 |
| "I remember appreciating Star Trek, but not getting it." – JJ. Abrams (Duh.) |
 |
| I can't tell if I should get my pores cleaned or a pint of lager. |
Now, I don't think there's anything wrong with people enjoying these films. I get it. They're whiz-bang exciting. But to call them Star Trek (let alone good Star Trek) displays a blatant disregard for what makes Star Trek Star Trek. But, what's there to "get" about Star Trek? It's just a bunch of guys in pajamas, pointy ears and bad wigs flying around the galaxy, kissing green women and punching lizards in the face, right? Sure. Just like Star Wars is about a kid in a karate outfit who flies through space with a cowboy and a beeping garbage pail having sword fights even though they have guns. Neither of those descriptions are wrong. But neither is really right.
Star Trek is many things. It's an examination of the human condition and our place in the universe. It's a mirror of today's society and our striving for equality, fairness, and justice. It's a character-driven adventure about disparate individuals working together to beat insurmountable odds. You can remove one or more of those elements, but if you ignore them all you risk losing what makes Star Trek Star Trek. And the heartbeat of Star Trek (sorry Spock fans) is the character of Captain James T. Kirk.
Kirk is the crux of what JJ got wrong about Star Trek. He reshaped Kirk for today's 13-year-old movie-going audience. But instead of keeping Kirk a character that a young person should want to aspire to be, he actually turned him into a 13-year-old (and a cliché one at that). His Kirk is lazy, petulant, a quitter, self-absorbed, emotionally unstable, horny and aggressive. You may think this is what the original Captain Kirk was like. But you'd be wrong. Don't believe me? Read this fascinating essay by Erin Horáková. It goes into great detail to illustrate that "Kirk, as perceived through mass culture memory has little or no basis in Shatner's performance and the original television show as aired. Macho, brash Kirk is a mass hallucination."
 |
| "If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!" |
It appears that many people (including JJ Abrams) think the over-the-top parody of Kirk (like Futurama's Zap Brannigan) really is Captain Kirk. More disturbing, is that many think that this revisionist persona of Kirk as a vain, womanizing bully is what makes him worthy of being a hero.
But, not content to turn Kirk into Zap Brannigan, JJ also gave his new Spock virtually the same characteristics and backstory. In the original series, Kirk and Spock are different but complimentary characters. Kirk is passionate. Spock is coldly logical. Kirk revels in his humanity. Spock represses his. Kirk is a respected leader. Spock is out of place on his home planet and the starship. But there's no room for two different characters in JJ's universe. Instead, we're given two people with virtually identical backstories, personality traits, and character arcs. The only real differences seem to be the shape of their ears and that Spock earned his place on the Enterprise while Kirk becomes a captain by virtue of white privilege.
Yeah, I said it; white privilege. Spock, the first Vulcan to enlist in Starfleet (clearly a minority) rises to the rank of Lieutenant and first officer of the starship Enterprise. Meanwhile, Kirk is "gifted" an admission to Starfleet by Captain Pike (an admirer of Kirk's dead father). Presumably, Kirk does well enough in Starfleet to finish in 3 years instead of 4. But then he cheats on his final exam so he's put on disciplinary suspension and is left behind while the graduates are assigned to their starships. Then McCoy (with nothing better to do) feels sorry for Kirk and sneaks him aboard the Enterprise. For what purpose? Doesn't matter. Then cadet Kirk is made the first officer by Captain Pike even though there are actual real-life officers right there (sorry, Lieutenant Sulu). You see, Pike believes this cadet is destined to be a great leader despite the fact that he's displayed no interest, temperament or skill that would earn such faith. However, Pike read about a heroic thing Kirk's father did 25 years ago, so that makes Kirk great too (I guess).
But, I digress. It makes sense in some stories to have the antagonist and protagonist be mirror images of one another (Luke and Vader, Superman and Zod, Harry Potter and Voldemort), but by making our two protagonists mirror images, JJ has rendered one of them (Spock) virtually irrelevant to the story. I say virtually because he does act as an obstacle for Kirk to overcome. But really nothing more.
