Star Trek’s Reboot Seeks Out New Life, New Civilizations, New Audiences
Posted by: Lisa Paitz SpindlerEver since Beth Andrews brought up the new Star Trek movie the other day and how she was new to the story, I started thinking about how I originally became interested in the franchise. Please be warned that if you haven’t seen the new movie, spoilers follow.
Right, Spock and Jim Kirk from the rebooted Star Trek movie.
My interest in Star Trek is just part of my overall interest in science that my parents continuously fostered during childhood. As a kid I remember watching PBS specials on science and evolution, specifically David Attenborough’s “Life on Earth” and “The Living Planet” and Carl Sagan’s “Cosmos.” I also remember watching the original Star Trek series with my dad and reading Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series with my mom. Between all of that and Mister Rogers, I learned early on that the best kind of entertainment does a little bit more than simply entertain. One of the criticisms of the various Star Trek series and movies has been that they are too cerebral, but this new reboot, I think, successfully balances action-adventure entertainment with science still being fundamentally important to the story. It has the potential to garner new audiences who have previously missed the opportunity to enjoy the Star Trek world.
As a science fiction writer, I hope that equates to more science fiction readers as well. Lou Anders, Editorial Director of Pyr, picked up this debate on FaceBook from SFSignal (full disclosure: I’m an SFSignal occasional reviewer) of how the new movie could influence science fiction in general. While talking to Anders about this debate, he offered the analysis he also gave to his friend George Mann, author of The Affinity Bridge:
. . .[T]he argument is whether a successful Star Trek film (or any big media SF property) will be good or bad for the genre in general. The arguers are saying that rehashing old stuff is always bad, no one should adapt books, and Hollywood should only do new, brilliant, original work. I am saying that the stigma attached to Trek is the #1 excuse I get from people who don’t read SF as to why, that the mainstream pronouncing Trek “cool” would be a huge boon to my ability to proselytize SF, that big blockbuster movies and NYT bestselling books allow studios and publishers to do smaller/edgier work that otherwise wouldn’t get greenlit/acquired, and that a climate in which SF is seen as highly profitable and mainstream will result in more of it getting produced/published - out of which some new geniuses will emerge - whereas as climate in which SF is geeky, niche, and “for losers” will result in less of it all round, authors getting dropped, etc… and the undiscovered geniuses will remain undiscovered.
As a fan of all things Science Fiction, I hope the new Star Trek movie not only introduces the genre — both in TV/movie and book formats — to a new audience, but I also hope the new audience realizes that Science Fiction is as much about the characters as it is about science. This, to me, tears down the stereotype that “SF is geeky, niche, and ‘for losers’” — and certainly not only for teenage boys. At the core of Star Trek are the relationships of its characters, of the various friendships that have sustained Kirk, Spock, and the entire crew through many challenges. Spock notes this in the new movie when he meets the young Kirk and tells him: “I have been and always shall be your friend.” This kind of character-driven engine of the story should strike a cord with Romance readers since a defining feature of Romance is that relationships influence character.
Moreso, this Star Trek reboot further examines this theme of how our relationships change us by altering the timeline. For example, originally Kirk found inspiration to join Starfleet from his father’s own long service, but in the reboot Kirk’s father dies as Jim is born. As a result Kirk is somewhat of a delinquent until he is rescued by father figure Christopher Pike. In the reboot Spock loses his mother, Amanda Grayson, but in the original story she lived a long life. Her death brought Spock closer to his father, Sarek, at best a strained relationship originally. Both of these events fundamentally changed Kirk and Spock, as will their future friendship.
I’ve never been shy about being a Star Trek fan (Trekkie, Trekker, whatever) because while not ignoring the baser facets of human nature, it ultimately appeals to the potential good in all of us. I particularly enjoyed the spin-off series Deep Space: Nine because of its willingness to delve into the darker aspects of its characters and also explore themes of redemption. The new Star Trek has the potential to examine the spectrum of its predecessor shows. J.J. Abrams and his crew have made Star Trek and Science Fiction more accessible to a new audience without giving up on the fundamentals that define a genre.
Where have all the Danger Gals gone?
Left, Lt. Nyota Uhura from the rebooted Star Trek movie.
