The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

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

View Poll Results: Whats your favorite scene(s)?
Kelvin vs Narada 22 44.90%
Bar Scene 2 4.08%
Enterprise's meets Narada for the first time 5 10.20%
Delta Vega 3 6.12%
Final Showdown - Enterprise+Jellyfish vs Narada 13 26.53%
Other...Explan... 12 24.49%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-04-2009, 10:58 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
As to the Romulans, we've been around that bush and the upshot is we totally disagree on the interpretation of Romulans, so no point going back round that one again.
Naturally perceptions differ, but I try to speak as objectively as I can about Romulans and Klingons, taking my TNG preference and the resulting bias into account:

We have TOS Klingons (and also ST09-Klingons!) and TNG Romulans who are conventional territoral enemies capable of deception, typical spy movie type antagonists, we have the TOS Romulans which seem to be honourable but members of a quite diverse society and we have the TNG Klingons with their honour ideal and brute behaviour.
None of these alien versions is particularly ingeniously written, they can even be stereotypical but they are never portrayed as evil villains (TNG Klingons are sometimes a bordercase ). They are rather shown as antagonists who have a different cultural background than humans have.
Klingons in TSFS, Remans in NEM (yeah, let the Viceroy mindrape Troi such that he is even more evil) and Romulans in ST09 are examples of evil villains.

Why is this so important to me? Because it is important in the real world. There are so many conflicts which are amplified because one side villanizes the other. A calmer, more rational view starts with the assumption that my enemy is a human being like I am and to understand him, I simply have to determine his objectives, then his strategy becomes evident and his actions are explainable. This does not imply that you wear pink glasses and ignore that there is a conflict, that would be the other extreme.

Another example are the Borg. I don't mind their FC and post-FC horror appearance, but I still prefer their less frightening TNG appearance. The TNG stories emphasized that these are not vile creatures, but that the central conflict between the Borg and the Federation is an ideological one.

Last edited by horatio : 11-04-2009 at 11:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:06 AM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,990
Default

Well, not so much ideology as simply being superior. The Borg saw humans as nothing more than fuel, they couldn't care less about our ideology.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:14 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

A Borg drone is not the enemy, the hive and their collectivistic goals are. "I, Borg" was about how the Federation or at least Picard is not willing to sacrifice the own ideology, the rights of an individual to defeat the Borg.

That is a pure battle of ideas and a surprisingly fresh theme. Can you defeat terrorism by stretching or abandoning the very rules which make the difference between us and them or is is necessary to battle extremists with extreme methods? Picard or Nechayev?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:20 AM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
A Borg drone is not the enemy, the hive and their collectivistic goals are. "I, Borg" was about how the Federation or at least Picard is not willing to sacrifice the own ideology, the rights of an individual to defeat the Borg.

That is a pure battle of ideas and a surprisingly fresh theme. Can you defeat terrorism by stretching or abandoning the very rules which make the difference between us and them or is is necessary to battle extremists with extreme methods? Picard or Nechayev?
It's a one sided battle of ideas, it's Picard's dilema. The borg have no such qualms.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:23 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 horatio View Post
Naturally perceptions differ, but I try to speak as objectively as I can about Romulans and Klingons, taking my TNG preference and the resulting bias into account:

We have TOS Klingons (and also ST09-Klingons!) and TNG Romulans who are conventional territoral enemies capable of deception, typical spy movie type antagonists, we have the TOS Romulans which seem to be honourable but members of a quite diverse society and we have the TNG Klingons with their honour ideal and brute behaviour.
None of these alien versions is particularly ingeniously written, they can even be stereotypical but they are never portrayed as evil villains (TNG Klingons are sometimes a bordercase ). They are rather shown as antagonists who have a different cultural background than humans have.
Klingons in TSFS, Remans in NEM (yeah, let the Viceroy mindrape Troi such that he is even more evil) and Romulans in ST09 are examples of evil villains.

Why is this so important to me? Because it is important in the real world. There are so many conflicts which are amplified because one side villanizes the other. A calmer, more rational view starts with the assumption that my enemy is a human being like I am and to understand him, I simply have to determine his objectives, then his strategy becomes evident and his actions are explainable. This does not imply that you wear pink glasses and ignore that there is a conflict, that would be the other extreme.

