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).