Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mitchell_pgh · Oct 28, 2007, 01:54 AM

Three part question:

1) Is the fact that Kirk didn't raise the shields a "plot hole?"

2) would you have entered the radiation filled room knowing that you would have died? Or asked some cadet to do it?

3) Would it have been better if Khan would have seen Kirk warp away as everything blew up at the end?

Lateralus · 02:57 AM

1) Not so much as how the shields were shown as being raised, starting on one side of the ship and circling around. If anything, I'd think activating the shield would immediately create a solid bubble around the ship that would increase in strength incrementally as the shields came to full strength.

2) Nah, I'd have gone myself. I don't think any good leader would sacrifice anybody under his command knowingly.

3) I've thought the same. Especially with all the dramatic dialogue they had given to Khan shortly before the explosion.

pinenuts · Oct 28, 2007, 03:29 AM

would have beamed out of there to make out with hot alien girls

MacosNerd · Oct 28, 2007, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

3) Would it have been better if Khan would have seen Kirk warp away as everything blew up at the end?

Yeah, I thought that would have been a better ending. Great movie, but the ending of it was a little of a let down, in that sense, at least when I first saw it back in the day.

SpaceMonkey · Oct 28, 2007, 11:04 AM

I think there are many other Star Trek movies with much bigger plot holes. We're picking apart Star Trek II?

Gator Lager · Oct 28, 2007, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

Three part question:

1) Is the fact that Kirk didn't raise the shields a "plot hole?"

2) would you have entered the radiation filled room knowing that you would have died? Or asked some cadet to do it?

3) Would it have been better if Khan would have seen Kirk warp away as everything blew up at the end?

ok off subject. kinda.
man they blew it. that could have been ST 5 or whatever.
the reason is simple. Khan died before the genesis torpedo detonated. so like spock, he (Khan) could have been reborn or whatever they call it, and pissed off. have him in allegiance with the klingons and looking to kick some kirk ass.

yep I'm a star trek nerd.

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 28, 2007, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

3) Would it have been better if Khan would have seen Kirk warp away as everything blew up at the end?

Even as a kid watching this I had to agree with you. As far as Khan knows he won, it would have been so much rewarding if last second he saw the enterprise jump to warp and he knew he lost.

Cipher13 · Oct 28, 2007, 12:21 PM

Stargate > Star Trek.

keekeeree · Oct 28, 2007, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

Stargate > Star Trek.

Perhaps...in the evil Star Trek universe.

Sourbook · Oct 28, 2007, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

3) Would it have been better if Khan would have seen Kirk warp away as everything blew up at the end?

Especially considering they were using a Moby Dick theme throughout the movie. In the book, Captain Ahab died hopelessly stabbing at the white whale. He knew the whale had won. Khan died thinking he had defeated Kirk.

ghporter · Oct 28, 2007, 05:43 PM

1) I didn't see it as a plot hole as much as Kirk being too curious and not skeptical enough. "Hey, that's one of our ships, I wonder why they're acting oddly..."

I'd agree with Lateralus about where the shields were shown starting up around the ship except that I think the lights coincided with where the other ship was. That would mean that shield generators in the more exposed areas would be online first. I'd prefer a system that comes on and builds strength, but they didn't ask me...

2) Yes, I'd do it. Would a cadet have known how to jury-rig the energizer? Could one have done so effectively? Would it have been appropriate to coach a kid through the job that an experienced person should have done? The answer is no to all of those. This is the kind of thing that leaders do. It was, indeed, Spock's "Kobiashi Maru" test, and his choice was both appropriate and effective. "Sometimes how you lose is more important than how you win."

3) I think the last thing Khan should have seen was the Enterprise warping away, in a sort of "you blew it" escape. But he died anyway, so it really doesn't matter. The Moby Dick theme was not as thoroughly used as it could have been-it was more "man against man." Kirk beat Khan with his own two hands once before, and this time he and his crew did it again.

stevesnj · Oct 28, 2007, 06:36 PM

KAHHHHNNN!!!!

zro · Oct 28, 2007, 10:02 PM

JoshuaZ · Oct 29, 2007, 04:15 AM

http://www.khaaan.com

Thank you internet.

olePigeon · Oct 29, 2007, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Lateralus

2) Nah, I'd have gone myself. I don't think any good leader would sacrifice anybody under his command knowingly.

[Nerd Mode] To complete officer's training in Starfleet, you have to order a crew mate to their death to save the ship. [/Nerd Mode]

olePigeon · Oct 29, 2007, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

Stargate > Star Trek.

