The Tragedy of Spock Prime
Trek rebooted, re-imagined, and re-invigorated! Phenomenal cast, awesome effects, and most importantly it felt like Star Trek---and looked like the Star Trek we've always imagined, dreamed of, and hoped for. So in a nearly (against all odds) perfect film... What went wrong?
Short answer: The villain.
Long answer: The Plot. A thin plot which robbed a seemingly wonderful villain of potential and motivation.
Even longer answer: Spock Prime. A strange reluctance on the part of writers Kurtzman and Orci to make the necessary choices with the character of Nimoy-portrayed Spock, to allow for a rich and meaningful plot, which in turn would provide depth and motivation to their villain, Nero.
Let’s take a closer look.
In both the Countdown prequel comic book mini-series and the film, the movie’s villain Nero is portrayed as hellbent on avenging the destruction of his planet Romulus, the loss of his culture, and the deaths of his wife and his unborn child upon Spock... a man who did everything humanly/Vulcanly possible to prevent that destruction. Strange.
The dilemma here lies primarily with Nero's motivation, or lack thereof. Simply put: the plot necessitated that Nero be obsessed with revenging himself upon Spock... and yet Spock did nothing whatsoever to instigate that obsession.
The mechanics of this problem (let’s think behind-the-scenes for a moment, shall we?) seem to be that, for whatever reason, the writers were simply unwilling (or unable?) to actually allow Spock Prime to do anything wrong. To make a single mistake. In other words to be human (as opposed to acting human, which he did wonderfully). Unwilling to allow him a tragic flaw, writers Kurtzman and Orci painted themselves into a plotting corner and created for themselves a writers' paradox: In keeping Spock Prime flawless and sacred, they still needed something absolutely dire for which to blame him.
For whatever reason (and I'd be very interested in knowing how this was bantered about the writing table...), they simply refused to allow Spock Prime to make a single bad choice, error in judgment, or even to make a hard (but right) judgment call (for example, placing Spock in the "no win" situation of having to choose between saving Romulus or the Federation, or even saving Romulus or the rest of the galaxy... Giving Spock a taste of his own Kobyashi Maru as he’s forced to allow Romulus to die for the greater good... (i.e., needs of the many...) would surely have played well against the Kobyashi Maru themes of young Kirk/Spock elsewhere in the film.
In not allowing there to be any shadow of doubt cast upon Spock Prime's role in the unfolding events that led up to the movie, we were robbed of an interesting and believable "villain." And also of a provoking story.
While I think the film was absolutely phenomenal in almost every respect (I can’t say enough good stuff about it!) the one area it was surely lacking was in the plot---and the reasons are purely due to the restrictions that were placed upon (or that the writers placed upon themselves) the treatment of Spock Prime. Their unwillingness to treat him with depth, as a multifaceted character.
How much more intriguing, tragic, and provoking would the story have been had they allowed Spock to make a mistake (or the tough judgment call) that resulted in the destruction of Romulus? This would have justified Nero's motivations to be sure... and it would certainly have made Spock Prime's situation far more heart-wrenching and tragic, as we discover him in isolation on the frozen planet, living with the guilt and ramifications of his actions---having sacrificed the very planet that he struggled to Unify with Vulcan and the Federation---especially, when (as the course of the film plays out and the galaxy has been saved) Spock's future mistakes are now justified, but at an awesome price: the destruction of Vulcan. Now, the new chapter of Spock's life, helping to rebuild the Vulcan society, would have an even deeper, even more personal and tragic poignancy...
How much more intriguing would it have been, if Captain Pike, young Kirk and Spock, et al, had not only reason to question Nero’s motives, but old Spock’s motives as well? This old Vulcan from the future, appearing out of nowhere in the midst of Apocalypse---who could trust him? What mystery and ethical intrigue might have been added to the story with the inclusion of having our heroes not sure of they should align themselves with Spock Prime or try him for crimes against humanity? Wondering if indeed Nero had a legitimate case against the aging Vulcan? If we, the audience, were forced to second-guess and wonder at Spock’s true motivations? I’ll go out on a limb: Since the writers decided to barely include a bare-bones backstory as to how and why Nero and Spock ended up in the past, how would the movie have felt if, in the end, we were never entirely sure who was right and who was wrong? Spock or Nero? Both or neither? Shades of gray…
Spock is not a superhero. He is not (or should not be) flawless. As an aging Jim Kirk will one day lament, "Of all the souls I've encountered in my travels, his was the most... human."
If only the writers had paid as much loving attention, care and willingness to allow imperfection (after all, it's our flaws, our mistakes, our tragedies which make us interesting) to Spock Prime as they did to young Spock, and every other aspect of the film... we would've had a story that was truly... fascinating.
