THE GEORGE TAKEI INCIDENT

Since I started this blog back in 2010, I’ve been waiting for the right time to share this story. And with the upcoming release of the documentary film To Be Takei, about Star Trek actor and frequent Howard Stern Show guest George Takei, along with his ongoing status as a pop-culture icon, and his much-publicized recent appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher, during which he launched yet another attack on his former co-star William Shatner, it seems that time has finally come. So here’s the tale of my one and (thus far) only face-to-face encounter with the man best known as Mr. Sulu.   

It was July of 1998, and I was writing the five-issue limited series STAR TREK: UNTOLD VOYAGES for Marvel Comics, which featured adventures of the original crew set after Star Trek: The Motion Picture and before Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.  

For issue #4, I wrote a story about Mr. Sulu taking command of the Enterprise when Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, and Dr. McCoy leave the ship on a diplomatic mission. An emergency situation arises that Sulu must confront, and he is forced to take the ship into combat. Sulu, with the help of Scotty, Chekov, and Uhura, manages to save the day, and we get to see the beginning of his ambition to command a starship of his own. Longtime Star Trek fans know that we finally got to see Sulu as a starship captain in the film Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, in which he is the commander of the U.S.S. Excelsior. This promotion of Sulu to the rank of captain was something that had been lobbied for by the actor who played him, George Takei, for many years.  

Okay, so here’s the incident. I had recently finished writing STAR TREK: UNTOLD VOYAGES #4 when I was sent by Marvel to Chicago, to represent the company at the annual Wizard World comic-book convention during the Fourth of July weekend. On the Saturday night of the convention, I was heading out to dinner with a Marvel contingent that included my friend and fellow staffer Bill Rosemann, artist extraordinaire Adam Kubert, and Marvel’s then-publisher, Shirrell Rhoades. Walking through the hotel, we passed by one of the conference rooms, and Bill noticed that a party was going on inside, and that Star Wars actors Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca), David Prowse (Darth Vader) and Jeremy Bulloch (Boba Fett) were there. Bill wanted to check it out for a few minutes, so we all went in.

As we were leaving, Bill pointed out to me that Mr. Sulu himself, George Takei, was standing right near the exit, and nudged me to say hello. “Come on,” Bill said, “didn’t you just write a story about him? You gotta tell him that!” 

I shrugged my shoulders and casually made my way over to the actor, who was chatting with a group of fans and hangers-on. Bill and the others waited for me outside, and I patiently awaited my turn to speak with Mr. Takei. Then I got his attention.

What follows next is the exact exchange between me and George Takei, which I immediately committed to memory. 

“Mr. Takei,” I said, “I’m Glenn Greenberg from Marvel Comics.”

“Ahhhhhhhhh,” he replied in his rich, distinctive voice. “Marvel Comics . . .”

“Yes,” I continued. “We have the Star Trek license now. I’m one of the writers, and I just finished writing a story about your character!”

“Oh?” he said with interest. “You’ve written a story about Captain Sulu?”

“Yes,” I told him enthusiastically. “But he’s actually not a captain in my story.”

He looked puzzled. He said to me, “Well, you know, I am a captain now.” (Please note that he said “I am a captain,” not “Sulu is a captain.”)

“Yes, I do know that,” I told him earnestly.

He continued, “I became a captain in Star Trek VI. I was supposed to become a captain in Star Trek II, but the scene got edited out. With each film that followed, I pushed to be made a captain: Star Trek III, Star Trek IV, and Star Trek V. But each time, it didn’t happen. I thought, ‘Well, that’s it, I guess.’ So when I got the script for Star Trek VI and saw the words ‘Captain Sulu of the Starship Excelsior’ on the very first page, you can imagine how delighted I was!”

I knew all of this already—he’d related it in numerous interviews over the years—but I didn't want to be rude, so I just let him go on uninterrupted.

When he was done, I said, “Well, my story actually takes place a number of years before you became a captain.” (To be exact, as per Star Trek’s chronology, my story took place about 14 years before Sulu was given command of the Excelsior.) I continued, “But it shows how you decided that you wanted to become a captain, and how you gained the experience necessary to eventually become one.”

