Greg Cox wrote:
In my experience, when you start putting the "message" ahead of the plot and characters, you end up with sermons, not stories!
It is not ahead of the plot and characters, it is behind them, in the background.
Do you know "Children of Men"? The background, in this case a political one which is very vivid, does not interfere with the plot. But the movie wouldn't be the same without it.
Or take the fictional historical genetic experimentation stuff, it served as background for Kodos, Khan, the pilot of TNG, the end of ENT and Bashir. Fictional politics and history belong in the background but the stories wouldn't work without them.
About your dislike for sermons, I agree. Another word for background in this context is ideology in the Marxian sense of 'they don't know it, but they are doing it'. If all the utopian elements of Trek have become automatic such that the respective writers isn't even aware of them his work will most likely be better.
J. Allen wrote:
TWOK) Revenge. Explosions. Getting old. KHAAAAAAAN! A FUCK TON of Pew!Pew!
FC) BOOM! Sweaty Borg. Sexual healing. Drunks. A METRIC FUCK TON of Pew!Pew!
Third Nacelle wrote:
Yes, but even the bad ones held onto what Trek is: a cerebral science fiction series for people who like to think. That sort of thing doesn't translate well from TV to the big screen, but when they got it right, they got it RIGHT. The last movie completely erased that and turned it into an action movie. A very entertaining and beautiful action movie, but it wasn't really Trek.
While TWOK and FC do include some action they also contain some slower parts and interesting themes. The mixture is what makes them work so well.
A purely idea-based movie like TMP fails and a pure action movie like NEM fails as well.