The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #231  
Old 05-20-2009, 06:15 PM
Vulkanis's Avatar
Vulkanis Vulkanis is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14
Default

The only technobabble I saw was dumping the the warp core into the black hole so as to give the Enterprise the needed burst out of there. Plus you can't jump into warp speed if you didn't disengage something. If there is any lessons to learn from it, it might of been...find your destiny and don't settle for less than you were meant to be.
Spock's dad seem to tell him that more important than logic is love. Spock must of been pointing out to his former young self that...you can be so sure of something being right starting out only to find later it wasn't. Romulan seeking satisfication through his bitter loss only gain the greater loss of himself into oblivion.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 05-20-2009, 06:18 PM
MrQ1701's Avatar
MrQ1701 MrQ1701 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Espanola, New Mexico
Posts: 3,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel View Post
Oh sure it does.

But there is no line declaring an upper limit to the amount of variety it can have. However, that doesnt mean I think there should be a planet populated by tooth fairies.
I see what you mean. "No upper limit", that is a good way to put it.
__________________
To secure the peace is to prepare for war. -Metallica
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 05-21-2009, 05:49 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz View Post
If you want to get technical, all Trek movies made to this point violate canon, starting with TMP.
I beg to differ. I agree that if one looks at every second of every Star Trek movie, then there will be, and indeed, have been, inconsistencies. That's going to happen in any franchise that has lasted for 43 years, six TV series', and 10 movies. Nobody's perfect. But for the most part, all six of the Star Trek movies flowed in a forward progressing, linear time line from the end of TOS to STVI:TUC. Despite the minor inconsistencies and "canon viloations" (the Khan/Chekov thing in TWOK comes to mind), Star Trek as a whole has been pretty consisitent as far as major developments and events are concerned. I don't quite understand your assertion that all Trek movies violate canon. Could you please clarify?

Last edited by I-Am-Zim : 05-21-2009 at 08:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 05-21-2009, 09:36 AM
Samuel Samuel is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,883
Default

Again? This has been discussed to death.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 05-21-2009, 09:55 AM
Vincent Cain's Avatar
Vincent Cain Vincent Cain is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,488
Default

Kind of amazed this thread's still going. *shrugs*
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 05-21-2009, 12:12 PM
TimelineTraveler TimelineTraveler is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2
Default

As for :"why does Star Trek have to be so "dumbed-down" for it to be cool?"

It does not need to be dumbed down to appeal to people in general. My older brother is a member of mensa and is a huge trek fan. I am not a member of mensa but my IQ has been tested & lets just say the results put me in the above average + range. Unfortunately most people are a LONG way from being mensa material (ever see the tonight show segment "Jaywalking!" ) So to appeal to the masses it maybe can benifit from a little dumbing down. I believe however that long time trek fans are likely too bright to ever make good material for Jaywalking, and I would like to hope that at least a portion of new Trek fans are also at least above average.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 05-21-2009, 12:30 PM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
I beg to differ. I agree that if one looks at every second of every Star Trek movie, then there will be, and indeed, have been, inconsistencies. That's going to happen in any franchise that has lasted for 43 years, six TV series', and 10 movies. Nobody's perfect. But for the most part, all six of the Star Trek movies flowed in a forward progressing, linear time line from the end of TOS to STVI:TUC. Despite the minor inconsistencies and "canon viloations" (the Khan/Chekov thing in TWOK comes to mind), Star Trek as a whole has been pretty consisitent as far as major developments and events are concerned. I don't quite understand your assertion that all Trek movies violate canon. Could you please clarify?
The Checkov/Kahn thing I can buy, he could have been working in a diffrent part of the ship, which wouldn't be unusual for a Engsin. Duty rotations, It's a minor flaw at least.

Ok, almost everything in the first 6 Trek films contradicts something established in TOS. Not that I think it's an issue, except for Trek 5.

Ok, one big one nobody ever picks up on. TMP takes palce 18 months after TOS, ok? TWOK takes place on Kirk's 50th Birthday, established in the film. Kirk was 34 when he took command of the Enterprise, a 5 year mission, makes him 39, ok he's 41-42 in TMP. So there's a 8-9 year gap that's NEVER explained on screen.

Ok, why did the Kilingon Bird Of Prey change outside and inside betwen Trek 3, and Trek 4? All the parts still look Klingon.

Trek 5 is biggest violator, Nimbus 3? Ok, therese 3 goverments can't agree not to kill each other on site. Why would they semi-willingly share a planet? Spock's brother, TOS made it clear Spock was an only child.

These are only a few.
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 05-21-2009, 12:58 PM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz View Post
The Checkov/Kahn thing I can buy, he could have been working in a diffrent part of the ship, which wouldn't be unusual for a Engsin. Duty rotations, It's a minor flaw at least.
Filled in by fan-magination.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz

Ok, one big one nobody ever picks up on. TMP takes palce 18 months after TOS, ok? TWOK takes place on Kirk's 50th Birthday, established in the film. Kirk was 34 when he took command of the Enterprise, a 5 year mission, makes him 39, ok he's 41-42 in TMP. So there's a 8-9 year gap that's NEVER explained on screen.
Filled in by this fan's-magination:
The Enterprise after TMP may have served another several years before being made into a training vessel at some point before Kirk's 50th birthday. It's just that those years have never been chronicled...and therefore are probably the basis for some novelizations set aboard the refit Enterprise after TMP, but well before Kirk's 50th.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz
Ok, why did the Kilingon Bird Of Prey change outside and inside betwen Trek 3, and Trek 4? All the parts still look Klingon.
Fan-magination defied here.
One might suppose that the ship had an alternate command center....but the bird of prey seems a bit small to support such a redundancy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz
Trek 5 is biggest violator, Nimbus 3? Ok, therese 3 goverments can't agree not to kill each other on site. Why would they semi-willingly share a planet?
Well, they were representatives/failed ambassadors. Even despite their "failed" status, the first job of an ambassador is to promote peace, or at least coexistence....not take up the d'ktagh and make with the chop chop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz
Spock's brother, TOS made it clear Spock was an only child.
Even GR said that he considered V (and VI, sadly) to be apochryphal. But, then again, if one went by in-universe explanation, it is quite possible that Spock (and Sarek) were so ashamed of Sybok that they saw no fit reason to mention him to anyone, let alone outsiders like Kirk and McCoy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz
These are only a few.
Indeed....and probably the most glaring.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 05-28-2009, 01:49 PM
HFM's Avatar
HFM HFM is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 20
Default

They killed it! Too much transporter use to much action.Classic science fiction such as bladerunner and aliens immerses you into the enviroment at the begginning.Shouldve been a slower start with a bit more character history.Whats the odds of finding Spock when you eject on a planet.The story has holes all in it.Otherwise for those with a short attention span and high action which seems to be the norm the movie is GREAT not!

Last edited by HFM : 05-30-2009 at 07:47 AM.
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 07:17 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.