In 2009 J. J. Abrahms accomplished something very cool with Star Trek. He took a major science fiction franchise in its most famous and well-loved iteration and managed to create an organic, in-universe reboot with a likeable and charismatic cast of actors. Now, there are some Star Trek fans that dislike "NuTrek" for its sleek redesign, its young cast, or the fact that it exists as an alternate form of the beloved Original Series. Of course, if you have paid any attention to the nearly fifty years of Trek, alternate universe stories are a cornerstone of the franchise and some of the best Trek stories have featured this device in one way or another (TNG's "All Good Things," and DS9's "The Visitor" among them.) Part of the cleverness of the reboot is in the fact that almost all of the redesign elements (including the much maligned "Apple Store" bridge) can be traced back to the presence of Nero's ship in the timeline. Maybe the very Trek-like logic is what infuriates some fans so much.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the new follow up to the 2009 movie and with this entry, the NuTrek series really steps out of the large shadow cast by the Original Series and its movies. Into Darkness is a big action packed blockbuster but one with a determined focus on its characters and relationships. One can make the argument that these movies treat their characters with more respect and attention than they ever received on the original television show or movies.
Chris Pine, in particular, has an terrific journey in the movie. Many people observed after Star Trek that Kirk simply fell into the captain's chair without earning it and much of the plot of Into Darkness deals with this. By the end of the movie, Kirk is forged into a real captain. I also admire his lack of vanity as he moves away from being a pretty boy and spends a good amount of time either sobbing or looking bloated and red-faced in a way that would make Shatner proud. Seriously, though, I hope he continues to play Kirk for a long time. I'm interested to see him continue to grow into this role and make it his own.
The rest of the cast continues to shine in their roles. Zachary Quinto is a wonderful foil for Pine and the two have really terrific chemistry together. The whole cast really work well as an ensemble and now that they are joined as a crew, watching these characters interact is one of the joys of the movie in the same way that it was in The Avengers last summer.
There has been a lot of criticism of Into Darkness about the movie's "military" plot and it is accused of straying from Gene Roddenberry's humanistic themes of exploration and optimism. In truth, all Star Trek stories walk the line between thought-provoking stories of science, diplomacy, social commentary and rousing adventure. In particularly, the feature films have always leaned more toward the spectacular and crowd-pleasing elements. When studios are spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to produce these movies, they want to end up with an entertaining product with mass appeal. When the feature films have tried to address Big Ideas, the resulting movies were among the series worst. This is something that Trek has always done better on television and an argument can certainly be made that Star Trek is best presented on a weekly television show as opposed to big-budget movies that are released every few years but for better or worse, that is where Star Trek is right now.
And ultimately, the sequel must deal with the events of the previous movie. With Vulcan having been detroyed by a mad Romulan, Starfleet decimated, and Earth attacked, it would have been almost bizarre not to deal with the militarization of Starfleet. Into Darkness handles this idea well and it is an active point of conflict for the crew of the Enterprise. "We're supposed to be explorers!" Scotty laments before resigning in protest when a load of experimental missles are loaded onto the ship. Spock argues for restraint against their orders to cross into Klingon territory to "drone" John Harrison into oblivion without a trial. Star Trek Into Darkness struggles with this idea and comes out on the right side in a way that is in keeping with Gene Roddenberry's vision.
I'm going to talk about John Harrison and his stated identity as Khan in a separate entry but I will say that Benedict Cumberbatch plays a wonderful villain who is all Hannibal Lectorish ice and intelligence. He's a great character in his own right but as Khan he seems to be lacking a little flair and theatricality. For all of his strength and intelligence, Khan was always a bit unstable and volatile. Even in his first appearence in "The Space Seed," before stewing in his Wrath for a decade and a half, he was fatally flawed with arrogance. This is a characteristic of all of the Augments in Trek lore, who have been established as having been prone to violence and insanity. John Harrison lacks this character trait and is quite disciplined and restrained. He's great but no Khan.
Many critics have often zeroed in on the fact that the film seems refer to other Star Trek stories, particularly Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, particularly in its final act which essentially recalls the ending of that movie with this movie's Spock and Kirk having switched places with their prime universe counterparts. The film has been accused of lacking "originality" for this or "fanwanking." I'm the first person to call out fanwankery and while the idea of Kirk on the other side of that glass is certainly a reference to Wrath of Khan, it is one that serves the character and the story and also plays with the audience's expectations in an interesting way. It's also a fun reminder that we are in an alternate timeline and things are not going to play out the way that they did in the original series and movies. This is supposedly a Khan story but it is neither a remake of Wrath of Khan nor even "The Space Seed," the events of which would have been roughly contemporary to this story in the prime timeline.
Star Trek Into Darkness is a worthy addition to the Star Trek canon and has the kind of warmth and humanity that Star Trek and science fiction often lacks. Particularly in a time of increasingly bland and flat blockbusters, Into Darkness focuses on its characters in a really satisfying way. It also mixes up the Star Trek that we all know and love and with this second movie in the NuTrek series, we see that these stories and characters are fast becoming into their own thing. Being more of a fan of '90's Trek, I had mixed emotions about abandoning the main timeline and going back to the classic crew in which I had never been particularly invested but I now look forward to future adventures with this crew which is starting to feel like my Star Trek. While the movie is largely concerned with militarism in Starfleet, the ending has the crew commencing their famous five year journey of the Original Series and going "where no one has gone before."
No comments:
Post a Comment