STAR TREK: THOUGHTS

I've been wanting to write about Star Trek Into Darkness for days, but everyone is still walking on eggshells about spoilers.  This is kind of dumb, because none of the film's twists deserved the build up, but hey, they tried.  So if you don't want spoilers, don't click on this on my Twitter or Facebook (this blog is just a dumping ground for long-form stuff).

The criticism of the film is really fascinating to me because one's Star Trek "credentials" don't seem to very well predict whether people love the film or rabidly hate it.  As usual there's no notable middle ground here.

I'm not going to write a review in detail because, let's face it, I'm a dollar short, a day late, and lazy.  but I'll give you my opinion, and then move onto some of my short little raves and rants.

Bottom line: I believe that in the general genre of sci-fi/action movies, that this is the best of the Star Trek movies.  Now you always have to qualify this, because we Trek fans are weird: this isn't the film that best showcases the ideals OF the franchise Star Trek, but it's the best movie that's also a Star Trek movie.  (The most Star Trek-y Star Trek movies are probably I and IV, both of which have their own flaws in other respects.)

Moreover, this is easily the most socially relevant Star Trek movie since Star Trek VI, my personal favorite of the franchise.  It's not as sophisticated as a typical televised Star Trek episode--which has MUCH more to do with the demands of the medium than with writing and directing ignorance or incompetence--but it delivers a laudable and compelling message with conviction.  It's a very pointed critique of extrajudicial killing, which people need to hear.  Kind of an anti-Iron Man.

Major pros:

-Acting.  Just all around.

-The story; very clever, very much in keeping with established elements of Star Trek, with more playing around with the idea that everything will play out differently in this timeline.

-Themes: responsibility (Kirk is still the reckless kid from movie 1, which briefly costs him his command here and almost costs him his ship and life), mercy to our enemies (if Kirk had killed Khan, he would have killed.  If Spock had killed Khan, Kirk would have died.  Scott only kills the enemy guard when he has no choice.  It occurs to no one but Khan to kill Marcus, and Marcus' violent ways lead to his downfall), the responsibilities of a major power (science and peacekeeping > paranoid defense).  I submit that most who have dismissed this film as a generic Hollywood action movie have failed to compare its themes with the usual Hollywood kill-or-be-killed fest.

-The Prime Directive is not just referenced but discussed and majorly featured, in contrast to every other Star Trek film, with the exception of Insurrection.  Major points here.

Major Khans:

-The pacing might be the biggest flaw in this film, and I'm not sure it's an easy fix.  On the one hand the film is PACKED with STUFF, but then some of the action sequences and character moments seem to stretch on forever.  The audience is never given a moment to feel at ease, which is crucial to a good action picture.  Priorities are also questionable: much more time is spent depicting Kirk and Khan flying through a debris field (an admittedly well-conceived and cool sequence) than in any combat between the Enterprise and the Vengeance.  Important character moments get SMASHED into the margins of action sequences in a misguided effort to keep the pot constantly boiling (example: Kirk/Spock/Uhura have a heartfelt conversation while in the atmosphere of Kronos, this would have been much better suited for space or even back on the ship).

-On a related note, the film runs out of time to show us much of the Klingons.  Unfortunately, the whole plot revolved around everyone being scared shitless of the Klingons.  This is great, and the actors really sell it!  Sadly, when we actually see the Klingons they are losers who can't detect the Enterprise while it loiters in their space, and most of their screen time is spent getting slaughtered by Khan.

-Cumberbatch is excellent in the role, better than Montalban, and I know they tried to get a Hispanic actor first.  But this doesn't change the fact that they whitewashed a major character.  HOLLYWOOD!
There is potentially interesting discussion to be had here, considering that Khan was originally a Sikh name they slapped on a character who was originally white because they hired a Mexican to play him.  So in the '60s it was sort of a weird conflation of different brown people.  And while it's nice to see a non-white "superman," they definitely also milked his exotic name and pseudo-magical charisma for all it's worth in a somewhat problematic way.  Check out the advertising for Star Trek II: "Beyond the universe, beyond human experience, lies KHAN."  Would they use that tagline if he were named Steve?
Plus you know, he flies a plane into a building.  There really wasn't a right way to handle this thing.

-The completely gratuitous fanservice.  The creators seem to think it's a nod to the fans to do this; it's not.  It just reads as insulting.  What would have been a much more interesting scene from a worldbuilding point of view would be if Kirk and Marcus changed WITHOUT making it a big deal.  It's the goddamn future!

