STID themes..what is it about?

Expanded from a Trekmovie post I made:


So earlier in the thread I was discussing themes in Trek movies. In ST09 the theme was mainly Kirk but also partially Spock's growth and establishing those characters for future growth(yes people ST09 had more character bits than most ST movies, get over it). STID, for those who seem to think it is solely an action flick (it is an action flick but a bit more) is the terrorism plot that firmly is in line with topical Trek, and in this aspect I'm seeing that it is taking the tack of previous Trek. In STNG several episodes tackled terrorism (Too Short a Season, The Hunted, The High Ground, et al) , and the conclusion--generally espoused by Roddenberry--is that their motivations are more complicated than it would seem and should not be dismissed. In STID, we have been told that Harrison might even be sympathized with, despite the killing. Now I won't excuse the killing but I generally agree with this...murderers must answer for their crimes. but that doesn't mean the underlying issues should not be looked into. Complicating the issue is backwards religion. I won't apologize for Christianity, it has little to recommend it, but it has been more open to knowledge and discovery over the last few hundred years (yes I'm aware such things flourished in the Middle East during the Middle Ages), and Islam must change to be accepted in the modern world. I think we should be prepared for such views in the movie, terrorism isn't all black and white. However, we also must guard against nutjob conspiracy theorists like BobOrci, who is a talented writer, but isn't very concerned about facts.

 

STID themes..what is it about?

As long as it's a fun movie that holds my attention for two hours, I honestly don't care what it's "about". Besides, most films mean different things to different people anyway.

 

"Your commanders have committed a crime I cannot forgive."

I suspect it's going to use Starfleet to parallel some of the US' actions over the past decade. Those who wrote it did say it'll be a modern-day allegory.

 

I tend to agree with you here, the "fun" will get people watching, the plot has to be good enough to be interesting, but there also can be underlying themes and often this is important for Trekkies as well as in the future when rewatching the stories. I feel it adds something to this future viewing.

RAMA

 

Potentially, it could be about abandoning "your own"...if it has anything to do with the Countdown comic...my speculation. It could also be about not supporting an ally or helping an "oppressed" culture.

RAMA

 

It does look like a fun film, with enough action and character to keep my attention.

Also, now that the characters and setting have been established in the previous film, I think I can have those things I mentioned above, with the addition of a story that is complicated (not overly so) and fascinating, something I can sink my teeth into, something where I might not, by necessity, agree with the hero or disagree with the villain.

I thought I was going to get something complicated with my action/adventure yarn when I saw Skyfall, but it turned out to be dull, at least to me, and the commentary on secret agents and their relevance seemed to be an after thought rather than a theme. I am fascinated by BC's line in the STiD trailer that implied the safety/paradise that Federation citizens feel in this so-called "perfect future" is merely an "illusion." This was something the writers of the DS9 were tapping into right from the start of that show, and they drove the point home by the time Section 31 came around.

Also, I've always thought that Star Trek worked best as a drama, and that is something that it has over Star Wars,that, amid either good or bad special effects, it survives on the relevant conversations, and situations and conundrums - the fascinating dilemmas it brings up. It doesn't matter that the sets and Star fleet uniforms in "The Measure of a Man" look kind of silly today, that episode holds up on the strength of it's themes and characters.

I said in another thread that I'll likely pass on seeing Iron Man 3 so I can see this film a few times it's opening weekend. Whatever we get with this film, it loos more interesting to me than "maybe I'll put on the suit and that might save everything" superhero angst Hollywood has given up for so many summers now. This film looks like a it could be a thinking man's blockbuster.

 

Interesting..I enjoyed Skyfall, but HALF the movie was basically a chase scene and a third took place in a Scottish countryside.

I thought ST09 was on an action movie level above Transformers and such. Lots of people are unfairly comparing it to them.

I'm also prepared I may not agree with everything in the movie but happy if it would put them up for debate.

 

I think it'll do what DS9 couldn't, show us what humans will do when we really are against the wall, even in "utopia" Earth.

I expect that this will truly shake up the Trek world, and I am so excited for it!

 

A man in a black trenchcoat (He's the baddie, get it?) is blowing stuff up and Kirk must stop him before he blows more stuff up.

 

Is there anything you would not do for your family? I think the movie will raise some morally ambiguous issues about what is right and wrong for people in a greater context. Interpretations of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," with differing ideas about who "the many" and "the few" are and when it's applicable.

-- Clarke (What will he be willing to do for his sick daughter?)
-- Kirk (Pike's realtionship with Kirk; Kirk and his crew; Kirk says, "I don't know what I'm supposed to do. I only know what I can do." When Kirk is told Starfleet is not about vendettas, he says, "Maybe it should be, sir.")
-- The Marcus family (Think it's a coincidence that Carol Marcus is Adm. Marcus's daughter? It's got to figure into the story.)
-- Nibiru (Where's the line between humanitarian aid and developmental interference?)
-- Harrison (Cumberbatch has said that the character has valid or at least rational and understandable points behind his acts of terrorism. He avenging something; so he's probably acting on the behalf of a greater group who he thinks have been wronged.)
-- Spock (Dealing with the loss of family and going forward.)

All that, and kewl 'splosions.

 

With respect, with all the depth you search for in other things, that's the best you can come up with for this movie?

Hell at that level, "Hamlet" was just about one dude seeking revenge against another dude who killed his father.

 

Exactly. Most people would say TWoK was about revenge. I say it was about coming to grips with getting old. Someone else may have another take on it.

 

I agree. Khan is great villain, to be sure, but not a super-complex one. they gave him a view great scenes and enough believable motivation for him to do what he does, the story and themes, everything.. it's all about Kirk. Khan is merely a monkey-wrench driven into his life!

 

Yes, aging. And new beginnings. And the price of hubris (both Khan and Kirk). If Kirk had been more careful about approaching the Reliant the first time, the events leading to Spock's death may never have occured. Khan failed because he was as much full of hubris as he was insane or obsessed.

Yeah. A lot of stuff, there.

 

Yet Section 31 ran around Deep Space Nine in all black yet some probably think they were cool, complex villains.

 

Well, Sloan was cool and complex until his last episode, imo. Carl Winslow's former boss certainly wasn't cool in his Section 31 episode. And I'm quite annoyed that the novels and fanfiction seem hellbent on retroactively explaining every corrupt Starfleet antagonist in the history of the franchise as a Section 31 sleeper agent.

 

I thought that was Inigo Montoya in the Princess Bride. No way is there two characters with that motivation!

Inconceivable!!!!

 

...and DS9 about endless space battles and superstitious mumbo jumbo.

 

Um, no. That's stuff from the trailers.