So I went to see "Into Darkness" at the weekend having waited 4 years to see the follow up to the excellent J J Abrams reboot of Star Trek. This was one of four movies in 2013 I simply can not wait to see. The fantastic Tom Cruise staring "Oblivion" (very intelligent, slightly predictable but thought provoking science fiction) was the first one. I have "Man Of steel" to come to try and help me forget the disappointing "Superman Returns" ( Christopher Nolan producing, "300" director Zack Snyder directing - what can go wrong?), although I'm from the generation where Christopher Reeves IS Superman, I really am excited about this as the trailer hints at a "Dark Knight" style gritty realistic super hero movie instead of the traditional cartoon like comic book action of previous super hero movies and "the dark knight" trilogy isn't just my favoutite comic book movie franchise, its in my humble opinion the greatest movie trilogy of all time (yes better than The Godfather and the original Star Wars trilogy's). Then finally the movie adaption of one of my all time favorite novels "Enders Game" - I am fearful of a change in plot direction to a more Hollywood ending from the first trailer, however the battle school scenes imply a possible real big new moment in film making.
Back to "Into Darkness"; I warn you, if you haven't seen it and you are planning to see it, read no more as this is spoiler city ahead and I won't even hide and hint at mere plot details, I will wave a big arrow at them for you. These are simply thoughts and musings, not a review.
One last chance to turn away.
Final chance
Right, its your own fault now, don't say I didn't warn you.
Much like the first movie, this is a wonderful balancing act to keep the hardcore Star Trek fan happy and entice non Trek fans to see it. There are plenty of nods to the classic series from a Tribble (yes a tribble, but only one mind you) to Sulu being poo-pooed as captain material (That is future Captain Sulu of the Excelsior in Star Trek VI) and Kirk bedding not one, but two human looking aliens sans tails. Bones is still just a doctor, and damnit he will explain this using a metaphor to Kirk in a grumpy fashion. There are Klingons, baddass Klingons and a hint at a possible direction for the 3rd movie - "Klingon War"?
But all this pales to the awesomeness of Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison who in absolutely no surprise to anybody is revealed as the greatest Star Trek villian - Khan. Due to the alternative universe method of the reboot he is discovered in a whole different way to the original series. I'll ignore the fact that in the alternative universe Khan has suddenly turned from being an Indian Sikh to a British genetically engineering superhuman villain. Because my favorite Sherlock is just so god damn intellectual, charming, persuasive and evil as Khan. He oozes psychotic intelligence as he gets the better of Star Fleet countless times. Plus not dying at the end, means we can have more Khan action in a future movie and this can only be a good thing.
I also loved the role reversals from "Wrath of Khan" with Kirk sacrificing his life to save the Enterprise and Spooks screaming the immortal line "KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNN" The irony of a Tribble saving Kirks life won't be lost on any long term fan of the original series after Bill Shatners obvious annoyance to them in the episode they featured in. A part of me actually wanted Kirk to stay dead, as that would have been a very brave decision by J J Abrams and really shifted the series to a new direction and level.
Of course whats next for Star Trek. With J J Abrams off to direct the new Star Wars movie and cement himself as one of the very top film makers a JJ Abrams directed Star Trek would be at least 4 years away again (he usually directs a movie every 2 years) but with the 50th anniversary of Star Trek only 3 years away he may only produce it and put trust in another director. We know that the Enterprise has just started its legendary 5 year mission so a plot would fall in this. I have already mentioned a potential Klingon war which would make a logical sense that Spock would be proud of - the first one had Romulans, the second has Khan, so that leaves The klingons as the other big villains in the original series.
Either way as a star Trek fan, I am hopeful the reboot series will continue in a great way.
Wednesday 22 May 2013
Wednesday 8 May 2013
In the beginning...
It would be easy to bore people with the usual first blog introductions. But it would be more fun and exciting to introduce myself over the coming days, weeks, months, years, decades, centuries, millennium and aeons. So I will keep it brief, just give the very basic stuff and let other facets of my personality filter out in coming blogs.
