A few blogs back I put together a list of the top whatever sci-fi shows of all time, and both Star Trek and Lost were on it.
Now, I was a late comer to Lost. I watched the premiere way back when, but it didn't grab me so I gave up on it about 30 minutes in. Then I started to hear about how great it was, but I didn't care. It wasn't until I fell for Abby that I began to seriously consider giving it a second chance. This year, I did that very thing, and was pleasantly amazed.
Lost is everything that good sci-fi and good television should be. It's exciting and action packed, for those people who need a lot of gunfighting and explosions in their entertainment. But more importantly, it's a mystery that actually knows where it's going. I know a common complaint about Lost is that the writers never answer any of their many questions, they just raise more. I'm not sure that I understand this, because having just watched the first five seasons in direct succession, it is pretty clear to me what the answers are to almost all of the mysteries raised in seasons 1, 2, 3, and 4. It's only a couple of questions raised in season 5 that are still up in the air. But what was cool about those questions is that they didn't have easy, predictable answers. They kept you wondering for a very long time. Lost is a show that requires patience. But don't let anyone tell you that the writers are making it up as they go along, because that is demonstrably not true. These guys have known since season 1, they just haven't let us in on the secret.
Star Trek was also on the list. Star Trek was a remarkable show that spawned a series of less remarkable spin-offs and a bunch of movies, some that were very good, others that were not. Most of the not so good ones were related to TNG spin-off.
But Star Trek was never about fast-paced action with little validation. It was about exploration and discovery. In fact, every single movie with the original cast had this as one of the major themes. So did both the original series and The Next Generation.
In the new movie, Abrams takes an incredibly flimsy premise (That an interstellar mining crew would be so overcome with vengance that they would wait 25 years for it, then use their mining ship to try to destroy the entire Federation of Planets. Why didn't they just jaunt off to Romulus and try to stop the destruction of their homeworld before it happened?) as an excuse to provide a lot of unrealistic action sequences. There was none of the planning that goes into Lost and none of the sense of wonder that goes into Star Trek. There was just a bunch of stuff blowing up. If that's what you want in a movie, fine. I like that stuff a little, too. Just don't hype it up as being so great. Tell me it's a kind of silly movie with a bunch of cool looking effects. That's all I'm saying.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Saturday, May 23, 2009
What I Didn't Like About Star Trek
I won't go so far as to say I hated the new movie. It was a mildly entertaining action film. I just don't understand all the hype. In an attempt to further my reputation as the guy who never likes anything popular, here are the reasons why I felt that the newest addition to the Star Trek universe was not a terribly good movie.
1. It was kind of boring.
I remember looking at my timepiece at several points. I knew the movie had a two hour running time, so I was able to keep myself going by saying, "Oh good, only 30 minutes to go." I can't really put my finger on exactly why it was boring without going into my other reasons I didn't like it.
2. It was unrealistic.
Listen, I know it's science fiction. Even so, there should be some rules about the way the world works. A ten year old boy, genius or no, should not be able to jump out of a car going 90 miles an hour and escape unscathed. Nor should a cocky cadet with a penchant for breaking the rules be promoted to Captain, and given command of a starship, on the basis of one mission. In Star Trek IV, Admiral Kirk returns from the 1980s having saved all of Earth from the whale probe only to find himself demoted to Captain for the stealing of the Enterprise that he perpetrated in Star Trek III. Starfleet recognized Kirk's contribution, but could not condone his insubordination. Now all of the sudden they're promoting kids to the command of an interstellar vessel with planet destroying weaponry just because he did all right in a pinch?
3. It violated most of the Star Trek canon.
I know people are going to like this reason least of all, but I was just really bothered by the alternate reality plot line. I only hope they use time travel in the sequel to stop Nero before he starts. Because of what they have done here, pretty much everything else that ever happens in Star Trek will not have happened. Furthermore, the movie violated the very spirit of the show, which was of boldy going where no one had gone before. The original series and most of the subsequent spinoffs were about exploration and discovery first and fighting and battle sequences second. Even most of the movies followed this vein, with a few exceptions. This movie may have been good if it had been made outside of the Star Trek universe, but as a Star Trek movie it falls short.
4. It was silly.
The great threat of the movie is an overly vengeful mining crew??? A mining crew that pilots a ship fully armed with torpedoes??? I'm sorry, but even the Romulans wouldn't waste money arming a mining ship. And then there was the whole using the mind meld as a flashback thing. That was just stupid. In fact, let me go on the record here as saying that having Nimoy in the movie at all was stupid. Further, the coincidence of having every long term character from the original movies in the cast was silly as well. It was a blatant ploy to keep us emotionally invested in characters that had been poorly developed. I mean, who needs to bother with character development when you can just employ remarkable coincidence?
Anyway, I didn't hate the movie. I just felt that someone needed to address some serious shortcomings with it, since the majority of people that I have talked to seem to be completely gaga over it. I would rate it as being of similar quality to the Next Generation films, but not as good even as Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.
1. It was kind of boring.
I remember looking at my timepiece at several points. I knew the movie had a two hour running time, so I was able to keep myself going by saying, "Oh good, only 30 minutes to go." I can't really put my finger on exactly why it was boring without going into my other reasons I didn't like it.
2. It was unrealistic.
Listen, I know it's science fiction. Even so, there should be some rules about the way the world works. A ten year old boy, genius or no, should not be able to jump out of a car going 90 miles an hour and escape unscathed. Nor should a cocky cadet with a penchant for breaking the rules be promoted to Captain, and given command of a starship, on the basis of one mission. In Star Trek IV, Admiral Kirk returns from the 1980s having saved all of Earth from the whale probe only to find himself demoted to Captain for the stealing of the Enterprise that he perpetrated in Star Trek III. Starfleet recognized Kirk's contribution, but could not condone his insubordination. Now all of the sudden they're promoting kids to the command of an interstellar vessel with planet destroying weaponry just because he did all right in a pinch?
3. It violated most of the Star Trek canon.
I know people are going to like this reason least of all, but I was just really bothered by the alternate reality plot line. I only hope they use time travel in the sequel to stop Nero before he starts. Because of what they have done here, pretty much everything else that ever happens in Star Trek will not have happened. Furthermore, the movie violated the very spirit of the show, which was of boldy going where no one had gone before. The original series and most of the subsequent spinoffs were about exploration and discovery first and fighting and battle sequences second. Even most of the movies followed this vein, with a few exceptions. This movie may have been good if it had been made outside of the Star Trek universe, but as a Star Trek movie it falls short.
4. It was silly.
The great threat of the movie is an overly vengeful mining crew??? A mining crew that pilots a ship fully armed with torpedoes??? I'm sorry, but even the Romulans wouldn't waste money arming a mining ship. And then there was the whole using the mind meld as a flashback thing. That was just stupid. In fact, let me go on the record here as saying that having Nimoy in the movie at all was stupid. Further, the coincidence of having every long term character from the original movies in the cast was silly as well. It was a blatant ploy to keep us emotionally invested in characters that had been poorly developed. I mean, who needs to bother with character development when you can just employ remarkable coincidence?
Anyway, I didn't hate the movie. I just felt that someone needed to address some serious shortcomings with it, since the majority of people that I have talked to seem to be completely gaga over it. I would rate it as being of similar quality to the Next Generation films, but not as good even as Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)