Skip to comments."Star Trek: Into Darkness" - My Semi-Review with a Yoda Contemplation
Posted on 06/19/2013 4:28:37 PM PDT by Finny
Star Trek: Into Darkness: My Semi-Review with a Yoda Contemplation
The new take on old characters in Star Trek: Into Darkness is like adding almonds to chocolate: it makes a good thing differently as good if not better. From Uhura to Chekov to Sulu, the entire crew is great fun to watch. Perfect pitch characterizes Zachary Quintos Spock, Karl Urbans Bones McCoy, and Simon Peggs Scotty. And as a Captain Kirk admirer since I was nine years old, I think Chris Pine is impeccably cast as Kirk.
Yet I was even more pleased with the plot. Star Trek: Into Darkness revolves around two excellent biblical teachings: the importance of eschewing vengeance, and the poignancy of No greater love hath man than this, than to lay down his life for a friend. It was a story of principle triumphing over temptation, of doing what was (biblically, as it happens) right even though it would have been easy to justify doing wrong. I left the theater feeling good about America.
Many here deride Star Trek as socialistic, holding up Star Wars as more inclined to conservatism with its plot foundation in rebellion and freedom fighting. I loved Star Wars so much when it came out in 1977 that I saw it nine times at the theater. I watched the next two installments many times and read the paperbacks over and over.
Yoda snapped me out of the spell. In a later movie, this oracle of wisdom solemnly taught: Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."
Think about that. Not lust for power, not envy, cruelty, covetousness, slavery, revenge, avarice, sloth, nor gluttony, nor abusing others for your own ends. Yoda sees none of those weaknesses as paths to suffering. According to Yoda, fear (a key animal survival mechanism) is ultimately responsible for anger, hate, and suffering. Such amoral wisdom is misguided at best.
ObiWan laid down his life for friends, but stated that in doing so, he would return more powerful than ever. He shows up in later movies to prove it, rather debasing the whole point of no greater love. In Star Wars, the grail is to achieve supernatural powers (mastering the force) to manipulate and deceive to achieve what is right.
In several Star Trek movies, the power of laying down ones life for friends changes destinies. The one dying believes his sacrifice is final, even if (as with Spock) he ends up being revived. In Into Darkness, respect is paid to a doctrine that shuns vengeance, and to the perils of defying a prime directive of observing but not interfering in strange new worlds happened upon in the voyages.
The grail in Star Trek is to go forth and explore, doing unto the galaxy and your crewmates as you would have them do unto you. Its good to see it successful in American culture.
You guys might be the only ones to read this! But if you haven’t seen this movie yet, I highly recommend the new Star Trek flick!
I think the new movies portray Kirk as too much of a loose cannon, and the original episodes seemed to show him as more of a charmer to the women than an unmannered horndog. but I suppose each director is allowed a certain artistic licence to deviate from one another.
Twas ok. A little choppy.
That works for me!
FYI to the UAP ping list..
I didn’t care for it. If I went into reasons why, it would probably spoil the movie for those that haven’t seen it yet. I’ll let them find out and make their own conclusions.
Yes, and waste no opportunity to break the Prime Directive!
the only reason the prime directive exists is to be broken. there’d be no episodes to watch if they didn’t break it.
They’d all be dead a dozen times over if they didn’t. Stupid rule anyway. In TNG series, Picard was sometimes willing to let whole populated planets perish just so they could exist without interference from others. Obviously in some cases they might actually want a little interference, though.
I wish SOMEONE had broken the Prime Directive for OUR Planet back in the 7th century.
We would have been MUCH better off without the you-know-whos for the lat 1400 years.
Thank you, Finny - looking forward to it. The first one with Chris Pine was terrific.
This is obligatory for the demons of anti-holywood, as well as profanity with the Lord's name. Surprised if they left out the latter. No more "we find the one [God] sufficient" or Bread and Circuses here.
- Former Trekie