Another way to look at it though, is Kirk wanted to draw attention to the ridiculousness of the test. He was making a bold statement that his intention wasn’t to “cheat” but to show the test was stupid by rubbing it in their faces. He was saying if you’re going to fix it so I can’t win, I’m going to fix it so no one can lose.
I have my issues with the Kelvin timeline. And to be honest I think the writing could have been better in that scene. But I would prefer they replace the ending of movie two. The reactor sacrifice thing went away past just a nod to previous movies into lazy writing. And the blood thing created SO many future plot holes…
This is how I see it. Reprogramming the test was a protest, and protests should be loud and obvious. A subtle change that made the test just barely passable would have just looked like academic dishonesty.
That’s very true, Kelvin Kirk is much more obnoxious than I believe prime Kirk would have been as a cadet. I’m not even sure Kelvin Kirk has the necessary charm to argue his way out of trouble the way prime Kirk did. If the attack on Vulcan hadn’t interrupted, I could see the academy authorities coming down pretty hard on him.
Yeah Into Darkness was just a bad concept all around. Just a bad idea to remake a good movie in general. And then Star Trek II revolved around a villain from Kirk’s past coming back for revenge. Kirk and Khan never met before in the Kelvin timeline, so there really isn’t anything there. It was destined to be a a half-assed remake at the concept stage, and they should’ve scrapped it and done pretty much anything else as soon as someone suggested bringing back Khan.
Yeah, I mentioned the end, but that was more the straw that broke the camel’s back. I’m general I liked them all but 2 was the worst of the three without question.
I understand where you’re coming from.
Another way to look at it though, is Kirk wanted to draw attention to the ridiculousness of the test. He was making a bold statement that his intention wasn’t to “cheat” but to show the test was stupid by rubbing it in their faces. He was saying if you’re going to fix it so I can’t win, I’m going to fix it so no one can lose.
I have my issues with the Kelvin timeline. And to be honest I think the writing could have been better in that scene. But I would prefer they replace the ending of movie two. The reactor sacrifice thing went away past just a nod to previous movies into lazy writing. And the blood thing created SO many future plot holes…
This is how I see it. Reprogramming the test was a protest, and protests should be loud and obvious. A subtle change that made the test just barely passable would have just looked like academic dishonesty.
Yeah the more thought about it, you also can’t compare “canon” Kirk to the Kelvin Kirk. Expecting one that grew up without a dad to act the same…
That’s very true, Kelvin Kirk is much more obnoxious than I believe prime Kirk would have been as a cadet. I’m not even sure Kelvin Kirk has the necessary charm to argue his way out of trouble the way prime Kirk did. If the attack on Vulcan hadn’t interrupted, I could see the academy authorities coming down pretty hard on him.
Yeah Into Darkness was just a bad concept all around. Just a bad idea to remake a good movie in general. And then Star Trek II revolved around a villain from Kirk’s past coming back for revenge. Kirk and Khan never met before in the Kelvin timeline, so there really isn’t anything there. It was destined to be a a half-assed remake at the concept stage, and they should’ve scrapped it and done pretty much anything else as soon as someone suggested bringing back Khan.
Still it’s not the worst Trek movie.
Yeah, I mentioned the end, but that was more the straw that broke the camel’s back. I’m general I liked them all but 2 was the worst of the three without question.