The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 11-22-2008, 01:37 PM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

Erm... Which bit is the clutch?


(Thus revealing that I know nothing of cars.)
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-22-2008, 01:44 PM
pastor.dude pastor.dude is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 19
Default The clutch

The clutch is the pedal you press when switching gears in a manual transmission.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-22-2008, 01:53 PM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

Ah, thank you!

[I can see why Kirk would have trouble with that!]
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-22-2008, 02:56 PM
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 pastor.dude View Post
Hi there everyone,
I am a big Trek fan. However, I want to just voice a couple little questions and comments that I really think needs to be answered by all the people picking apart the trailer.

First, do we know that these problems are really problems? For instance, the clutch deal...do we know this clutch performs in this movie like the clutch does in the 1920s?

The building the ship in Iowa deal...do we really know that it is Iowa? - No. Do we really know that the ship isn't completed in space? - No. Do we even know for sure it is the Enterprise? - No. And if it is the Enterprise, and it is in Iowa, and it isn't completed in space dock, do we really believe that the Star Trek encyclopedia trumps the rest of the entire cannon? No! Is there any mention in a show or movie on where the ship is built? The seeing Romulans before Balance of Terror deal...did you not get the gist of the story?

The Romulans travel back in time from old Spock's day to young Spock's day to screw up the timeline. So of course no one saw Romulans until the Balance of Terror...that changes as the timeline is screwed up by the time traveling Romulans. And BTW...time travel is one of the Backbones of Trek. Its used all the freakin' time!

Secondly, a trailer is simply...a trailer.
We don't know how much of the trailer will be in the final movie. We don't know if what we are seeing and assuming we are seeing are actually what it really is!

Thirdly, I think Trek films and Trek shows need to be thought of differently. The movies fit the chronology of the show...why? Because they always come after the show. This one is a re-boot of TOS era...before TMP. The movie series cannon I believe will be perfectly preserved even if the movie and show cannon isn't. So maybe this film breaks a few of the details of the show...it still is getting the important things right. And if you watch the movies back to back to back, it will work! Maybe a shift here, a wink there will not work with every statement ever made in TOS. But, did you see the trailer? Who cares! This movie is going to rock!

And Finally, what is more important, that Kirk doesn't use a clutch as a kid? Or that we actually get to see a Star Trek movie IN 6 MONTHS...after 6 YEARS!!!
Hi there,

Personally, I agree that these are not at the moment things to keep us awake at night. As there is undoubtedly a lot more information to be dropped to us from high up, some of them may have answers yet to be revealed.

However for many they ARE problems - MAJOR problems, which demand immediate answers or apologies. I find it hard to understand in the absence of complete information but it's the case nonetheless. I'm glad that you seem to have a similarly patient approach to proceedings.

I'm sure many others will also have their own answers for you!
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-22-2008, 03:18 PM
mmoore's Avatar
mmoore mmoore is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: OKUSA
Posts: 1,973
Default

For the love of Pete, it's all fiction. You people should be more concerned with the revision of actual history that is taking place every single day.

Questions? See my sig.
__________________
"Are you out of your Vulcan mind?"
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 11-22-2008, 06:47 PM
tsar tsar is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Default

A couple of observations, if the Enterprise is being built on Earth's surface then what method of transportation do they use to get the ship into orbit? Some kind of Anti-gravity I suppose? Surely it can't fly on it's own up to orbit using thrusters or impulse. This ship was never meant to fly through atmosphere.
I also think it's interesting that James T. Kirk drives his car into the Xindi blasted Earth trench and barely escapes with his young life. Perhaps he thought he could jump the trench like Evil knievel or something.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 11-22-2008, 06:54 PM
tsar tsar is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Default

Actually it was mentioned in the "Balance of Terror" that Earth and Romulas had fought a war a hundred years prior using Nuclear type weapons. When that war ended the Romulans went into their seclusion until Kirk's time. Not that it really matters. If I understand this movie concept it is a re-imagining of the concept kinda like what you saw with Battlestar Galactica.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 11-22-2008, 08:17 PM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionTrek08 View Post
Ah, so I ask you to back up your point, and you change the point.
No, I think you missed my point entirely. Aside from those things that have been proven onscreen, the rest of the stuff the Okudas have made up is just, well, made up stuff and has never been proven onscreen.

