Not your father's Star Trek
I am not surprised by the opening grosses of the new Star Trek film because it promised a new take on the same story. Therein lies the rub. By no means a Trekkie (or Trekker), I do like my Star Trek unadulterated and as close to the original as it can get. I have never, for example, been enthralled with the later incarnations (Voyager, Next Generation). But I did have to go into this one with an open mind, if not an open heart.
And it is the same but different. Time travel is introduced in this new movie which alters the destinies of the characters, as old Spock notes to new Spock.
According to Star Trek Canon (and I am by no means an expert), Jim and Spock are not at the Academy at the same time and do not meet until Jim serves on the Enterprise, where Spock has been an officer for 11 years.
In the new film, Jim's years as an Academy instructor are ignored, and the graduating cadet meets Spock during the Kobayashi Maru test. As we know, Kirk's ability to beat that test remains a mystery until the Wrath of Khan when the test presents itself in real choices.
Personally, I think that Spock's allure was that he was generally unflappable, and when he did flap it usually meant there was serious danger ahead. Also, he appealed to female viewers and characters because of his unattainableness. You might remember that in the very early episodes of the original series, Spock and Ohura clearly flirt--and it is reciprocal. In the second season, as Spock's dual nature is explored, he seems to have a thing for nurse Chapel. Finally, while under the influence of mind-altering spores (season one), Spock is reunited with a woman with whom he clearly had some sort of previous relationship. At the end, returned to his most logical self, Spock remarks that the experience was the only time during which he was completely happy.
The Spock in this new incarnation is more vulnerable, less unflappable, and definitely more attainable. I confess that Spock's duality was always the most interesting aspect for me, so I am willing to accept that a younger Spock is less able to deal with his own duality, even though he was never, and will never be, wholly human or Vulcan. The death of his mother in this version is violent and sudden. The young actor really did a wonderful job of conveying the horror of that moment, expecting, somehow that his mother will magically appear on the transporter.
Again, this is time travel, so this incident and the attendant emotions are bound to reverberate through Spock who was always conflicted about the emotions he felt for his mother. Although the destruction of Vulcan was never part of the original story, this is a new story because time travel has changed events.
Therefore, the older Spock would then have the new memories of his younger self, and would be able to suggest to the new young Kirk that the younger Spock was, at that moment, particularly vulnerable and because of his youth, perhaps, less able to sublimate that pain and shock and more open to the vicious goading that eventually leads to his loss of command.
I have a harder time with the new Kirk, who is more impetuous, more of an unthinking cowboy than the original Kirk, who, if you remember, was a severe taskmaster while an Academy instructor. But again, he's young and unseasoned, which then begs the question, why give him command of the Enterprise?
So I wonder, do I have a mild form of Trek-O-Mania or do other, perhaps more hardcore fans, have the same concerns. I'd love to hear what others think.
And it is the same but different. Time travel is introduced in this new movie which alters the destinies of the characters, as old Spock notes to new Spock.
According to Star Trek Canon (and I am by no means an expert), Jim and Spock are not at the Academy at the same time and do not meet until Jim serves on the Enterprise, where Spock has been an officer for 11 years.
In the new film, Jim's years as an Academy instructor are ignored, and the graduating cadet meets Spock during the Kobayashi Maru test. As we know, Kirk's ability to beat that test remains a mystery until the Wrath of Khan when the test presents itself in real choices.
Personally, I think that Spock's allure was that he was generally unflappable, and when he did flap it usually meant there was serious danger ahead. Also, he appealed to female viewers and characters because of his unattainableness. You might remember that in the very early episodes of the original series, Spock and Ohura clearly flirt--and it is reciprocal. In the second season, as Spock's dual nature is explored, he seems to have a thing for nurse Chapel. Finally, while under the influence of mind-altering spores (season one), Spock is reunited with a woman with whom he clearly had some sort of previous relationship. At the end, returned to his most logical self, Spock remarks that the experience was the only time during which he was completely happy.
The Spock in this new incarnation is more vulnerable, less unflappable, and definitely more attainable. I confess that Spock's duality was always the most interesting aspect for me, so I am willing to accept that a younger Spock is less able to deal with his own duality, even though he was never, and will never be, wholly human or Vulcan. The death of his mother in this version is violent and sudden. The young actor really did a wonderful job of conveying the horror of that moment, expecting, somehow that his mother will magically appear on the transporter.
Again, this is time travel, so this incident and the attendant emotions are bound to reverberate through Spock who was always conflicted about the emotions he felt for his mother. Although the destruction of Vulcan was never part of the original story, this is a new story because time travel has changed events.
