter swallows a whole planet in mere moments, and in another scene another black hole created by the very same red matter sits there and does absolutely nothing to the ship trapped in it until the Enterprise starts firing at it.

I have no problem with wierd and unconventional stuff in scifi - for as long as it stays consistent throughout its whole appearance and doesn't turn around on its heel every other second in what it does and how it works.

Quote from: Stargate525Well, Generations didn't. Khan didn't. Search for Spock Didn't. Final Frontier and Undiscovered Country didn't. Insurrection didn't.

In fact, the majority of them don't involve Earth peril at all.

Sorry I didnt word myself very well at all. Not the movies in particular but rather the Star Trek Universe as a whole and in the context of the more recent work. Most of the Original Movies didnt, other than Voyage Home which I still love. I like Insurrection for being about the moral corruption in the Federation, maybe if Franks made/release it in the last few years the story might have reverberated with the audience a little more.

What I was referring to was the Dominion War, Nemises, Season 3-4? of Enterprise, End of Voyager Borg Threat, The Temporal Cold War, ect. I just seems more and more and more Star Trek is all "pew pew lasers in space/aliens blowing up Earth". And not "Through the mirror darkly.."

If they wanted to do "something different" and "new and edgy" they should have done a one-off movie for the Dark Mirror Universe (or whatever it was called i cant remember). Could have reinvented whatever the hell you wanted, lots of unknowns to fill and in all fits nicely in what was already presented. This is not a condemnation of the movie as i have yet to see it and still plan on, but rather i feel this would just have been a better way to go.

[spoiler]

Quote from: Ra-TielIf you take a look at the pictures of Vulcan in the Memory Alpha article you can see that while the individual color varies the general theme stays the same. Reds and other sand tones are dominant. And a clear blue sky just doesn't fit in. If we go by what Ishmayl posted earlier we must conclude that the atmospheric composition of Vulcan must be identical to Earth's - otherwise the sky would need to be a different color. However, this clearly contradicts the fact that Vulcan has a thinner atmosphere.

composition and thickness have nothing to do with each other. You can shovel off 50% of out atmosphere, and it'll be the same general composition as long as you shovel it off equally.

Quote from: Ra-TielAnd yes, structural integrity is a problem, considering how often it fails in the various shows from even the slightest problems. Would you really want to risk the construction of the whole ship? What do you thing would happen to the saucer section and the internal structure of the ship if the artificial gravity only failed for 10s? How about the warp nacelles and the pylons? A power outage or field generator failure for even a few seconds could ruin weeks or months of construction work.

True, there are support beams. But the proportions of the ship don't lend themselves to the conclusion that the weight and structure is distributed in a way so that the whole ship can be supported on only like nine points.

Sorry bud, but Structural Integrity Fields (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Structural_integrity_field) throw this all right out the window. And by 'slightest problems' you mean large spatial disturbances and general power failure, then yes. I would hardly call that slight, but whatever.

And considering the fact that birds of prey can land completely unassisted, It's not a terrible stretch to assume that a Constitution can stand Earth gravity when completely shut off, unmoving, and propped up.

Quote from: Ra-TielNo, no, and no again. You need to connect a black hole and a white hole. However, these so called "Schwarzschild wormholes" are highly unstable, only existing for as long as they don't interact with any matter:

Fine. Whatever. You're obviously not going to be moved on this point, but it's funny since you have no problem with slingshooting around a sun for time travel, but have a problem with this.

Quote from: Ra-TielNot to mention the currently confirmed properties of black holes like
* gravitational time dilation
* gravitational red shift
* gravitational lensing
* etc
that were all completely ignored in the movie.

Oh, confirmed eh? Have we been able to play with a black hole that I didn't know about?

I would LOVE to see this done in a movie and still retain any sense of drama or interest. Further, don't those effects only matter when looking from a black hole outwards? If that is the case, this hardly ever occurs.

