http://www.westhollywoodbookfair.org/

There’s a dif between ‘fun’ and ‘dumb fun’ too.

And I hope someday soon people point to this as the single most annoying and moronic use of chromatic distortion in the history of motion pictures.

By far the most entertaining film of the year.

And no…the ‘core elements’ of Trek have not been replaced.

It is still very much an optimistic vision of Humanity’s future in which Mankind does not destroy itself, but instead, unites to conquer the social ills which plague it today…

…All the while getting back to what really made TOS such wonderful entertainment to begin with—-action, adventure, romanticism, sexuality, humor, drama, rich emotion, and—what’s that word again? Fun?

Too bad you missed it.

Making TREK over into some latter-day TOP GUN with STAR WARS-style it-is-ordained arbitrary plotting … I’d HAVE to leave my brain at the door, along with my heart, if I were to appreciate that kind of assassination.

Since it obviously never did get done….not really. It’s no wonder at all.

“If you mean making a trek film today includes having to check your brain at the door, then Meyer would be a bad choice.”

There was nothing more intellectual about Trek when Meyer was directing it back in 1982, nor was TWOK (which Meyer wrote and directed) a story with any fewer weaknesses and contrivances to it.

As for ST09, it hardly requires leaving your brain at the door.

“You probably did get the trek you deserved.”

The Human Condition:
—-The psychological significance to a young man of a paternal relationship (regardless of whether or not the father is alive or dead) is explored through both of the story’s two main characters.

Social Commentary:
—-We also see the blatant racism depicted in Vulcan society in its treatment of Spock, and that arrogant bigotry is only mildly toned down (in the form of underhanded praise) in the council scene as compared to the Vulcan equivalent of the schoolyard playground. Indeed, Spock’s biracial heritage is perhaps even more socially significant today than it was 43 years ago—particularly given that such a large portion of the population (including the current US President) now deals with similar cultural issues in their lives.

Philosophy:
—-Add to that the philosophical ground covered in the fatalistic/deterministic manner in which certain events and relationships in the story are almost naturally predestined, and I would say that this film gives the audience more than enough to chew on besides a couple of hours worth of action.

Meyer’s themes about aging and life/death in TWOK, as well as his transparent and elementary post-Cold War allegories in TUC fail to solicit any more thought from the audience than ST09 does.

Star Trek’s intellectual value has always been dramatically exaggerated by much of the fanbase. Get a grip. If I deserved anything more thought-provoking from Abrams, then I deserved more from Meyer too.

This was just a Star Trek movie. Get some perspective.

If you mean making a trek film today includes having to check your brain at the door, then Meyer would be a bad choice. Hell, Meyer has done flicks with only half his brain in gear (TUC for one), but at least that half has got something of interest and value beyond dubious eyecandy.

You probably did get the trek you deserved.

What I said was that his time on Trek has come and gone. And that doesn’t mean that I have any less appreciation for his work (he’s still working now). The point was simply that making a film like Star Trek today involves things which Meyer (like Nimoy) has no clue about.

And there is a big difference between Nolan’s (and Abrams’, for that matter) aversion to “overreliance” on CGI and Meyer’s vow never to use it at all. That was a poor analogy…

Geez, if you are the target audience, it is just as well that most talent is going to HBO instead of making theatrical features.