I just got back from seeing the movie Star Trek. While it is an interesting new twist on Gene Roddenberry's brainchild, I did not like the movie and think it is a complete disappointment.

 

I lost interest in Star Trek after finding out Paramount literally stole Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski's idea for their Deep Space Nine series.

 

What originally drew me to it wasn't just the science fiction but also the positive vision of the future Star Trek encompassed. At the time it was wonderful and fascinating seeing the crew of the Enterprise who are made up of a variety of aliens, races and creeds, working together to explore new planets and contact alien life forms in other galaxies.

 

I also liked the space combat too since, for me, it helped break up the monotony of constant space exploration.

 

Star Trek itself was also Gene Roddenberry's vehicle to demonstrate the philosophy of Humanism that he subscribed to.

 

While flawed due to its egalitarianism, as a philosophy Humanism is based on rationalism that is informed by science and free of supernaturalism.

 

Gene Roddenberry was an agnostic, respectfully, and used his show to demonstrate the glories of scientific knowledge, discovery and space exploration.

 

In addition to this, Star Trek is a world where the characters successfully use their ability to think. It offers an inspiring and entertaining demonstration of heroes of both intellect and action who do not rely on whims, emotions or superstitions to solve problems.

This is also demonstrated with the franchise's strong, pro-technology outlook since technology is essential to problem solving and scientific investigation.

 

Many life forms that the crew of the Enterprise encountered admittedly were superhuman but not gods. Yet, if they were antagonists, the hostile aliens could be defeated due to their flaws and weaknesses despite their godlike abilities.

 

The 2009 Star Trek film, while having excellent special effects and action to keep the movie interesting, still lacks the overall depth of the original television series and movies on which it is based.

In the original television series and films the main characters of the Enterprise were put into plots that were often philosophically driven. Additionally, the intergalactic crew is poised for adventure in which the primary plot of the television episodes and Star Treks I - VI are composed of a clear and consistent hierarchy of events.

 

In the new movie, we see nothing more than a chaotic discombobulated miasma of conflicting personalities who try to rule by consensus in order to stop a rogue Romulan on a vengeful warpath from destroying Earth and the United Federation of Planets.

 

In the end, the movie seems to imply that we should abandon reason, act on faith and whatever feels right. A bad message to send in a movie whose primary driving force is science and reality.

 

Faith is the blind acceptance of an idea or concept usually based on feelings without any evidence or proof and can be a pre-cursor to embracing religious or superstitious beliefs of some kind.

 

Faith is something best left to priests, preachers and politicians and to insert it into a scientifically driven, albeit fictional, story line is a blatant contradiction.

 

If he were alive, I do not think Gene Roddenberry would approve of this new version of his universe.