Another example are the Borg. I don't mind their FC and post-FC horror appearance, but I still prefer their less frightening TNG appearance. The TNG stories emphasized that these are not vile creatures, but that the central conflict between the Borg and the Federation is an ideological one.
I think the fallacy here is using TNG as a reference point. I tend to try and look at things in the context of the film in terms only of TOS and the Star Trek universe.

For the straightforward reason we know that was the show they concentrated on - not everything that came later.

The TOS depiction of the Klingons was of course not that of TNG (though at any rate, I find Klingon 'honour' to be more a front for patently idiotic conduct as much of the time as it's portrayed as the key to their nobility - which is why I've never had much time for Klingons period). The fact is that, in the Star Trek universe, during the TOS period the Klingons and the Starfleet were enemies.

And TOS portrayed them as such.

And we know that they didn't know much about each other at that point and for many, many years afterwards (up to and including TUC).

That animosity is what was appropriate to the time period in which the film was set. Within that context, the way the Klingons are presented is not unlike their TOS incarnation. Plus, the scenes are set on a prison planet and the conduct of the guards is not unlike the way the prison guards were portrayed in TUC (which I actually watched tonight out of curiosity about Rura Penthe).

Because of the part they play in the script we're seeing a very, very small aspect of Klingons in a particular environment. There is no room for the film to have an expansive 'look how diverse they are' element because they are not the point.

It's a cameo.

Obviously, like most attempts to do so the writers made, it fell flat in some quarters.

Again with the Romulans - well, I think once we see actual regular Romulans and not a specific Romulan group led by an individual who is/are separate from the main Romulan crowd we might be more informed about what alterations may have been made to them.

Then again, I never found the Borg frightening after FC either, only before it.

So while I'm not disagreeing with why it's important to you, when we see either or both species in a story that really features their culture in depth as a function of the plot, then we would have more information on which to base a decision of how poorly or how well the new writers may have done their job.

You think they will have done a bad job, I think there is insufficient evidence to convict at this time.
__________________
'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 : 11-04-2009 at 11:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:30 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Sure and I am the first one to say that I was wrong like in the case of the Klingons who look very promising in these few minutes.
If they do Romulans again and they are fine, I will take everything back and praise O&K.

By the way, I did not want to use TNG as a reference point, I just wanted to be complete. Simply ignore TNG and you still have Romulans and Klingons who are interesting antagonists and not villains who twirl their mustaches (OK, the Klingons did that ).
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:35 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Well, that was only because the Augment Virus left them with no Ridges to rub.

The reason I emphasize not using later incarnations, is only because those later incarnations are not always themselves consistent with TOS, but as TOS was the show being shined up, it's obviously the one that should be paid most attention to, to see where the ideas are coming from.

They can still be equally inconsistent with later shows, of course!
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:36 AM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,990
Default

Cutting the Klingon storyline was the right way to go. It really would have just raised more questions than it could have answered.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-04-2009, 11:52 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Well, that was only because the Augment Virus left them with no Ridges to rub.

The reason I emphasize not using later incarnations, is only because those later incarnations are not always themselves consistent with TOS, but as TOS was the show being shined up, it's obviously the one that should be paid most attention to, to see where the ideas are coming from.

They can still be equally inconsistent with later shows, of course!
Be it Koloth or the Romulan command in 'Balance of Terror', there was always some form of mutual respect between Kirk and his enemies.

In case of the Klingons, they seems to go for a mixture and integration of the two basic different versions. Hard to tell based upon a few minuted, but there were the grunt-ish guards (TNG) and the cunning interrogator (TOS).
Not that it matters whether they resemble what came before them, as long as they come up with interesting characters it is fine IMO.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
Cutting the Klingon storyline was the right way to go. It really would have just raised more questions than it could have answered.
I think the problem was that the interrogator was kind of a chorus, he revealed half of the plot.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-04-2009, 01:12 PM
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
OneBuckFilms OneBuckFilms is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 909
Default

To me the Romulans were a plot device to allow things to change, and to help set things up.

Dramatically speaking, Nero was never meant to have much depth, and certainly there is no reason for the Klingons to have that depth either.

They are background items to the real story: Kirk and his crew.
__________________
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
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 09:49 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.