|
Cingulate posted:"A ship under my direct command was destroyed on a secret mission in Klingon space under unclear circumstances. Clearly, an act of unilateral, unprovoked aggression! Conveniently, we already had the fleet parked in a perfect position for retaliation." He would be waiting for the Klingons to retaliate. The Starfleet ships would not be the ones retaliating, just reacting to the first wave of the Klingons' attack. Then I guess the Vengeance would swoop in and save the day. quote:I assume to avoid that the actual plan would have to involve the Klingons either formally declaring war or just launching a massive offensive. Or so my limited movie-text-ignoring, fun-hater brain speculates, but then why leave Earth of all places undefended? Klingons can just warp in, pound it to rubble, and win straight up. A fleet of enemy ships coming to attack Earth is a different situation from two Starfleet vessels duking it out over Earth. The former could set off safeguards, like outposts that detect Klingon warp signatures or whatever. Where we really disagree is that I don't see an unanswered question, like why weren't ships visibly defending Earth at the end of the film, as an automatic flaw. If I wasn't happy to ignore some of those things or make up a satisfactory answer myself I could never enjoy any Star Trek media ever.
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
Man I personally hope they hurry up with the Bluray release so this thread is more people who know more about films than me explaining composition and lighting and stuff rather than explanations of how to optimally position Starfleet assets to most effectively win the Klingon war.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Where we really disagree is that I don't see an unanswered question, like why weren't ships visibly defending Earth at the end of the film, as an automatic flaw. If I wasn't happy to ignore some of those things or make up a satisfactory answer myself I could never enjoy any Star Trek media ever. Honestly I wouldn't care if it were any old Federation Planet, but Earth was stretching it for me.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
It could have helped flesh out the JJTrek Federation more by showing some ships around earth, by having some boats reacting to the two ships crashing into earth. Just to make the world look more lively.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Honestly I wouldn't care if it were any old Federation Planet, but Earth was stretching it for me. Alright. Cingulate posted:Man I personally hope they hurry up with the Bluray release so this thread is more people who know more about films than me explaining composition and lighting and stuff rather than explanations of how to optimally position Starfleet assets to most effectively win the Klingon war. You and me both. This film was beautiful. Is there an art of/ making of book out? EDIT - Did this film have any of the really obvious product placement that plagued the last one? I didn't notice any. Lord Krangdar fucked around with this message at 18:51 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Honestly I wouldn't care if it were any old Federation Planet, but Earth was stretching it for me. There's hardly anything defending Washington D.C. and the Pentagon was attacked just over a decade ago. This just isn't how societies that aren't at war function (or most societies that are) and Starfleet isn't even a military organization in the film. That's like, a big part of the plot.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
Is it wrong to hope for a movie with the cast as old fogies?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Is it wrong to hope for a movie with the cast as old fogies?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
No Wave posted:There aren't enough of those?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
With this cast. I want them as old fogies too. Possibly with Abrams fast whiz bang paced action direction too to make them more exciting when they stand around.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
I thought the uniforms looked like crap. Like they wanted them to kind of look like OS uniforms only worse and weirdly baggy. The should have either redesigned 'em or kept the old ones. I agree the lighting was good.DeimosRising posted:There's hardly anything defending Washington D.C. and the Pentagon was attacked just over a decade ago. This just isn't how societies that aren't at war function (or most societies that are) and Starfleet isn't even a military organization in the film. That's like, a big part of the plot. They made a big deal of defending DC, including AA batteries and jet patrols, after 9/11. And remember Khan has already had his "Pentagon attack" moment by this part of the film. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 21:08 on May 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:They made a big deal of defending DC, including AA batteries and jet patrols, after 9/11. And remember Khan has already had his "Pentagon attack" moment by this part of the film. Khan's "Pentagon attack" used an atmospheric craft, so it wouldn't necessarily prompt an increase in space defense assets. Also, many of the people responsible for those space defense assets were killed or injured in that same attack. Really, any perceived problems with the apparently weak defensive footing of Starfleet can be answered with the facts that Starfleet is emphatically not a military organization and that many of its command officers were just killed or incapacitated.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Really, any perceived problems with the apparently weak defensive footing of Starfleet can be answered with the facts that Starfleet is emphatically not a military organization and that many of its command officers were just killed or incapacitated. Except in JJAbrams world Starfleet quite clearly is a military organisation.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:They made a big deal of defending DC, including AA batteries and jet patrols, after 9/11. This is a little bit of a stretch, given what came of that.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:45
|
|
|
Wasn't the whole point that Earth wasn't actually at war with the Klingons. I might be missing something.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:45
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Wasn't the whole point that Earth wasn't actually at war with the Klingons. I might be missing something. Yeah but there's a great big spacestation in orbit that always has several ships docked very time we see it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
