View Single Post
Old 08.30.2016, 10:25 AM   #19382
Severian
invito al cielo
 
Severian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,741
Severian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's assesSeverian kicks all y'all's asses
I think the whole speculative/moral dilemma/evolutionary philosophy angle of the original Star Trek and most of its greatest incarnations is a bit lost on the modern era. Deep down, beneath the make-up and the impossible space explosions and action scenes, Star Trek is a whip smart commentary on the nature of humanity, and how war — and, more sugnificantly, peace — fit into the dream of an eventual and improbable utopia.

Looking back at Roddenberry's original storylines and characters, it's all about the importance of peace, and the distinctly non-military way in which peace might ideally be maintained by a semi-military force. Its truly defining plot points often deal with disastrous mistakes made in this fictional future during the 20th and 21st centuries, i.e. NOW. The greatest Star Trek moments concern themselves with issues of friendship, camaraderie, compromise, the measured resourcefulness of a group of post-conflict peace-keepers and meaning of "humanity" itself. Some of the best moments come from pure dialogue, instead of raw action. Some of the most powerful scenes depict a these peace-keepers as the weigh the pros and cons of breaking the peace in various trying situations, and the greatest virtue of it is that they almost never resort to violence when good, sensible governance could be used to achieve the same goal.

I think this stuff is just a bit too boring for the audiences they're trying to reach. They've mostly abandoned these elements for the new films. In the hands of JJ Abrams, I think it was a match made in heaven. That man has always wanted to make Star Trek. Look at LOST, and tell me the same themes of governance at the edge of civilization (the "frontier") aren't firmly in place throughout the series. But Abrams is being tapped as a "turnaround artist" for flailing franchises, the Mitt Romney of sci-fi cinema. And his talents as a storyboarder, produced, director and creator are being pushed aside by his ability to reliable make blockbusters.

In his hands, I think the new Star Trek films would have eventually found their footing. But now, if this movie really is a disappointment, then I'm afraid it may be the end of the line for Star Trek in cinema.

Though I think a modern film with the TNG cast would definitely draw in some bucks. Those TNG kids are the world's biggest nerds. For serious. They'd pay millions just to see a 2010s Patrick Stewart "make it so."

Anyway. What the fuck were we taking about again? Oh yeah, LOST! LOST was great.
Severian is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|