Quote from: Ra-TielWhich, however, is not the same. The black holes generated by red matter are not permanent and seem to disappear shortly after they swallowed their "intended target" (as can be seen by the lack of any lingering effects after Vulcan is destroyed).

Not true. You seem to be under the impression that a black hole with the mass of vulcan would somehow destroy everything like some uber destruct-o-matic. This is not the case, considering it has exactly the same gravitational field as vulcan did in regards to every other body around it. That black hole will just keep orbiting Vulcan's sun for quite some time.

Quote from: Ra-TielFirst, in the Star Trek universe capital mining ships (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Mining_vessel) generally do have facilities to process the mined materials. After all, if the ship processed the materials on site it can achieve a much higher efficiency because unwanted products can be instantly eliminated and the whole "harvest" can be refined into a denser form or one that's easier to transport.

The argument still stands that there could very well be such facilities in there. We don't see bedrooms, toilets, lounges, or the majority of the bridge either, so why aren't you complaining those aren't there too? Frankly, it didn't need to be in the movie, so it wasn't.

Quote from: Ra-TielSecond, I meant the massive empty space inside the Narada containing all those small platforms. The platforms where Nero and Kirk fought. This was basically dead space that couldn't be used for anything else. Why would an engineer that wanted to build a highly efficient mining vessel waste so much space - even more, dead space that would still have to be supported by the ship's life support systems (atmosphere, pressure, temperature, radiation shielding, etc. etc.)?

Hmm. Cargo bays are supported by life support... The space to which you refer acts as a shuttle bay, has a gigantic-ass door leading to vacuum, I can't really see what else it could be, because IT WORKS AS A BLOODY CARGO AREA.

And who said anything about highly efficient?

Quote from: Ra-TielThis explanation is even more dumb than I could ever imagine. There are misleading and confusing the audience on purpose. Why didn't they just show the scene on a monitor or something? Or from space (again)?

...Because that's not the way they decided to do it?

Quote from: Ra-TielAnd to remove him from where you can have an eye on him? That's not logic, that's stupid. If you are suspicious of someone you want to keep him someplace where you can observe him, and not put him somewhere where he can do something that you can't observe or control. And last but not least, what would have happened to Spock if Kirk had died on Delta Vega?

Who cares whether you can observe him? He's quite literally incapable of doing anything to you, as he can't get on the ship while at warp. If he was on the ship in a holding cell, there is a chance he could. Hell, if it weren't for information from the future, it would have worked.

If he had stayed in his pod he would have been in no danger. The thing was obviously emitting a distress signal, and he was on an inhabited planet.

Quote from: Ra-TielAnd what do you do with intruders? You put them under arrest and interrogate them later. But you do not maroon them in a lethal environment. I can see the Klingons doing that ("if you survive this trial you can walk away") or the Romulans ("aren't we being nice? instead of putting you in a dark prison cell we allow you to freely walk around on this planet"). But not the fancy pants goody-two-shoes UFP.

UFP hasn't been fancy pants goody-two-shoes since about the middle of DS9. Not a lethal environment. He can breathe, he can walk around, etcetera.

Quote from: Ra-TielI haven't watched almost any TV for almost 2 years now and really, I don't miss it.

Doesn't matter about your opinions; That is a mild show of intimacy in a completely private setting. La de frikkin dah.

 

Quote from: Ra-TielStill, when she's kissing and caressing Spock in the turbolift the state of intimacy in which their relationship already is comes to the viewer as a complete surprise. There hasn't been any obvious indication before that there might be anything more than a healthy friendship going on between them.

So you wanted them kissing and caressing each other MORE? When he is her teacher? The thing is kept hidden for a reason.

Quote from: Ra-TielWhere does it say that? How about the walls, frontpanel and ceiling being ripped open by the black hole's gravitational pull? :?:

Don't remember that, so I can't comment, but I think I would have remembered wall panels flying off and heading for the back of the ship. Remember, if they fall to the ground or behave normally, it's shaking itself apart, not getting ripped apart.

