So is the Star Trek we Knew Dead to Us Now? (Spoiler Alert)
Had a chance to go see the new Star Trek movie last night and if I may be permitted a brief descent into geekyness, I have an existential question to ask (spoiler alert for those who have not seen it yet):Is the Star Trek we grew up with (depending on your generation: TOS, TNG, DS9, or Voyager) dead to us now?
I don't consider myself a full fledged Trekkie, but certainly in my youth I was a pretty avid viewer of the show on TV and still enjoy it sometimes in spite of the occasionally high-levels of "corn-ball"ishness in the writing. To my memory, in every instance I can remember when time travel was used as the basis of the plot (which to be frank, has always struck me as a crutch for lazy sci-fi writers unless done VERY well) the timeline was more-or-less restored back to normal; not so in the new Star Trek movie. So unless I am missing something, the Star Trek universe that we grew-up loving is now gone for good (Or maybe I am just being a little too linear in my thinking?) - an unfortunate result of what could have otherwise been a great movie.
Thus I am forced to disagree with the reviews of the film by most critics, not the least of which being that of America's Finest News Source, The Onion:
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
posted by Prairie Fire @ 4:20 PM
5 Comments:
I've been a Trek fan since before Jean Luc and the new crew even showed up. I think that version of Star Trek has had a good run. It's not like it was unceremoniously cut off. Over 40 years, six tv series, and ten movies, it was given every chance to succeed but ultimately only succeeded in losing viewers. It's day is done, which is fine by me. Bring on a fresh perspective that hopefully comes to embrace the spirit of the original Trek and continues on the legacy for newbies.
Nero's traveling back in time creates an alternate timeline branching off from the original; so the prior shows still happened, just in a different continuity.
I loved the movie. Very well done.
Star Trek was dead. It's not anymore :)
Messing with the timeline was the only way you could do a reboot.
Otherwise, there’d be no way to use the original characters without creating continuity problems left, right, and centre. From a dramatic perspective, it also creates a bit of suspense since, if you stuck to the original plot, everyone would know that the characters live, that earth/Vulcan survive, etc.
I don't know - seems I just can't agree with 99% of the people who have seen this movie. Not sure why there is always a need for plot lines to be BIGGER, which is certainly not always the same as being better. Why couldn't they have stuck to the original plot (which is what I thought they were going to do)? I think a movie about the academy days and the first mission or two of Kirk and co. on the Enterprise would have been fascinating and I'm not sure why it would cause any continuity problems unless written sloppily(besides, we obviously knew all the main characters were going to live regardless of whatever parallel universe they were in!).
Permanently changing the entire continuity of the Star Trek universe seems like either dramatic over-kill, a scrip-writing cop-out, or both. But maybe that is just me.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home