ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Star Trek III : The Search For Spock

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 21 2011, 7:55 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Jun. 21 2011, 5:18 am

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>


Oh, I dunno, I think it's kind of fun. 


And, yeah, it's all based on circumstantial evidence and yes, there is no smoking gun wrt such a child, but it was a planned plot point by Harve Bennett at least (at least I think it was him and maybe Nimoy, since HB wrote the screenplay). 


I read somewhere that Nimoy didn't like that plot point, so he just had Saavik written out.  It's kind of surprising that she was even shown in TVH.  That last scene with her and Spock, though, well, I thought there was some tension there.  I guess it's understandable, since they'd had relations, so maybe that's all it was.


 


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this Jun. 21 2011, 9:21 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Jun. 21 2011, 5:18 am

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>


Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:


-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas


-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior


-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly


-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap


It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want. - Spock

Ziriath

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 245

Report this Jun. 21 2011, 2:16 pm

I can imagine other reasons, why she stayed there. I am not into angst, so I see it something like this:


She spend the most of her life on the planet surface and alone. Then many years of studies. I suppose that she did not have much free time even on holidays, cos she had to catch up all the education. And then she was on a star ship, with many people around.  And then the ship, where she was assigned, was blown up. New school year is still far away, the superiors do not hurry with a new assignment or the new ship will be there in a month or two. Go with Spock and the others on a Bird of Prey? No, let's have a rest from suffocating atmosphere of a starship, especially this small one. Let's enjoy  open sky and landscape. What to do now? Wooohooo, holiday!  And why at Spock's parents? Yes, he's an important ambassador and surely has a garage full of shuttles and terestrial vehicles! He wouldnt miss one, would he?


 


THE WOMEN!!!

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Jun. 21 2011, 4:43 pm

What we see in STAR TREK IV is Saavik
in her pressed uniform, adorned with
spit and polish. She did NOT have any
baby bump, nor was she in a moo moo.
Her being left behind meant and means
only one thing: all she's good for is
Pon Farr!


Saying of which:
We ALL know how Spock's Pon Farr had
been dealt with in AMOK TIME! ... Proof
that sexual intercourse is NOT necessary
to relieve it. And Saavik would have only
gone as far with relieving Spock on Genesis,
as was necessary. Caressing fingers did the
trick! Now, let's move on, people ... please.


rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 7:47 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>What we see in STAR TREK IV is Saavik
in her pressed uniform, adorned with
spit and polish. She did NOT have any
baby bump, nor was she in a moo moo.
Her being left behind meant and means
only one thing: all she's good for is
Pon Farr!

>Saying of which:
We ALL know how Spock's Pon Farr had
been dealt with in AMOK TIME! ... Proof
that sexual intercourse is NOT necessary
to relieve it. And Saavik would have only
gone as far with relieving Spock on Genesis,
as was necessary. Caressing fingers did the
trick! Now, let's move on, people ... please.

>

You don't show after only 3 months.

Come on those big red jackets hid a multitude of sins.

In 'Wink of an Eye' we just saw Kirk putting on his boots on the bed. Deela was dressed, no-one had a hair out of place but we all know what happened.

Thet traditionally don't show any explicit detail in Star Trek movies to keep the PG 13 rating.


Servalfan is right.  My wife had twins this past March.  After 3 months, there is only a slight bump.  The fetus is only like 6 cm from head to rump.  It'd be easy for Saavik to conceal her pregnancy.   Heck, since she's Romulan/Vulcan she might barely show. 


Second, just "carressing fingers," is not going to do "the trick."  We all know that if a Vulcan Male isn't satiated with sex (or violence in the case of Spock in "Amok Time") he'll die.  The finger touching was Vulcan foreplay.  It obviously went beyond that.  Saavik did the deed with young Spock.  That fact is indispuitable.  Whether there was a child that resulted, well, that's certainly debatable.  The original intent, again, was that there was.


 


 


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 7:54 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>

Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:

-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas

-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior

-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly

-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap

Who hoo - go the fanwankery.

Saavik being pregnant wasn't canon but neither was it 'not canon' as she was never seen again after STIV.

And I've been happy with my life since 1984 think Saavik did get pregnant but disappointed that nearly 30 years later I have no canon evidence of it. But I know in my fangirl way that it did indeed happen and of course Spock was/is perfectly ummm capable of having children and never fires blanks. I'm absolutely sure of it.

 


Yeah, I'm dissapointed to.  That could've been a "fascinating" plot point in the franchise if they'd actually followed through on it.     With the new ST XI timeline, I'd say its chances of entering canon are nil. 


I wonder, though, if there was any discussion by any of the producers or writers of the spin-offs wrt picking up this plot-thread, that is, bringing back Saavik and "her child" for an episode.  I know they had Robin Curtis in that TNG episode "Gambit" (which I thought was a really fun 2-parter).  Why didn't they just do an episode with her as Saavik?  It kind of seems like a no brainer.  And you'd think that ST fans like Ron Moore on the writing staff would've remembered the whole "Saavik and Spock had sex on the Genesis planet" event.  Heck, they could've brought Nimoy back too for that, I bet.  Of course, by that time, Berman had probably already burned bridges with Nimoy and had him effectively banned from ever appearing in the franchise again, thanks to Nimoy's frank critique of the GEN script and his refusal to direct and appear in the film. 