He thought for a moment, and finally asked me, “Well, do I become a captain at the end of the story?”

I looked at him and said simply, “No.”

He replied, obviously bewildered (and perhaps even a little offended), “Well, who wants to read about that?” The fans and hangers-on surrounding him burst out in laughter and spurred him on. “I am a captain now! You should show me becoming a captain!” I felt very much alone at that moment. 

“Yeah, but—yeah, but,” I stammered. How do I explain this to him more clearly than I already have, I wondered. But I just gave up. Time to get out of this conversation, I told myself. So I politely took my leave of Mr. Takei and rejoined my colleagues, who of course were having a great laugh over my encounter with Mr. Sulu—I mean Captain Takei—I mean Captain Sulu—I mean . . . oh, whatever.

You know, reflecting on this incident again, I’m now inspired to come up with a sequel to that story—one in which Sulu gets bumped down to ensign. That’ll show him!

© All text copyright Glenn Greenberg, 2014.

EARLY REVIEW: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

The folks in charge of Star Trek these days have said that it took them four years to produce a sequel to their 2009 hit because they didn’t want to rush things, they wanted to take their time and make sure they got it right. Judging from the finished product, they should’ve taken another four years. 

As a movie, Star Trek Into Darkness is no better than passable. As a Star Trek movie, it ranks among the worst. It has some good, strong moments, but they’re buried inside a loud, sloppy, unfocused, derivative film that doesn’t seem to know what it’s about, and that fails to follow through when it actually introduces an innovative and intriguing idea. 

For example, Captain James T. Kirk, once again played by Chris Pine, is demoted to Commander after a mission on an alien world goes awry. He’s now slated to be the first officer of the U.S.S. Enterprise, the ship that he had commanded, and will serve under returning Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood, also returning from the previous film and once again delivering a fine performance). This is an interesting turn of events, one we’ve never seen before, and one that promises some very interesting character dynamics. Too bad it goes absolutely nowhere and the status quo is restored within about five minutes.

Returning screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci are now joined by Damon Lindelof, who co-created Lost and wrote last year’s major misfire, Prometheus. Their work on Star Trek Into Darkness is, for the most part, generic. There are no truly memorable lines of dialogue, not even from Dr. McCoy (once again played by Karl Urban, who does the best he can with what he’s given). There are no particularly compelling character arcs. The main plot hinges on the villain seeking vengeance—which is what the previous film was about. Two films in a row with the same basic theme? That’s something the six films starring the original cast managed to avoid. 

Things happen in this movie, and characters pop in, not because they make sense or help move the plot along, but because the filmmakers apparently felt they were “cool.” Just two examples: Early in the film, the Enterprise rises from the bottom of the ocean on an alien planet after trying to remain hidden from the primitive beings that live there—a very dramatic and well executed visual, but why was the ship down there in the first place? Why didn’t it just remain in orbit, where there was no risk of it ever being observed? And while it’s certainly nice to see a certain cast member from the original TV series have a scene in this movie, the scene serves no real purpose. 

The screenwriters, along with returning director JJ Abrams, also display a distinct lack of understanding of who the main characters are. Their handling of Kirk is particularly appalling. In short, he’s an ass. He’s portrayed as a sleazy horndog who beds multiple alien women at the same time, and who seems to think that the only way to resolve a conflict is with his fists or a phaser pistol. William Shatner’s James Kirk was a ladies’ man, to be sure, but he wasn’t a creep—and he was as much of a diplomat as he was an explorer and a military leader. This was a guy who could talk planet-ruling computers into short-circuiting themselves. Chris Pine’s Kirk is a bruiser, a reckless, thickheaded know-it-all and a real jerk where women are concerned.

It should be noted that at certain points in the film, Kirk also comes off like Indiana Jones and Han Solo. It seems like Abrams and company want him to be pretty much anybody but James T. Kirk.  And that’s a real shame, because James T. Kirk is a great character in his own right. Too bad his current caretakers don’t seem to appreciate that fact. 

