Focusing on photon torpedoes rather than proton torpedoes.

Last night I managed to scavenge up enough money to take myself and one other grueling Star Trek fan to see Star Trek: Into Darkness.
Let me star out by saying that I don’t have as many cruel words about Abrams as I thought I would, considering how cynical Trekkies can be concerning the entire structure of Star Trek when pitching it to an uncultured audience (usually fans of everyday SciFi or action films), but I’m happy to announce that after much consideration, I am actually pretty impressed, and not to mention slightly excited by what Abram’s approach might be to the upcoming Star Wars.2e6cxu9
But this post is not about Star Wars, as it usually is. But about Star Trek, the redheaded stepchild of most Science Fiction.
The problem with essentially remaking The Wrath of Khan is that you’re asking yourself to be geekily judged by the very high standard of Trekkies around the US.
I’m sure Abrams knew this when as he began working on the film. Abrams managed to take something that is solely based upon instances where there is a curious spatial anomaly in the astrometrics lab and an unexplained burst of tachyon particles from a nearby nebula has cause a wormhole.
This is what Trekkies love, and expect, and wait on the edge of their seats for. Abrams however made these moments almost nonexistent and focused more on the action-packed, dramatic ending, rather than mysteries to be explored.
Respectable, I suppose.
I suppose these are the things viewers hope for.
But the film dearly lacked important Trek-lingo that gave (my favorite) Voyager and the other Trek iterations their distinctive feel. I missed the babble and rambling of spacial distortions that is not scientifically possible.tumblr_mnpk9veZ1N1qe24emo1_500
Abrams did not give the Star Trek feel, it was much more like Star Wars than anything. Its preference for violence and political intrigue rather than science and exploration.
Baby Kirk quoted at the end of the film, “To explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before.” it was pretty bittersweet to listen to a line that we, as Trekkies, had heard over a hundred times, yet it was to sum up the ending of a film that did not have the soul of Star Trek.
It was upsetting to watch as Abrams approached those “new worlds” with phasers rather than tricorders.
That is NOT the Star Trek way.tumblr_m9q7fcNFKY1rehzdoo1_500My bitter Trekkie heart was a little sore. However Abrams managed not to derail Star Trek, but give you the feel that you just watched Will Smith curb stomp some aliens in Independence Day.
Which in once instance I loved, but like I said… That is NOT the Trek.
A couple other nitpicks I had toward the film was the looseness of the uniforms makes them lose someof the military-ness. This is the MILITARY, not cosplay.
Kirk would have NEVER sent his senior officer into a volcano. That shit is for redshirts, and redshirts only. There was no reason for Spock to be down there except to get Uhura all emotional.

Spock crying. Yes, it was sweet that Spock was all choked up about Kirk’s death (which is Spock’s death at end of The Wrath of Khan), but that is NOT Spock.
He would have sat there in silence, he never would have expressed such emotion.

Khan’s blood was not known to regenerate OTHER cells than his own. Where did Abram come up with that bullshit?

And one of the things that pissed me off the most were the Klingons. THOSE WERE NOT KLINGONS. Those things looked like the gay Persian God, Xerxes in 300 Movie.

BUT! The whole cast was rock-solid, honestly it was such an awesome thing to see Star Trek going from being KNOWN for their chronic horrible actors, to having some of the most extraordinary actors of our time. Benedict Cumberbatch was (for lack of better words) breathtaking at his performance as Khan.tumblr_mnpk9veZ1N1qe24emo2_500
I was (to put it lightly) disappointed that they decided to pick a pasty white British man to portray a genetically engineered superhuman from India, I have no idea how they messed that up. But that doesn’t sway the fact that Benedict did a superb job, as usual. Also Simon Pegg’s portrayal of Scotty was one of the most stand-out performances of the movie.
He was able to truly give the feel of Scotty, original Scotty. Which was such a relief because he is such an important piece of the series.
Overall, I kept in mind what Abrams said about the film – it’s for movie fans, not Trekkies.
He did provide the us with some “inside jokes” of the past. So, he did not completely forget about this audience. It was a movie for everyone.I recommend everyone – including Trekkies – to see it.
Abrams is trying to open it up to everyone wanting to see a good sci-fi movie. Star Trek Into Darkness isn’t a bad movie.
I even admit to the fact that it was a fucking badass fucking movie (even though it’s the new poster-child for sequel mistakes).
But what can you do?
I’m just one of the many Trekkies out there in the world who may ever be truly satisfied.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s