1. 10:01 20th May 2013

    Notes: 11

    Reblogged from nezua

    nezua:

    “In 2009’s Star Trek, JJ Abrams successfully made the effort to appeal to new viewers as well as dyed-in-the-wool Trekkies. This time round, he seems to be going further afield— and alienating the original fanbase entirely.

    The publicity for Into Darkness has been solidly high school: Don’t worry—it may be Star Trek, but it’s not for nerds anymore! In an interview with Jon Stewart this week, Abrams made it very clear that he’d never liked the show as a kid, because it was “too philosophical.” “I stopped listening when you said you didn’t like Star Trek,” Stewart joked. “I saw your mouth moving, so I assume you apologized.”

    —-

    It is a bit offensive to me that a man is going to go out of his way to disembowel the spirit of such a long running and popular show. Also he just sounds kind of like a dick himself—his take on the characters and the messaging of the original show is juvenile.

    I don’t understand how you can not care for the philosophical elements of Star Trek…but still claim to love Star Trek. These kinds of searching themes have always been an integral part of the show’s script.

    I used to love the show when I was like six years old (1975) and I would watch it after All in the Family. Even as a young boy, I always loved that very element. How Kirk could outsmart and destroy robots by twisting logic back on itself; how so many of the central dilemmas revolve around conundrum and conflict that needed to be thought through and ultimately revealed enlightening and or bizarre truths about the universe.

    How could you not like that? And if you don’t, why would you direct a Star Trek film? Go make a big titty, car crashy, male-bonding, blow em up flick, if that’s your yen. Leave Star Trek’s socially-subversive (though admittedly imperialist and colonialist), intelligent soul alone.