As for Zachary Quinto’s Spock—instead of drifting closer and closer to Leonard Nimoy’s portrayal, which one would quite reasonably expect as the character matures and develops, he’s drifting further and further away. He’s way too emotional and intense, two words that shouldn’t be used to describe Spock. 

Along the same lines—I really wish Abrams and company would end the romance between Spock and Zoe Saldana’s Lieutenant Uhura. It’s not interesting and it makes Uhura far more prominent than she should be, at the expense of Dr. McCoy. The heart of Classic Star Trek is the trinity of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy: the captain at the center, with the science officer representing his logical side and the doctor representing his compassion and humanity. Spock’s girlfriend isn’t part of this triangle. 

(Uhura does have a great scene in this film in which she confronts a team of angry Klingons and addresses them boldly in their native language. It’s nice that she gets some time to shine, and that she gets to show off her impressive abilities as Chief Communications Officer—something Nichelle Nichols rarely got to do when she played the character. But I don’t think her function in the grand scheme of things should extend much further than that—call me old school.) 

The rest of the supporting cast—Simon Pegg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu, and Anton Yelchin as Chekov—are fine here. Pegg’s Scotty is actually one of the highlights.

It’s no secret that Dr. Carol Marcus, a character introduced in 1982’s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan as Kirk’s old flame and the mother of his son David, appears in this film. Originally portrayed by Bibi Besch, Carol is now played by the stunningly beautiful British actress Alice Eve. 

But like many of the other key characters in this movie, she’s Carol Marcus in name only. Eve, who has dropped her British accent convincingly for other roles, retains it here for some reason. (Needless to say, Besch’s Carol was not British.) And in this film, Dr. Marcus is shown to be a weapons specialist instead of a molecular biologist researching the possibility of reorganizing matter at the subatomic level. And there’s virtually no chemistry between her and Kirk. 

So why call her Carol Marcus? Why not just make her an all-new character? The cynical part of me can’t help but think that this was just a way to pillage from The Wrath of Khan, still the most popular Star Trek movie of all.  

And then there’s Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays the central villain. 

I can’t comment much about him or his character without revealing a major plot twist. I’d never seen Cumberbatch’s work until this film, but I do know that he’s a very popular actor and that he currently plays Sherlock Holmes in a widely acclaimed BBC TV series. And if he were playing a different character in Star Trek Into Darkness, particularly one we’ve never seen before, I’d say that he did an adequate enough job. Without giving too much away, I will state that, considering the character Cumberbatch is actually playing, this was miscasting of the highest order. Which is appropriate, I guess, because the part is written and directed completely wrong too, to the point of distraction. I don’t think it’ll work for longtime Star Trek fans. And I don’t think newcomers will be particularly impressed either. 

As far as I’m concerned, this shows just how much Abrams and his team don’t fully understand the property they’re working on. This surprises me, because overall, I thought they did a good job on the previous movie. They do seem to get it on a superficial level, but no more than that. They don’t really grasp the essence, unlike producer Harve Bennett and writer/director Nicholas Meyer, who, as total newcomers to the series, successfully recaptured the spirit of Star Trek when they made The Wrath of Khan.

It’s clear that Abrams and company are very much aware of the long shadow that The Wrath of Khan casts over the franchise to this day, considering how much they crib from it in the new movie, right down to dialogue, imagery, and key plot points—to the point where the only appropriate response is an exasperated groan.

It’s also clear just how much Abrams prefers the work of George Lucas over that of Gene Roddenberry. In addition to trying to turn Captain Kirk into one of Lucas’s Harrison Ford-portrayed characters, Abrams begins the film with an impossible-to-miss homage to the opening of Raiders of the Lost Ark. In a later scene, he does a riff on the asteroid field sequence from The Empire Strikes Back, with Kirk, Spock, and Uhura in a ship that looks suspiciously like the Millennium Falcon.

Star Trek Into Darkness most likely ends JJ Abrams’s direct involvement with the series. As you probably know, he’s heading off to direct Star Wars: Episode VII, to which I say, “I wish it had happened sooner—preferably before this movie got made.” At least on his next film, Abrams will keep the Lucas worship where it belongs.