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 11:40 am

Quote: Treknoir @ Jun. 21 2011, 9:21 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Jun. 21 2011, 5:18 am

>

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>

Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:

-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas

-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior

-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly

-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap



I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 11:43 am

Quote: rocketscientist @ Jun. 22 2011, 7:54 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>

Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:

-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas

-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior

-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly

-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap

Who hoo - go the fanwankery.

Saavik being pregnant wasn't canon but neither was it 'not canon' as she was never seen again after STIV.

And I've been happy with my life since 1984 think Saavik did get pregnant but disappointed that nearly 30 years later I have no canon evidence of it. But I know in my fangirl way that it did indeed happen and of course Spock was/is perfectly ummm capable of having children and never fires blanks. I'm absolutely sure of it.

 

Yeah, I'm dissapointed to.  That could've been a "fascinating" plot point in the franchise if they'd actually followed through on it.     With the new ST XI timeline, I'd say its chances of entering canon are nil. 

I wonder, though, if there was any discussion by any of the producers or writers of the spin-offs wrt picking up this plot-thread, that is, bringing back Saavik and "her child" for an episode.  I know they had Robin Curtis in that TNG episode "Gambit" (which I thought was a really fun 2-parter).  Why didn't they just do an episode with her as Saavik?  It kind of seems like a no brainer.  And you'd think that ST fans like Ron Moore on the writing staff would've remembered the whole "Saavik and Spock had sex on the Genesis planet" event.  Heck, they could've brought Nimoy back too for that, I bet.  Of course, by that time, Berman had probably already burned bridges with Nimoy and had him effectively banned from ever appearing in the franchise again, thanks to Nimoy's frank critique of the GEN script and his refusal to direct and appear in the film. 

 


 


To me, it just seems far too soap-opera-ish to have fit into the 2-hour action / dventure format of the Star Trek movies cleanly.


Books? Yes. Comics? Sure, I guess. An off-hand mention in TNG or one of the spin-offs? Why not? Revisiting this in Star Trek IV, V, or VI...? Nah, I'm glad they let it be.


Different strokes...


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 12:01 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Jun. 22 2011, 11:43 am

Quote: rocketscientist @ Jun. 22 2011, 7:54 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>

Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:

-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas

-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior

-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly

-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap

Who hoo - go the fanwankery.

Saavik being pregnant wasn't canon but neither was it 'not canon' as she was never seen again after STIV.

And I've been happy with my life since 1984 think Saavik did get pregnant but disappointed that nearly 30 years later I have no canon evidence of it. But I know in my fangirl way that it did indeed happen and of course Spock was/is perfectly ummm capable of having children and never fires blanks. I'm absolutely sure of it.

 

Yeah, I'm dissapointed to.  That could've been a "fascinating" plot point in the franchise if they'd actually followed through on it.     With the new ST XI timeline, I'd say its chances of entering canon are nil. 

I wonder, though, if there was any discussion by any of the producers or writers of the spin-offs wrt picking up this plot-thread, that is, bringing back Saavik and "her child" for an episode.  I know they had Robin Curtis in that TNG episode "Gambit" (which I thought was a really fun 2-parter).  Why didn't they just do an episode with her as Saavik?  It kind of seems like a no brainer.  And you'd think that ST fans like Ron Moore on the writing staff would've remembered the whole "Saavik and Spock had sex on the Genesis planet" event.  Heck, they could've brought Nimoy back too for that, I bet.  Of course, by that time, Berman had probably already burned bridges with Nimoy and had him effectively banned from ever appearing in the franchise again, thanks to Nimoy's frank critique of the GEN script and his refusal to direct and appear in the film. 

 

 

To me, it just seems far too soap-opera-ish to have fit into the 2-hour action / dventure format of the Star Trek movies cleanly.

Books? Yes. Comics? Sure, I guess. An off-hand mention in TNG or one of the spin-offs? Why not? Revisiting this in Star Trek IV, V, or VI...? Nah, I'm glad they let it be.

Different strokes...


Yeah, I see what you mean.  I'd say if it was going to be in the succeeding films, i.e. TUC, it would have to be very organic and important to the plot, obviously.  Maybe it would've been more appropriate for TNG.  Heck, they could've even introduced the son or daughter of Spock as a new regular or semi-regular. 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 12:02 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>But in the Final Frontier movie Kirk, Spock and Bones were talking about the fact they have no families...

>

Spock may well be blissfully unaware of any Saavik-produced progeny.

Exactly, imagine the angst if he found out.


It could have been great!


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

Ghostmojo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1826

Report this Jun. 22 2011, 1:07 pm

Quote: rocketscientist @ Jun. 22 2011, 7:47 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>What we see in STAR TREK IV is Saavik
in her pressed uniform, adorned with
spit and polish. She did NOT have any
baby bump, nor was she in a moo moo.
Her being left behind meant and means
only one thing: all she's good for is
Pon Farr!

