Slashdot Mirror
Spock and the Legacy of Star Trek
StartsWithABang writes While the nerd/geek world mourns the death of Leonard Nimoy in its own way, it's important to remember the legacy that Star Trek — and that Spock and alien characters like him — left on our world. Unlike any other series, Star Trek used a futuristic, nearly utopian world to explore our own moral battles and failings, and yet somehow always managed to weave in an optimism about humanity and our future. This is something, the author argues, that is sorely missing from the new J.J. Abrams movies.
The Game Star Trek Online, on thursday they are gonna have an update that add's a memorial for him on vulcan.
The reason TOS had such an optimistic viewpoint is because it's creator, Gene Roddenberry believed firmly that in the future, Mankind would get beyond the childish violence. You youngsters also need to remember that the TOS was shot at the height of the Hippy/Flower Power movement.
Gene was still around for TNG but passed in 1991 before DS9 (1993) & it shows in the subject matter & tone. DS9 becoming much darker than the previous series for example.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Where are the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Sikhs, Jains, etc etc. The answer is: They don't exist.
Sorry, you're attributing your own wishful thinking to Star Trek here. Kirk, McCoy, and Uhura have spoken of Christ. Khan Singh is a Sikh. Worf's parents are Jewish. And the Vulcan salute is a traditional Jewish benediction, intended as such by Nimoy himself.
"Star Trek used a futuristic, nearly utopian world to explore our own moral battles and failings, and yet somehow always managed to weave in an optimism about humanity and our future. This is something, the author argues, that is sorely missing from the new J.J. Abrams movies."
The problem with the Abrams Star Trek movies, is they're not really Star Trek movies. They do contain a Starship called Enterprise and the crew are called Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Bones, Uhura, Sulu, Chekov. But the core has been excised and they've been rendered for a generic audience. You can tell Abrams doesn't trust his audience to engage with the characters, hence the reason the plot races at breakneck speed from one spectular effects/action sequence to the next. Take 'Star Trek Into Darkness' for instance. This just from the opening sequence, Enterprise underwater, volcano exploding, natives attacking and so on.
If you'd bothered to watch it, you'd realize that was a major plot point as it was the villain who gave him back the Enterprise, hoping he'd be just as reckless with it the second time around.
I agree that it is Trek-in-name-only, and lacks the heavy social questions and moral compass that TOS and TNG had, but that doesn't mean it's lacking in good plot and characters. It has those, they're just dealing with acts of war and terror instead of philosophy.