![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thatcrazycajunWell, the Songbird and I finally went to see the new movie almost everyone on my LJ and Facebook friend lists has been raving about. I went in honestly wanting to like it, truly I did, as I have all the ten prior films released by Paramount Pictures under the Star Trek banner. But I don't; in fact, I'm disgusted with it...and here's why.
Spoilers back of the cut; you have been warned.
I could live with the casting choices, as dicey as they were in some instances (Chris Pine barely looks old enough to shave, but on the other hand Karl Urban and Zach Quinto showed they both got their characters), or the plot holes big enough to sail that shiny new starship through (A cadet—one on trial for cheating and breaking the honor code, yet!—being jumped up instantly to captain and given a starship, much less the fleet's spanking-new flagship, to command? No matter how heroic he's been, it doesn't wash) or the abysmally bad science (every Trek is notorious for giving all the real scientists in the audience conniptions). I could even live with the hamfisted attempt to jam this "re-imagining" into canon using poor Leonard Nimoy and the unspeakably overused time-travel plot device (as![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
khaosworks points out, there is no way in Hell this movie can fit into canon even as an offshoot). Or the lack of major themes relevant to the day, which has always been a hallmark not only of the Original Series but all its offspring.
But then J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman did the one thing I find absolutely, positively unforgivable: They destroyed Vulcan. Imploded it with a black hole planted in its core by the movie's villain, the Romulan renegade Nero, using something called "red matter" (which appears to have no scientific basis whatsoever and is basically defined as "magic stuff that makes the story go where we want it to"). Wiped out billions of its inhabitants and wildlife in hardly more time than it takes to tell it.
This planet was a keystone of the United Federation of Planets—in fact, one of its three founding worlds. It was instrumental in humans' joining the interstellar community in the canonical timeline. It had history and culture and rugged, harsh beauty, and a people who were ancient, advanced and flying in space when Earth's humans were just climbing down out of the trees. It had the Vulcan Science Academy, fergossakes! And they had Nero destroy it all for...what? To show how evil he is? Any number of other planets, or other dastardly deeds, could have been used for that. To make Spock a more tragic figure by offing his mother (after having barely been introduced to her!) and all but his father and about 10,000 other Vulcans? They didn't need that either; this character has withstood death and resurrection (which was the last time I was this outraged at an event in filmed Trek) and has long since proven his durable appeal.
This wantonly destructive writing choice, taken with all the other problems, was the last straw for me. This piece of crap may have the name slapped on it, but any resemblance between it and the Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry created and nursed along through decades of cult-level success at best is strictly coincidental. And I shall content myself with all the filmed material that has gone before and the occasional Pocket Books novel, from now on, and avoid giving this "rebooted" film series any more of my time or money. It's enough to make one think Harlan Ellison was right all along.
Spoilers back of the cut; you have been warned.
I could live with the casting choices, as dicey as they were in some instances (Chris Pine barely looks old enough to shave, but on the other hand Karl Urban and Zach Quinto showed they both got their characters), or the plot holes big enough to sail that shiny new starship through (A cadet—one on trial for cheating and breaking the honor code, yet!—being jumped up instantly to captain and given a starship, much less the fleet's spanking-new flagship, to command? No matter how heroic he's been, it doesn't wash) or the abysmally bad science (every Trek is notorious for giving all the real scientists in the audience conniptions). I could even live with the hamfisted attempt to jam this "re-imagining" into canon using poor Leonard Nimoy and the unspeakably overused time-travel plot device (as
khaosworks points out, there is no way in Hell this movie can fit into canon even as an offshoot). Or the lack of major themes relevant to the day, which has always been a hallmark not only of the Original Series but all its offspring.But then J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman did the one thing I find absolutely, positively unforgivable: They destroyed Vulcan. Imploded it with a black hole planted in its core by the movie's villain, the Romulan renegade Nero, using something called "red matter" (which appears to have no scientific basis whatsoever and is basically defined as "magic stuff that makes the story go where we want it to"). Wiped out billions of its inhabitants and wildlife in hardly more time than it takes to tell it.
This planet was a keystone of the United Federation of Planets—in fact, one of its three founding worlds. It was instrumental in humans' joining the interstellar community in the canonical timeline. It had history and culture and rugged, harsh beauty, and a people who were ancient, advanced and flying in space when Earth's humans were just climbing down out of the trees. It had the Vulcan Science Academy, fergossakes! And they had Nero destroy it all for...what? To show how evil he is? Any number of other planets, or other dastardly deeds, could have been used for that. To make Spock a more tragic figure by offing his mother (after having barely been introduced to her!) and all but his father and about 10,000 other Vulcans? They didn't need that either; this character has withstood death and resurrection (which was the last time I was this outraged at an event in filmed Trek) and has long since proven his durable appeal.
This wantonly destructive writing choice, taken with all the other problems, was the last straw for me. This piece of crap may have the name slapped on it, but any resemblance between it and the Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry created and nursed along through decades of cult-level success at best is strictly coincidental. And I shall content myself with all the filmed material that has gone before and the occasional Pocket Books novel, from now on, and avoid giving this "rebooted" film series any more of my time or money. It's enough to make one think Harlan Ellison was right all along.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 10:06 pm (UTC)Uh, excuse me, but did you read my comment about it?
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 10:12 pm (UTC)Most of the comments I've seen about the film have been positive, so I shall probably go and see it. I was never as invested in original Trek as I was in realWho, anyway, so I'm more open to shall we say variant texts.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-12 11:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 12:03 am (UTC)You know
Date: 2009-05-13 02:23 am (UTC)Re: You know
Date: 2009-05-13 10:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 04:09 am (UTC)I'm not quite as steamed about Vulcan being destroyed as you are, I guess. There are plenty of precedents in other branches of SF; Alderaan, for one, and we lost Earth in HHGG. If you think about it, the destruction of an entire planet and the inability to save more than a token number of its inhabitants would be a great jumping-off place for a series of books or movies, especially given the Vulcan culture which emphasizes logic but accounts for mysticism and the expression of emotion, no matter how seldom or how tightly channeled. We could see how these individuals, trained to see the world through a lens of logic, deal with such a massive tragedy. We could watch how it affects their cultural identity, their music, their literature, their mating choices and their stance toward the other races in the galaxy and toward the Federation.
Unfortunately, movies being what they are these days, we are never going to see that exploration.
This movie does have at least one redeeming feature. For years we have been trying to gently nudge my granddaughter in the direction of SF&F, preferably of the literary kind but we'll take what we can get. So far she has shown a lot more interest in Kim Possible than Kim Stanley Robinson. But she likes Star Trek and is asking if we can go back. Hopefully this will be the jumping-off point to get her deeper into SF&F.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-13 06:22 pm (UTC)