And like a lazy writer, JJ assumes that our past relationship with the original characters will translate to a fondness for these new ones. But that's an assumption based on a history he literally destroyed. This new Kirk is a petulant, entitled jerk. Spock's not much better. They see nothing to admire or respect in one another. And frankly, I agree with them. So, once again JJ has to play the "destiny" card. He drags Leonard Nimoy out of retirement so that the aged Spock can tell young Jim Kirk that he and young Spock will be best buddies and that he must wrestle control of the Enterprise away from him. Okay, but why?
Unless old Spock has abandoned all logic, he should know that the young Kirk he's facing is not the same Kirk from his timeline and therefore destined for nothing. He'd have figured that out if only he'd mind-melded with him. Oh yeah, he does. Then he should know that there's no logical reason to believe this Kirk is fit to be a good captain or a worthy friend to the younger Spock. Apparently, JJ couldn't even let Leonard's Spock be true to his own character.
But at least Kirk and Spock got characters. Poor McCoy is reduced to a grumbling pessimist with nothing to offer but whiny predictions of doom. In the original Star Trek, Dr. McCoy was an important part of the triumvirate. Like the Scarecrow, Lion and Tin Man in The Wizard of Oz, Spock, Kirk, and McCoy represented intellect, courage, and heart. These three elements frequently approach challenges from different perspectives but ultimately it's their combined power that brings understanding and success. McCoy was also the present-day man that served as our surrogate in the future. He reacted much as many of us would have if thrust into a universe of strange creatures, planets, and powers. When he argued with Kirk or Spock, it was with a contemporary voice of "old-fashioned" tradition, fear, and distrust. Now, other than being a device to get Kirk onboard the Enterprise, McCoy serves no purpose.
There were also other people in the movie.
Uhura, Scotty, Sulu, and Chekov were always supporting characters, so I'm not upset that they never felt more fleshed out than their original series counterparts. What does bother me is that other than Uhura, these new officers are all pretty terrible at their jobs. In one way or another, we're told that they're all geniuses of one sort or another. But Sulu is introduced by forgetting how to fly a starship. Scotty is introduced as a disgraced loser that keeps a little person as a pet. Chekov is always screaming "I kin do zat!" as he runs around in a blind panic. In this universe, not demonstrating any professionalism or skill at your post doesn't seem to be a barrier to serving on (or being made the captain of) a starship. This is Starfleet's best? Heaven help us.
And speaking of lazy writing, let's get to the first movie's "story."
With the introduction of an alternate timeline, JJ had a whole universe of possibilities to explore. Instead, he decided to tell a basic revenge story. He'll rehash it again in Into Darkness and then once more in Star Trek: Beyond. The reasons for the villains' desire for revenge never really make much sense - but I guess most people don't care as long as there are enough explosions (and JJ does blow stuff up good).
So, the story opens in the original timeline, on the day of James T. Kirk's birth. A strange Romulan ship from the future kills Kirk's father and sets a new timeline in motion that rewrites Star Trek history as we know it (but only when convenient). When we next see Jim, he's a delinquent 12-year-old driving his step father's car off a cliff for reasons never explained. Because he's a dick was the only reason I could come up with. Some claim it's a metaphor for JJ driving the old Star Trek franchise off the cliff. Which would be fine, if he were making something better in its place. The next time we see Kirk he's a Starfleet Academy dropout and drunk who starts fights in bars for reasons never explained. Dick again? Then Captain Pike shows up and tells Kirk (a punk he's never met) that he should return to the academy because he thinks he might be "meant for something special." Not special like the hard working cadets who invest their intelligence, time, and energy in the service of their planet and galaxy. No, Pike says that Kirk is like his father and "leaps without looking." In his mind, that's a positive trait that Starfleet has lost. So apparently intelligence, experience, and temperament have made us a bunch of weenies in the future and what we need in space are more macho shitheads who punch first and ask questions later (thanks, America). So it's either a story of destiny or redemption. I'm not really sure. But then, neither was JJ, I think.
So Pike pulls a few strings and gets Kirk to the academy. We're told he has a genius IQ, so he gets through the academy in three years instead of four. We have to take their word for it because the only academic activity we witness is Kirk chasing skirt and generally acting too cool for school. Then he cheats on his final exam, gets suspended and makes an enemy of Lt. Spock (an instructor at the academy). Then, for no good reason, he's suddenly acting first officer of the Enterprise. Predictably, he butts heads with Spock (the acting captain) who has him thrown off the ship. Probably not regulation, but since when did Spock follow regulations. Oh yeah, since ALWAYS.