Quote from: Ra-TielThey are so futuristic that they don't even generate the typical plasma screen around the entry body? Hardly.

Today the best reentry angle is between 5° and 7° - and even then the temperatures at the thermal shield reach in excess of 1000°C. Even with Vulcan's thinner atmosphere the temperatures would be significantly higher, considering that the reentry angle for Kirk and the others was a nice 90°. Further, they were already in an atmospheric region with probably comparable properties as Earth's, considering that the air was thick enough to allow them to talk and fight without problems and to carry their parachutes.

*sigh* Many problems with this...

Problem 1: The Narada is in geosynch orbit, but not way out there. The mining cable is not several miles long. Therefore, the ship is very low in space, on the edge of the atmosphere. We've already got the technology to jump from near this height.
Problem 2: You're equating a several ton spaceship with a person. The amount of energy they have, even falling at the same speed, is tremendously different. A person simply isn't carrying enough kinetic energy to get to that 1000 degree heat you want.
Problem 3: a 90 degree entry is the best one, assuming you don't need to burn off lateral velocity, as you're passing through the atmosphere the quickest. The only reason spacecraft enter at 5 degrees is that that creates the most time to burn off their excess speed without skipping off the atmosphere.

Quote from: Ra-TielThe problem is lack of consistency. One moment the black hole created by red matter swallows a whole planet in mere moments, and in another scene another black hole created by the very same red matter sits there and does absolutely nothing to the ship trapped in it until the Enterprise starts firing at it.

'mere moments' being several minutes, or enough time for them to lament a bit, evacuate ten thousand people, and for Spock to do a nice half-mile dash. My guess is that the thing ate out the core and the mantle until the crust couldn't support itself. The dramatic bit took a few moments, but the entire process was much longer.

Considering the ship had already gone through one of those, we might conclude it would perhaps survive a second one.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]

Quote from: Stargate525composition and thickness have nothing to do with each other. You can shovel off 50% of out atmosphere, and it'll be the same general composition as long as you shovel it off equally.

A thinner atmosphere would provide different scattering effects which would lead to a different coloration.

Quote from: Stargate525Sorry bud, but Structural Integrity Fields (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Structural_integrity_field) throw this all right out the window. And by 'slightest problems' you mean large spatial disturbances and general power failure, then yes. I would hardly call that slight, but whatever.

Curiously, in the movie there was not a single mentioning of such fields, while you basically can't watch a TNG episode without the structural integrity failing. And considering that the Kelvin and Enterprise are put through some heavy punishment I find that very interesting, possibly even leading to the conclusion that there are no such fields (yet).

Quote from: Stargate525And considering the fact that birds of prey can land completely unassisted, It's not a terrible stretch to assume that a Constitution can stand Earth gravity when completely shut off, unmoving, and propped up.

Perhaps because BoP were designed for atmospheric flight and landing? Think of the VOY episode where the ship is landed for the first time - iirc Janeway says that the Intrepid class is one of the few Federation ships designed for atmospheric flight and landing.

Quote from: Stargate525Oh, confirmed eh? Have we been able to play with a black hole that I didn't know about?

So you don't believe in mathematics?

Quote from: Stargate525I would LOVE to see this done in a movie and still retain any sense of drama or interest. Further, don't those effects only matter when looking from a black hole outwards? If that is the case, this hardly ever occurs.

Why would this hardly ever occur? These are the effects that are visible from outside the black hole.

Quote from: Stargate525Not true. You seem to be under the impression that a black hole with the mass of vulcan would somehow destroy everything like some uber destruct-o-matic. This is not the case, considering it has exactly the same gravitational field as vulcan did in regards to every other body around it. That black hole will just keep orbiting Vulcan's sun for quite some time.

Then how comes you don't see any lingering after effect after Vulcan is destroyed? No lensing effects? Not even the mysterious "space lightnings" that seem to accompany any red matter created black hole.

Quote from: Stargate525The argument still stands that there could very well be such facilities in there. We don't see bedrooms, toilets, lounges, or the majority of the bridge either, so why aren't you complaining those aren't there too? Frankly, it didn't need to be in the movie, so it wasn't.

