Star Trek (2009) captures the democratic impulse but misses the bigger picture.

While tremendous fun for both fans and the wider audience, the new Star Trek movie fails to satisfy on a deeper level, unlike the best of the franchise. The idea behind the movie was a clever one, taking us back in time to the period leading up to Classic Trek and giving many Star Trek fans something we probably would’ve longed for if we’d thought about it, the background story of the characters we came to know and love, not the least of which was Spock, well-played by the excellent actor, Zachary Quinto, also the creepy bad guy in the hit show, Heroes. Bones (Karl Urban), Sulu (John Cho)… some of the coolest moments in the film come when we hear their voices–we instantly recognize our old friends, but are left waiting for Kirk (Chris Pine) to say, “Beam me up, Scotty.”

Like a roller coaster ride, there is never a dull moment. Two hours pass like minutes. Abrams, the director, grabs us with state-of-the-art effects AND character development, unlike most summer blockbuster science fiction. I enjoyed the witty repartee as Kirk, Spock and crew face almost certain disaster. In the rush of the moment I didn’t dwell upon the unlikely twists and turns in the plot that jumped out at me as I left the theater (plot summary at imdb.com). Ultimately, though, I felt something was more was missing than believability.

Warning, spoilers coming: if you haven’t seen the film yet, do it quickly while it’s still at the big screen… and then return here.

Captured well is the impulsive, reckless, Kirk who challenges his superiors, gets in trouble but then of course, saves the day. In past episodes we cheered him on as he stood up to those stuffed shirts back at Starfleet Academy. In this parallel universe he’s even more of a “bad boy,” having lost his father, George Kirk, on the day young James was born — a clever twist. At times Jim’s attitude works, yet it is completely unbelievable when, after refusing to follow orders, Kirk assaults an entire security detail on the Bridge of the Enterprise. It gets worse. Spock the younger throws the insubordinate junior officer off the freaking ship. At least Spock doesn’t jettison Kirk into outer space! Placed unconscious (thanks to the Vulcan “death grip”) in an escape module, Kirk is dumped on the nearby ice-covered planet Delta Vega, another planet in Vulcan’s system, presumably to be picked up later (although that’s never made clear). Too impatient to ask the onboard computer for info about his location, he just has to jump out and explore, risking almost certain death. At least the monstrous creatures were well done. And then just as he’s about to bite it, Kirk just happens to be saved by the elder Spock! Left there as punishment to watch the destruction of Vulcan, Spock “prime” gets a close-up view as if from a nearby moon—another inconsistency. But of course, we forgive the director because we’ve been longing to see Leonard Nimoy. As the film closed it focused on him and I was close to tears, it was like saying goodbye. I kept thinking, my God he looks old. Will I ever see him again?

But my problem with the film went deeper than unbelievable plot twists. I was bugged throughout the film by the bad guy but it wasn’t until leaving the theater that I figured out why. I could deal with the fact that he looked nothing like a Romulan, instead a leather-clad, tattooed stereotype from a bad motorcycle movie. Rather it was that the plot hinged on a single individual, Nero (Eric Bana), getting revenge. Sure, he had good reason, if confused about the details. Having one’s planet destroyed is a major bummer. But still… what made the original Star Trek much more than a western in space was its willingness to explore bigger issues. Apparently Abrams decided he couldn’t or wouldn’t appeal to the thinking person, something that’s expected of good science fiction.

For example, in the TV show I loved when Kirk and Spock debated the prime directive, something that seemed to disappear later in the series, although its spirit often remained. According to Memory Alpha, “The Directive states that members of Starfleet are not to interfere in the internal affairs of another species, especially the natural development of pre-warp civilizations, either by direct intervention, or technological revelation.”  When you think about it, this is a pretty radical notion in a world where the United States is arguably the major imperialist nation. While most TV shows celebrate and often glorify war, Star Trek at its best searched for alternatives, seeing it truly as a last resort. And it was never acceptable against less technologically advanced societies/species (Kirk would never have gone into Iraq). This put our intrepid crew into a much larger and more interesting context. But here it’s reduced to one person and his vendetta. Sure, it’s gripping adventure, but ultimately much less satisfying. With the US fighting two wars and Republicans saber rattling against Iran and North Korea, the narrative of an alternative to war is needed more than ever.

