I really wanted to like this new movie. But it is an empty action flick, with no science fiction involved.
Science fiction introduces scientific concepts, real or speculative, in detail and explores their social, political and emotional consequences. It has meaning. Depth.
When Dax is struggling to deal with her past lives, that's sci fi. When Organians demonstrate the primitiveness of humans and klingons, that's sci fi. When Picard has to prove that Data is sentient, that's sci fi. The Borg are not just villains - the reality is their cyborg, joint human-machine nature is fundamentally sci fi.
Abrams' Trek wonderfully visualises these characters. Quinto is great. So is Pine, and so is Urban...etc. etc. The acting is outstanding. But there's nothing beyind that. Great characters and great effects. Apart from that, nothing. There's nary a pretence at meaningful dialogue, just quips, and the plot is so weak (Vulcan is destroyed...Kirk is exiled....Nero is defeated).
But where's the science fiction? Is this a space fantasy like Star Wars? (actually it's worse than Star Wars; SW was had amazing spiritualist elements, ST just has mindless explosions)
Even The Final Frontier had interesting ideas in it. Kirk's stalwart devotion to empirical, scientific values of the enlightenment (starfleet principles, in other words) contrasts with the medievalist faith of the others, and saves them in the end. Classic Alien/God tension (e.g. DS9) Crap movie, but it was sci fi.
Even rubbish Nemesis was sci fi. The thread throughout - to what extent can a clone (B4, Shinzon) be 'me'?
And the much overlooked The Voyage Home is one of the finest examples of environmental sci fi ever seen on screen. The idea that whales have a connection with something 'alien' - that their exstinction is significant, that humans are not the only advance life on earth; it's brilliant. And funny and fun at the same time.
I'm not saying action isn't good. It is, and almost every good novel or film has action and tension and so on. Yet this film goes overboard. It is totally, totally dumb - and, is only tolerable as an action movie, since the motives, nature, and portrayal of the villain were unconvincing at best.
When I compare this to The Cage, I despair. Now that was action packed and thoughtful at the same time. It was about exploration, and new worlds. This film had nothing to do with that.
PLUS, a bit off topic, there was no idealism. Captain Pine is fairly neanderthal towards Chekhov, getting his name wrong, as if he's this strange Russian guy in a monoethnic crew. Roddeberry's vision was that the world would be unified to the point where that wouldn't happen.
Anyway, rant over. Do you think STAR TREK is sci fi?
Science fiction introduces scientific concepts, real or speculative, in detail and explores their social, political and emotional consequences. It has meaning. Depth.
When Dax is struggling to deal with her past lives, that's sci fi. When Organians demonstrate the primitiveness of humans and klingons, that's sci fi. When Picard has to prove that Data is sentient, that's sci fi. The Borg are not just villains - the reality is their cyborg, joint human-machine nature is fundamentally sci fi.
Abrams' Trek wonderfully visualises these characters. Quinto is great. So is Pine, and so is Urban...etc. etc. The acting is outstanding. But there's nothing beyind that. Great characters and great effects. Apart from that, nothing. There's nary a pretence at meaningful dialogue, just quips, and the plot is so weak (Vulcan is destroyed...Kirk is exiled....Nero is defeated).
But where's the science fiction? Is this a space fantasy like Star Wars? (actually it's worse than Star Wars; SW was had amazing spiritualist elements, ST just has mindless explosions)
Even The Final Frontier had interesting ideas in it. Kirk's stalwart devotion to empirical, scientific values of the enlightenment (starfleet principles, in other words) contrasts with the medievalist faith of the others, and saves them in the end. Classic Alien/God tension (e.g. DS9) Crap movie, but it was sci fi.
Even rubbish Nemesis was sci fi. The thread throughout - to what extent can a clone (B4, Shinzon) be 'me'?
And the much overlooked The Voyage Home is one of the finest examples of environmental sci fi ever seen on screen. The idea that whales have a connection with something 'alien' - that their exstinction is significant, that humans are not the only advance life on earth; it's brilliant. And funny and fun at the same time.
I'm not saying action isn't good. It is, and almost every good novel or film has action and tension and so on. Yet this film goes overboard. It is totally, totally dumb - and, is only tolerable as an action movie, since the motives, nature, and portrayal of the villain were unconvincing at best.
When I compare this to The Cage, I despair. Now that was action packed and thoughtful at the same time. It was about exploration, and new worlds. This film had nothing to do with that.
PLUS, a bit off topic, there was no idealism. Captain Pine is fairly neanderthal towards Chekhov, getting his name wrong, as if he's this strange Russian guy in a monoethnic crew. Roddeberry's vision was that the world would be unified to the point where that wouldn't happen.
Anyway, rant over. Do you think STAR TREK is sci fi?
) epic conflict which has no idea to its name. The idealism? I'm not keen on Roddeberry-esque idealism but it is often explored and discussed in other Treks. In TNG it is discussed and practised (Prime Directive etc.) and in DS9 it's challenged and probed (It's easy to be a saint in paradise). STXI gives no thought to the matter beyond the bare minimum of complying with canon. I would have liked to see more of the intelligent radicalism of the original for a new age, e.g. with a Muslim commader and a gay helmsman (have we already have that!