Babylon 5 > Battlestar > Star Trek > ... > Battle Beyond the Stars > Stargate

nonhuman · Oct 29, 2007, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

[Nerd Mode] To complete officer's training in Starfleet, you have to order a crew mate to their death to save the ship. [/Nerd Mode]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who had that thought... Poor Geordi...

starman · Oct 29, 2007, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Babylon 5 > Battlestar > Star Trek > ... > Battle Beyond the Stars > Stargate

OMG. Someone remembers BBTS.

That's like...the movie that almost was. As if , you could see that it could have been, SHOULD HAVE BEEN a better movie than it was.

1) Yes and no. There was protocol but he knew it was Checkov's ship. As for the lights, remember this was filmed in 1981. If you check out Star Trek VI, there's a proper "bubble" on the shield display.
2) No.
3) I'd bet it was scripted that way, but in the sense of editing, it had to go.

Laminar · Oct 29, 2007, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

Stargate > Star Trek.

Wow, you're right about everything!

ghporter · Oct 29, 2007, 08:26 PM

Please all note that without Star Trek (the original series as well as the movies) there would never have been a B5, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Stargate, etc. Star Trek made the suits sit up and realize that there were people-people with MONEY-who didn't want "Space Ranger Rickey" type tripe. They wanted really well written, well made serious stuff to watch. And within the limits of the budgets and technology of the day, the original Star Trek series generally delivered just that. Yes, I know that some episodes were poo, but some were fantastic, such as "City on the Edge of Forever", "Amok Time", "The Trouble With Tribbles," and more. The poo came from underfunding the series, not from a lack of talent or writers.

Cipher13 · Oct 30, 2007, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Please all note that without Star Trek (the original series as well as the movies) there would never have been a B5, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Stargate, etc. Star Trek made the suits sit up and realize that there were people-people with MONEY-who didn't want "Space Ranger Rickey" type tripe. They wanted really well written, well made serious stuff to watch. And within the limits of the budgets and technology of the day, the original Star Trek series generally delivered just that. Yes, I know that some episodes were poo, but some were fantastic, such as "City on the Edge of Forever", "Amok Time", "The Trouble With Tribbles," and more. The poo came from underfunding the series, not from a lack of talent or writers.

What a nonsense argument.

I posit that without Star Trek, something else would've started the same trend; also that Star Trek itself wouldn't have existed without certain influences, thereby causing us to fall into an infinite regression.

JohnM15141 · Oct 31, 2007, 12:23 AM

Nahh!

Ganesha · Oct 31, 2007, 03:44 AM

2) would you have entered the radiation filled room knowing that you would have died? Or asked some cadet to do it?

Your assuming a cadet knows how to perform the repair, as it was the Enterprise got away just in time. A cadet pausing even a second to ask a procedural question would of meant the everyone died.

Good News: You didn't die of radiation poisoning.
Bad News: Your still dead.

ghporter · Oct 31, 2007, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

What a nonsense argument.

I posit that without Star Trek, something else would've started the same trend; also that Star Trek itself wouldn't have existed without certain influences, thereby causing us to fall into an infinite regression.

It would seem that you don't know the history of Star Trek very well. Gene Roddenberry shopped his show to all three networks. ABC wouldn't even listen to him. CBS (which is currently in charge of the franchise, at least on TV) said "We already have a science fiction show." They were talking about Lost in Space. NBC grudgingly bought in, and wound up making plenty of money off of the show.

TV is run by people who take no risks; they don't buy into new kinds of shows unless somebody else has already broken that ground. This was particularly true in the 1960s, and if it hadn't been for Star Trek, that ground wouldn't have been broken nearly as well or nearly as early. Look at what "SF" shows were around in the 1960s: Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, and not much else. And note that the only one that was "new" was Lost in Space. Wow, what a fabulous piece of science fiction...

olePigeon · Oct 31, 2007, 12:09 PM

Firefly > *

Cipher13 · Oct 31, 2007, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

It would seem that you don't know the history of Star Trek very well. Gene Roddenberry shopped his show to all three networks. ABC wouldn't even listen to him. CBS (which is currently in charge of the franchise, at least on TV) said "We already have a science fiction show." They were talking about Lost in Space. NBC grudgingly bought in, and wound up making plenty of money off of the show.

TV is run by people who take no risks; they don't buy into new kinds of shows unless somebody else has already broken that ground. This was particularly true in the 1960s, and if it hadn't been for Star Trek, that ground wouldn't have been broken nearly as well or nearly as early. Look at what "SF" shows were around in the 1960s: Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, and not much else. And note that the only one that was "new" was Lost in Space. Wow, what a fabulous piece of science fiction...

None of that changes a thing; my comment still stands, and your previous one is still discredited.

Laminar · Oct 31, 2007, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Cipher13

None of that changes a thing; my comment still stands, and your previous one is still discredited.