As for Star Trek Into Darkness, personally, I think you’d be better served watching the classic 1967 TV episode “Space Seed,” followed by Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I consider that combo a far more satisfying viewing experience—Star Trek at its best. And if the franchise continues in this current direction, it may be a long while before we see that again. 

© All text copyright Glenn Greenberg, 2013.

STAR TREK THROUGH FRESH EYES, PART ELEVEN

Well, this is it. The end of the line. The last installment. And ironically, it’s all about a new beginning.

It’s been a while now since I first introduced my nine-year-old daughter Maddie to Star Trek, watching the entirety of Seasons One, Two, and Three of The Original Series with her, followed by The Animated Series and then the first six movies. Now, I’ve introduced her to the 2009 relaunch.

Before we got to that, though, I showed Maddie some key episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, particularly “Unification,” the 1991 two-parter guest-starring Leonard Nimoy as Spock, since the 2009 movie picks up on where Spock was left at the end of that storyline.

Maddie’s assessment of The Next Generation is pretty much the same as mine: it got off to a horrendous start with “Encounter at Farpoint”—Maddie absolutely hated the episode, and I found that it was even worse than I remembered. (Its only real highlight: the lovely scene of Data giving the 137-year-old Admiral Leonard “Bones” McCoy a tour of the Enterprise-D. Remember, Maddie loves McCoy!) But later episodes showed a lot of improvement, and some were downright terrific. (For the record, we also watched “The Measure of a Man,” “Q Who”, “Déjà Q”, “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, “Sarek”, “The Best of Both Worlds”, “The Inner Light”, “Relics” [guest-starring James Doohan as Scotty], “Tapestry,” and the excellent series finale, “All Good Things…”)

With my “Next Generation sampler” out of the way, we were primed for the start of the new era.

Star Trek

An alternate timeline is created when the Narada, an enormous Romulan ship from the year 2387, is thrust back in time more than 150 years and destroys the Starfleet vessel U.S.S. Kelvin. This disruption in history has a profound effect on the life of James T. Kirk, who is born during the Kelvin’s final moments, and whose father was in command of the ship when it was destroyed. Growing up without a father to inspire him, young Kirk faces a future as an aimless, reckless rabble-rouser, until he’s recruited by Captain Christopher Pike to enlist in Starfleet. Twenty-five years after the destruction of the Kelvin, the Narada reappears, its commander bent on wiping out Vulcan, Earth, and the Federation itself. The only thing that stands in his way is a new Starfleet vessel on its maiden voyage: the U.S.S. Enterprise. James Kirk, fresh out of Starfleet Academy, is aboard this new ship and believes he knows how to stop the Narada—but he faces strong resistance from a rival who neither respects nor trusts him: the Enterprise’s half-Vulcan, half-human science officer, Commander Spock.

                                 *          *          *  

I give Star Trek a thumbs-up, but with a few reservations. 

Director J.J. Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman had a specific goal for this movie: to restart the franchise by going back and focusing on the iconic, beloved, original characters. And they wanted to do it without being locked in to the series’ definitive continuity and canon, established not only in the 79 episodes of The Original Series and the first six movies, but also in the spin-off TV shows The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise.

It made perfect sense to go back to the original crew. With the TNG crew played out after 2002’s execrable Star Trek: Nemesis (the only Star Trek movie I ever wanted to walk out on halfway through), and none of the other spin-off shows warranting a promotion to the big screen, Abrams and company really had only two choices: create an entirely new crew and concept and risk audience apathy, or go back to the familiar but put a whole new coat of paint on it. Let’s face it: it was not that difficult a choice to make.

Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov are still the best-known characters of the franchise. And it would have been very difficult to pass up the chance to tackle these classic characters and put a fresh new spin on them and the universe they inhabit.

In taking this approach, Abrams and company did neither a total reboot, a la the Sci-Fi Channel’s Battlestar Galactica TV series, nor a proper prequel that ties in directly and adheres faithfully to the established continuity. Their Star Trek is a little of both—they tried to have it both ways. And for the most part, they succeeded.