-It's a major plot point that Marcus knocked out the Enterprise communication system so they can't call for help even though they are right next to Earth.  But then all of a sudden, they call up New Vulcan so that Leonard Nimoy can freak out about Khan in a fairly awful scene.  Not ok.  You could at least tell Old Spock that in 1 minute they are going to get blown out of the sky by the head of Starfleet so it doesn't actually fucking matter.  Moreover, just...look at this.
Spock Prime in Star Trek II: "He is intelligent, but not experienced.  his pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."
Spock Prime in Star Trek Into Darkness: "He's the most dangerous foe we ever faced, he's a killer, we only stopped him with great sacrifice, I'm going to break my temporal vow and basically do the Vulcan equivalent of a complete breakdown."

Minor pros:

-Every time you make a DS9 reference, an angel gets its wings.  Section 31 as the Big Bad is a YES EXCELLENT moment.  The wrecked province on Kronos is where General Martok grew up.

-Carol Marcus as an admiral's daughter actually explains her defense of Starfleet in Star Trek II, not to mention giving her a plausible explanation of how she met Kirk.  Also, a background in weapon design and physics makes perfect sense for her, she led the Genesis project.  Oh sure, that wasn't MEANT to be a weapon, but COME ON.

-Fallout from the "transwarp beaming" stuff from the last movie.

-The new warp effect is awesome and kind Next Gen-ish.

-The concept of a super-ship with a light crew is something that a) makes tons of sense and b) has been in the technical reach of the Star Trek future basically forever.  Nice to see that Starfleet can be scary when it wants to.  At the same time the ship wasn't SO over-the-top as to be unbelievable.

-Bat'leths and "D4" Birds-of-Prey in the Klingons scenes!  The one Klingon we saw even looked "human-ish" as per canon, while still having a bit of a brow ridge.

-Khan may have seemed over-the-top compared to his old version, but 1) he actually seemed like a super-being this time around, which never really came across before, and 2) he's in peak health for once and has had months to study and work with Federation technology.  In all honesty, this movie resurrected the character of Khan from "neat, concept, had potential, kinda went crazy and fizzled" to "credible, terrifying threat."  Plus, they got the 72 crew members right and remembered that Khan always was a good leader to them.

-The Chekov redshirt gag was extremely clever.  We the audience are laughing because "redshirts get killed."  But he the character is only nervous about taking over Engineering!  The musical sting even works in both contexts.  A dangerously meta joke that they pulled off.

-"Cupcake" got a name, and an established one!

-Actually nearly all the minor characters and extras from the previous movie seemed to return.  Fantastic.  I love when it feels like the same ship from movie to movie.

-Why does Kirk have to save the warp core himself?  Because Spock ordered all the engineering staff to the weapons bays.  BAD-ASS.

Minor Khans:

-Spock's yell.  I can understand how this was justified, but it took me (and many others) out of the film, and overall seemed like an excessively clever little victory lap for the writers.  I appreciate that Vulcnas repress strong emotions, but Spock simply cannot lose his shit in the next movie or else he will start to seem like a basket case.

-Not as bad as the last film, but the casual racism towards Vulcans--who are almost a DEAD SPECIES--is inexcusable.

-Pike wants to be an Obi-Wan, but he's really more of a Rachel Dawes isn't he?  Two great scenes and then he's dead so fast it makes your head spin.  What if he'd managed to damage Khan's craft?  Whatever.

-The Enterprise is just a major chew toy, never gets a shot off.  The failure of Klingon warships to complicate the final battle also feels like a bit of a missed trick.  And even the Vengeance is crippled before it can do anything cool, even fire those mega-cannons.

-Warp speed is totally fucked up.  It's way too fast.  It acts more like hyperspace in Star Wars.  And it's implied that warp combat is this unprecedented thing, when it happened about every other week in the 22nd century show, Enterprise.

-The Enterprise falls into Earth's atmosphere in moments after taking phaser hits very close to the Moon.  That is every flavor of wrong.  Especially when the crew easily could have just been trying to avoid hitting the MOON during the save-the-ship sequence.

-Much like the Klingon fleet, the Starfleet kind of feels like it doesn't even exist.  A firefight takes place right next to Earth, and no one notices?

-Pike seems to espouse the morally bankrupt "Next Generation" view of the Prime Directive.  Spock has the more coherent and classic idea that the species should be saved, but it's worth his life to avoid wrecking their culture.  Kirk of course is just a prat.  However the movie really doesn't seem to take a position either way.  I was just disappointed that Pike was the "let them die" guy.  At least let Spock write a paper on his view and get vindicated or something.

-Kirk finds out about his relief of duty and his subsequent reassignment from Pike.  Spock finds out about his reassignment from Kirk.  Scotty still treats Kirk like the captain even when he isn't.  Does no one get e-mail in the future?  It all feels very ad hoc.

-Finally...this may be the best Star Trek movie, but without question it has the worst title.  What were they THINKING?