Sunday, August 25, 2019

The unknown nebula strikes again

A known nebula 


SPOILER WARNING! CONTAINS HUGE SPOILERS!

“Star Trek Beyond” (2016) is the third neo-Star Trek film, the two previous being “Star Trek” (2009) and “Star Trek Into Darkness” (2013). The actors try their best to mimic the old crew of the original TV series, and succeed to a great extent - it´s actually quite funny! “Bones” and his hard boiled exchanges with Mr Spock are particularly convincing. Perhaps inevitably, “Captain Kirk” is less convincing, but it must be difficult to star one of the most famous fictitious space ship captains in galactic history.

The plot is (frankly) basic bitch, with all the usual sci fi tropes we love to hate: the unknown nebula which makes communication with Star Fleet impossible, the hostile aliens hiding (surprise) inside the nebula, and the unredeemable mad scientist. More typical for Star Trek is the peacenik UN-style rhetoric, and the constant destructions and recreations of the starship Enterprise. While the franchise is “liberal”, I suppose it could shock a few people that the Russians are on *our* side in this particular intergalactic confrontation. But then, “Star Trek Beyond” was made before the Russian narrative took over the chattering classes in true nano-probe fashion.

The plot revolves around an attempt by a mysterious alien civilization to attack the Federation base “Yorktown” with a highly advanced super-weapon. The aliens need an ancient artifact stashed onboard the Enterprise to rebuild the bio-weapon and hence complete their nefarious designs of conquest and fascistic-vitalistic militarism (their leader Krall sounds like a blend of Heraclitus and a Klingon). They also need the crewmembers themselves – Krall rejuvenates himself by killing other sentient beings and harvesting the electric energy of their dying bodies. Think the revenge of Frankenstein´s monster or something to that effect. Several major plot holes later, Kirk and a marooned female alien with a penchant for kickboxing attack Krall´s compound and succeeds in rescuing most of the crew. The twist of the story is that Krall isn´t really an alien at all. He is actually a former Star Fleet captain, real name Edison, who went missing beyond the Nebula and turned mad in the belief that the Federation had abandoned him. Edison discovered the technology of a vanished alien race and used it to stay alive – which, of course, turned *him* into an alien look alike.

While most of “Star Trek Beyond” is vintage Star Trek, it does contain nods to other franchises. Or is just me seeing things? Star Wars, Babylon 5, Tomorrowland, Alien…maybe it *is* difficult to make an original scy fy flick! Still, “Beyond” gets the gold star for being the only known production in existence (this side of the Unknown Nebula) which contains references to both “Lord of the Rings” and the Beastie Boys!

Three stars. Live long and prosper.

9 comments:

  1. Have you read Fred Hoyles "The black cloud"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Simply put no. Why? Does it feature an unknown nebula?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jag antar att "nebula" är samma ord som svenska "nebulosa". Det som kallades "nebulusa" i slutet av 1800-talet visade sig vara två typer av objekt. Dels avlägsna galaxer, dels gasmoln i vår galax. Hoyles svara moln var i vilket fall som helst ett jättelikt gasmoln som trängde in i vårt solsystem. I motsats till nebulosor msn kan se på avstånd lös det inte, utan var som sagt svart.

    Det visade sig vara en levande organism, som verkade vara fientlig mot mänskligheten. Den blev fientlig på allvar, när försvarsmakter på jorden började skicka atombomber på det..

    Men till sist visade det sig att det I GRUNDEN inte var fientligt och några forskare lyckades få kontakt med det.

    Historien är oerhört fascinerande, med en lite komisk poäng. Och det är när Hoyle låter molnet vederlägga Big Bang-teorin. En av forskarna säger förtjust ungefär "åh, där fick de där gossarna med sin exploderande universum".

    Jag tycker boken var en av de bästa sf-romaner jag läst. Vill bestämt rekommendera den....

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Finns massa slarvfel i min kommentar. jag vet...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fred Hoyle trodde förstås inte på big. Ang eller hur?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Han var ju dess mest kända motståndare på 50-talet.

    ReplyDelete