Abrams and company managed to show respect for and incorporate what came before, but they also managed to make a break from the past and take things in a new direction—one in which the futures of these characters are not set in stone. Anything can happen to them. Some can die young, or leave Starfleet in a huff, or lose a limb. This adds a tremendous amount of suspense and drama to the proceedings, because you CAN’T rely on prior knowledge—what you know from the TV series and the movies is no longer applicable. 

So this movie is not really a prequel in that it doesn’t set the stage for The Original Series. You can’t watch this film and then sit down and start watching TOS and the first six movies and have it feel like a seamless fit. 

That doesn’t bother me, really. Why bother going back to Kirk and his crew and making new movies about them if we already know exactly how their lives are going to play out over time?

What I DO have a quibble about—and this is the kind of thing that could ONLY come from a longtime Star Trek fan who’s very familiar with the material—is the WAY in which Abrams and his team got to where they wanted to go.

The movie treads on some of the same ground that we saw in TOS episodes like “The City on the Edge of Forever” and “Tomorrow Is Yesterday,” as well as the TNG episode “Yesterday’s Enterprise” and even the TNG movie First Contact. Yet in those previous stories, the challenge for the Enterprise crew was to try to undo the damage to the timeline and set things right again. In this film, however, it’s accepted that what’s done is done, and that a new reality now exists as a result—a new reality in which we will now move forward. Instead of trying to undo the damage inflicted by the villain, Captain Nero (played by Eric Bana), the challenge for our heroes is to stop Nero from causing any FURTHER damage. 

That’s fine—but why wasn’t that the case in any of the previous stories? What makes this new history-changing incident different? Why is it no longer a priority to restore things to the way they were? Why, in this case, is an alternate timeline created that exists alongside the original one? 

But unless you’re a longtime Star Trek fan, you won’t think twice about this. You’ll just accept what the film tells you and move on—and that’s probably for the best.

Thankfully, this movie doesn’t negate or wipe out what has come before. Abrams and Co. make it fairly clear that the original timeline is still in place, still intact. It hasn’t been wiped out. We even get a nice new detail about Kirk’s personal backstory as it exists there. 

But to really make the point that this is a whole new ballgame, Abrams and Co. don’t pull their punches. They’re not afraid to upset the apple cart and depict sweeping, drastic, and, quite frankly, shocking events that bring significant changes to the Star Trek universe as a whole. That alone sets this movie apart from just about anything that’s been done with Star Trek since writer/director Nicholas Meyer last worked on the franchise in 1991. Let me put it this way: even this longtime viewer—who has written Star Trek professionally on numerous occasions—found his jaw hanging open at one point while watching this movie the first time. 

I must admit to a lack of enthusiasm about the look of the new Enterprise. 

I feel it lacks the grace and beauty of the original—and especially the revamped version as seen in the first six movies, which remains my all-time favorite spaceship design.

The interiors of the new ship did not particularly impress me either. The bridge is too BUSY. There are too many people working on it, and too many duty stations and consoles. The previous versions were much simpler, much easier to comprehend, and it was easier to figure out where everything was and where everyone was stationed.

Also, the new engine room is, shall we say, quite a departure from what we’ve seen in the past. Not a deal-breaker for me, but I certainly didn’t love it. 

The musical score is effective enough, with a stirring main theme. But it doesn’t quite measure up to the work of Jerry Goldsmith and James Horner, whose remarkable compositions on the original series of films (especially the first three) remain the standouts to this day. 

All that said, there’s a lot to like. For one thing, the first third of the film is damn near PERFECT. The opening scene, which essentially acts as a teaser, is one of the most gripping and powerful sequences in Star Trek history—no exaggeration.

Orci and Kurtzman definitely did their homework and what was a very pleasant surprise was how much stuff they actually kept, in terms of the details about the characters’ lives. For example, McCoy’s backstory, developed for the TV show in the 1960s but never dealt with onscreen, is finally addressed—and very effectively, I might add. We also learn a couple of new things about Uhura—one that shouldn’t be too shocking to anyone who’s read the novels published by Simon and Schuster over the last 30 years, and another that caused a lot of controversy amongst fans (see Maddie’s comments below).

As for the cast—by and large, they’re all really strong.

