The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Delta Vega
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-04-2010, 12:03 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
The name is an Easter Egg and nothing more. The planet is in the Vulcan system. That's why Nero left Spock there. It's also why Kirk was left there. Enterprise had not yet left hte system. They hadn't gone to warp yet. They were still discussing what to do when Kirk was marooned. They were in close proximity to Vulcan.
That is certainly a possibility and it shrinks part of the time frame. However, it makes Nero look incompetent for depositing Spock within walking distance of a Starfleet base. It makes Scotty look incompetent because he seemed oblivious to the facts that the Vulcan system's defences had been overcome, that a fleet of Federation ships had just flown into the system, that the planet next door had just imploded, or that a Federation distress beacon was going off a few miles from the base i.e. well within transporter range. Instead he wondered if Kirk was from a supply ship with food! Why does he need a supply ship when he has a shuttle and the planet Vulcan a 5 minute shuttle trip away or indeed a trasnporter trip, since he cockily announces that he can transport from planet to planet and minutes later transports himself one light year onto a ship at warp ?

If the planet is in a separate system it alleviates some of the inconsistencies, although it is unlikely that another star system lies close enough to reach that quickly at less than warp 4 (astronomers can probably confirm how close the nearest star is to Vulcan's real life counterpart).

I agree that they never really intended this to be the same planet and it was just an Easter egg. They gave this part of the movie very little thought beyond ticking boxes (snowscape like in ESB - check; CGI monster - check; meet Spock Prime and learn about Nero - check; meet Scotty - check; get back to Enterprise - check). There were far more sensible ways they could have ticked those boxes too.

If Spock had beamed Kirk to the outpost brig, it would remove the silliness of dumping him in a shuttle. Spock could have already been working with Scotty to beam back onto the Narada, which is less silly than stumbling across him in a cave and would mean that Scotty wasn't an oblivious dimwit. Adjustments could have been necessary to the base's systems in order to transport so far and Kirk could have met CGI monster while carrying out that work, which is less silly than just uploading a program to adjust the transporters.
__________________
Angels of Acheron: http://www.youtube.com/user/pauln6
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-04-2010, 12:15 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
Like so many things in this movie...
Shield Alert!!! Like so many things in Trek period.........
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 12-04-2010 at 12:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-04-2010, 12:20 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
I do think it was an ill advised Easter Egg. They probably should have just given it another name and avoided this altogether.
I kind of agree, and also don't.

It was never anything other than intended as a nod/homage to the first episode of TOS. Sure they could have called it Polaris 67881c Beta Phi if they wanted to.

But that's just another random crappy name.

However, what they certainly did do was totally underestimate the ability of some Trek fans to take something simple and straightforward and their subsequent efforts to turn it into a Mt Everest of a problem. Which it isn't, and which it never was. That was a rookie mistake they should have anticipated.

But then, somedays, I kinda get a perverse pleasure out of seeing some folks scratch their heads for so long over a mere nod. At times, it kinda makes me hope they do some more of that in the sequel.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 12-04-2010 at 12:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-04-2010, 01:17 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauln6 View Post
That is certainly a possibility and it shrinks part of the time frame. However, it makes Nero look incompetent for depositing Spock within walking distance of a Starfleet base. It makes Scotty look incompetent because he seemed oblivious to the facts that the Vulcan system's defences had been overcome, that a fleet of Federation ships had just flown into the system, that the planet next door had just imploded, or that a Federation distress beacon was going off a few miles from the base i.e. well within transporter range.
I think some of those are good points (the part regarding the beacon certainly because he seemed unaware even though the pod computer voice indicated a beacon was being transmitted). In the film there's a series of coincidences that do take place - although in film in general this is not at all unusual and it's not even unusual for a Star Trek film - but I think that some films do 'hide' that slew of coincidences better than others so that one can be less aware of them.

But it also depends on how far away one believes DV to be. From my own reading of the film, I personally don't think they are necessarily as close as some others do because of the potential of unknown time cuts in the sequences between the destruction of Vulcan and Kirk being put off ths ship. There's an unknown passage of time in there that elapses while at the same time the ship is moving away from where Vulcan used to be.

