Kevin Thomas Riley wrote:Not that I should really care since I've sworn myself off the Trek reboot franchise, but for those interested:
Star Trek Sequel May Contain Pointed Modern Commentary
I have an ill foreboding feel about this. Contrary to many Trekkies I've never really liked it when they do "in your face" commentaries on Trek. It tends to be devisive to the fans. Also, as the writer of the article says:Problem there is that as soon as they start tackling ‘real issues’, those things can seem a lot more important than just telling a proper story. Fall into that trap, and suddently Trek is exactly where Abrams said it wouldn’t be: pretentious.
Richard Arnold (that was his name right?), speaker at the last convention, said that this new movie set up the characters and situation, so that this next movie can have some kind of a moral. I think it would be a shame to squander the opportunity. Star Trek (the franchise) has a "soul" and the last movie drew alot of it's energy from that fact without much contributing to it. BUT I LOVED THE LAST MOVIE. But it's time for a movie with a moral or fascinating theme, or something. Remember Nemisis? I loved Nemisis. That whole "twin" thing and how Picard deals with the fact that if he had grown up in different circumstances he might have been evil. Remember in Generations Picard and the Alurian having a philosophical discussion about "time" as Picard looks for an opening to attack him. I love that sort of thing. Doesn't have to be pretentious. That's what was great about the original series. It was so . . . ambitious . . . the writers and actors just aimed high and went for it. So sometimes it looked ridiculous, but never pretentious.