Quote:
I never said the Okudas were "masters of everything canon" but they have done a lot of work on it based on the source material. If you don't have examples to show about contradictions, then just say so. I assumed you did have examples in mind when you made your post, my mistake.
Hello? What about the contradiction of their placement of the 5-year mission in VOY (which pretty much tosses a great deal of their chronology prior to the 24th-Century out the window) and the origins of Starfleet in ENT? You kind of ignored those.
Quote:
With the blessing of Paramount, otherwise the books wouldn't have happened.
Which proves, what? That Paramount allowed Pocket Books to publish a book they wanted based on Star Trek?
Quote:
Source please? I'd like to hear more about this.
As I'll repeat it again, VOY and ENT.
Quote:
Meanwhile, of course the Okuda books cannot include or account for information written AFTER their publication -- be realistic. Were the books updated, they would include this newer material, just as the last update included new onscreen material that was available at that time.
You be realistic. It doesn't matter if they made new books tomorrow. Unless it is also stated or shown onscreen material, a great deal of their work is conjectural and should be considered non-canon. And if new material comes AFTER the publication of their books that contradicts their conjecture, it's still a contradiction.
Quote:
But it seemed to me that your ORIGINAL assertion was that somehow the Okudas were proven 'wrong' about something in TNG let's say by TNG itself, which makes no sense since they derived material FROM the show itself.
My ORIGINAL assertion was that a lot of what the Okudas brought forth in their books was just stuff they made up "to fill in the blanks". A lot of fans have sort of accepted their conjecture as canon but it really isn't.
Quote:
Of COURSE much of the material is conjectural -- and if you read it, they specifically say WHY it's conjecture and when they must resort to it: because there is NO onscreen material which supports a firm conclusion about such points to make it definite. They say 'this is conjecture' and so it must be regarded differently than accepted canon facts -- so there's little point in attempting to say their conjecture isn't 100% canon when they already warned readers it wasn't. That's what the word conjecture means, right?
FINALLY, you understand my point! Thank you.
Quote:
The fact that contradictions and confusion on some points exist is because the onscreen material is imprecise -- which means NO one has the absolute right answer for it, because all interpreters are working off the same set of incomplete data. Not a hard concept to grasp.
Bravo! Bravo! You get it.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 11-22-2008, 09:26 PM
pastor.dude pastor.dude is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 19
Default You are missing the point!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsar View Post
Actually it was mentioned in the "Balance of Terror" that Earth and Romulas had fought a war a hundred years prior using Nuclear type weapons. When that war ended the Romulans went into their seclusion until Kirk's time. Not that it really matters. If I understand this movie concept it is a re-imagining of the concept kinda like what you saw with Battlestar Galactica.
The plot is that Romulans from Old Spock's time are supposed to be coming back in time to before the Balance of Terror which is when the movie is taking place. The timeline is altered thus allowing for TOS episode to have it where no one knows what Romulans look like, but now Kirk of the past comes face to face with Romulans from the future...again, time travel and timelines are vintage Trek!

So it doesn't matter what is said in the Balance of Terror episode because the timeline changes.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 11-22-2008, 09:49 PM
Kukalaka's Avatar
Kukalaka Kukalaka is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Personal quarters of Dr. Julian Bashir
Posts: 336
Default

So Star Trek's established fictional history has quite a few conflicting dates and events........

bah dah buh buh buhhhhhhh

Because it's fiction!!!!
Because it's fiction!!!!
Because it's fiction!!!!
Because it's fiction!!!!

I really appreciate everyone trying to rationalize the smallest nitpicks using in-universe shenanigans, though, you guys kill me.
__________________


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 12:03 PM.


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.