If you read my own Danger Gal Blog, you may know that most Fridays I profile heroines, usually in Science Fiction, who defy feminine stereotypes. Many of the posts have profiled kick-ass characters such as Alien’s Ellen Ripley, Terminator’s Sarah Connor, and Firefly’s Zoe Washburne. So of course I was looking for such a character in the Star Trek reboot. I’m still looking for her. I do very much like the update to Nyota Uhura, but was slightly disappointed that Christine Chapel will probably remain Nurse Chapel instead of Number One as she was first written in the original Star Trek pilot. Network TV wasn’t ready for such a strong female character in the 1960s, but we definitely are now. Since J.J. Abrams has created other great female characters like Alias’ Sydney Bristow and Fringe’s Olivia Dunham, I have faith he’ll continue that trend in the new Star Trek and introduce some potentially brand new characters. After all, there’s still Carol Marcus to contend with, and what a Romance that could turn out to be for Kirk!
Getting my nerd on
The movie left me with some deliciously unanswered questions, such as:
- What exactly is red matter?
- When Romulus was destroyed, was its sister planet Remus also destroyed? If not, will we see the Remans in future movies? Since they’re the most biologically compatible people left as mate options for the remaining Vulcans, could they help rebuild Vulcan society?
- The Andorians helped Earthlings and Vulcans form Starfleet, and yet we saw no Andorians. Will we see them in future movies?
- How did Nero know when Spock would emerge from the black hole? I hope some bigger geek than me tackles this question. Until then, I’m left to wonder if the differential in arrival times might be explained by the huge difference in mass between the two ships. I also wonder what effect the red matter itself might have had on Spock’s travel through the black hole. Was Nero able to predict Spock’s appearance based on the calculations of his own trip and adjusting for the mass of Spock’s ship and/or the red matter?
What about you? Have you seen the Star Trek movie? Are you a longtime fan or a newbie? Either way, what was your favorite or not so favorite part of the new flick? Has the movie piqued your interest in Science Fiction?
19 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
May 13th, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
WHEW!!!!!
I wondered that too but figured I was too…um, uneducated, to know! Guess it is meant to be a mystery!
I also wondered how one little drop of it at one point could implode a planet and create a black hole, but then when the whole huge blob of it exploded …well, we just got another black hole. *shrug*
Great post, Lisa. I loved this movie. It was fun and funny!
May 13th, 2009 @ 3:14 pm
I have actually been reading up on reactions to the “red matter” element of the new movie. The singularity, or black hole, that it creates collapses almost immediately. The way I understand it, that wouldn’t happen with such a huge singularity because it would have to be losing more matter than it gains and quickly — that’s kind of challenging for an object so enormous. It would happen with a mini-black hole though, as was thought possible with the Large Hadron Collider experiments. Discover Magazine has an article on some of the science in the new movie.
But, yeah, you’d think more red matter = gigunda black hole.
May 13th, 2009 @ 3:27 pm
[…] have a new post up at my Writers At Play group blog about the new Star Trek movie. It includes a great quote from Lou Anders, Editorial Director of Pyr, on how this new accessible […]
May 13th, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
Um… live long and prosper?
Geesh, Lisa, I loved the movie, but questions about time travel always give me a
because they seem so unanswerable. All I really understood regarding the device within the movie is that now we get a whole new (yet similar) timeline for future Star Trek movies, which means I’ll hopefully get to see a lot more of Chris Pine! 
(What can I say - I believe in getting down to basics.)
As for red matter, I just put it in the same category as Klingon cuisine, which (if it existed), I would avoid at all possible!
May 13th, 2009 @ 4:57 pm
Re: Red Matter - I loved it. I hate when scifi in the future tries to conform exactly to our current understanding. Obviously 400 years from now, we should have some terms we don’t have now and theories we haven’t come up with yet! And, in fact, given how many scifi neologisms became real scientific terms (ie “multiverse”), I would bet some scientist will discover an exotic form of dark matter or somesuch one day and chose to name it after this.
May 13th, 2009 @ 5:21 pm
I haven’t seen it yet–
–self inflicted punishment for being in manic deadline crunch 
Here’s hoping it’s still in theaters when I’m cracking open the finished-ms bubbly 
Thanks for the preview!
