As I remember Kirk had always had an interest in Antique. IN Star trek 2 we see his appartment with tons of antiques. Bones in that scenes tells Kirk to regain his command before he becomes a permament addition to his antique collections. Spoks gives him an old book and says he has a fondness for antique.

I have to assume that his love for for Antique comes from a young age and must be why he took the car instead of a hover vehicule.

I have to read the book. Seems to be the book is 10x better than to movie. They should of done a 3 hour movie and explain those things to us. it would of been a lot better methinks.

Agreed!

Here's the reason why;

The rate upon which we are served technological advancements in our current rationalized reality.

They kept up with us rather than using perspectives over *old* truth. Imagination is much more than fantasy, fiction or weird science - it's an intellectual deduction at least.

makes me really want to see the deleted scenes. ought to be interesting when it comes out

OK...this sentence is REALLY convoluted, but I think I know what you are saying.  Maybe.

The problem is that limitless science fantasy removes all constraints and tension from a plot.  There are no boundaries or challenges that can't be answered with some gadget.  Hence, there is no real danger or risk, because everything is "fixable".  It is weak storytelling, though it works just fine for movies because movies are about stunning images.

The old Star Trek canon was important because it was always setting the limits on the technology.  The borg were so dangerous because they had superior technology and had to be fought in innovative ways.

This is one reason why people groan when they see a time travel plot in Star Trek nowadays.  In the old days time travel was used to create interesting scenarios or allow the protagonists to explore different eras.  Nowadays time travel is just used to change the rules whenever people don't want to deal with the old ones.  So rather than get a Star Trek Prequel, we get a Star Trek alternate reality that on one hand alienates old timers but on the flip side, can be easily written off as being a "once off" if it doesn't work out.  You see, it is not making a hard commitment to the new audience it is trying to capture either.  It is kind of like when some girl cheats on her boyfriend with you, then starts dating you exclusively.  You win in the short term...but is she going to cheat on you next?

Want convolutions? Here's some more;

If people perceive Ambassador Spock "explanations" as being the direct cause of an alternate reality, though.

All i saw in that film was Nero using time travel to find him (that makes 2+ coming from the future) BEFORE Romulus was **being** destroyed by his attempt to either contain or prevent the SuperNova accident. The timeline "flaws" experienced by everyone occured AFTER or during both the Kelvin destruction (i'll even submit to you that the Narada showed up in the past by wrongfully calculating an exit point) and Ambassador Spock was left on Delta Vega (on purpose if for anything other than witnessing Vulcan destruction alone) where he met with Kirk & Scott.

AFAIC, some reality alterations are much more than just a coincidence IF & WHEN interpreted by elder Spock.

Btw, this movie was a clear Reboot not a Prequel.

Yes, I agree with this totally, that was my point, it wasn't a prequel.

Everything else is indeed pretty convoluted.  The way the movie described it Nero and Spock both got trapped in the event horizon of the black hole and time travelled to the past rather than get destroyed.  Nero came out first and destroyed the Kelvin and proceeded to wait around 25 years for Spock.  Why he expected Spock to come out later, we have no clue, because as far as we know Nero went in first and wouldn't know to expect Spock....whatever, more muddy plotline.  The timeline flaws occurred the moment Nero started screwing things up in the "past" starting with the destruction of the Kelvin.  At that moment, he created the alternate timeline from the one which was his own history.

My point about Delta Vega was that old Spock was supposed to be there to see the destruction of his homeworld, but he wouldn't have been able to see Vulcan from that location anyway.  And if it was so close that he could see it, it would not be where Kirk got dumped.  All plot contrivances in a flashy action movie.

To which i can only reply; Is Venus always aligned with Earth?

The "cinematic image" itself of him seeing Vulcan imploding was quite puzzling, indeed. As i don't have an orbital map of the Vulcan system handy or a proper explanation for it, either.

That doesn't invalidate theory though, such as;

-- An Eagle can see a fish from 1000+ feet above.

-- Laforge had an implant to see.

-- We, as film goers, look at an event from a first-person POV. I doubt i would be forced into bringing a telescope in a theater to stare at a pixel wide proportion (resolution aside, zoomable) on the silver screen from my seat. IF Delta Vega is far enough (considering hypothetical distances taken in ANY context) from me and the Abrams' camera filming and Spock standing somewhere away from Vulcan, then the Entreprise or the Narada were closer than everyone else.

Meaning - had none seen Vulcan implosion, which other photographic proof needed to be shown by producers? The Narada leaving from an invisible point in space?

Identify it.

Yeah...I kind of think you are missing my point.  Everything WAS done just perfectly by the producers for the audience to understand what was going on in the story.  Apparently they moved Delta Vega into the same solar system as Vulcan....and I kind of thought they had already left the Vulcan star system when they jettisoned Kirk...but maybe they turned around for him.  My point is none of it really makes sense, it is just conveniently placed to forward the story.

Is there any other way? They'd be insulting people's intelligence should they try otherwise.

