With the new Star Trek movie, which I recently saw, comes a new departure from reality. We find out over the course of events in the movie that we are experiencing an “alternate” universe of Star Trek, put into play by using the device of time travel through a black hole. Nice ploy. Now, in subsequent Star Trek movies, the writers are free to mess around with this alternate universe, changing ITS course of (fictional/speculative) history with impunity and without any concern as to how it would affect future Star Trek scenarios (especially that of Star Trek: The Next Generation). Any character can now be killed off and any planet destroyed. After all, this is a different universe! As “cheap” as this strategy may seem, it does add a much-needed element of suspense to the series. Now, when Kirk (or Spock or Uhura or McCoy or Scotty or anyone else) is hanging by one hand on the edge of a cliff with his adversary trying to pry it off, we can never be too sure that (s)he’s going to get out of it alive. The writers are also free to write new scenarios regarding the Klingons and Romulans. And they are also free to introduce the Borg and Q, staples of Star Trek: the Next Generation (occurring later on the original Star Trek timescale), earlier in time to allow interaction with Kirk, Spock, and company.
Yes, I generally feel that time travel can often be used as a “cop-out” science fiction trick in that it is all-too-easy to present mind-boggling paradoxes to the viewer. Although this does happen with the 2009 movie Star Trek, it also works to liberate this series from any constraints regarding its adherence to the fictional “Star Trek history”. I say bravo!
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm a bit more ambivalent about it. I've never been fond of deus ex machina plot devices, and that's what this is. The figurative hand of God (read: the screenwriter) can reach in at any time and change whatever it wants, and it is, by definition, consistent, because there is no required consistency.
ReplyDeleteThat bothers me. It's nice to give the writers freer reins, but letting them run wild isn't always best.