May 13th, 2009 @ 6:49 pm
I’m no help, Lisa. I never watch the series so haven’t a clue.
May 13th, 2009 @ 9:17 pm
Wonderful post, Lisa. The movie was fab, and your analysis, as always, is spectacular. Love the questions you had at the end. I’m not sciencey-enough to ask them. being a magic kinda gal, I just figured “Science Magic”
and accepted the concept.
I did, however, keep waiting for Kirk and Gang to somehow restore the timeline, as they always did in the previous versions. Now there’s a whole new universe of possibilities out there!
May 13th, 2009 @ 10:45 pm
Been a Trekkie, Trekker, whatever you want to call us since the original–yes, original, I am OLD, children–airing of “Devil in the Dark,” Season 1, Episode 26. Spent the summer watching all the reruns of everything I’d missed.
Since their sun destroyed Romulus, I think it’s a safe bet Remus got wiped out, too. From a true Trekkie/Trekker geek POV, the Star Trek books make it very clear Romulans and those Romulans who live on Remus, came from Vulcan. They disagreed with the move to use logic rather than emotion and left the planet.
Yeah, yeah, more than you wanted to know.
btw, I was watching “Journey to Babel” late one night during the last week of my second pregnancy and decided “Amanda” was a perfect name if we had a girl. When I told my husband the meaning of “Amanda,” he agree. So, our daughter is named after Mr. Spock’s mother.
May 13th, 2009 @ 11:16 pm
I haven’t seen the new movie yet, but I think Josie and I are seeing it this weekend. I wouldn’t call myself a Trekkie
, but I don’t think I’ve missed many of the original series or the spin off Deep Space. There’s many elements I enjoy but there’s also some I can’t relate to. Great post.
May 14th, 2009 @ 10:06 am
Terri: I admit, it is a little difficult to concentrate on things like red matter when Chris Pine is on-screen.
May 14th, 2009 @ 10:08 am
Hi Lou! Thanks for stopping by, and thanks also for starting up a great topic on FaceBook that gave me the idea for this post.
Evidently in the Star Trek prequel comic book red matter is explained as having been created by the Vulcan Science Academy from “decalithium,” an isotope the Narada was built to mine. (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Red_matter) I wish they’d been able to hint more at that in the movie, but I guess they have to draw the line somewhere to keep it under two hours.
I won’t be surprised either if a future physicist names a new particle “red matter” either.
May 14th, 2009 @ 10:14 am
Stacey: I think watching the new ST movie would be a great writing reward. Go you!
Paisley: It’s never too late to discover Star Trek.
Cheryl: I try, but it is so much fun to talk about this stuff. Remember that Arthur C. Clarke said: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
Betty: I remember when I first watched the original series it was in reruns and my dad had seen every episode already. I was so amazed that he pretty much knew what happened in each one. As a kid I just couldn’t fathom that anyone could remember all that. Which is funny, considering my own fascination with BSG. Get your nerd on all you want, Betty. I think it’s cool. I totally forget that’s what caused the Vulcan/Romulan schism. I’m kind of sad that Remus is probably gone too, but you have a point there. I guess it depends on how quickly that black hole collapsed. This explains a lot about your daughter (and why she’s so cool).
May 14th, 2009 @ 10:21 am
Anne-Marie: I hope you get to see the movie soon. I’m looking forward to hearing what you think about it.
May 14th, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
I’m going with my brother (the Trekkie) this weekend. Having watched reruns of the original series is there any relationship between Red Matter and the way the ships engines were originally propelled-the Matter/Anti-matter chamber? I just remember constantly hearing Scotty complain about the engines a lot and how any little thing would throw them off balance.
McH
May 14th, 2009 @ 10:04 pm
Betty, you named your daughter after Spock’s mother? Okay, you are a true Trekkie.
Great post, Lisa.
May 15th, 2009 @ 11:10 am
[…] mind” was then attributed to Spock instead. I have few criticisms of the new Star Trek movie, and in fact very much enjoyed it, but one facet that saddened me was the continuation of the Nurse Chapel character without any […]
August 23rd, 2009 @ 10:49 am
January 7th, 2010 @ 12:00 am
Thanks for the tips