Read on Twitter
“Are you giving me attitude, Spock?" "I am expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously sir, to which are you referring?”
“Star Trek Into Darkness” is on, so this evening’s viewing is sorted.
I have a huge affection for JJ Abrams’ two “Star Trek” movies.
“Star Trek Into Darkness” is on, so this evening’s viewing is sorted.
I have a huge affection for JJ Abrams’ two “Star Trek” movies.
What people who get so frustrated about the two Abrams movies tend to miss is how fundamentally accessible they are to larger audiences.
I remember seeing “Star Trek” and “Into Darkness” with my non-fan better half, who adored them.
I remember seeing “Star Trek” and “Into Darkness” with my non-fan better half, who adored them.
In fact, she asked to watch some classic “Star Trek” with me.
(She specifically asked for the “hot, horny Spock” who featured in the film, which is a solid chunk of classic “Star Trek” episodes, from “The Naked Time” to “This Side of Paradise” to “Amok Time”, and so on.)
(She specifically asked for the “hot, horny Spock” who featured in the film, which is a solid chunk of classic “Star Trek” episodes, from “The Naked Time” to “This Side of Paradise” to “Amok Time”, and so on.)
Interesting, the release of “Into Darkness” in 2013 arrived at a point where you could feel certain fans getting resentful of media made with the enjoyment the “not-we” in mind.
Remember the backlash over “Iron Man 3” not making the Mandarin a racial caricature?
Remember the backlash over “Iron Man 3” not making the Mandarin a racial caricature?
Obviously, this would balloon over the ensuing years, with GamerGate and similar movements emerging shortly afterwards.
At the core, an uncomfortable and creeping sense that anything that prioritised pleasing general audiences rather than “true fans” was monstrous.
At the core, an uncomfortable and creeping sense that anything that prioritised pleasing general audiences rather than “true fans” was monstrous.
It’s worth noting “Star Trek Into Darkness”, “Iron Man 3” and “The Last Jedi” all belong to that weird 2010s subgenre of commercially successful and critically praised movies that generated an intense backlash from fans that appears to have shaped the franchise going forward.
“Enough with the metaphors, alright? That’s an order!”
One of the more interesting aspects of the “fannification” of “Star Trek” is that it’s been coupled with the destruction of what fans claim to want from the franchise:
The idea of “Star Trek” as social commentary.
One of the more interesting aspects of the “fannification” of “Star Trek” is that it’s been coupled with the destruction of what fans claim to want from the franchise:
The idea of “Star Trek” as social commentary.
At its core, “Into Darkness” is an extended metaphor about the War on Terror: the idea that America largely manufactures its own enemies, the sense in which the military industrial complex pushes for war, the impersonal horror of drone strikes.
It’s not subtle, but it’s there.
It’s not subtle, but it’s there.
And it’s notable that “Into Darkness” and the first season of “Star Trek: Discovery” were the last times “Star Trek” really went big and unqualified on their metaphors.
And certain segments of fans reacted strongly against this, insisting these weren’t “really” “Star Trek.”
And certain segments of fans reacted strongly against this, insisting these weren’t “really” “Star Trek.”