Chris Pine shows us a somewhat different James Kirk from what we’re used to, which is only natural given the nature of the film, but by the end, you see him settling in to being the Kirk we know and love.

Pine also carries himself well during the action and fight scenes, and he's good at portraying a rough-around-the-edges Kirk who’s developing his notorious magic with the ladies. He’s also good during the more comedic moments. And during his scenes with Leonard Nimoy as the elderly Spock, he more than holds his own. What I WOULD like to see in future films is Kirk portrayed as a bit more intelligent, more thoughtful, more cultured, and more strategic than he’s shown here. We get to see plenty of Kirk as a rough-and-tumble man of action in this movie, but there’s a lot more to the character than that. 

As the young Spock, Zachary Quinto doesn’t quite capture the essence of Nimoy—I found his delivery to be a bit on the robotic side on occasion, and even arrogant at times.

It’s not a bad performance by any means, just a different interpretation of the character. In the future, though, I would like to see Quinto try to incorporate more of the wisdom, the dignified demeanor, and the gentle wit that Nimoy brought to Spock. 

Karl Urban is absolutely WONDERFUL as Leonard McCoy, from start to finish. He captures the spirit of the late great DeForest Kelly marvelously. The irascible nature, the sarcasm, the irreverence, the nervous raise of his eyebrow—it’s all there.

One thing is certain: Urban MUST have a bigger, more central role in future films. 

Zoe Saldana's Uhura is absolutely gorgeous—you can't take your eyes off of her. She carries herself extremely well, projects an air of confidence and ability, has a lovely speaking voice, and has good chemistry with both Pine and Quinto.

It's a really strong performance, and she’s given more to do and more of a characterization than Nichelle Nichols was given throughout her 25-year run as Uhura.

Anton Yelchin is very endearing as Chekov and has a great scene where he really shines. He’s a bit more childlike and eager than Walter Koenig was in the role—but it works, because this is a younger Chekov.

As Sulu, John Cho gets less of a chance to make a strong impression but has a few very nice moments and gets to take part in one of the film’s most thrilling sequences.

Simon Pegg's Scotty is more playful, manic, and mischievous than James Doohan's. He’s played mostly for comic relief here.

My main criticism with regard to Scotty is that he falls into his familiar place just a little too quickly and easily, given the circumstances surrounding his arrival aboard the Enterprise. The establishment of his relationship with Kirk—right down to Kirk calling him “Scotty”—came off, at least to me, as just a wee bit rushed.

Bruce Greenwood is very effective as Captain Christopher Pike. His performance is more or less consistent with Jeffrey Hunter's, and I’m pleased that he’ll be back in the sequel. His relationship with Kirk, as portrayed in this film, shows lots of potential for further exploration.

Eric Bana’s obsessed Captain Nero does not rank among the best-developed or most compelling antagonists we’ve ever seen in Star Trek. He’s certainly no Khan, who without a doubt remains the one to beat. But I also wouldn’t place Nero among the utterly forgettable and inadequate bad guys from the last couple of TNG movies, either. He’s okay. Nothing more, nothing less. 

As for Leonard Nimoy… it almost would have been enough just to see him back as Spock after so many years. But to see him play such an important role—one that doesn’t give him a lot of screen time but is nonetheless absolutely essential to the story (unlike Shatner’s return as Kirk in the ill-conceived mess that was Star Trek Generations)—makes it all the more special and essential.

It’s clear that Nimoy had a good time playing Spock again. There's a warmth, a sense of comfort, and a level of gravitas in his performance that I don't think we've really seen since The Wrath Of Khan. Nimoy’s Spock (referred to in the end credits as “Spock Prime”) is shown the utmost respect and treated with dignity—again, unlike Kirk in Generations. And there are two moments—one between Nimoy and Pine and one between Nimoy and Quinto—that are really quite touching.

Overall, I found Star Trek to be a high-octane, fast-paced, exciting, funny, and even poignant adventure. It does what it set out to do, which is make Star Trek accessible to a new audience and forge a new direction without being constrained by the franchise’s history—while respecting and acknowledging everything that came before.

