DISQUS

Bill · 1 year ago

I don't think adding action to Star Trek would be bad. There was plenty of action in all the series and movies. And action is relative. Today's audiences are more desensitized. To them, the original Star Wars movies must look positively dull when compared to today's action movies. You add the action from the original Star Wars movies to Star Trek, and today's audiences will barely notice it.

Also, I don't agree with the concept that Star Wars equals action and Star Trek equals rational thinking. To me, Star Wars equals the mythic struggle between good and evil, and Star Trek is about CHARACTERS.

I can't say whether I like Star Wars more than Star Trek or not. But I can say that I like the characters in Star Trek better than those in Star Wars. Star Wars characters are stock. They're symbols. The Star Trek characters are real. And "human". (Especially the non-humans).

I love all the characters in all the series and movies. But especially, Spock, Bones, Scotty, Data, Worf, Quark, Odo, and the Doctor in Voyager. (Heck, the Quark-centered episodes were my favorite in the DS9 series.) And one of the reasons I enjoy Star Trek novels, is that I love and know the characters. I can't say the same for Star Wars novels.

So, even though I'm looking forward to this new Star Trek movie, and expect plenty of action, it's the characters that are going to make it for me. And from what I know of the cast, I know it won't disappoint. (Especially Spock!)

And that image of the cast (minus Spock) is awesome. You can tell the makers of this movie are putting substance over style. They all look real. Not perfect-looking movie stars. Character and story will be king.

I can not wait.

cedorsett · 1 year ago

I agree that action itself would not be a bad thing, and I see Star Wars the same way you do. My worry is that in interviews the Writers, Director, and Producer have said that Star Wars is nothing but quick action, and have praised the idea that Star Wars does not make people think.

I am excited about the film, and want it to be good, the writers have said numerous things that make me question whether they understand the difference between a character driven drama and mindless action that assaults the viewer with a lot of shaky cam and nauseating eye candy.

SlashFilm recently reported the Entertainment Weekly synopsis of the plot:

Star Trek’s time-travel plot is set in motion when a Federation starship, the USS Kelvin, is attacked by a vicious Romulan (Eric Bana) desperately seeking one of the film’s heroes. From there, the film then brings Kirk and Spock center stage and tracks the origins of their friendship and how they became officers aboard the Enterprise. In fact, the movie shows how the whole original series crew came together: McCoy (Karl Urban), Uhura (Zoë Saldana), Scotty (Simon Pegg), Sulu (John Cho), and Chekov (Anton Yelchin). The adventure stretches from Earth to Vulcan, and yes, it does find a way to have Nimoy appearing in scenes with at least one of the actors on our cover — and maybe both. The storytelling is newbie-friendly, but it slyly assimilates a wide range of Trek arcana, from doomed Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) to Sulu’s swordsmanship to classic lines like, ”I have been, and always shall be, your friend.” More ambitiously, the movie subversively plays with Trek lore — and those who know it. The opening sequence, for example, is an emotionally wrenching passage that culminates with a mythic climax sure to leave zealots howling ”Heresy!” But revisionism anxiety is the point. ”The movie,” Lindelof says, ”is about the act of changing what you know.”

These stories just add to my concern.