Hmm. Cargo bays are supported by life support... The space to which you refer acts as a shuttle bay, has a gigantic-ass door leading to vacuum, I can't really see what else it could be, because IT WORKS AS A BLOODY CARGO AREA.

And who said anything about highly efficient?

Ask yourself: If I was an engineer building a mining ship, would I prioritize style or efficiency? Efficiency will generate more value with each mining run, while style will only increase the construction, build, and operation costs.

Quote from: Stargate525...Because that's not the way they decided to do it?

Which is, frankly, suboptimal borderlining outright stupid. Deceiving the audience in such a way can work in a horror/mystery movie, but not in a simple and straightforward SciFi movie. No matter what they say, the movie clearly shows that Delta Vega is in the Vulcan system. What's next? A moon called "Yellow rubber duck moon" orbiting Qo'noS?

Quote from: Stargate525If he had stayed in his pod he would have been in no danger. The thing was obviously emitting a distress signal, and he was on an inhabited planet.

And who would have picked up that distress signal? The guys in the Federation Outpost obviously didn't care, as they didn't show any sort of (re)action even after the time it too Kirk to

a) wake up
b) meet the monsters
c) run away from the monsters
d) get saved by Prime Spock
e) get a heads up on the current situation
f) walk/climb the rest of the 14 miles towards the outpost

Further, who says that the beasties would have let him alone in the capsule. These things look like they'd eat advanced dire bears for breakfast - I don't think a tiny escape pod would be much of an obstacle for them.

Quote from: Stargate525UFP hasn't been fancy pants goody-two-shoes since about the middle of DS9. Not a lethal environment. He can breathe, he can walk around, etcetera.

But this is not DS9. DS9 will likely never been built, anyways.

And not a lethal environment? Really, with predators like these that's pretty much given a lethal environment. Or wouldn't you think the shark basin in a zoo wasn't dangerous?

Quote from: Stargate525So you wanted them kissing and caressing each other MORE? When he is her teacher? The thing is kept hidden for a reason.

No, I wanted some scenes leading the audience towards that scene. Perhaps the two sitting with each other while eating, or meeting to do sports, or stuff like that.

Quote from: Stargate525Don't remember that, so I can't comment, but I think I would have remembered wall panels flying off and heading for the back of the ship. Remember, if they fall to the ground or behave normally, it's shaking itself apart, not getting ripped apart.

Stuff didn't fall off, the walls and ceiling were showing cracks and tear marks from the gravity. I'd think that the moment some reinforced steel or whatever is cracked open by gravity, that there would be at least some effect on the crew - but there was nothing. And I ask you: why? If some sort of dampener field was still holding, where are the cracks and tears coming from?

Quote from: Stargate525*sigh* Many problems with this...

Problem 1: The Narada is in geosynch orbit, but not way out there. The mining cable is not several miles long. Therefore, the ship is very low in space, on the edge of the atmosphere. We've already got the technology to jump from near this height.

Geosynch orbit does have nothing to do with the problems of reentry.

Quote from: Stargate525Problem 2: You're equating a several ton spaceship with a person. The amount of energy they have, even falling at the same speed, is tremendously different. A person simply isn't carrying enough kinetic energy to get to that 1000 degree heat you want.

:huh: And what do you think are shooting stars? Most of them are made of ice or stone, and only few weight more than some pounds. And yet almost none of them makes it to the surface. Guess why.

Also regarding kinetic energy, mass is only factored in with half its value, while speed is factored in with its squared value. At the last stage of the descent they were falling with speeds exceeding 1000m/s. Assuming a mass of 80kg for Kirk, that means his kinetic energy would be 40000000J. That's the same kinetic energy a 2030 ton space shuttle has when cruising with 6-7 m/s.

