![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
"Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film as 'Fun. Watchable.'"
That was the headline in the Onion when JJ Abrams "reboot" of the Star Trek franchise came out. I personally loved the new film, despite it being an action-packed(tm) thrill-ride(r) of non-stop adventure (c).
Still, it was missing something.
Some essential "Star Trek"-ness.
I wasn't sure exactly what. I loved the characters. I loved the way they portrayed them, larger than life, but not quite stepping over into parody. I was amused that the one show that changed all the history was more true to the history than any of the other movies had been. (The First Next Generation Movie, for example, turned Zephram Cochrane into exactly the kind of person the original character had fled to Gamma Canaris to get away from, for crying out loud!)
I liked arguing with my fellow Trekkies online, pointing out they were wrong in many of their criticisms ("They had to make McCoy divorced?" "He revealed that he was divorced in the episode What Are Little Girls Made Of." "Sulu fences?!" "They showed his love of sword in both Naked Time and Day of the Dove. Also, Riley complained about Sulu's fencing in The Corbomite Maneuver" "And Scotty was just used as comedy relief!" "Did you even watch the original series?"
But still. Something missing. Something made it not quite Star Trek.
Then I heard that Khan was going to be in the new movie. And JJ Abrams promising to give the fans more than before. More action! More explosions! More...
Not more "Star Trek"-ness.
Sure, I'll go see the new movie.
I'll probably enjoy it. I like these characters, and I'll be happy to see their new interactions, and their new adventures. I look forward to the movie. I expect it to be fun. Watchable.
But still.
When Enterprise started, I was excited. I watched every episode. For a while. But I didn't really enjoy it. And I soon figured out why not.
When Star Trek was on TV, it tackled the issues of the day and took bold stands about how the future would judge each. The peace movement. Civil rights. Racial integration.
When Enterprise aired, they tackled... the same issues. But in the 40 years between those two series, those issues had been largely settled. Pretty much everyone now agrees that racism is bad. Even the racists agree and try to deny being racist. The issue can't get much more settled.
Maybe you can't really do a show like that now. Most people don't really like preaching in their TV shows. Allegory is passe. Even Babylon 5 got overly preachy sometimes, and not giving easy answers to important questions was kind of the cornerstone of their philosophy there.
But they still raised the questions.
What questions does the new Star Trek movie raise? What issues does it explore? What ideas does it examine?
"To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before." These are the voyages of the Star Ship Enterprise.
But not anymore, it looks like.
I'll still see the movie. And I'll enjoy it. I like action movies (and the original Star Trek certainly had plenty of action), and I like the characters. It'll be a bit like visiting old friends.
But it won't be the Star Trek I originally fell in love with - that old show that I knew only in syndicated re-reruns. The could boldly go somewhere new. Show us some new life, and new civilizations. There's still room for plenty of action there, and I could think of dozens of ways of raising some fun moral quandaries while still having lots of action and explosions.
But instead they're bringing back Khan.
And if the rumors aren't true, and there's no Khan, they're still not going boldly anywhere new. Another threat to the federation. Kirk and crew kick its ass and save the day.
It'll be fun. It'll be nostalgic. But I suspect I'll have to look elsewhere for that "Star Trek" quality I'll be missing. That "What If..." wondering.
That was the headline in the Onion when JJ Abrams "reboot" of the Star Trek franchise came out. I personally loved the new film, despite it being an action-packed(tm) thrill-ride(r) of non-stop adventure (c).
Still, it was missing something.
Some essential "Star Trek"-ness.
I wasn't sure exactly what. I loved the characters. I loved the way they portrayed them, larger than life, but not quite stepping over into parody. I was amused that the one show that changed all the history was more true to the history than any of the other movies had been. (The First Next Generation Movie, for example, turned Zephram Cochrane into exactly the kind of person the original character had fled to Gamma Canaris to get away from, for crying out loud!)
I liked arguing with my fellow Trekkies online, pointing out they were wrong in many of their criticisms ("They had to make McCoy divorced?" "He revealed that he was divorced in the episode What Are Little Girls Made Of." "Sulu fences?!" "They showed his love of sword in both Naked Time and Day of the Dove. Also, Riley complained about Sulu's fencing in The Corbomite Maneuver" "And Scotty was just used as comedy relief!" "Did you even watch the original series?"
But still. Something missing. Something made it not quite Star Trek.
Then I heard that Khan was going to be in the new movie. And JJ Abrams promising to give the fans more than before. More action! More explosions! More...
Not more "Star Trek"-ness.
Sure, I'll go see the new movie.
I'll probably enjoy it. I like these characters, and I'll be happy to see their new interactions, and their new adventures. I look forward to the movie. I expect it to be fun. Watchable.
But still.
When Enterprise started, I was excited. I watched every episode. For a while. But I didn't really enjoy it. And I soon figured out why not.
When Star Trek was on TV, it tackled the issues of the day and took bold stands about how the future would judge each. The peace movement. Civil rights. Racial integration.
When Enterprise aired, they tackled... the same issues. But in the 40 years between those two series, those issues had been largely settled. Pretty much everyone now agrees that racism is bad. Even the racists agree and try to deny being racist. The issue can't get much more settled.
Maybe you can't really do a show like that now. Most people don't really like preaching in their TV shows. Allegory is passe. Even Babylon 5 got overly preachy sometimes, and not giving easy answers to important questions was kind of the cornerstone of their philosophy there.
But they still raised the questions.
What questions does the new Star Trek movie raise? What issues does it explore? What ideas does it examine?
"To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before." These are the voyages of the Star Ship Enterprise.
But not anymore, it looks like.
I'll still see the movie. And I'll enjoy it. I like action movies (and the original Star Trek certainly had plenty of action), and I like the characters. It'll be a bit like visiting old friends.
But it won't be the Star Trek I originally fell in love with - that old show that I knew only in syndicated re-reruns. The could boldly go somewhere new. Show us some new life, and new civilizations. There's still room for plenty of action there, and I could think of dozens of ways of raising some fun moral quandaries while still having lots of action and explosions.
But instead they're bringing back Khan.
And if the rumors aren't true, and there's no Khan, they're still not going boldly anywhere new. Another threat to the federation. Kirk and crew kick its ass and save the day.
It'll be fun. It'll be nostalgic. But I suspect I'll have to look elsewhere for that "Star Trek" quality I'll be missing. That "What If..." wondering.
