on tumblr: guys we need to have a serious discussion about the erasure of nonbinary trans* people
in real life: ok, I guess I have to explain to my entire class how "feminist" is not an insult
Oh dear God, not another Star Trek: Into Darkness analysis. Remember when this was a social justice blog? I don’t. Anyway, you’re just going to have to deal, because this just occurred to me, and it seemed significant to the Trekkie part of my being. Spoilers under the cut.
poeticimplosion asked: Okay--so i was totally glad that you addressed the whitewashing thing, because that really pissed me off. As handsome as whatever the fuck his name is can be, still. And I (i mean, i haven't watched it, but i have no beef with spoilers, really) totally agree with the comment earlier about the going off and doing the new thing-- i mean you went through all that fucking trouble in the first place to do the new time line why not use it? also if you haven't seen, there's an interview with stewart
Yeah, I am endlessly pissed that JJ Abrams himself admits that he doesn’t like Star Trek. I don’t care how much money it can make him, it’s dumb to take on something of this magnitude when you don’t really understand it. adjlfkjdslfj;af I just love Star Trek so much, why can’t it all be perfect???
I just got back from the midnight premiere of Into Darkness here in my neck of the woods. It’s like three am and I’m exhausted, but Imma do this now so I can just get it done. For my take on the movie, look under the cut.
You’ve just perfectly articulated why I hated this movie with every fiber of my being. So, uh, thanks? Honestly, I just do not have the patience to get into it myself so I’m glad other people can point out flaws.
My experience was, basically, I blinked and it was over.
That brings up a good point that I didn’t even really touch on, and that’s why do a (spoiler) Khan storyline at all? JJ Abrams has created a timeline that is completely separate from TOS canon, so he could literally do anything, and instead he goes for revamping a storyline that didn’t need to be revamped in the first place. We have Space Seed and we have Wrath of Khan, and idk about you, but I’m content with those. Whitewashing aside, it was just lazy writing. It shows essentially no creativity, and didn’t impress me, or tell me anything new. If you’re familiar with Khan, then you know how the story is going to end. The whole point of having nu!Trek is to make fresh, new material—not to decimate the old.
This will probably contain spoilers, be warned:
I know I already did an analysis of the movie, but in my haste, and also exhaustion, I feel like I kind of skipped over the whole whitewashing issue. It’s something that has been bothering me, so I wanted to put it into words here.
I am, of course, against whitewashing in every scenario. It’s awful, it’s a form of institutional racism, and it’s hurtful. But there’s something about whitewashing Star Trek that is just unbearable to me. Star Trek is known for being inclusive. Half the reason Star Trek is what is today is because it had a black woman working communications, and a Japanese man on the helm. It had the first interracial kiss, and women working high positions. And this was in the 1960s. The 1960s! Where else on television (or even real life) were you going to find black women who weren’t just working as nannies and housekeepers? Where were you going to find Asian men who weren’t doing accents? I just recently watched the TOS episode Tomorrow is Yesterday, when a man from the past ends up aboard the Enterprise, and when he sees a woman working, he says, “A woman?” and Kirk immediately replies, “A crewman.”
Of course TOS wasn’t perfect, but for the time, it was damned impressive, and it gave way to four more Star Trek series (and one animated series), and 10 movies that follow that same principle—that construct storylines around the idea that we’re all created equally, and that in the 23rd or 24th century, our differences are only going to make us stronger.
So then we have Khan, who is arguably one of the best Star Trek villians ever, who shows up and is a person of color. But he’s not this meekly, evil-for-the-sake-of-evil villian. Khan is a superhuman. He doesn’t sit around with conniving evil plans. He sits there and quotes Moby Dick, and manipulates. We have a person of color who is smarter, stronger, more brilliant than almost everyone, which was practically unheard of in 1966. What other villian in any TOS episode, or movie, takes as big a toll on Kirk than Khan? Both directly and indirectly because of Khan, Kirk loses his son, he loses Spock, and he loses the Enterprise. In some respects, if only for a fleeting moment (and depending on how you look at it), Khan beats Kirk. Our strong, brilliant captain is, in some ways, beaten by this villian, and this villian is a person of color.
But then JJ Abrams casts Benedict Cumberbatch (who I love and adore, please note) to reprise this iconic role, and something incredibly important has been lost. Because when it comes to POC seeing themselves in the media, it’s not enough to just have Uhura in the background, or Sulu at the helm. Khan represented the sort of strength and power a POC could have (albeit not in the same way, but still), and to whtiewash him is to inevitably take that power away.
No one would ever stand to have Uhura played by a white woman, or Sulu replaced with Martin Freeman, because it’s understood that they are iconic POC figures in the Star Trek canon. I think Khan is just as, if not more, important a figure, and to replace him with Benedict Cumberbatch is just as problematic, and is a complete disservice to POC who found solace in Khan’s character, and definitely a disservice to Ricardo Montalban.
And that is why I do not appreciate the whitewashing, and why, even though he acted brilliantly, I can never accept Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan.
raven-sun asked: i'll talk to you about Star Trek I just got back from seeing it and wow yeah feelings good things bad things but mostly feelings
TALK TO ME ABOUT STAR TREK, DO IT!
friendbrotherlover asked: Ah! I agree with almost everything in your Star Trek Into Darkness analysis!!
I’m glad I’m not alone! Idk, I didn’t really go into the movie with high expectations, and as I said to many people, it’s not like the Star Trek franchise hasn’t had their share of bad movies. But this one just sort of took away a lot of the core meaning of Star Trek, and that was sad. I am just incredibly conflicted about it. I’ll probably go see again. xD
hannahble-lecter asked: re: the fuck did i just watch post - YES THANK YOU YOUR COMMENTARY SUCCINCTLY AND APTLY CONVEYED EVERY CRITICISM AND ENJOYMENT I HAD OF THE MOVIE. Like almost verbatim. I thought it was better than the first movie by far but there wasn't enough of an emotional connection yet with the crew that the impact of Kirk dying was just "eh" for me - not because he sacrificed himself for the crew, but the scene between he and Spock. It was too forced and cliched and UGH GOD DAMMIT SO BAD BUT SO GLORIOUS.
Can you imagine that scene if we had the Kirk and Spock relationship up to par with how it was in TOS? It would have been absolutely killer. I liked that particular scene a lot, but that’s just because I have a background knowledge of the connection those two share. Anyone who is just getting into Star Trek now cannot possibly understand how momentous that scene was, because JJ Abrams does not come even remotely close to conveying it. I JUST WANT TO HAVE MY STAR TREK FEELS, OKAY, I WANT SOME GOOD, NON-FORCED, NON-CLICHE STAR TREK FEEEEELS.
tevakh-kahk asked: You gave me tears of rage with that review because I couldn't agree more with you about exactly everything :'I
It was a pretty frustrating movie, because I really wanted to like it, but there were so many problems! I will tear rage with you. <3