Quote from: Stargate525Problem 3: a 90 degree entry is the best one, assuming you don't need to burn off lateral velocity, as you're passing through the atmosphere the quickest. The only reason spacecraft enter at 5 degrees is that that creates the most time to burn off their excess speed without skipping off the atmosphere.

No, 90° entry is the worst possible because it puts the most stress on the heatshielding and structure. Even a 24th century shuttle from the Enterprise-D couldn't survive a 90° entry - which should tell you something.

Quote from: Stargate525'mere moments' being several minutes, or enough time for them to lament a bit, evacuate ten thousand people, and for Spock to do a nice half-mile dash. My guess is that the thing ate out the core and the mantle until the crust couldn't support itself. The dramatic bit took a few moments, but the entire process was much longer.

So you say that the black hole doesn't need some built up time or anything but instantly starts at eating away the planet? Great, how comes the Narada isn't torn to pieces in an instant then?

Quote from: Stargate525Considering the ship had already gone through one of those, we might conclude it would perhaps survive a second one.

How the Narada and Spock's vessel would survive the gravitational tides of the first time travel black hole is yet another pile of pandora's boxes imho.
[/spoiler]

Wow...

Just for the record, everything we currently "know" about black holes is in a class of physics called "Theoretical Physics."  We have theories on them, that we have yet been able to test out.  Why?  Because we don't have any black holes in our back yard to play with.  Theoretical physics (being, you know, theoretical and all) lend themselves very well to science fiction, because they allow plenty of room to play.  You say "not believing in mathematics" is the same thing as "not believing in what a black hole can do?"  That's ridiculous.  Our mathematics showed us for hundreds of years that we were alone in the universe as far as other planets go.  Now, in recent years, it has been discovered that there are literally billions (and possibly trillions) of other planets circling other suns just in our galaxy.  Why is that different?  Because our technology has changed, advanced, and evolved enough to actually "know" these things now instead of merely "theorize" on them.  However, we do not "know" what black holes do yet.  We have theories, that are strongly supported by numerous facts, but we do now have pure knowledge on them.  Thus, saying "this cannot happen because this is how black holes are supposed to work" is exactly the same as, sixty years ago, saying "There are no other planets in our galaxy other than those in our solar system."  Stating theories as facts causes a lot of problems in the scientific community, and thus, is usually very highly looked down upon.

You said (and I quote):

QuoteI have no problem with wierd and unconventional stuff in scifi - for as long as it stays consistent throughout its whole appearance and doesn't turn around on its heel every other second in what it does and how it works.

every single one of them[/i] had a different reason for existence, and they all frakked with time and our understanding of it.  Because that type of "science" is purely theoretical and can stand a little bit of play.  Therefore, I'm done talking about factual theoretical science here - this is beyond ridiculous at this point.

As for Spock and Uhura, you said "There hasn't been any obvious indication before that there might be anything more than a healthy friendship going on between them."  

I'm going to have to go with a solid "Wrong," there.  The first moment they talked when everyone was loading up on the ships, my brother looked to me and said "So Spock's bangin' Uhura?"  And every look she gave to him afterwards confirmed that.  So "no buildup" seems to indicate here that you simply didn't catch the hints that were being tossed your way.  That's not meant to be offensive - I didn't catch it either at first.  But the fact that people did catch it, means that they did the job they needed to do.  If they had made it obvious (little hand brushes, batting eyelashes, other bullshit) so that the entire audience had been able to gasp, "Oh, they're in love!!!" then that would have been very "illogical," and Spock would not have done something like that. I think it was a very controlled, rational, logical way of handling their relationship.

I'm done with this.

Quote from: Ra-Tiel

Quote from: Stargate525UFP hasn't been fancy pants goody-two-shoes since about the middle of DS9. Not a lethal environment. He can breathe, he can walk around, etcetera.

But this is not DS9. DS9 will likely never been built, anyways.

And not a lethal environment? Really, with predators like these that's pretty much given a lethal environment. Or wouldn't you think the shark basin in a zoo wasn't dangerous?
 