The Enterprise is always the only ship available. At least until Sulu gets promoted.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
I don't understand how so many are hung up on the Enterprise not having backup when "Enterprise is the only ship in the sector" has been accepted without any issue for so long.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Except in JJAbrams world Starfleet quite clearly is a military organisation. No more than it ever has been. Starfleet ships have always been armed and ready, but they are designed to be multi-role. They even make note of this in the movie by stating outright that the Vengeance is the only Starfleet vessel designed solely for war. EDIT: If I remember Trek canon properly, Starfleet has already had a war with the Romulans by the time JJTrek takes place.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
If any other ships were near Earth the Enterprise would have been doomed. The Enterprise and her crew had just made an unauthorized trip and landing to the Klingon home world, are carrying a 300 year old war criminal, and are fighting the commander of the Federation. That is all really incriminating, more incriminating than a secret warship existing (which is something that occurs in real life). If any other ship shows up, they are going to shoot at the Enterprise. Even when Khan takes over the big bad ship, the Enterprise just becomes the second ship to be shot at, considering Kirk helped Khan take over that ship. That no other ships are around isn't a narrative convenience to allow our heroes to save the day alone, it's so the film doesn't end with our heroes dead or under arrest for treason.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Or, any other ships have no idea that there is a 300 year old war criminal on board nor do they know about the secret mission the enterprise was returning from because it is a secret but they do see the flagship of their fleet being chased and assaulted by some gigantic obviously aggressive mysterious and unidentified war ship.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Except in JJAbrams world Starfleet quite clearly is a military organisation. Except characters in the film explicitly state otherwise and a central thread is the antagonist's plot to surreptitiously turn it into one.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Except characters in the film explicitly state otherwise and a central thread is the antagonist's plot to surreptitiously turn it into one.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Except characters in the film explicitly state otherwise and a central thread is the antagonist's plot to surreptitiously turn it into one. A knife is a knife, no matter how much you protest that it's a spoon. Starfleet in the films is a primarily military organisation. Everyone marches round in a military uniform. Khan attacks a Starfleet meeting where the response to a terrorist attack is being organised. Kirk and Spock don't bat an eyelid at being told that Starfleet has secret weapons labs. If it isn't primarily a military organisation then what is it?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
Plus, this is an action movie and the cast is all devoted to action-y military things. Science and exploration have been the main hook of maybe one of the last four trek movies.HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:This is a little bit of a stretch, given what came of that. Operative word "after." As in after 9/11 and after Khan's first two attacks on Earth.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:A knife is a knife, no matter how much you protest that it's a spoon. Their uniforms aren't very military. In fact, they're modeled on the TOS uniforms that were designed to not look like military uniforms. It is a response to a terrorist attack on that organization. Kirk and Spock do bat an eyelid. They aren't exactly stunned, but they are surprised. Considering what the Enterprise is doing in the cold open and the whole preparing for the Five Year Mission through-line, it would appear that Starfleet is primarily a scientific and exploratory organization. You're the one protesting what the film has explicitly told you. Certainly, there is a tension between militarism and a peaceful mission, and Starfleet appears to be becoming militarized, but that's a central conflict in the film.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:You're the one protesting what the film has explicitly told you. Certainly, there is a tension between militarism and a peaceful mission, and Starfleet appears to be becoming militarized, but that's a central conflict in the film. The film tells me lots of things and then shows me something different (RLM go into this: Khan tells me he cares deeply about his crew - he acts like a sociopath, Kirk and Spock tell me they're friends - really they should just hate each other). If it were a different kind of film then I would assume that it meant it was a satire. In this film I just conclude that it's poorly made and incoherent.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The film tells me lots of things and then shows me something different (RLM go into this: Khan tells me he cares deeply about his crew - he acts like a sociopath, Kirk and Spock tell me they're friends - really they should just hate each other). If it were a different kind of film then I would assume that it meant it was a satire. In this film I just conclude that it's poorly made and incoherent. Why should Kirk and Spock hate each other? Why is Khan's loyalty to his crew/family incompatible with his violence?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:RLM go into this: Khan tells me he cares deeply about his crew - he acts like a sociopath, Kirk and Spock tell me they're friends - really they should just hate each other And this is one of many examples where RLM misses the mark. Sometimes they'll really think about what's going on in a film, and other times they seem to just half rear end it and just say whatever. Khan being a dangerous rear end in a top hat has nothing to do with his feelings for his crew, which are consistent throughout the film. He never stops worrying about the safety of his crew, and when they detonate the torpedoes on the Vengeance he freaks out. Kirk and Spock established their respect for each other in the first movie. This film went out of its way to show that despite their differences, their friendship was actually pretty strong. It's just that the friendship between a human like Kirk and a Vulcan can be pretty volatile at times because each side has expectations that aren't always met.