I'm John, married, future father to be with baby Morg due to hit the world at the end of October. The rumors are indeed true, I am an Ironman, having completed the Ironman Triathlon in Wales last year. All you need to know is, it was immensely tough, both physically and mentally. I am a writer - nothing published but the great Iain Banks called himself as a writer before being published, and if it works for him, it can work for me. That should be enough for now... just a hint of little old me.
Predominately I am looking at this blog as a tool to practice my writing. It will probably be very poor early on, but time is a great healer (cliche alert!) and I can only get better. I am working my way through the "writers bureau" writing course and one of the first things they suggest is a blog. So here goes. Now with the introductions over, lets begin.
With a geeky love of science fiction, I am working towards that genre as a writer with a short story in the works and plans for a set of books in a future universe - think Alistair Reynolds "Revelation Space" series. But as the title of this blog asks, do I follow the faster than light route or stick to the strict laws of physics? Both have their pro's and cons but for me it is the first decision any science fiction writer must decide on as it shapes their story and how it is told. One idea may work with no FTL, but it may be awkward and impossible with no FTL to move characters and situations around. Imagine "Battlestar Galactica" with no FTL - the 12 colonies would still be making their way from the original star system with the Cylons chasing them in a seemingly long and slow cosmic game cat and mouse. But on the flip-side, would Joe Halderman's classic "The Forever War" have had the same affect if he had used FTL to get the UNEF to the various combat zones, to then return in the same amount of time they were away as they experienced, losing the relativistic effects that they experienced in the book? The problem I have is being a stickler for accuracy means I tend to lean towards having no FTL, however, that doesn't mean I can't use the various theories on possible FTL (Alvubierre drive, Travesable wormhole etc) as a kind of poetic license.
Whatever route I go down in my science fiction writing endeavors I am looking forward to getting the ideas littering my mind and in my dreams on to paper. At least it will save on headache tablets!
I'm John, married, future father to be with baby Morg due to hit the world at the end of October. The rumors are indeed true, I am an Ironman, having completed the Ironman Triathlon in Wales last year. All you need to know is, it was immensely tough, both physically and mentally. I am a writer - nothing published but the great Iain Banks called himself as a writer before being published, and if it works for him, it can work for me. That should be enough for now... just a hint of little old me.
Predominately I am looking at this blog as a tool to practice my writing. It will probably be very poor early on, but time is a great healer (cliche alert!) and I can only get better. I am working my way through the "writers bureau" writing course and one of the first things they suggest is a blog. So here goes. Now with the introductions over, lets begin.
With a geeky love of science fiction, I am working towards that genre as a writer with a short story in the works and plans for a set of books in a future universe - think Alistair Reynolds "Revelation Space" series. But as the title of this blog asks, do I follow the faster than light route or stick to the strict laws of physics? Both have their pro's and cons but for me it is the first decision any science fiction writer must decide on as it shapes their story and how it is told. One idea may work with no FTL, but it may be awkward and impossible with no FTL to move characters and situations around. Imagine "Battlestar Galactica" with no FTL - the 12 colonies would still be making their way from the original star system with the Cylons chasing them in a seemingly long and slow cosmic game cat and mouse. But on the flip-side, would Joe Halderman's classic "The Forever War" have had the same affect if he had used FTL to get the UNEF to the various combat zones, to then return in the same amount of time they were away as they experienced, losing the relativistic effects that they experienced in the book? The problem I have is being a stickler for accuracy means I tend to lean towards having no FTL, however, that doesn't mean I can't use the various theories on possible FTL (Alvubierre drive, Travesable wormhole etc) as a kind of poetic license.
Whatever route I go down in my science fiction writing endeavors I am looking forward to getting the ideas littering my mind and in my dreams on to paper. At least it will save on headache tablets!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)