(So, yes, I am using it here gratuitously, too.)
by Roger Bourke White Jr., copyright May 2013
Iron Man 3 and Star Trek into Darkness are the action Bobsy Twins of May 2013. One is 1970's comic book based, the other 1960's TV based, but both are all about using expensive production effects to tell familiar stories. These are trend followers: The stories are there to provide the framework for the neat effects and good acting, not vice versa. Both movies are really neat to watch... if you think seeing the latest in smash-bang is important, and you enjoy actors working through roles in story lines you've seen many times before.
Iron Man is classic comic book. It does a good job of transplanting the comic book story structure to the screen. The production team has put together a lot of interesting special effects to highlight Tony Stark's inventing abilities. The biggest story problem is that the bad guys are so well funded. This is partially explained by the chief bad guy being a successful businessman like Tony Stark, but the result is still way over the top. The second biggest is that even though early in the movie Tony's mansion is trashed to the point of toppling off its seaside cliff face, Iron Man goodies keep constantly popping out later in the movie.
This year ripping up commercial airplanes in mid-flight is a hot trope, and Iron Man has it, plus terrorism and successfully threatening a US president. Another trope-in-making is having the final showdown at a container ship pier. I ran into this a couple months ago watching The A-Team from 2010.
On to Star Trek: The heart of the neat stuff in this Star Trek movie is how much the actors and actresses have managed to absorb the airs and mannerisms of the 1960's characters. They have improved since the previous movie.
On the other hand, I find it laughable that the phasers and photon torpedoes of the 1960's Enterprise could completely wipe out enemies in seconds with just a couple bursts and a single explosion, but over the many movies since then they keep getting weaker. In this 2013 version they can rain fire for minutes and the enemy is still operational. (And don't get me started on transporters and warp drive!) And it has its full share of tropes. One that comes to mind is the CGI trope of flying through a steep-walled valley of some sort, hotly pursued by shooting enemies, and decisively eluding them near the end of the scene by flying sideways through a really narrow part.
The story problems in Star Trek are a bigger issue than Iron Man because it has a different ambition. The story heart of this 2013 version is exploring ethical issues. But the producers loaded up about six different ethical situations into this one movie. To get from one to the next there is a whole lot of deus ex machina which sends the story line spinning off in new directions to address each new issue. It left me head scratching a little and face palming a lot. The opening scene is a good example of this problem.
Question: Why is the Enterprise, a star ship equipped with transporters and shuttles, hiding on a planet surface in an ocean?
Answer: Umm... umm... we need a cute setup for the prime directive ethical issue exploration.
Another heart of this movie was homage. I felt like I was watching a Shakespeare play as the producers steadily brought in quotes, in-jokes, and personality quirks from the 1960's episodes.
In sum, in both of these movies have action and CGI at the center. With Iron Man being comic book-based that worked OK. But the ethical issue story meanderings in Star Trek kept popping my belief suspension and it felt like I'd been sitting a really long time by the time it ended.
|
| I'm surprised at how much this Carol Marcus-in-a-bikini shot gets talked about in social media. (So, yes, I am using it here gratuitously, too.) |
Here, in response to this crazy attention focus on what a woman is shown wearing for two seconds, are parts I consider much more story- and belief-suspension shattering.
o First scene, first inconsistency: What is the Enterprise, a star ship, doing under an ocean? This is crazy for about six reasons, but the most important is that a high performance craft designed to deal with vacuum and warp speed is going to be out of its element in air, water, and holding itself together in a planet's surface gravity. ...yeah, in every movie the Enterprise gets beat up and crashes on a planet. And in every movie I have to facepalm when it happens.
o About six times in the movie the story pits family against duty, and in every case family wins out. This is feel good, but it's not how either a civilized society or a military functions -- especially not a military. When family consistently wins out, you have a Hatfield-McCoy style society.
o Kirk consistently wins because of his bravery, guessing, and good luck: I guess I'm thinking like an old man, but, Whew! This is not a commander I'd like leading me!
o The whole business of dealing with the Klingons on the remote planet was wacky. The wackiness starts with: Five minutes before they go down, "Oh, let's go down disguised as arms dealers." That's all the prep time they had for putting together some kind of disguise?
o As mentioned earlier, the CGI aircraft chase scene in some kind of a valley is now such a trope. I saw it two weeks earlier in Oblivion.
o The flying through the debris field in space suits is handled as if this is flying in air and gravity, not weightless in the vacuum of space. If it was weightless in a vacuum the second half of the journey would be with them facing backwards so the jets could slow them to a halt at the entrance lock.
o In each movie the definition of what transporters or warp drive can do is arbitrarily changed. In the previous movie transporters could lock on to ships in warp space. In this movie one ship can pursue another in warp space. Also in this movie when the other ship catches the Enterprise it seems both spontaneously come out of warp space, somehow, and they come out so conveniently close to an Earth-like planet covered with clouds... which the Enterprise predictably crashes on to. <sigh, sigh, sigh>
o The business of Kirk fixing the core by jumping on it, then getting almost out, then dying palm-to-palm with Spock... except he doesn't really die, he gets high-tech miracle revived! This is yet another example of family beating out duty.
o At the end of the movie Kirk is an honored speech giver at a Starfleet Command ceremony. I'm sure there were a lot of Starfleet Commanders rolling in their cryo-storage at that! "We're honoring luck and hunches, not planning and preparation?"
At this point the Star Trek franchise can support a Cabin in the Woods equivalent. There are sufficient tropes that good comedy can come of it.
-- The End --