Chris Pine's comments that modern movies can't be cerebral... what about Interstellar? The Martian?

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Social issue dramas like THE DEFENDERS, EAST SIDE/WEST SIDE, SLATTERY'S PEOPLE, and THE BOLD ONES tackled many more tough issues than STAR TREK did, and they did so head-on, without the trappings of purple polka-dotted people, to paraphrase Roddenberry.

If STAR TREK was on par with anything in the '60s, it was on par with other well-regarded action-adventure shows (I SPY, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE).

Exactly. And I SPY touched on the issue of drug addiction in an excellent episode ("The Loser") guest staring Eartha Kitt where there was no last-minute resolution or rescue. TOS never touched drug addiction and when TNG did it, it was an after-school special.

 

[CorporalClegg]

TWOK and TUC all tackled complicated themes

They really didn't.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

In my opinion, Star Trek isn't necessarily at it's best when it's trying to tackle social issues. But it's at its best when characters are outsmarting each other and outtalking each other instead of just outshooting each other. That's the element I find missing with Abramstrek. No corbomite, no 'Destroy yourself', just a lot of the pew pew.

I find that far more boring than a really well written talking scene.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

In my opinion, Star Trek isn't necessarily at it's best when it's trying to tackle social issues. But it's at its best when characters are outsmarting each other and outtalking each other instead of just outshooting each other. That's the element I find missing with Abramstrek. No corbomite, no 'Destroy yourself', just a lot of the pew pew.

I find that far more boring than a really well written talking scene.

This.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

I can rather easily explain why Interstellar and The Martian did so well.

Interstellar: Loaded academy award winning cast directed by Chris Nolan who also made all those Batman movies people loved, that dream movie people loved, and all those other movies he made after Memento that people loved.

The Martian: Academy award winning cast directed by Ridley Scott who made that Alien movie the kids like and the Blade Runner-y film.

No offense to him but just to say if Justin Lin and this cast of actors made Interstellar nobody would have given a crap. Big stars and big directors mean big budgets and big ad campaigns.

Every now and again a studio can make a movie like this if they want to but it has to be one off. Star Trek is a tent pole and tent poles have to have more action and excitement in them. Personally I found both JJ films to have plenty of allegory in them to satisfy that side of my Trek fandom and (for me) it's about as much as I've seen in most of the films in the franchise.

 

[JWPlatt]

It depends on the courage of a studio to believe in something strongly enough to try or lucky enough to anticipate the popular mood. Confluences of popular events and the whims of social eddies often determine the success of something that could be incredible during one period of time and disastrous during another. It might not be up to the film and its intellectual or action qualities at all - just the mood of the audience of the day. Timing. When it works, the studio, producers, director and actors are all brilliant. When it doesn't, the audience is smart and the studio is stupid. In another time, I suspect that given the same film, it could be the reverse. We're all a fickle bunch ruled by subjective concerns of the day that are later forgotten. Today, Pine might be right. Tomorrow, he doesn't have a clue. But for studios, only today matters because that's what generates the revenues to make movies. Check with them tomorrow for something more intellectual.

 

[The Wormhole]

To be honest, the idea that Star Trek is "cerebral first" needs to be tossed away along with the notion that Starfleet isn't a military. The most popular episodes or movies are almost always the action oriented ones with the occasional light-hearted comedic ones getting recognition.

But even ignoring that, why does everyone get so high and mighty about "Cerebral Trek" seem to want 2001 or whatever. That's not Star Trek. Star Trek, when it works is about good characters. TOS was at its core about the friendship of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, that is why we tuned in week after week, day after day, and why we're still re-watching the same episodes fifty years later, even the crappy ones. Likewise, TNG gave us an ensemble that worked really well together. Granted some characters there weren't really fully realized or whatever, but watching TNG you can tell the actors all liked each other and worked well together, and that translates into their performance and helped the show out. Which is also why the TNG movie that shafted the cast and focused mainly in Picard and Data didn't work as well as the series. I could go on, but most of the Treks usually have characters the audience give a damn about. Except Enterprise, and IMO that's why it failed.

But anyway, I would rather watch a Trek movie that was an action-packed Guardians of the Galaxy imitation that gave us good characters than a hard-science opus that didn't have any memorable characters at all. Indeed, you will find it's because of the character moments in Interstellar, or Matt Damon's performance in The Martian that resonated with audiences rather than the fact they were cerebral. Although, IMO both movies are overrated.