Essentially, it’s Star Trek filtered through a Star Wars mentality—still recognizable as Star Trek, but the energy level is amped up considerably, as is the emphasis on action and spectacle.

I’m interested in seeing where Abrams and his team take the series from here. It’s clear that they understand Star Trek well enough.

But I must admit that I’m a bit disappointed by some of the rumors I’m hearing about the sequel. Bringing back Khan would not represent a bold step forward. It’s a safe, unadventurous, unimaginative move. It’s the far less creative way to go. I’d rather see an emphasis on new characters, new situations, new locales, and new kinds of challenges. So I hope those rumors turn out to be false.

It’s also important to note that Star Trek isn’t just about good guys vs. bad guys. Going forward, Abrams and his team must remember that Star Trek is just as much about exploring the unknown, taking great risks, making incredible discoveries. At its best, Star Trek has something meaningful to say and makes you think. Action, spectacle, and special effects are all well and good, but that’s not enough for it to be good Star Trek.

There are some rough spots in this relaunch, to be sure, but Abrams and his team definitely gave Star Trek the shot in the arm that it was in need of for quite some time.

MADDIE: “I liked it. All the characters really fit the originals. Everything kind of fell into line with the original series.

“The special effects were tremendously good!

“It took a little while for me to understand that the movie was taking place in the past, but it explained it well enough that I could catch on.

“With Nero, I didn’t really understand why he was out to destroy the Federation and Spock.

“Seeing the guy who played Thor (Chris Hemsworth) as Kirk’s father, and seeing him be such a great captain but not live to see his baby born—I started tearing up.

“I though the woman who played Kirk’s mother (Jennifer Morrison) was very good. I liked the part when she and her husband are discussing what the baby’s name should be and he says, ‘Tiberius? That’s the worst!’

“The guy who played Kirk really looked like a young William Shatner. It was funny how in this movie, Kirk always ends up at the edge of something, hanging over a big drop, usually when he’s in the middle of a fight!

“I thought Spock looked a little too young. But it was cool to see him as a boy. They explained Spock’s character very well. It was a lot like how he was shown as a boy in The Animated Series (in the episode ‘Yesteryear’). But Spock shouldn’t be kissing Uhura!

“Spock really has it tough in this movie. Vulcan is destroyed and his mother dies. He can’t show how he’s feeling but he wants to and he wants to express his feelings to his father but he doesn’t think his father will understand—but it turns out that his father does understand. His father tells him that he married Spock’s mother because he loved her. That was a really sweet scene.

“I didn’t like that the Vulcans became an endangered species. I didn’t like that Nero destroyed Vulcan.

“McCoy was PERFECT. It was funny when he first says about Spock, ‘I kinda like him,’ and then, like 10 minutes later, he calls him a ‘green-blooded bastard’!

“Scotty was done very well, and Uhura really looked liked Uhura. As soon as she appeared in the bar at the beginning of the movie, I knew it was her!

“It was so funny to see Chekov. His hair was different, but the accent was spot-on.

“I liked seeing Sulu with the sword. It reminded me of the TV episode where everyone was acting silly and Sulu was running around the ship with his shirt off, swinging a sword (‘The Naked Time’).

“I liked seeing Captain Pike again. It was cool that they put him in a wheelchair at the end. It was sort of like the way he was in the original series, but it was different because it’s in an alternate reality.

“I thought it was really sweet that they brought back Leonard Nimoy as Spock. That was the cherry on top! That really made the movie for me.

“The Enterprise was really cool in this movie. It was nice to see ‘NCC-1701’ without a letter after it again!

“But the bridge of the Enterprise was too modern for that time period. It should have looked more like the one in the TV series. The bridge in this movie looked more advanced than the bridge in the movies we already watched!

“The music was really good. I liked that they used the original TV series music at the end—and that Leonard Nimoy did the ‘Space, the final frontier’ speech.

“I’m looking forward to seeing the next one!”

And so, the “Star Trek Through Fresh Eyes” series of blog entries comes to an end. I hope you’ve had fun reading them. Maddie and I sure had a whole lot of fun putting them together!

© All text copyright Glenn Greenberg, 2012.