My comments stands too.

Shaddim · Oct 31, 2007, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Firefly > *

QFMFT, I say.

ghporter · Oct 31, 2007, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Firefly > *

Them Browncoats stand on some mighty tall shoulders, but they stand tall themselves.

turtle777 · Nov 2, 2007, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Firefly > *

Yes, FF FTW.

-t

- - e r i k - - · Nov 2, 2007, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Yes, FF FTW.

Safari > FF

starman · Nov 2, 2007, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Firefly > *

Uh, no.

Shaddim · Nov 2, 2007, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Uh, no.

Yes, Joss > *

starman · Nov 2, 2007, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Yes, Joss > *

Maybe if you weren't born before 1985.

Roddenberry >>>>>>> Joss.

Shaddim · Nov 2, 2007, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Maybe if you weren't born before 1985.

Roddenberry >>>>>>> Joss.

Pulease, Whedon would write circles around Roddenberry. Hell, he even made X-Men comics fun to read again, and that's no mean feat.

ghporter · Nov 2, 2007, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Pulease, Whedon would write circles around Roddenberry. Hell, he even made X-Men comics fun to read again, and that's no mean feat.

No. And Joss would be one of the first to admit it too. Joss is good. REALLY good. He thinks differently than a lot of SF writers because he doesn't pigeon-hole himself. But Gene was really, really, really good too. Has Joss created and written a number of successful TV series? So did Gene-and in a number of genres. Has Joss developed a number of different, fairly rabid fanbases? With conventions and online fanfiction and everything? Yep, so did Gene, but HIS fanbases started out with zines that were actually printed. You gotta really love what you do to PUBLISH fanfic on actual paper. Oh yeah, and the whole "convention" thing? Gene's works started it. I was there and saw it happen.

starman · Nov 2, 2007, 08:05 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Pulease, Whedon would write circles around Roddenberry. Hell, he even made X-Men comics fun to read again, and that's no mean feat.

Excuse me, but how's Buffy and Firefly doing nowadays?

Thought so.

ghporter · Nov 2, 2007, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Excuse me, but how's Buffy and Firefly doing nowadays?

Thought so.

Actually, you can blame that on Fox. They're first degree imbeciles, or Firefly would not have been so humped by them. The fanbases are, shall we say "robust." But Fox owns the episodes and they want to make money off of them so unless they see dollar signs in syndication, the episodes languish. The good thing is that they licensed all of those episodes to DVD so we can watch them whenever we want, including during "Fox Execs are Toadstool Brained Lame-os" parties. Which makes me smile a lot.

But then, where did the whole "I want all those episodes so I can watch them at home" thing come from? Star Trek fans wheedling local TV stations out of 16mm copies of Star Trek episodes. I put the whole "have the whole series" thing's beginnings firmly on Star Trek fans' shoulders. Think of the money the suits have made over the years on this! They're farking rich because of this.

Shaddim · Nov 2, 2007, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

No. And Joss would be one of the first to admit it too. Joss is good. REALLY good. He thinks differently than a lot of SF writers because he doesn't pigeon-hole himself. But Gene was really, really, really good too. Has Joss created and written a number of successful TV series? So did Gene-and in a number of genres. Has Joss developed a number of different, fairly rabid fanbases? With conventions and online fanfiction and everything? Yep, so did Gene, but HIS fanbases started out with zines that were actually printed. You gotta really love what you do to PUBLISH fanfic on actual paper. Oh yeah, and the whole "convention" thing? Gene's works started it. I was there and saw it happen.

Joss, as a writer, is far better than Roddenberry. There's no question about that. None.

Shaddim · Nov 2, 2007, 10:08 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Excuse me, but how's Buffy and Firefly doing nowadays?

Thought so.

Buffy ran it's course, the series ended. A 7 season run is very impressive. Actually, I'm very glad it did, the actors were getting too old for it.

Firefly being cutoff was a mistake, if FOX could take it back now they would.

ghporter · Nov 2, 2007, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Buffy ran it's course, the series ended. A 7 season run is very impressive. Actually, I'm very glad it did, the actors were getting too old for it.

Maybe, but Joss is writing a "season 8" comic series, so there's new Buffy and people are eating it up.

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Firefly being cutoff was a mistake, if FOX could take it back now they would.