Could be minutes, could be longer.

Certainly I'm personally not counting the way Spock 'saw' it's destruction as being an entirely literal representation not least because it takes place in the middle of a joint mind-meld and it's a series of images of memories and thoughts blending and mixing with each other.

Quote:
Instead he wondered if Kirk was from a supply ship with food! Why does he need a supply ship when he has a shuttle and the planet Vulcan a 5 minute shuttle trip away or indeed a trasnporter trip, since he cockily announces that he can transport from planet to planet and minutes later transports himself one light year onto a ship at warp ?
IIRC from the film, the shuttle didn't seem to be a fully functional shuttle, and was not operational and his transporter proposal was more of a theory at that point (he had obviously tried to test the theory using the dog, which had failed, so without being able to perfect it, I would doubt he would try it on himself).

So it seems he may not have been as able to move about as easily.

Obviously, at some point in FutureSpock's past, Scotty had developed the method and Spock must have known of it. Not unreasonable conjecture given their long service together in the Prime that Scotty would have told Spock of any breakthrough he made. It was FutureSpock that gave Scotty the final transporter method to make his theory 'work' in a practical (but still not perfect, as the beam-in showed) way.

(this could also be viewed as a nod to the 'creation' of transparent aluminium from TVH, where knowledge from the 'future' was used to advance the plot in the 'past')
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 12-04-2010 at 01:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-04-2010, 02:37 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Shield Alert!!! Like so many things in Trek period.........
Captain Diplomacy: Hold your fire Mr. Saquist! He's taken a hostage.
Saquist: I have a shot, sir.
Captain Diplomacy: Negative Mr. We can't risk hitting an innocent TV show.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-04-2010, 03:47 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
I personally don't think they are necessarily as close as some others do because of the potential of unknown time cuts in the sequences between the destruction of Vulcan and Kirk being put off ths ship. There's an unknown passage of time in there that elapses while at the same time the ship is moving away from where Vulcan used to be.

Could be minutes, could be longer.

IIRC from the film, the shuttle didn't seem to be a fully functional shuttle, and was not operational and his transporter proposal was more of a theory at that point (he had obviously tried to test the theory using the dog, which had failed, so without being able to perfect it, I would doubt he would try it on himself).

So it seems he may not have been as able to move about as easily.

Obviously, at some point in FutureSpock's past, Scotty had developed the method and Spock must have known of it. Not unreasonable conjecture given their long service together in the Prime that Scotty would have told Spock of any breakthrough he made. It was FutureSpock that gave Scotty the final transporter method to make his theory 'work' in a practical (but still not perfect, as the beam-in showed) way.

(this could also be viewed as a nod to the 'creation' of transparent aluminium from TVH, where knowledge from the 'future' was used to advance the plot in the 'past')
I don't think that the movie was intended to be in 'real' time either. A fuzzier timeline helps with internal logic a bit, although it still doesn't explain why Nero took so long to get to Earth (maybe he blew up Andor on the way?)

While I agree that Scotty's shuttle may not have been functional, that also strains credibility in other ways. That Archer has the power to consign him to a watered down version of a gulag, that miracle-worker Scotty cannot fix his own shuttle, that the transporter on a non-functional shuttle has the power to transport them a light year etc.

Spock's (or future Scotty's) calculations were stated to be about beaming onto a vessel at warp, not beaming more than a 80,000 km. Even at the time of TNG, subspace transporting (which must be what Scotty is talking about if we are to apply canon) is considered unreliabile and dangerous in spite of the greater distances that can be covered. Spock might have been able to improve on Scotty's long distance calculations but it's still quite likely that they will die trying it out.
__________________
Angels of Acheron: http://www.youtube.com/user/pauln6
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-04-2010, 04:25 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauln6 View Post
I don't think that the movie was intended to be in 'real' time either. A fuzzier timeline helps with internal logic a bit, although it still doesn't explain why Nero took so long to get to Earth (maybe he blew up Andor on the way?)
Maybe!

