Star Trek

Because the NitCentral webmaster is asleep at the wheel, Lisa has granted us an exception to nitpick the new Star Trek film (2009, directed by J. J. Abrams). Haven't you heard? It's the #1 movie in America (this week). Those of you who haven't seen it yet, read a review instead. Then go see it and come back to read this. Or don't go see it, but don't base your decision to go see it or not on this blog post, it's not meant as a review of the film.

Before getting underway, let me tell you a few things I accept without explanation in any Trek film: First, I accept it without explanation that the computers on this new film will look a heck of a lot better than those on the original series. Second, I accept it without explanation that any alien language dialogue will be conveniently translated to English so we don't have to read any subtitles. And thirdly, I would accept it without explanation if Klingons appeared with or without ridges on their foreheads, but alas, a ridiculously tortured explanation has already been given in a Star Trek: Enterprise episode.

So, on to Star Trek (2009). The director, the writers, and even a couple of the actors (Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto on Saturday Night Live) have assured hardcore fans that the new film respects the canon. But it does so with all the integrity of Jew eating turkey bacon. In the year 2387, Ambassador Spock (Leonard Nimoy) fails to prevent a star in the Romulan Empire from going supernova. Aboard a mining vessel, Captain Nero (Eric Bana) witnesses the destruction of Romulus and chases Spock into the black hole, which takes them to the past. Nero destroys the USS Kelvin and later the Vulcan homeworld. These two events, and possibly others, inevitably alter all that follows, and the writers made sure to put this into the dialogue: Uhura realizes that now they're in an "alternate reality" and young Spock (Zachary Quinto) hammers the point home by declaring that their destinies have now changed. The writers have written themselves a license to write anything into the Trek universe. But is it really necessary? Would it have been that hard to write an exciting movie without discarding everything that had been written before?

The death of George Samuel Kirk Sr. (Chris Hemsworth) undoubtedly alters the destiny of James T. Kirk (Chris Pine), while the destruction of Vulcan makes many storylines of the various Trek series and earlier films untenable. What will happen when Spock gets the pon farr? Will Kirk know well enough to not to strand Khan on Tau Ceti Alpha V? And if he still does, will Spock have the sense to come up with an alternative to transfering his katra to McCoy and killing his body in the hopes of being restored on Vulcan? And how exactly can the Star Trek: The Next Generation two-parter "Unification" play out now that a Romulan is responsible for the destruction of Vulcan? In short, the original series is now invalid for nitpicking the new film. In fact, the only valid prior series or film valid for nitpicking might be Star Trek: Enterprise. Ugh. But there are still plenty of nits to be had using the film by itself.

When Uhura goes to the bar in Iowa, she orders several drinks, including a Cardassian sunrise. I seriously doubt that Nero's incursion to the past would have caused the xenophobic Cardassians to share their mixology with the Federation.

The child Kirk drives an antique car with a Nokia phone. Really!? If money is obsolete on Earth, why would a company feel the need to stamp their brand on every product? And don't talk to me about the Picard Dom Perignon champagne bottle, that's a matter of tradition, not commerce. And why would the police be patrolling the desolate Iowa highways? Maybe the policeman beamed in with his hover bike from some central police headquarters.

When Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) talks to Kirk, he gets the Federation and Starfleet mixed up. He explains to Kirk that "The Federation is an armada..."? Let me stop you right there. That's like confusing the United States for the United States Armed Forces (Army, Navy, Air Force). One is a political entity with civilian leadership, the other one is a defense organization that answers to the civilian leadership of the political entity. It would be understandable for an alien to make a mistake of this sort, but a captain in the defense organization? That would be like General Shinseki saying "The United States is the most powerful army on Earth."

So much of this film depends on coincidences. Isn't it a coincidence that Kirk tried to have sex with Uhura's roommate the same night Uhura intercepted a strange Romulan message and told her roommate about it? Isn't it a coincidence that after being grounded for cheating on the Kobayashi Maru test, Kirk went straight to the one person who could figure out an unorthodox way to get Kirk on the Enterprise anyway? Isn't it a coincidence that when young Spock orders Kirk off the ship, Kirk's pod lands close to both the Starfleet facility where Scotty is currently on duty at and the cave where Ambassador Spock was hiding out? Maybe not, given that the Enterprise was just coming from where Vulcan used to be, and young Spock would not strand Kirk on a planet with no Starfleet presence, thus narrowing down the choices, and also given that Nero wanted to place Spock someplace from where he could watch the destruction of Vulcan. But Nero wouldn't feel any obligation to place Spock close to a Starfleet facility; the only consideration would be placing Spock on the hemisphere of the planet that would give the view of Vulcan during its destruction. How differently would the story have turned out if Spock had been placed 2,000 miles away from the Starfleet facility! Earth would be added to the list of destroyed planets.

But what is Nero's motivation? Is he a blithering idiot? He's smart enough to know he's in the past, and that Spock exists in the past. But in 25 years of cruising around Federation space, it doesn't once occur to him or to his crew that maybe they can get back to the future at just the right time and kill Spock before he destroys Romulus. Or maybe kill both Spocks, to make sure. Or maybe realize that it wasn't really Spock's fault. Or how about just warning Romulus to evacuate the planet a year before the catastrophe? The shallowness of his character is made clear at the end when Kirk offers to help Nero escape the latest red matter-induced black hole. Nero says he would rather suffer the destruction of Romulus a thousand times than accept Kirk's help! And maybe offering help was just bravado on Kirk's part (which Spock understandably failed to realize), because how can the little Enterprise pull that huge ship out of the black hole when the Enterprise herself has trouble breaking free? But Nero's response only shows his rabidness.

There's more to nitpick in this movie, I'm sure, and hopefully the comments will have nits I've overlooked. But now I'm going to turn to nitpicking some of the reviews. Scott Mantz of Access Hollywood says this film is "the first 'Star Trek' for everyone!" That means that what everyone wants in a movie is non-stop action, with no time for reflection whatsoever. I can just picture the writers worrying that the audience would fall asleep during Kirk's conversations with Ambassador Spock, which is why Kirk couldn't just walk to Spock's cave and why Scotty had to beam into a water tube aboard the Enterprise. No, the first 'Star Trek' for everyone is Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. An argument could be made for Wrath of Khan. I respect Roger Ebert's opinion, but in his review he gets confused about which planet it is that Kirk, Sulu and the red-shirt dive into: Vulcan, not Earth. As for his comments on the science of Star Trek, it has been established in the canon that black holes can lead to other times and places and deliver materials intact; to what extent this is true in real life is of little concern to most viewers.