>Saying of which:
We ALL know how Spock's Pon Farr had
been dealt with in AMOK TIME! ... Proof
that sexual intercourse is NOT necessary
to relieve it. And Saavik would have only
gone as far with relieving Spock on Genesis,
as was necessary. Caressing fingers did the
trick! Now, let's move on, people ... please.

>

You don't show after only 3 months.

Come on those big red jackets hid a multitude of sins.

In 'Wink of an Eye' we just saw Kirk putting on his boots on the bed. Deela was dressed, no-one had a hair out of place but we all know what happened.

Thet traditionally don't show any explicit detail in Star Trek movies to keep the PG 13 rating.

Servalfan is right.  My wife had twins this past March.  After 3 months, there is only a slight bump.  The fetus is only like 6 cm from head to rump.  It'd be easy for Saavik to conceal her pregnancy.   Heck, since she's Romulan/Vulcan she might barely show. 

Second, just "carressing fingers," is not going to do "the trick."  We all know that if a Vulcan Male isn't satiated with sex (or violence in the case of Spock in "Amok Time") he'll die.  The finger touching was Vulcan foreplay.  It obviously went beyond that.  Saavik did the deed with young Spock.  That fact is indispuitable.  Whether there was a child that resulted, well, that's certainly debatable.  The original intent, again, was that there was.


Oh I think it is disputable.


Bearing in mind this is a family board (or there are younger posters here) lets' just say a Vulcan lady could do a lot with her hands ...


to boldy go where no man has gone before

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 23 2011, 7:29 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>

>

>

>Bottom line is that any of the "pregnant Saavik" stuff is fanwanky speculation. If it isn't shown or mentioned on screen, it ain't canon.

>I've been very happy living my life since 1984 figuring that Saavik did not get pregnant. Even if they did, ahem, "go all the way" on Genesis, who's to say that the "shot on goal" was successful?

>Silly discussion! 

>

Vger, fanwanky speculation is the majority of the conversation on any ST board at any given time. I believe the breakdown is as follows:

-60% fanwanky speculation/continuity/retcon/new series ideas

-15% my favorite ST series is the best and all others are inferior

-15% HAWTEST female/male/alien/ship/entity/anomaly

-10% ST09 violated me like I was a fresh and purty inmate who dropped the soap

Who hoo - go the fanwankery.

Saavik being pregnant wasn't canon but neither was it 'not canon' as she was never seen again after STIV.

And I've been happy with my life since 1984 think Saavik did get pregnant but disappointed that nearly 30 years later I have no canon evidence of it. But I know in my fangirl way that it did indeed happen and of course Spock was/is perfectly ummm capable of having children and never fires blanks. I'm absolutely sure of it.

 

Yeah, I'm dissapointed to.  That could've been a "fascinating" plot point in the franchise if they'd actually followed through on it.     With the new ST XI timeline, I'd say its chances of entering canon are nil. 

I wonder, though, if there was any discussion by any of the producers or writers of the spin-offs wrt picking up this plot-thread, that is, bringing back Saavik and "her child" for an episode.  I know they had Robin Curtis in that TNG episode "Gambit" (which I thought was a really fun 2-parter).  Why didn't they just do an episode with her as Saavik?  It kind of seems like a no brainer.  And you'd think that ST fans like Ron Moore on the writing staff would've remembered the whole "Saavik and Spock had sex on the Genesis planet" event.  Heck, they could've brought Nimoy back too for that, I bet.  Of course, by that time, Berman had probably already burned bridges with Nimoy and had him effectively banned from ever appearing in the franchise again, thanks to Nimoy's frank critique of the GEN script and his refusal to direct and appear in the film. 

 

 

To me, it just seems far too soap-opera-ish to have fit into the 2-hour action / dventure format of the Star Trek movies cleanly.

Books? Yes. Comics? Sure, I guess. An off-hand mention in TNG or one of the spin-offs? Why not? Revisiting this in Star Trek IV, V, or VI...? Nah, I'm glad they let it be.

Different strokes...

I would have been OK with this too.

Some stuff is left better to the imagination.

Perhaps she could have had twins in honour of RS


That would certainly tax her Vulcan calm! 


It's no picnic with twins.  The boy head-butted my wife in the jaw yesterday.  He's packin' on the pounds and is over double his 5 lbm 9 oz weight at 3 months, so he's got a big red head.


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

Ziriath

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 245

Report this Jul. 09 2011, 4:31 pm

 


Some time ago I saw a TNG episode, where Deanna Troi learned that a bridge officer should be able to send even a chief engineer and friend to death, when the situation demands it. Then I started to think about the scenes before Spock's death. It seemed to me everyone in the engineering knew exactly what should be done, everyone knew that everyone will die if no one will do it, and nobody there did it.. Like they were just waiting for someone (Spock) to walk in and fix the engine. It quite ruins the ending of TWOK for me (even when I know the backstory).


I do not want Scotty to be dead. I like him. But his death would be right in this case. Or, as I said previously, it could be Saavik and her own decision..


The simulation in that TNG episode might be based on the TWOK events.


 


THE WOMEN!!!

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: miklamar

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum