After weeks of rave reviews for the latest Trek movie (even an endorsement from the president!), with moderate skepticism we ventured out last night to find precisely what we expected: the standard, trite formula: action, violence and special effects. Oh sure, they re-invented (used) our beloved characters as a vehicle to pull in a large gate; but aside from these wafer-thin imposters, there was no Star Trek in the production.
Instead, we got a pop-culture caricature of an arrogant, self-serving, authority-defying youth with zero leadership potential who brings the staid, adult leadership of Star Fleet Command to its knees in adulation over imaginary heroism.
We got another message to our youth that arrogance, disrespect for others, and wanton violence have no consequences. Oh, so we don’t need to fear a beating that would probably require months of reconstructive surgery, plastic surgery, dental reconstruction, leading perhaps to permanent mental disability, since our hero walked away from a bar fight that he initiated with a few bruises and felt fine a couple of days later.
J. J. Abrams has hijacked and sullied the Star Trek franchise by twisting Gene Roddenberry’s vision of exploring the best that we have to offer and delivering the worst. I was duped into visiting this travesty. Can the legacy of my beloved Star Trek survive this assault?
Television is filled with “reality” programs that are as contrived as any of these action thrillers that attack our senses. It must be another comment on our culture that in order to find a movie depicting real life we must go to Pixar and watch a cartoon.
Oh yes, Checkov was not in the original crew of the Enterprise.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I take it you have either seen Up! or Wall-e? (terrific films) And yes, even though I totally enjoyed Star Trek, it was nothing but a special effect/violence money-maker. But in this age of consumerism, can we truly expect more from Hollywood; the primary distributer of American culture? No, I think we cannot. However I still have hope in a select few directors and artists that actually see beauty in film and care more about the basic plot and characters than the money the film will rake in. Have you seen Slumdog Millionare yet?
ReplyDeleteoh. I hear great things about the film Moon. It is supposed to be a bit scary though!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the latest Star Trek adventure, but then my standards in movies are pretty low. I expect consumerism, because I feel it is awfully naive to expect otherwise. When a movie comes out which is not completely driven by economic considerations, I am ecstatic. While it is fun, I suppose, to complain about an emphasis on action, violence, special effects, etc. etc., I must say, "Get a grip". This is our world. It's a lot like expecting a politician to be intelligent and honest. Are you kidding me? That world does not exist. This is not cynicism, it is truth.
ReplyDeleteValid comment. There are so many "action thrillers" out there---why do we need just one more, with "Star Trek" attached to it. As schlocky as the series (of movies) became after Roddenberry's death in 1991, they still had the feel of Star Trek. They still targeted me---a real "Trekkie". This new movie targets a different audience, and I can't believe that Roddenberry would have staked his franchise on it.
ReplyDelete