Strange, isn't it? A slight imperfection and crowds would husher out of their seats to riot over such a detail however snappy (Cliché) or incohesive.

No, they are insulting intelligence with spoon feeding.

I had done a bit of digging and it turns out that two planets (D-V and Vulcan) can only share an orbit if they are 90° apart. If 90° in that orbit was the actual location of the planets, the orbit would be so tiny that they would be INSIDE the star. Now, if Nero had thought to give Spock a telescope (which would make sense considering that he wanted Spock to see the destruction), this problem would have been rfesolved.

Actually, the entire scene takes place in Kirk's mind, which is in turn recieving memories from Spock's mind. Therefore, Vulcan may really have been just a little dot, and either one's brain created the image we saw from Kirk's recollection of the event.

Also, the Vulcans may have some sort of ESP or "scrying" ability: we know that they are telepathic across long distances, can transfer their consciousness into other animate and inanimate objects, and can even completely rewrite a person's nature. Therefore, Spock may have been watching a VISION of Vulcan imploding, or even recieved the image from his younger self onboard the Enterprise. A similar thing happened in the TOS episode The Immuntiy Syndrome.

By Alan Dean Foster?

Cuz... if this is the case, it's a Movie Adaptation from the screenplay & the film itself.

Well, if you insist... the simplest explanations might never convince anyone being overly critical. However, Occam Razor abnormalities would start losing their sharp edges under worst scrutiny.

So, to be fair...

-- I want some more weird irrational proof to demolish.

Unless, you're here to stir perpetual attempts at controversy which i'd rather slam with a fork and knife right back at you.

I was just pointing out flaws in the movie that were disappointing.  The movie had enormous resources, so you would kind of like it to make more sense when you sit down and think about it.  That said, it was an enjoyable action movie. 

As for wanting stuff to demolish, go pick on someone elses posts, I'm pretty much done.  You are just kind of trolling, and you don't ever really say much, and what you do say isn't that clear.

Not YOUR perception of flaws in particular.

I know i wasn't dissapointed in the least for a number of reasons, one of which;

- Subtility all over. They had me thinking sooooo much about *Science_Fiction* again, that i doubt further complexity or tricky explanations by anyone would have made it any easier for my own perception (even if wrong, btw). See, i try rationalizing the story when i probably shouldn't.

DVD might help me understand better.

It was "greyed" - indeed.

Sylar is Spock

Saint Mina of Ophelia VII of Order of the Bloody Rose of Orders Militant of Adepta Sororitas

Zachary Quinto made great character moments with Spock given he had *very* precious pre-production meetings with Leonard Nimoy but claiming he kept some of Sylar's features in that particular Star Trek film isn't what i saw.

What's your point exactly with that comment? Heroes is a different "show"?

Zachary Quinto is Sylar and Stan Lee did a great job with Heroes so what I am saying is this is just awesome.   

Did you expect someone esle to play Spock like a nobody actor?

Gotcha.

I saw the new Star Trek film the day it opened.... had some minor gripes about it but overall, loved the alternate universe "reboot / re-imagining" of the original series concepts.  My comment to my friends as we walked out of the movie, "They found a way to bring new life to the best crew of the most beloved starship in Scifi."

My main complaint was that it took a 4 issue comic book prequel to establish the origin of the anatagonistic relation between Nero and Spock Prime, which took place in the post-TNG/DS9/Voyager timeline... That info should have been included in the Spock Prime-Kirk Mind Meld sequence to make the movie motivations a lot more coherent.

A lot of the background and motivations that were missing or murky in the film were expanded upon quite nicely in the novelization / audiobook. i.e.:

- Spock's birth and various key events  in his life.

- The reason young Kirk went joyriding with the 65 Vette... (By the way, a perfect choice of vehicle, it was the dream car for many when the original series premiered back in '66!)

- Spock Prime's explanation for the many "coincidences" that were occuring in the new timeline.

I've been a fan of much of Alan Dean Foster's writing since the Tar-Aiym Krang novel first came out, and always admired his ability to expand upon the scripts for various movies and series giving the stories a life of their own.

Now if all the moron fans out there would stop screaming to see a remake of The Wrath of Kahn....  If they'd stop to think about it, they'd realize they've just seen  The Wrath of Kahn, mixed in with The Search for Kirk as well. (grin)

 Looking forward to seeing where they'll go with the franchise from here.

Even if that movie tried to please them as much as possible by providing numerous winks to the past, i doubt true Sci-Fi afficionados have any complaints about it for more reasons than i can list here or any other threads.

The only real cannon about Trek, AFAIC, can be found exclusively in TeeVee shows & films... as with novels, books, comics, etc -- we get *other* opinions or alternate stories; merchandising pays off but not entirely within the scope or people responsible for this franchise by Paramount & script writers & actors & who else worked to produce original material.

The product is simply diluted for profits rather than value.

Fakes & fads ensues and as a result, the public gets confused by receiving the wrong message(s).