Obvoiusly, in which case there would be absolutely no point in mentioning it either at the beginning (with Sulu) or at the end (before using said equipment). They should have just said “hey, we have a bunch of techno-babble equipment, let’s use it to build the thing”.
So you’re saying that if you had been an editor and had read the screenplay immediately before shooting began and had said to the writers and directors “hey, wtf? at the beginning it’s one ship that has equipment for tracking gaseous anomalies, and at the end it’s a different one” they would have said “wait, there’s a CONNECTION between those two scenes? I mean, the one at the beginning is purely intended to show the flavor of the kind of thing Starfleet does, and the one at the end is just some technobabble”? That’s ridiculous. I’d bet good money that some initial draft of the script started out with both of those scenes taking place on the same ship, at some point one of them got moved onto a different ship, and no one noticed until it was too late. There’s no way that whoever wrote that movie was either weird of subtle or unlucky enough to insert identical and connected-seeming technobabble setting up a classic “here’s some special equipment/talent we have… oh hey, it came in handy!” plotline, but with the wrong ship at the end, purely by accident.
I agree that there are plenty of in-universe explanations. But I’d give you huge odds that the out-of-universe explanation is a mistake.
There’s one major problem with the idea that the scanning equipment was standard issue, and not something special that Sulu had taken on board for that specific mission. If that sort of scanning equipment is standard on Federation starships, then the Klingon cloaking device, which is presented as a major military game-changer, was obsolete before it ever left the drawing board.
No, there’s a point, it’s to remind the audience that starships have that kind of equipment. Pulling technobabble out of your ass is bad writing.
That an incredibly poor reading of what I said. I’m going to assume it’s not deliberate and just suggest you read it again.
You mean the same cloaking device that leaves a smudge in the starfield, so when a ship goes to cloak everyone stares at the screen to look for wavering stars? The cloaking device is as good or as bad as the plot calls for.
cloaked ships - prior to this one - really couldn’t do much other than “not be seen” - in this case, this one could fire while cloaked making it much more dangerous.
IOW, they weren’t as concerned with firing on cloaked ships in the past.
I’m willing to assume that now all torpedoes will have this guidance bit added to them.
I’m not quite sure what you’re saying, but I have clarified what I’m saying, so I’ll try to express it again. Tell me where you disagree:
(1) It’s very clear that ST6 contains two scenes which, taken together, are VERY SIMILAR to an extremely familiar story beat/trope… the “hey, here’s a somewhat random mention of some skill or item I possess” and then many scenes later “wow, it’s lucky that I possess that skill or item, as it will now save the day”.
(2) In fact, it’s so similar to that familiar trope that I suspect a fair number of people, upon seeing the movie initially, didn’t even realize that the two scenes took place on different starships
(3) So the question is, why is that almost-but-not-quite trope there? I can think of several explanations:
(a) The writers intended for the trope to be complete and correct, but someone screwed up at some point between script and screen
(b) The writers didn’t intend for there to be a trope at all, and just didn’t notice that the line of dialog early in the movie and the line of dialog late in the movie would seem similar to people
(c) The writers intended the scenes to be as written, because to them it was adequately clear that Excelsior was not the ONLY ship that was studying gaseous anomalies
(d) The writers intended the scenes to be as written, because they were doing some kind of Whedon-esque lampshading of the whole trope
(e) The writers intended the scenes to be as written as a bit of a prank to see if anyone would notice
To me, (a) is just hugely the most likely. What are your thoughts?
I could see A or C, but for me, it’s still only a nitpick, not a plot hole. Yeah, it could’ve been done better, but it’s not outside what I (a hardcore, longterm Trek fan, to be sure) would see as a reasonable, but somewhat poorly done scene.
I guess, in the movies at least, some will have higher expectations. I can see your point, I’m just not going to say it’s major. IOW, it doesn’t detract from the movie, imho. A casual fan would probably not even notice. A hardcore fan, like all of us here, might go one way or the other.
Has there actually been a scene in Star Trek where someone spots a cloaked ship by looking for wavering stars on the main view screen? Even for Trek, that would be hilariously stupid.
But, in this instance, I’m not talking about how cloaking devices were handled throughout the whole Trek continuity, just the continuity of this specific movie. In this movie, the new cloaking device is presented as a major new threat. If the gear necessary to detect one is already standard issue on all Starfleet ships, the new cloaking device is useless, and the Klingons look stupid for wasting their time inventing it in the first place. And given that making Klingons look stupid and ineffectual was more TNG’s bag that TOS, I don’t think that was the intent.
It’s a bit of a weird case, in that if we assume that the trope was meant to be complete (which as experienced consumers of fiction we pretty much have to) then it’s effectively a MASSIVE continuity blunder. At the same time the actual in-universe implications are at least potentially minor (although Miller’s point is a good one).
So if you imagine rating potential plot holes on one axis of how silly a mistake it seems for the writers to make and one axis of how hard it is to fanwank around the results in-universe, it’s larger on the first axis than on the second, which is backwards from the way it usually is. (For instance, it’s super-easy to see how George Lucas put in that line about the Kessel run and parsecs, but takes a reasonable bit of ingenuity to fanwank the error away, which is a more typical “plot hole”.)
So - you’re saying that the tail pipe is akin to an exhaust port?
and technically, it was the only prototype - I’m sure many a klingon engineer back on kronos did a collective headsmack and/or started complaining that managment had said it was ok to ship with that particular feature since it was an alpha release and they could fix it in later versions.
I… don’t think so, but sure, I guess they’re pretty much the same thing.
Which is back to “Klingons are chumps,” the deadly new Klingon Bird of Prey is a paper tiger, and most of the dramatic tension is gutted from the movie because the major threat is no threat at all.
Ah. There’s something to that, but I think the fact that it required literal magic powers to exploit the design flaw somewhat forgives the Imperial engineers.
If you can find a copy of the comic anthology Star Wars Tales Vol. I, check out “A Death Star is Born.” It’s pretty much exactly that meeting, and it’s hilarious.