Therefore, the older Spock would then have the new memories of his younger self, and would be able to suggest to the new young Kirk that the younger Spock was, at that moment, particularly vulnerable and because of his youth, perhaps, less able to sublimate that pain and shock and more open to the vicious goading that eventually leads to his loss of command.
I have a harder time with the new Kirk, who is more impetuous, more of an unthinking cowboy than the original Kirk, who, if you remember, was a severe taskmaster while an Academy instructor. But again, he's young and unseasoned, which then begs the question, why give him command of the Enterprise?
So I wonder, do I have a mild form of Trek-O-Mania or do other, perhaps more hardcore fans, have the same concerns. I'd love to hear what others think.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by I'm Not a Turnip on -
I think it's time to quote a little Scripture. From the book of Joel:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
And other science facts,
Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show,
I should really just relax"
I really enjoy Star Trek and have watched every episode from every series at least once. I don't care about which captain is "better" or become outraged by some niggling inconsistencies. I say "so what." I watch for the sake of having a little fun - I'm not studying it in preparation of some imaginary test that will somehow make my life better or different.
I say enjoy the ride or don't get in line for the roller coaster.
-
Permalink Reply by eviltimes on -
I'd love you to put a big dark SPOILER ALERT on the top of this page, please.
I hate time travel stories too, they always trip over their own feet or just use it for a "God" ending. But it is not used as the primary story here, and they didn't mess it up, so I could roll with it. My wife and I both cheered with the rest of the theatre when the movie ended. That doesn't happen very often.
And, I would put this time frame about 10 years prior to TOS, and yes, they changed some things that will really piss off trufans Canon worship. Still thought it was a hell of a summer popcorn movie!
-
Permalink Reply by spiderpig on -
I hate time travel stories also, especially if they try to "go back" after the timeline changes, but this one was good because if there's a sequel (and with those box office numbers how can there not be) it looks like they'll just continue with the alternate reality JJ Abrams created. The purists can still have their original "canon" in the previous tv shows and movies, and the new people jumping on board can proceed with the reboot in forthcoming movies.
-
Permalink Reply by JDoors on -
Clearly, it's Trek-Mania. On and on about ONE character's appeal and motivations? And you question whether or not you're obsessed? (Not sayin' that's a bad thing.)
I loved everything they did. They made a movie that stands alone, yet manages to honor Star Trek cannon, at least as far as possible while avoiding simply repeating what's been done.
Kirk's "impetuousness" was a bit stronger than I expected, but it's not impossible to accept. Kirk is known, after all, as someone who plays by his own rules. He wasn't "given" command, he stumbled into it in a rather round-about way.
Spock, I agree, was different than expected, but the character was great nonetheless. I could certainly see how meeting his future self could have changed him into the Vulcan he would eventually become.
And the others! Whoa; great, funny, unexpected.
After so many years of Star Trek, I have no problem with them changing things around. After all, they've made it perfectly clear that there is no "one" timeline. Some of the best shows were "alternate" universes/dimensions. One of the best things in the series "Enterprise," in which they made some production changes that DIDN'T work, were the alternate reality episodes.
-
Permalink Reply by Moviebunny on -
Well, no, see that's the thing with Time Travel, once your past is changed so is your future, so you don't become what you were but something different. Spock as always going to out Vulcan pure Vulcans but he becomes something else when he and Kirk endure what they endure, which is now changed, yes, yes, for a whole new generation of people to buy tickets for a franchise that was on its last leg. I get it.
A character's appeal and motivations are the reasons why people tune in or buy a ticket. The problem is that people want big, dumb summer movies, which leaves no room for a more intelligent take on the same subject.
I am now beginning to sound obsessed, so I think it's time to sign off.
-
Permalink Reply by Cheryl on -
I'd love to hear what others think.
I didn't like it. I'm not a Trekkie. I'm impressed with your knowledge of the show for someone who also says they're not a Trekkie. Anyway, it's a big dumb summer movie and I tend to not like those. It wasn't my idea to go see it, but I'm glad I got that over with because I knew I'd have to see it eventually.
-
Permalink Reply by Phineas T Freakears on -
In honor of some movie that came out this weekend.
-
Permalink Reply by Moviebunny on
-
OKAY, LOVED THAT odd video, something else to think about, I guess.
Not really obsessed as it sounds, but, you know, if one is going to do a prequel to an existing franchise one might wish to respect the original precepts--or not--it is, after all, only a movie. And since it is only a movie, I guess this means at some point the dead Kirk will be resurrected.
Still, Spock rules.
-
Permalink Reply by I'm Not a Turnip on
-
A Zombie Trek movie would ROOOOOCCCCKKKK! Since Simon Pegg is the new Scottie, it's already half written.
- 1
- 2
About
Badge
Photos
Ning Stats...
© 2009 Created by droidmaker on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network