Still, I really like the way the crew comes together as a team, it works on the individual level, reminding me of something that always impressed me about past episodes. If Scotty told Capt. Kirk he had a hunch, there was something in his gut that didn’t feel right, Kirk took it seriously. He trusted his crew even if it contradicted his sense of what was going on. The same for Captains Picard and Janeway. The relationship was almost a family one, but not like a father and his children, rather close-knit team of equals–despite differences in rank. Call this the democratic impulse. David Brin, the science-fiction author of the incredible work Star Tide Rising , claims that the big difference between Star Trek “populists” and Star Wars “despots,” democracy versus elitism as a underlying theme . In Star Wars the hero, within whom “the force runs strong” saves the day. In Star Trek the crew working together led by the captain achieves the same effect. The back-and-forth shifting power relationship in the film between Kirk and Spock captured this nicely, with Spock initially the superior, gracefully accepting the number two spot when necessary. With the encouragement of elder Spock, he embraces a partnership with Kirk which may last a lifetime.

My other complaint has to do with Uhura (Zoe Saldana). Star Trek has been legendary for pioneering new social terrain, such as the first interracial kiss between Kirk and the original, older Uhura (Nichelle Nichols). Then years later, a black man captained Deep Space 9, Avery Brooks as Benjamin Sisko, perhaps setting the stage for Obama. A woman captained the Voyager, Kate Mulgrew as Kathryn Janeway. Noting the order, I find it curious–did Star Trek predict we’d have a black president before a woman president? Perhaps it was no surprise, they had more difficulty depicting a strong woman than a strong black man. Janeway was unnecessarily sharp-edged, sometimes the stereotypical schoolmarm and at other times going “Rambo.” But still, they tried. In Star Trek (2009), we only get one major female character. While this may be the fault of the original, what Abrams does to her character is not. At first they seem to get it right, she’s a smart and determined officer… then she turns to mush, serving primarily as Spock’s unbelievable love interest (I don’t care that he just lost his entire planet, Spock would not kiss a woman in public, a Vulcan who has spent his life repressing his human half!).

Yet for all the film’s problems, thanks to Abrams, the crew is back together! I can’t wait for the next episode.

Chuck Ogg

Now for a little Star Trek humor. As you may recall, the opening for Classic Trek proclaimed their mission: “To boldly go where no man has gone before.”

Next came Next Generation: “To baldly go where no man has gone before.” (Picard was hair-deprived).

Then Deep Space Nine: “To boldly sit where no one has sat before.” (On a space station near a planet the equivalent of the Middle East).

Then Voyager: “To boldly go back home from where no one has been before.” The ship was swept up by a powerful alien and deposited in a distant galaxy.

And last, Enterprise, “To boldly go where everyone’s been already.” Prequel to the Classic Trek.

I thought it was clever, the whole parallel universe thing in Star Trek (2009). The lack of unexplored space weakened Enterprise. By creating a parallel universe, destroying Vulcan and changing Kirk’s personal history, the new series avoids this problem to some extent. Enterprise was so weak for the first several seasons it lost most of its audience, achieving excellence by the fourth season–just in time to be canceled. So if you really want to start close to the beginning chronologically, you might want to start there.

Chuck Ogg has been a longtime troublemaker and is the Editor of TheOggBlog. His work has appeared in The Rocky Mountain Bullhorn (Fort Collins, CO), Z magazine, The Crazy Shepherd (now The Shepherd Express, Milwaukee) and The Steel City Star (Pittsburgh).