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Saw this last night. I preferred Wraith of Khan but it's the best Star Trek movie. That said it was an enjoyable enough blockbuster that was also Star Trek. Better than what they tried with the TNG movies. Would be nice if they went a more cerebral route but then they wouldn't make millions of Earth bucks. Also I just had to say the exchange between Chekov and Kirk when he tells Chekov he'll need to put on a red shirt after slapping him on the back "thanks, bro" style is hilarious. The look of sheer terror on Chekov's face was absolutely the highlight of the film.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The film tells me lots of things and then shows me something different (RLM go into this: Khan tells me he cares deeply about his crew - he acts like a sociopath, Kirk and Spock tell me they're friends - really they should just hate each other). If it were a different kind of film then I would assume that it meant it was a satire. In this film I just conclude that it's poorly made and incoherent. Khan surrenders to save his crew. The film shows this to you. Kirk and Spock have conversations about their differences and come to better understandings of one another. Again, this is shown to you in scene after scene. Also, using show/tell as some meaningful dichotomy is silly. What a film shows you with visuals and action is no more reliable or meaningful than what a film tells you with sound and dialog. If you see a conflict between the two, you should consider its narrative significance.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
DFu4ever posted:And this is one of many examples where RLM misses the mark. Sometimes they'll really think about what's going on in a film, and other times they seem to just half rear end it and just say whatever. Khan being a dangerous rear end in a top hat has nothing to do with his feelings for his crew, which are consistent throughout the film. He never stops worrying about the safety of his crew, and when they detonate the torpedoes on the Vengeance he freaks out. To play devil's advocate: It's just as plausible that Khan doesn't give a poo poo about his crew, only says he does to manipulate Kirk's sympathies, and is angry when the torpedoes detonate because they've wrecked his nice new ship. I don't think it's the case, but it is a valid reading.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:It could have helped flesh out the JJTrek Federation more by showing some ships around earth, by having some boats reacting to the two ships crashing into earth. Just to make the world look more lively. Yeah, the people walking as if nothing was happening during the Spock chase scene kinda stretched it for me. ^ He screams "NO!" when the torpedoes go off - at that point, Kirk is unconscious and he has no reason to keep up his charade. It could be a case of "he's saying no because he just got bombed", though.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
JackMackerel posted:Yeah, the people walking as if nothing was happening during the Spock chase scene kinda stretched it for me. Who was walking around like nothing was happening? The people at ground zero were panicking and screaming, the people a little further out were booking it, the emergency personnel toward the scene, civilians away. Then as Spock and Khan make their way further away, all the civilians they pass are staring in horror toward the shattered buildings and smoke plume. Once further away, they're on top of the truck things and you don't see any more civilians.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:To play devil's advocate: It's just as plausible that Khan doesn't give a poo poo about his crew, only says he does to manipulate Kirk's sympathies, and is angry when the torpedoes detonate because they've wrecked his nice new ship. Except that interpretation relies on things that the movie doesn't show you. His actions in the movie only point to him being completely sincere when dealing with his crew. It's arguable that the only reason he's comfortable with them beaming 72 torpedoes onto his ship in the first place is that he's already figured out that Kirk and Spock wouldn't just kill his entire crew outright. Spock just happens to outsmart him while at the same time living up to Khan's belief about their unwillingness to do something so cold.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Who was walking around like nothing was happening? The people at ground zero were panicking and screaming, the people a little further out were booking it, the emergency personnel toward the scene, civilians away. Then as Spock and Khan make their way further away, all the civilians they pass are staring in horror toward the shattered buildings and smoke plume. Once further away, they're on top of the truck things and you don't see any more civilians. No, no, not at ground zero. It's when Spock has a clear line of sight and is jackhammering for Khan - yeah, you do see civilians staring in horror and crowds of Starfleet and cops hustling it, but the rest of the civilians are having some sort of weird business stroll.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
Looked a lot like people trying to process what had just happened in shock and horror to me.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
I did feel that when Khan leapt through a God drat glass window there should've been a bit of a reaction from the people on the ground.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:I did feel that when Khan leapt through a God drat glass window there should've been a bit of a reaction from the people on the ground. And that. It wasn't a drunken "what the hell did I just see oh my god oh my god" traumatized walk, it was more like a "I'm headed back from work during rush hour" stroll.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
Alchenar posted:A knife is a knife, no matter how much you protest that it's a spoon. They tell you outright that it is a peacekeeping force, similar (but obviously not directly analogous to) the UN. Given some characters' strong objection to militarization, they're probably much more focussed on snalker-scale law enforcement. More progressive characters, like Scotty, are opposed to even that aspect (though note that he does eventually kill a Blackwater merc - that's character development). Into Darkness is very much concerned about what it means to be a peacekeeping force, and whether that's even possible without becoming an oxymoron. As gone over before, the Federation's humanitarianism is criticized pretty strongly here. Of course, the Federation does not actually exist. It, in this film at least, is simply a broad metaphor for the 'Western world' as we understand it today.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 05:16
|
|