I hate to nitpick here, but your logic on the construction of DS9 is faulty. DS9 is the UFP designation for Terok Nor, a Cardassian built spacestaion. Terok Nor isn't a singlur station, but one of what seems to be a class of staions as shown by Empok Nor, a sister staiton. Terok Nor has nothing to do with the Federation until the beginning of DS9.

Here is the Memory Alpha page for DS9  DS9 (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Deep_Space_9)

I'm agreeing with Ish, you seem to be under a heavy bit of 'they changed it now it sucks' philosophy.

The only one I'm going to keep banging on about is the re-entry bit. What you're not getting is that they are moving WITH LITTLE TO NO LATERAL COMPONENT TO THEIR VELOCITY. They are going straight down. No space ship does this, no shooting star does this, it is essentially a skydiving just really high up.

The low orbit I mentioned means that they didn't have time to build up your ridiculous velocity you're spouting before hitting the atmosphere, as they were either right outside it and already being slowed by it.

Quote from: Ishmayl[...] Thus, saying "this cannot happen because this is how black holes are supposed to work" is exactly the same as, sixty years ago, saying "There are no other planets in our galaxy other than those in our solar system." [...]

First, care to quote any sources for the later part of your statement? Second, care to show any source that the event horizon of a black hole can possibly - in any way - take the shape of a flat circle as it was shown in the movie instead of being a sphere?

Further, the fact that basically any known object would ultimately be completely destroyed (probably even before reaching the black hole's event horizon) is just an logical application of the laws of gravitation you and I can experience every moment of our life. The effect that causes that is known as Spaghettification (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification) and can be verified by scientists on earth - it even occurs for every one of us (although at such a small scale it's irrelevant). That's not speculation or theory, that's hard cold logical fact.

Quote from: Ishmayl[...] You said (and I quote):

Quote from: Ishmayl[...] I'm done with this.

Yeah, me too. :-/

Quote from: XXsiriusXXI hate to nitpick here, but your logic on the construction of DS9 is faulty. DS9 is the UFP designation for Terok Nor, a Cardassian built spacestaion. Terok Nor isn't a singlur station, but one of what seems to be a class of staions as shown by Empok Nor, a sister staiton. Terok Nor has nothing to do with the Federation until the beginning of DS9.

Here is the Memory Alpha page for DS9  DS9 (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Deep_Space_9)

Problem is: the "new" Enterprise has been built based upon reverse engineered data from the Kelvin's scans of the Narada. This is the supposed reason why the "new" Enterprise is tremendously more advanced than the TOS Enterprise. Additionally, caused by Nero's mayhem, the UFP will likely take up a much more direct and interventionalist stance regarding military assault of defenseless worlds. This will likely lead to military intervention when Cardassia occupies Bajor, which in turn will lead to a defeated Cardassia because of the UFP's more advanced ships.

According to the 2nd law of thermodynamics the entropy in a isolated system can only increase. There simply is no way that "only" the UFP and the officers of the Enterprise changed while the rest of the universe stays the same. Such an outlook is hopelessly naive. The changes brought around by the new movie will have unforeseen sideeffects and consequences which invalidate everything we know about the Star Trek universe.

Perhaps the Romulans and the UFP become allies and eradicate the Klingons. Perhaps the Bajoran Wormhole is discovered centuries earlier and the Dominion is destroyed before it becomes as powerful as it did in the DS9 show. We don't know - we only know that it's mathematically basically impossible for any event from TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY to occur as we know.

Quote from: Stargate525I'm agreeing with Ish, you seem to be under a heavy bit of 'they changed it now it sucks' philosophy.

Why should I repeat my bashings and criticism of TNG and (especially) VOY when the "discussion" was about STXI? I have criticized and I did bash and flame the irregularities and logical errors in the other ST shows and movies - but that has next to no bearing on the topic.

Can you quote one - and only one - other ST movie in which the same technology changes the way it functions and its application's consequences so drastically during the run time of the movie? I dare you, give me just one example that equals the sudden change from "world devouring superweapon" to "interstellar speed bump" that occured in STXI regarding the black holes.