Just my two cents...,
Trek rebooted, re-imagined, and re-invigorated! Phenomenal cast, awesome effects, and most importantly it felt like Star Trek---and looked like the Star Trek we've always imagined, dreamed of, and hoped for. So in a nearly (against all odds) perfect film... What went wrong?
Short answer: The villain.
Long answer: The Plot. A thin plot which robbed a seemingly wonderful villain of potential and motivation.
Even longer answer: Spock Prime. A strange reluctance on the part of writers Kurtzman and Orci to make the necessary choices with the character of Nimoy-portrayed Spock, to allow for a rich and meaningful plot, which in turn would provide depth and motivation to their villain, Nero.
Let’s take a closer look.
In both the Countdown prequel comic book mini-series and the film, the movie’s villain Nero is portrayed as hellbent on avenging the destruction of his planet Romulus, the loss of his culture, and the deaths of his wife and his unborn child upon Spock... a man who did everything humanly/Vulcanly possible to prevent that destruction. Strange.
The dilemma here lies primarily with Nero's motivation, or lack thereof. Simply put: the plot necessitated that Nero be obsessed with revenging himself upon Spock... and yet Spock did nothing whatsoever to instigate that obsession.
The mechanics of this problem (let’s think behind-the-scenes for a moment, shall we?) seem to be that, for whatever reason, the writers were simply unwilling (or unable?) to actually allow Spock Prime to do anything wrong. To make a single mistake. In other words to be human (as opposed to acting human, which he did wonderfully). Unwilling to allow him a tragic flaw, writers Kurtzman and Orci painted themselves into a plotting corner and created for themselves a writers' paradox: In keeping Spock Prime flawless and sacred, they still needed something absolutely dire for which to blame him.
For whatever reason (and I'd be very interested in knowing how this was bantered about the writing table...), they simply refused to allow Spock Prime to make a single bad choice, error in judgment, or even to make a hard (but right) judgment call (for example, placing Spock in the "no win" situation of having to choose between saving Romulus or the Federation, or even saving Romulus or the rest of the galaxy... Giving Spock a taste of his own Kobyashi Maru as he’s forced to allow Romulus to die for the greater good... (i.e., needs of the many...) would surely have played well against the Kobyashi Maru themes of young Kirk/Spock elsewhere in the film.
In not allowing there to be any shadow of doubt cast upon Spock Prime's role in the unfolding events that led up to the movie, we were robbed of an interesting and believable "villain." And also of a provoking story.
While I think the film was absolutely phenomenal in almost every respect (I can’t say enough good stuff about it!) the one area it was surely lacking was in the plot---and the reasons are purely due to the restrictions that were placed upon (or that the writers placed upon themselves) the treatment of Spock Prime. Their unwillingness to treat him with depth, as a multifaceted character.
How much more intriguing, tragic, and provoking would the story have been had they allowed Spock to make a mistake (or the tough judgment call) that resulted in the destruction of Romulus? This would have justified Nero's motivations to be sure... and it would certainly have made Spock Prime's situation far more heart-wrenching and tragic, as we discover him in isolation on the frozen planet, living with the guilt and ramifications of his actions---having sacrificed the very planet that he struggled to Unify with Vulcan and the Federation---especially, when (as the course of the film plays out and the galaxy has been saved) Spock's future mistakes are now justified, but at an awesome price: the destruction of Vulcan. Now, the new chapter of Spock's life, helping to rebuild the Vulcan society, would have an even deeper, even more personal and tragic poignancy...
How much more intriguing would it have been, if Captain Pike, young Kirk and Spock, et al, had not only reason to question Nero’s motives, but old Spock’s motives as well? This old Vulcan from the future, appearing out of nowhere in the midst of Apocalypse---who could trust him? What mystery and ethical intrigue might have been added to the story with the inclusion of having our heroes not sure of they should align themselves with Spock Prime or try him for crimes against humanity? Wondering if indeed Nero had a legitimate case against the aging Vulcan? If we, the audience, were forced to second-guess and wonder at Spock’s true motivations? I’ll go out on a limb: Since the writers decided to barely include a bare-bones backstory as to how and why Nero and Spock ended up in the past, how would the movie have felt if, in the end, we were never entirely sure who was right and who was wrong? Spock or Nero? Both or neither? Shades of gray…
Spock is not a superhero. He is not (or should not be) flawless. As an aging Jim Kirk will one day lament, "Of all the souls I've encountered in my travels, his was the most... human."
If only the writers had paid as much loving attention, care and willingness to allow imperfection (after all, it's our flaws, our mistakes, our tragedies which make us interesting) to Spock Prime as they did to young Spock, and every other aspect of the film... we would've had a story that was truly... fascinating.
Just my two cents...,
Last edited:
