'Star Trek Into Darkness' and the Wrath of Fanboys Being Khaned

In this spoiler heavy overview of the new Star Trek film, we discuss how the fanboy nation is gnashing its teeth over what J.J. Abrams and company have wrought.

Star Trek Into Darkness

Director: J.J. Abrams
Cast: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Benedict Cumberbatch, Anton Yelchin, Bruce Greenwood, Peter Weller, Alice Eve, Leonard Nimoy
Rated: PG-13
Studio: Paramount
Year: 2013
US date: 2013-05-17 (General release)
UK date: 2013-05-09 (General release)

Right now, it's just a disgruntled din, but by the end of the weekend, one assumes it will be an outright Trek geek uproar. Fans of the famed Gene Roddenberry space opera have already expressed a degree of difficulty with J. J. Abrams' update/ reimagining/ commercialization of their beloved '60s sci-fi staple, and with the money mandated sequel, Into Darkness, ready to invade theaters this week, the problems are only going to multiply. You see, the filmmaker has decided to tread on some very sacred ground, soil so cinematically adored that to mess with it at all requires all kinds of reprimands and repercussions. If you haven't already guessed by the title, let this SPOILER WARNING be your final caveat. You see, Abrams has decided to do a literal second helping of motion picture Star Trek, taking on that most heralded of holy grails, Khan.

Yep, Benedict Cumberbatch is the Ricardo Montalban for those who are way too young to have heard of "Space Seed", let alone the original TV interpretation of the character. While the Trek geeks, yours truly included, loved that the post-Motion Picture pitch saw the genetically engineered superman return to take on Kirk and his comrades, The Wrath of Khan has become something more than a successful continuation of a then still up in the air film franchise. In fact, you can say it saved Star Trek from being a one and done anomaly. With the death of Spock, who would later be resurrected both in front of the lens and behind it (Leonard Nimoy was lured back to the role with the promise of a directing gig) and the establishment of a firm movie mythos, the Enterprise was on its way.

And now, J. J. Abrams is fucking with the entire Khan conceit - big time. No, he really hasn't changed the character much. He is still an uber-warrior with an insane amount of pride and a desire to do unto others what he believes they did unto him and his entire DNA-tweaked clan. But in this case, Khan is seen as a terrorist, someone getting back at Starfleet for using him and his sentient combat skills. Unlike Wrath, which offered a brawny, bare-chested version of the aging exiled character going toe to toe with his nemesis Kirk, we get a younger, mostly spry take on the villain, a viable update considering that almost everything else about Abrams' take centers around reconstructing the Trek universe and shooting it off into its own parallel plane.

The story starts right after Kirk (Chris Pine, again) has been made Captain of the Enterprise. He screws up one of the Prime Directives while on an alien world and is demoted. Serving under Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) he is privy to some classified information surrounding an attack on Starfleet's London Headquarters. Before you can say 9/11-Boston Marathon bombing, the San Francisco offices are raided as well. All clues lead to a rogue officer, John Harrison (Cumberbatch) and Kirk is given the order to destroy him by his sitting superior, Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller). The only problem? The fugitive has sought asylum on the Klingon home planet of Kronos, and any violation of their territory will be viewed as an act of war.

Gathering back up the crew including Spock (Zachary Quinto), Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), Chekov (Anton Yelchin), and Scotty (Simon Pegg), Kirk decides to capture Harrison instead of killing him. Arriving on the planet surface, he witness the man singlehandedly wipe out legion after legion of Klingon warriors. Eventually, they discover that he is actually Khan, a super-being that it over 300 years old. Marcus, anticipating a need to turn Starfleet into a military organization, thawed out the frozen fiend, utilized his superior intellect, and then, when he realized he couldn't be controlled, labeled him for termination (along with 70-plus of his tribe). As an act of vengeance, Khan wants to see Starfleet fall and will do anything to fan the flames of war.

Kirk is shocked when Khan surrenders. He's even more mystified when he agrees to help the Enterprise fend off Marcus and his massive Star Destroyer, the Vengeance. Turns out, however, that it's all an elaborate ruse, a way of getting Khan command of the lethal vessel while destroying Kirk and his crew. In a bid to save his ship, our Captain does a space dive into the Vengeance, only to be sent back to a dying Enterprise when Khan no longer needs him. Knowing his crew will more than likely perish, he goes into the radioactive core to address an engineering issue...and dies. Yes, like the original Wrath, a main character kicks it because the reactor needs realigning, and only a human, or human like extraterrestrial can apparently do it.

So Kirk dies, Khan gets his ship and that's it, right? Well, not really. You see, our baddie has blood that can rejuvenate dead cells. We see Dr. McCoy reviving a lifeless Tribble with it. So while Kirk is frozen to keep him fresh, Spock takes off to get more of Khan's revitalizing DNA. They battle it out over San Francisco, Uhura steps in to help her man, and, eventually, Khan gets his ass kicked and Kirk is saved. The film ends on a note setting up a return visit from the villain, as he and his sleeping clan are not destroyed, but stored away for safe (?) keeping. Oh, and along the way, that famous moment where William Shatner scrunches up his mouth and yells, "KHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAANNNN!" at the top of his lungs is echoed here, except this time, it's an emotion filled Vulcan doing the shouting.

As a combination of homage and deconstruction, it borders on the brilliant. It turns what is already an amazing bit of mainstream movie magic into something akin to a masterwork. It's like David Lynch's take on The Wizard of Oz, otherwise known as Wild at Heart - all the same pieces are in place, with their recognizability used to same something new and novel. Abrams knows he is going to piss off the fanboys with this defiant story stance, and he apparently doesn't give a shit. He goes full throttle with the connections, even offering up familiar line and gestures during Kirk's climactic death scene (the only missing dialogue? The whole "you have been and will always be... my friend."). Ricardo Montalban's Shakespearean readings may be missing, as are the quotes from Moby Dick, but Cumberbatch makes up for it in the dramatic thespian department. When he promises to walk over "the cold corpses" of the Enterprise crew to victory, you believe this bastard would really do it and enjoy it!

Naturally, by more or less rewriting Wrath of Khan, In Darkness asks to be skewered by Trek nation, and savaged it has been. Many of the dismissals take on that familiar "How dare they!" drawl while failing to address the stellar action set-pieces and special effects work involved. A few even find fault with ANYONE deciding to tackle Khan and his considerable cache of cool. As with most things on the Interweb, such fetishism borders on the insane. Abrams, when given the reins to Trek by Paramount, more or less warned you he was going to do whatever the Hell he wanted. Heck, Spock and Uhura are busy making cow eyes at each other as an established couple and you're bellyaching over the return of a minor character made mythical by a movie some 30 years old? Really?

Of course, many have also dismissed the movie for reasons having nothing to do with a certain beloved foil. They, instead, point out character flaws, superficial tone shifts, and plot holes, using that always helpful critical tool know as 'assertion as fact.' The truth is that 2013 has already seen one pretty great action epic, Iron Man 3, but Star Trek: Into Darkness exceeds even that film's fantastic scope. Not only does J.J. Abrams take on the material, but the entire precedent that created in the first place... and if this is what he has in store for Star Wars, all we can say is bring it on. That franchise needs an infusion of fun, stat. Let's just hope the director doesn't diddle with the canon of classic characters George Lucas left us with over the last few decades. If he does, the pandemonium will only grow louder, and louder, and louder.


Cover down, pray through: Bob Dylan's underrated, misunderstood "gospel years" are meticulously examined in this welcome new installment of his Bootleg series.

"How long can I listen to the lies of prejudice?
How long can I stay drunk on fear out in the wilderness?"
-- Bob Dylan, "When He Returns," 1979

Bob Dylan's career has been full of unpredictable left turns that have left fans confused, enthralled, enraged – sometimes all at once. At the 1965 Newport Folk Festival – accompanied by a pickup band featuring Mike Bloomfield and Al Kooper – he performed his first electric set, upsetting his folk base. His 1970 album Self Portrait is full of jazzy crooning and head-scratching covers. In 1978, his self-directed, four-hour film Renaldo and Clara was released, combining concert footage with surreal, often tedious dramatic scenes. Dylan seemed to thrive on testing the patience of his fans.

Keep reading... Show less

Inane Political Discourse, or, Alan Partridge's Parody Politics

Publicity photo of Steve Coogan courtesy of Sky Consumer Comms

That the political class now finds itself relegated to accidental Alan Partridge territory along the with rest of the twits and twats that comprise English popular culture is meaningful, to say the least.

"I evolve, I don't…revolve."
-- Alan Partridge

Alan Partridge began as a gleeful media parody in the early '90s but thanks to Brexit he has evolved into a political one. In print and online, the hopelessly awkward radio DJ from Norwich, England, is used as an emblem for incompetent leadership and code word for inane political discourse.

Keep reading... Show less

The show is called Crazy Ex-Girlfriend largely because it spends time dismantling the structure that finds it easier to write women off as "crazy" than to offer them help or understanding.

In the latest episode of Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, the CW networks' highly acclaimed musical drama, the shows protagonist, Rebecca Bunch (Rachel Bloom), is at an all time low. Within the course of five episodes she has been left at the altar, cruelly lashed out at her friends, abandoned a promising new relationship, walked out of her job, had her murky mental health history exposed, slept with her ex boyfriend's ill father, and been forced to retreat to her notoriously prickly mother's (Tovah Feldshuh) uncaring guardianship. It's to the show's credit that none of this feels remotely ridiculous or emotionally manipulative.

Keep reading... Show less

Gallagher's work often suffers unfairly beside famous husband's Raymond Carver. The Man from Kinvara should permanently remedy this.

Many years ago—it had to be 1989—my sister and I attended a poetry reading given by Tess Gallagher at California State University, Northridge's Little Playhouse. We were students, new to California and poetry. My sister had a paperback copy of Raymond Carver's Cathedral, which we'd both read with youthful admiration. We knew vaguely that he'd died, but didn't really understand the full force of his fame or talent until we unwittingly went to see his widow read.

Keep reading... Show less

If space is time—and space is literally time in the comics form—the world of the novel is a temporal cage. Manuele Fior pushes at the formal qualities of that cage to tell his story.

Manuele Fior's 5,000 Km Per Second was originally published in 2009 and, after winning the Angouléme and Lucca comics festivals awards in 2010 and 2011, was translated and published in English for the first time in 2016. As suggested by its title, the graphic novel explores the effects of distance across continents and decades. Its love triangle begins when the teenaged Piero and his best friend Nicola ogle Lucia as she moves into an apartment across the street and concludes 20 estranged years later on that same street. The intervening years include multiple heartbreaks and the one second phone delay Lucia in Norway and Piero in Egypt experience as they speak while 5,000 kilometers apart.

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.