Quote from: Stargate525[...] your ridiculous velocity you're spouting [...]

Watch the film and pay attention to the scene when they are announcing how far away from the platform they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81gn2oLeC_U

Sorry Ra-Tiel its already been done and he lived. The differences is terminal velocity is based on object density and a shuttle craft is way heavier/denser than a man. Also shuttles usually don't come to a complete stop and then "Drop" into a planet. Most sources put terminal velocity of a skydiver (parachute closed) around 200mph, although Kittenger was reported to hit mach 0.9, this must be max speed at the early part of the jump in the less dense stratosphere. Either way... he survived.

Quote from: Ra-Tiel

Quote from: XXsiriusXXI hate to nitpick here, but your logic on the construction of DS9 is faulty. DS9 is the UFP designation for Terok Nor, a Cardassian built spacestaion. Terok Nor isn't a singlur station, but one of what seems to be a class of staions as shown by Empok Nor, a sister staiton. Terok Nor has nothing to do with the Federation until the beginning of DS9.

Here is the Memory Alpha page for DS9  DS9 (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Deep_Space_9)

Problem is: the "new" Enterprise has been built based upon reverse engineered data from the Kelvin's scans of the Narada. This is the supposed reason why the "new" Enterprise is tremendously more advanced than the TOS Enterprise. Additionally, caused by Nero's mayhem, the UFP will likely take up a much more direct and interventionalist stance regarding military assault of defenseless worlds. This will likely lead to military intervention when Cardassia occupies Bajor, which in turn will lead to a defeated Cardassia because of the UFP's more advanced ships.

According to the 2nd law of thermodynamics the entropy in a isolated system can only increase. There simply is no way that "only" the UFP and the officers of the Enterprise changed while the rest of the universe stays the same. Such an outlook is hopelessly naive. The changes brought around by the new movie will have unforeseen sideeffects and consequences which invalidate everything we know about the Star Trek universe.

Perhaps the Romulans and the UFP become allies and eradicate the Klingons. Perhaps the Bajoran Wormhole is discovered centuries earlier and the Dominion is destroyed before it becomes as powerful as it did in the DS9 show. We don't know - we only know that it's mathematically basically impossible for any event from TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY to occur as we know.

A few things:

1.)The UFP is not an isolated system; the Milky Way Galaxy is not an isolated system. The only truly isolated system is the universe itself.

2.)With the amount of time travel and inter-dimensional travel presented in the Star Trek universe. Who is to say what can or can not happen? Who is to say that a future movie will put everything back?

3.)You are right. It is mathematically impossible for any event from TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY to happen as we know it; it is a TV show after all.

Oh just something to keep in mind, when you have a discussion with people it is best not to insult them. It makes you look like a child, and more often then not makes people take you less seriously.

Anything you have to say is now moot. I am done with this topic.

I have been following the posts on this thread, as i did (innocently enough) start it.
Watching it devolve has been more educational than any of the content.  *sigh*

Much love for all the posters and the thought...

Please remember that the movie doesn't include about 5 guys arguing about the merits of the movie, unless you like bring them yourself.

Also shatner's not in it, if that helps.

Judging by your OP Vreeg, I think a part of us ALL saw this coming. We might as well created a Pirates or Ninjas? thread

I think really this all comes down to this, for some it (the movie) is a Star Trek movie, for some its a Sci-Fi movie with a Kirk and Spock in it. All that matters is if you choose to see it did you feel like you wasted 20 bucks and 2 hours of your life, and judging by what the critics are no one in this thread felt is was a complete waste.

Quote from: LathI think really this all comes down to this, for some it (the movie) is a Star Trek movie, for some its a Sci-Fi movie with a Kirk and Spock in it. All that matters is if you choose to see it did you feel like you wasted 20 bucks and 2 hours of your life, and judging by what the critics are no one in this thread felt is was a complete waste.

Could not have said it any better myself.