Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

I’d chalk it up to the “lowest common denominator” factor (which happens a lot in this film to me... Not necessarily a bad thing as the point was to have it accessible to the widest audience possible).

Not every man has the same level of relationship with their Mother as their Father. While we love our Parents equally, I would go out on a limb to say that men generally seek the approval of their Fathers more than their Mothers.

I do see the point you are making, however I too believe from a storytelling point of view (and “this” story moves pretty quickly- too quickly for my taste) explaining “What happened to Kirk’s Mom?” wasn’t necessary to get from A to B.


Kevin
 
Even if Kirk's mother were still alive and a wonderful influential person it wouldn't matter. They needed Kirk's character to be a rebel like every other hero character. According to latest set of Hollywood rules bookworms don't make good main characters unless it's in a nerdy comedy. Lazy by the book writing is why Kirk is the way he is in Trek 09. The only reason the character works is that Chris Pine is likable in the role despite the writing. Keep in mind this opinion is coming from a die hard TOS Trek fan from the age of four.
Despite all the laziness in the writing and the iffy production design I still liked the movie. It's typical Hollywood summer fluff but at least it's entertaining fluff.
 
I thought it was a nice contrast between the two characters - Kirk and Spock. Kirk is the absolute daddy's boy... and Spock is the absolute momma's boy. Maybe that's why they complement each other so well?
 
I do see the point you are making, however I too believe from a storytelling point of view (and “this” story moves pretty quickly- too quickly for my taste) explaining “What happened to Kirk’s Mom?” wasn’t necessary to get from A to B.

I could say the same about the Spock/Uhura romance. No, I'm not opposed to a Spock/Uhura romance simply because it never happened in TOS. I was completely for it. I kept wondering about things like when did they first meet? Who made the first move? What did they do together that brought them closer? But we didn't get any of that. Instead we're just shown that they're in a relationship with each other that doesn't have any substance or importance to the story.

And in the end, like Kirk's mother, the film doesn't care. When we finally get to the see Spock during the point where he most certainly could use support since his mother was murdered, his home planet was destroyed and his race on the endangered species list, she's not around. I guess she felt that having a position on the bridge where doesn't have to do any work was more important than helping Spock and the remaining Vulcans try to find a new world to start anew.

At least having Kirk's mother at Kirk's promotion would have tied in with the rest of the story.
 
Instead we're just shown that they're in a relationship with each other that doesn't have any substance or importance to the story.

Of course
it has importance to the story. It's part of the emotional arc Spock is on, showing the throughline for the boy who got teased by his peers, the young adult who tells the Science Academy to go screw, to the Starfleet officer on a quest for knowledge. They're showing that even though Spock comes from a society that supresses shows of emotion in favor of logic, of all the souls we have encountered, his is the most human.
 
Uhura works as a sounding board for Spock's journey. She allows for his progression to be shown through character interaction rather than being expounded through dialogue. Beyond design aesthetics, I think this is the biggest departure that unconsciously "feels" different to Trek fans.

Trek '09 tells its story in a cinematic way, with thematic content being born of the interaction of plot and character, rather than being summed up neatly and delivered on a platter through dialogue at the end of the episode. Interpretation is required. Star Trek has allowed its audience, no matter how optimistic in it's interest, to passively enjoy it for forty years.
 
They're showing that even though Spock comes from a society that supresses shows of emotion in favor of prejudice and racism, of all the souls we have encountered, his is the most human.

Fixed it for ya. And I think Sarek stole that "most human" spotlight when he went to assure Spock about his feelings towards Amanda, and he's a pure blooded Vulcan.
 
It doesn't matter that Kirks mom was not at his promotion because she was only in the story for 1 specific reason and that was to survive the attack and give birth to Kirk. After that, as far as story line goes, she doesn't matter anymore.
 
If you step back from Trek09, the most impressive thing it did was dare to scrap our beloved time line. When I grabbed my popcorn and quelled my own excitement, I expected a really excellent new episode of TOS with new actors standing in for the established personalities of our heroes. What I got was my beloved characters placed in a blender with new emotions, new backstories, a new environment, and a new outlook on the entire Trek universe.

By the time I could mutter, "how dare he," I already changed my mind. Why go see a new episode of TOS when we can view a unique character study that attempts to demonstrate a "what if things had been different?" In fact, the concept alone just reaked of TOS in and of itself.

We don't know Kirk's relationship with his mother, and why he ended up the way we see him at the beginning of the film. My guess is that, at the very least, this tells us how important Kirk's father was to him becoming Captain. (I would NOT generalize that to be ALL fathers, just his). Maybe his mother died in this timeline. Maybe she was in the audience and you just didn't see her. Maybe, despite her care and love for Kirk, she was not the parent who led him to Starfleet.

My BIGGEST concern was that the trinity that is Spock, McCoy and Kirk, did not yet develop on screen. That is absolutely acceptable if we see it happen in Trek10, my biggest fear is that it doesn't.
 
Last edited:
What I got was my beloved characters placed in a blender with new emotions, new backstories, a new environment, and a new outlook on the entire Trek universe.

New, new, new, new. And yet is the least new thing that could have ever happened to Star Trek. If you want a Star Trek that has new backstories, a new environment and a new outlook on the Trek universe, give Deep Space Nine a shot. That's a series that even back in the 90s looks more new than this Trek09. That series was actually about something that Star Trek hadn't done for three whole series.

...New. :rolleyes
 
Just what I want out of my Star Trek. Boldly sitting in one place with a thinly-veiled Israeli/Palistinian conflict that goes on forever. That show bored me silly. I even stopped watching after a while, which, as a lifelong ST fan, is saying something.
 
And with not one set of characters with a dynamic as provocative, compelling, and archetypal as Kirk-Spock-McCoy. They ARE Trek.

Oh, really? Not a single one? Did TOS have a series long dynamic between the hero and the villain?

I think other Star Trek series have earned the right to not only belong in the Trek franchise, but also should be given a look by those who even have an interest in it at all, even if they don't have Kirk, Spock or McCoy.

The original series certainly was important and had a lot of episodes I still consider timeless classics, but it's not the series I would want to forever designate as the "end all be all" of Star Trek. There are just too many things wrong with TOS that unfortunately got carried over into Trek09.
 
This thread is more than 10 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top