Sunday, May 26, 2013

Trekking Even Further Into Darkness

A few further links into the growing disappointment of Star Trek Into Darkness. First, the spoiler-free stuff:

The Harlem Shake is kind of a big deal right now. But the Star Trek Shakethat's been a big deal since the '60s! Here are some GIFs to help you out with that.

So you've seen the last two Star Trek movies and had a good time — good enough to finally consent to watching The Wrath Of Khan after years of pestering from your boyfriend (“Greatest Star Trek movie — ever!”). Your first thought: “Kinda overrated, no?” Ho-ho-hoooold on there, newby!

Next: the SPOILER-LADEN links:

After his subtle, spoiler-free meditation equating Abrams' Trek to the trophy partner we gave up our soul mate for, Locke Peterseim tucks in and exposes where Abrams and Crew are egregiously betraying Trekkies.

The arena of charged political debate is hardly verboten to Trek writers. But would George W. Bush dig this movie? Would Dick Cheney?

In a brilliant bit of fan-fic from The Awl, Leonard “Bones” McCoy surveys the post-Into Darkness landscape and wonders if, “perhaps on further reflection, we were a bit naive”?

And finally, Roger Ebert's far-flung Turkish correspondent Ali Arikan argues robustly that “Survivor's Guilt” ought to qualify Mr. Spock for the role of the central hero in the new Star Trek.

No comments: