Nathan (vovat) wrote,

Trek to Star-pidity

So, I finally saw the new Star Trek movie today, with bethje and Uncle John. I have to wonder what the point was of the alternate universe thing. I mean, I'm no expert on Trek continuity anyway, and I'm sure it's been changed somewhat over time anyway. (Didn't Gene Roddenberry's original back story have interstellar flight occurring prior to what's now the present?) Really, I think there's a certain amount of ego involved in deciding you're going to rewrite an already established canon, isn't there? It's not like there aren't already enough incarnations of Star Trek to work with. Was there any particular reason why they couldn't just make a straight prequel? That said, I quite enjoyed the movie. It was a good story, largely focused on showing us earlier versions of established characters, and it had plenty of amusing parts. So, yeah. I recommend the movie itself, but I'm not sure I understand the need for an alternate-reality Star Trek.

Really, though, I guess alternate takes on established franchises are all the rage nowadays. The previews before the film included one for the live-action G.I. Joe movie, and another for a second live-action Transformers flick. Strange that we have yet to see a modern live-action take on Thundercats or Rainbow Brite, but they're probably coming soon. Can't we just let eighties cartoons lie, or at least bring them back AS cartoons?
Tags: movies, television

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.