Hmmm …
Definitely Hmmm …
I think …
Possibly …
Ummmm …
Can I make a confession, here?
I love a good film, I really do …
I’m just not sure if — tonight — I’ve actually seen one.
Bless ’im, Kevin D had a night free, tonight, and — bless his little cotton hair-do! — dropped me a text to see if me and the rest of the gang, fancied a film.
Even had one in mind.
And I’m not to sure if I’m impressed.
I’m really not.
You see, I’m something of a fan of the franchise.
While I was never the more enthusiastic fan a couple of friends of mine are, I’ve enjoyed the series for many years.
Part of that is seeing how the background world and continuity develops, over time: part of the reason I’m found of things like Doctor Who, classic and modern, and Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series of novels.
The 2009 cut of Star Trek however …
Well, it’s good. Would could possibly say impressive: a nicely told tale, directed well by J. J. Abrams, nicely written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, and with a strong ensémble cast that include Chris Pine as James Kirk, Zachary Quinto (and Leonard Nimoy) as Spock, Zoë Saldana as Uhura, and Eric Bana as the villain of the piece, revenge obsessed Romulan Captain, Nero.
Which is where it sort of went awry for me.
The plot sees Nero hopping around time, in the attempt to follow Ambassador Spock — Leonard Nimoy — after the Ambassador accidentally destroy’s the Romulan home-world.
I’m not going to spoilt the plot for you: but, as a result of this, an alternative timeline is created.
•••••
But what get’s me, personally … ?
Is the ignoring of the simple fact that we’re dealing — as I said earlier — with a classic piece of American myth.
And — speaking personally — I’m none to sure if I completely approve of tinkering with history.
So, from where I’ve sitting?
Star Trek is a good film, don’t get me wrong.
But I’m none too sure if I approve of the amount of rebooting.
Sometimes, good things are best left alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I love it when someone comments. But, having had anonymous comments I feel may be libellous, actionable or just plain offensive, over the years?
I’d appreciate you* leaving your name — with a link to your website or social-media profile†, for preference — before you post a comment.
Should you choose to use a pseudonym/name, I’d appreciate it if that name were to be polite and inoffensive. I’d rather you kept it clean, and relatively grown up. Comments left with a pseudonym will be posted at my discretion: I really prefer a link.
Contentious, actionable or abusive posts left anonymously will not be posted. Nor will comments using offensive pseudonyms or language, or that are abusive of other commenters.
Thank you.
* I know many value their online privacy. I respect that. But hope you respect my wish to see who’s commenting on my blog: and my wish for you to introduce your self to me, and to your fellow commentors.
† Your Facebook, X/Twitter, Blogger, Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn profile are acceptable. I also like seeing folks webpages.