We saw Star Trek last night. First off, I just need to comment that we went to see Star Trek, and the previews were for Transformers, GI Joe, and Land of the lost. STOP FUCKING WITH MY CHILDHOOD! I know that these things were campy and stupid back then, but I liked them. What I don't enjoy is an update with CGI and shit blowing up just because you know people my age will get nostalgic for your destruction of our youth. (As a side, Tracy asked me what I thought of the first Transformers, which I foolishly watched thanks to netflix. I told her it was a Michael Bay movie. Shit blew up, then shit blew up. How bad does he suck as a director?)
I did actually enjoy Star Trek, which wasn't a complete surprise as the reviews, professional and personal have been good. But I'm conflicted. I understand the desire to "reboot" the franchise. I know from my comic book days that the easiest way to get a clean slate, both in terms of characters and situations is time travel, but I hate it.
I've always hated time travel in science fiction tv/movies, mainly because it's frequently used as a cheap plot device to allow the writers to fuck with the greater story with no ramifications (Hello Superman II. Running the ferrari in reverse didn't get the mileage back for Ferris, why should it work for you?). The Star Trek series have dabbled in this quite a bit, but the need to have an older, time-travely Spock come back, talk to Kirk and himself was a particularly heavy handed way of severing the continuity, while allowing a connection with the original. If they had left it all the same, had the bad guy do a little exposition to explain how they got there no one would have said a thing. But no. Spock had to be there to explain what they should do.
It just irritates me.
As another side note, does Zachary Quinto know what he's done? Let's see, the main/only villain in a tv sci-fi series and now playing Spock. He's all set for the convention circuit, but finding non-stereotyped work is going to be a tough sell here on out.