Don’t you hate critics who review “films” instead of “movies.” You know, those self-important nimrods who think they’re too smart by half and wear out their thesauruses (thesauri?) in an attempt to convince you of the same thing.
The Times of London just ran one of those reviews on the new Star Trek movie that premieres May 8.
(One disclaimer: we are not ashamed to say that we are long-time Trekkies. We don’t even attempt to hide behind the supposedly more dignified name “Trekker.”)
Let’s just go with one paragraph of this freshman poly sci term paper disguised as a movie review:
There was always a very close relationship between the American Dream — not to mention American imperialism — and Star Trek, with its liberal, secular, multiracial, technophiliac vision of the future. But the two seem almost to have mind-melded with the election of an optimistic, liberal, multiracial President with a Kenyan father and a white American mother (Star Trek featured the first interracial kiss on US television, sparking protests at the time) — and, who is himself something of a 1960s tribute act, with his JFK and Martin Luther King cadences. Suddenly, with Barack Obama at the helm, America looks like a brand that people can believe in again. Or at least root for at the movies.
For God’s sake, it’s just a friggin’ movie, Limey Boy. It’s cowboys and Indians in outer space. Good guys versus bad guys. White hats versus black hats.
Read the whole thing. Just to remind yourself why newspapers are neither living long nor prospering.
We have to go now. Advance tickets just went on sale downtown for the May 8 opening.
Source: Times of London via Big Hollywood
This post was last modified on October 18, 2023
View Comments (1)
Piece of JUNK - just a blooming piece of trashy Junk; Kirk as a spoiled brat, Kirk as Jimmy Dean (who, I would remind everyone was hardly a lady-lover!) Kirk as a peeping tom? ..
Multicultural? not the first Star Trek - shamelessly pro- American and pro-Earth.How I truly hate modern Hollywood. They despise the very people and pocket books that made them what they are !
I want phasers, warp drive, (OH didn't you know that was bad for the fabric of the time/space continuum, yeh, like time or space can be harmed by our little lives!) , space battles, mysterious worlds, all hands on deck, weird weapons, red shirts, man the torpedoes, three dimensional chess games and Spock, McCoy and Kirk making stupid jokes. I could care less whether the special effects were none-existent or the medical tools were salt and pepper shakers. Plot and Characterization, philosophy were EVERYTHING ! It showed a generation what Science Fiction REALLY IS.
I'm 57 - nearly 58, friends, do the math. I was 16 in Fall 1966, entering HS. An intellectual girl, lover of science, history, philosophy - a loner - loved science fiction since the age of 10 years old. Discovered the Golden Age of Science Fiction at 10 and never looked back.
Darn, the 1st. Star Trek was great even with the wrinkled Andromeda galaxy picture! I was my own little fan club - long before the Net, long before Trekkie was even a recognizable word. Trust me - it went down hill since, down hill.. The movies were pathetic for the most part, they got preachy and self-righteous, liberal stupid and peace-nik dumb.
Wana bet they have a great space battle and then find a way to preach against Bush and Iraq? I bet you all a dollar they somehow mention Bush and Iraq!
If you want the true spiritual descendants of Star Trek I suggest Firefly, Serenity and Babylon 5 - all shows, all TV movies - Serenity is a fine movie, and of course, the great antecedent, Forbidden Planet.