Quote:
While I agree that Scotty's shuttle may not have been functional, that also strains credibility in other ways. That Archer has the power to consign him to a watered down version of a gulag, that miracle-worker Scotty cannot fix his own shuttle, that the transporter on a non-functional shuttle has the power to transport them a light year etc.
Well, that's a thought. But then if a deskbound Starfleet Admiral who knows absolutely nothing about how a refitted Constitution Class starship works can get himself manouvered into commanding her during an Earth threatening emergency, thus bumping her actual present commanding officer into a non-role on the same mission.............would it be a real stretch to imagine an Admiral can get a lowly officer transferred to a remote station?

Some might........but I'm not sure.

The latter would also assume an element of him needing to fix the shuttle (maybe he didn't, maybe it was already there when he arrived and normal process was for a ship to stop by every few months) and did Scotty not have dialogue that the transporters were OK on it?

It's a while since I watched the movie, but does he not say something about the shuttle's engines being out of action, but the rest of it's systems are ok.

While this might raise questions about his ability to fix things, it also in no way precludes the possibility that they are just unfixable......technology does break down even with the best of tech guys trying to prevent it......or he doesn't have a part he needs to fix it.

None of which is inherently intergral to the film anyway.......but is as possible as anything else. I'm not sure it stretches credulity to a severe degree. But I do think that things like 'credulity' can be linked to individuals own perceptions and tolerances and may not match depending on who one asks.

So, I guess if some of it stretches credulity for some, that's probably normal enough and if it doesn't for others the same applies. I think that could be easily said about lots of other Star Trek episodes and films as well. I certainly know there are things that I have trouble swallowing along the way that others don't about some of the previous material presented.

Quote:
Spock's (or future Scotty's) calculations were stated to be about beaming onto a vessel at warp, not beaming more than a 80,000 km. Even at the time of TNG, subspace transporting (which must be what Scotty is talking about if we are to apply canon) is considered unreliabile and dangerous in spite of the greater distances that can be covered. Spock might have been able to improve on Scotty's long distance calculations but it's still quite likely that they will die trying it out.
And yet, as the film demonstrates it would still be considered dangerous and unreliable since Scotty very nearly did die when they tried it because he beamed into an unsafe location.

So, while it's a huge theoretical technological leap in terms of the alternate universe, it would not yet be anywhere near 'safe' for routine or regular use.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 12-04-2010 at 04:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-04-2010, 06:11 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Yeah it's possible that Scotty's role at the outpost was something specific, although if it was meant to be a listening post he should be fired for incompetence - he was comletely clueless. I agree that it is possible that a defunct shuttle was left on the base and he was just using its transporter systems on the quiet to continue his beloved research in his spare time. Scotty was the weakest portrayal for me. He was a buffoon and showed little of the genius that made him so valuable in TOS. You get the impression Kirk employed his aid just on the say so of Spock. 'Trust me Captain, he is smarter than he looks...'
__________________
Angels of Acheron: http://www.youtube.com/user/pauln6
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-04-2010, 08:31 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Sorry, I haven't read all the posts. But I just want to point out Orci's statement when asked if they fudged canon and relocated DV. He stated "Yeah. We did. We moved the planet to suit our purposes."

That's about the only straight forward answer we ever got from any of them. It's quite obvious from that statement that they intended for us to believe that NuDeltaHoth was the same planet depicted as Delta Vega in WNMHGB. However, there was no reason to change the planet from a desolate wasteland with an automated lithium cracking station into a Hoth-like ice world with a Federation outpost manned by comic relief NuScotty and his little pet lawn gnome. They could have easily called it "Exo-III" or a completely new name. I know they "thought' it was a cool easter egg, but the decision was ill-advised, and not very well thought out. Just like the rest of the movie.

Just my 2 quatloo's. Ya know me. Stirrin' tha pot

Last edited by I-Am-Zim : 12-04-2010 at 12:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-05-2010, 12:39 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Well yeah they're admitting it's a contrivance...fans try to hard explain and excuse this stuff..It was forced that all there was to it really...
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:33 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.