One BIG coincidence later, and Kirk comes face-to-face with old (original) Spock on the planet where they were both marooned. Spock mind melds with Kirk and tells him how he arrived in the past and how the timeline he knew has changed.
Through Spock's mind meld we learn that 25 years ago, the planet Romulus (no mention of its sister planet Remus) was about to be destroyed by a star going supernova. When he hears about it on Vulcan, old Spock promises to stop the explosion by throwing a tiny drop of "red matter" into the star to create a black hole which will absorb the star and save the planet. Okay, that's great! Except...science.
See, if it's the star in Romulus' system that's going supernova, sucking it into a black hole would send Romulus and the rest of the system planets spinning off to freeze and die in space. As a rescue plan, it's pretty stupid. Now, if it's a nearby star (say even just 2 light years away) that would mean they'd have at least 2 years to evacuate everyone before the blast hits the planet. I assume somebody brought this up in the story meeting. But JJ probably said, "Nyah, just add more lens flare and no one will notice." I noticed JJ, I noticed.
Anyway, Spock's ship arrives too late and Romulus is destroyed. But even though his plan failed and he was too late to save the planet, Spock still ejects the red matter into the exploding star creating a black hole. Why? Lens flare!
Meanwhile, on a nearby Romulan mining vessel, Captain Nero blames Spock for the sun going supernova killing everyone on the planet – including his pregnant wife. Now, it's PERSONAL! But Nero's ship was pretty close to Romulus. So why didn't Nero just save her himself? Lens flare!
 |
| Spock only needed one teeny drop to accomplish his mission. |
But original timeline Spock hasn't emerged from the wormhole yet, so Nero takes his incredibly powerful ship (capable of destroying 47 Klingon Warbirds) and spends the next 25 years going from system to system destroying the federation starting with Vulcan where Spock will be killed while still an infant. Oh, wait. No, he doesn't. Instead, he heads to Romulus and starts evacuating his people to a new planet where they'll all be safe from the supernova. Oops, he doesn't do that either. Nope. He just hides quietly (for 25 years!) and waits for baby Jim Kirk to grow up, almost graduate the academy, and find himself on a starship just in time to stop his vengeful plan. It's what I like to call, "Bad Decision Theater."
Old Spock finally arrives in the past (or is it the present?) and is easily captured by Nero. Since Spock is carrying enough red matter to destroy thousands of worlds and doesn't want it to fall into enemy hands he sets his ship to self-destruct – destroying Nero's ship and closing the wormhole forever. Oh, no he doesn't. He surrenders and lets himself get marooned on a planet close enough to watch Nero destroy the planet Vulcan. More good thinking.
So now all Nero has to do is to shoot one teeny drop of red matter at Vulcan (or its sun) and it'll get sucked into a black hole. But I guess he wasn't paying attention when Spock did it, so instead he uses his mining machine to slooooowly bore a hole to Vulcan's core so he can inject the red matter in the very center. Sure, it'll take a lot longer to do that, giving thousands of Vulcans a chance to escape and for the Enterprise crew time to try and stop him... oh I get it...lens flare!
Anyway...at old Spock's insistence, Kirk tricks new Spock into letting him have control of the Enterprise. Now, with that dumb Vulcan put in his place, Kirk can finally save our galaxy from the mean Romulan. Which he does by igniting enough red matter to destroy thousands or millions of suns. Fortunately, science has no place in this science fiction story, so all that red matter only makes a wormhole big enough to envelop the bad guys allowing our hero to escape. Hooray, I guess.
Look, I get the idea that sometimes you've got to shake up a franchise to help it appeal to modern audiences. Batman, Planet of the Apes, The Mummy, even The Brady Bunch prove that you can reinvent the source material to appeal to a modern audience. But the writer must first understand the source material. JJ admitted he was never a fan of Star Trek and it shows. The original Captain Kirk, as portrayed by William Shatner, is a character I still admire. His intelligence, wisdom, bravery, and loyalty to his mission, ship, crew, and friends is worthy of admiration, respect, and emulations. Making him a jerk who gains his place as captain through privilege and trickery instead of hard work and dedication doesn't make him a better character. It makes him lazy.
As lazy as the writers who re-created him.