 

[BillJ]

To be honest, the idea that Star Trek is "cerebral first"...

People think they're smart if the things they like are "smart".

 

[Guy Gardener]

Dumb people don't know that they are dumb.

It's not like you can get into a Fast and Furious movie by failing an IQ test, but a lot of jellybrains would be happy if they could.

The original script of City on the Edge of Tomorrow (recently turned into a 6 issue comic book adaptation.) touched on Drug addiction.

 

[Aldo]

Forever. 'City on the Edge of Forever'

 

[StarTrek1701]

Fitting "cerebral" stories into a 2 hour action-adventure/space opera format is tough. They have to balance it out. Would a Star Trek movie have worked with a crewman stuck on a planet and having to survive? Probably not, it would have driven fans crazy...it's not really what is expected.

As was pointed out, a story for this genre in movies has tended towards action-adventure. The one movie that didn't, wasn't very successful critically or creatively. The new movies balance out character, action, and message with scale better than the original 10...a fact not lost in Hollywood..ST09 was so good it was nominated for 127 awards..including the first Writer's Guilld Award for a Star Trek movie...why? It wasn't "cerebral", but it built early versions of well-known characters, tugged at people's emotions and still managed to be more professionally made films than the usual Trek movie.

Beautiful post!

 

[Guy Gardener]

Forever. 'City on the Edge of Forever'

You got some beef against Tom Cruise?

 

[jamestyler]

In my opinion, Star Trek isn't necessarily at it's best when it's trying to tackle social issues. But it's at its best when characters are outsmarting each other and outtalking each other instead of just outshooting each other. That's the element I find missing with Abramstrek. No corbomite, no 'Destroy yourself', just a lot of the pew pew.

Have we been watching the same films? I can't even remember the Enterprise firing one shot in Into Darkness. Not the best film and does have it's fair share of action - but I can't recall one shot being fired form the Enterprise - most of the story is based around emotional manipulation and outsmarting the other guy (or trying to).

On the comments themselves... I've seen aload of comments on social media and I can tell a lot of the reactionary types there haven't bothered to read the full thing. He's not saying anything we didn't already know - Trek isn't all social commentary. Never has been, never will be. But it has this weird reputation of being a sci fi lecture.

Star Trek always has been a bit of everything. The idea that 'Cerebral Trek' is the only way it can be, or has been done is absolute bollocks.

 

[SpaceLama]

To be honest, the idea that Star Trek is "cerebral first" needs to be tossed away along with the notion that Starfleet isn't a military. The most popular episodes or movies are almost always the action oriented ones with the occasional light-hearted comedic ones getting recognition.

But even ignoring that, why does everyone get so high and mighty about "Cerebral Trek" seem to want 2001 or whatever. That's not Star Trek. Star Trek, when it works is about good characters.

I don't think anyone is arguing against action, it's just the OP questioned why we can't have both forms of the genre tried out.

 

[Guy Gardener]

The problem is that we don't want our TV talking down at us.

It's humiliating and condescending.

But what about dummies?

They need it, and are (by definition) too dumb to understand that they are (hopefully) being manipulated into right minded thinking.

Do you understand how dangerous the world will stay unless there's some attempt to make the dummies less dumb?

Scott Baio talking about the Muslim threat.

That's a 9.3 on the weird-shit-o-meter.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

The only Trek that I think was cerebral would be TMP and the amount of people clamoring for more Trek like that is few. .Trek has always been about space adventures with likable characters. Trek is about the human drama in space as they explore the frontier. Along with phasers, photon torpedoes, skirt & catsuits and women with skimpy clothing.

Trek's brand of storytelling for message shows has always been about using allegory and metaphor to get the audience to see a certain POV. The writer's and producer's POV.

 

[Dales]

It should come as no surprise, Paramount made it clear that they wanted Beyond to be like Guardians of the Galaxy,

 

[CorporalClegg]

And yet it looks to be nothing like Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I don't think Trek has ever been like Interstellar (which IMO goes into nonsense fairy land at the end, ruining a good movie) or The Martian.
Here's an article poached from a thread of mine a few years ago: http://io9.gizmodo.com/was-star-trek-ever-really-intelligent-grown-up-science-1563605154

 

[RAMA]

It's funny because I felt Guardians of the Galaxy was a meld of Marvel with Star Trek! Guardians took elements of ST more than anything in it's space adventure. The Nova Corps was somewhat based on Starfleet.

The vehicle designer for Guardians 2 is working on the new ST TV series.

RAMA