Nah. They have poop for brains or they wouldn't have messed with it in the first place. Have you looked at any of their original stuff-like Fox News or Fox Business News? I miss "The Weekly World News" because it was the only publication that made Fox News look legit... The Fox TV holdings are written by idiots. Universal isn't much better with handling "Serenity" either-they actually SUED browncoat web sites that were (gotta love this!) promoting the movie-without permission. How cool is that? Provide FREE publicity and get sued for it. The "entertainment industry" is run by poop brained suits, and truly innovative and interesting entertainment gets made now and then in spite of them.

starman · Nov 2, 2007, 10:17 PM

gh, doesn't that sound a lot like Trek and NBC?

ghporter · Nov 2, 2007, 10:22 PM

The problem was that NBC didn't have a clue-Nielsons were very broad numbers in 1968, and not broken down by demographics until after Star Trek showed that simply looking at total viewership was useless. Had NBC had a clue about that, they might have at least had a chance to do something smart. They also were being shuffled between parent companies at the time, and that hurt the network, which of course hurt their programs. Not that the peacock suits were particularly good, but that they didn't have the history and extremely good data that Fox's execs had available to them. Fox told Joss "you made a huge hit with ... whatever that teenage thing you did was. We want you to make another series-go for it." Then they didn't even try to understand it. I mean "Make an action-oriented episode so we can start the series off with a bang" is NOT something that anyone who knew jack about Firefly -and had a working brain- would say. So they manipulated not just the schedule, but the scripting because they were idiots. And we wound up with just 15 episodes of 100% win. It was literally years before Joss got Serenity made, and it was because of all of us fans making so much noise, and probably Universal wanting to stick its collective tongue out at Fox too.

Shaddim · Nov 2, 2007, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Maybe, but Joss is writing a "season 8" comic series, so there's new Buffy and people are eating it up.

Yeah, I've been eating it up, really good stuff. It's still a little early to tell, but it very well could be the best written comic since Miller's the Dark Knight Returns and Moore's The Watchmen. Joss said in an interview that he was much more comfortable doing this part of the series in comic format, there's a great deal more creative freedom than TV, not to mention producing story lines and scenes that would be impossible to do on a network budget.

Nah. They have poop for brains or they wouldn't have messed with it in the first place. Have you looked at any of their original stuff-like Fox News or Fox Business News? I miss "The Weekly World News" because it was the only publication that made Fox News look legit... The Fox TV holdings are written by idiots. Universal isn't much better with handling "Serenity" either-they actually SUED browncoat web sites that were (gotta love this!) promoting the movie-without permission. How cool is that? Provide FREE publicity and get sued for it. The "entertainment industry" is run by poop brained suits, and truly innovative and interesting entertainment gets made now and then in spite of them.

They were simply too stupid to see the potential it had, in just another year it would have had a cult following the size of Buffy. Joss is a master of creating a fan base for a thing, if I had $50M I'd give it to him and tell him to make whatever show he wants, give him complete creative control. Then sit back and watch the viewership (and advertising revenues) soar.

Edit: UPN knew what they were doing, but they were so small the just didn't have a budget for it. They basically mortgaged the farm to let Joss finish Buffy.

ghporter · Nov 3, 2007, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

UPN knew what they were doing, but they were so small the just didn't have a budget for it. They basically mortgaged the farm to let Joss finish Buffy.

Unfortunately, UPN was too far beaten down for even Buffy to save it. Without a Star Trek series as an anchor, UPN really didn't have much of a viewer foundation. Remember, the network was started specifically with ST:TNG as its anchor series.

starman · Nov 3, 2007, 11:31 AM

Wasn't that Voyager, not TNG?

Kevin · Nov 3, 2007, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by stevesnj

KAHHHHNNN!!!!

ghporter · Nov 3, 2007, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Wasn't that Voyager, not TNG?

You're right. ST:TNG was "supposed" to premier on a revamped Paramount TV network, but the network making deal fell apart months before the premier, so it was done on Paramount-owned stations and syndicated stations. My bad-thanks for catching it.

Shaddim · Nov 3, 2007, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Unfortunately, UPN was too far beaten down for even Buffy to save it. Without a Star Trek series as an anchor, UPN really didn't have much of a viewer foundation. Remember, the network was started specifically with ST:TNG as its anchor series.

Interestingly enough, for UPN, the numbers for Buffy were double that of ST.

Lateralus · Nov 3, 2007, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

You're right. ST:TNG was "supposed" to premier on a revamped Paramount TV network, but the network making deal fell apart months before the premier, so it was done on Paramount-owned stations and syndicated stations. My bad-thanks for catching it.

Actually... That's still not entirely correct.

The 'Paramount Network' that was supposed to have launched with a Star Trek series as its anchor was originally set to debut in the late 70's. And the series that was to have been its anchor was 'Star Trek: Phase II'.

Once that piddled out, Phase II became The Motion Picture.

A number of episodes that had been written for the first season of Phase II were later adapted for use with the first season of The Next Generation.

Star Trek: Phase II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia