Star Trek: 50 Years Into the Final Frontier

Hate to show my age but I grew up on Star Trek TOS, the theatrical movies, and all the spin-off series that have gone to the final frontier.

This year marks the 50^th anniversary of the franchise and Paramount Pictures decided to release a new movie, “Star Trek Beyond,” directed by Justin Lin (from the Fast and Furious movies) and featuring the actors from the first two J.J Abrams movies. The third entrée in the series is a fun, visceral, action pack ride, heavy on BIG ASS explosions, and short on the moral allegories and philosophical debates of TOS. Casual movie goers will appreciate the action set pieces and the witty interplay between the characters. However, long-time Trekkies will have to make peace with the fact that J.J Abrams and Justin Lin favor action over introspection. 

The 50^th anniversary and “Star Trek Beyond” comes with some heart-felt sadness, as Leonard Nimoy, the only actor of the seminal TV series to join the rebooted film franchise as Spock Prime died in Feburary 2015 at age 83, and Anton Yelchin, 27, who reprised the role of Pavel Chekov in the rebooted movies died in a freak car accident in June 2016.  

The credit tributes for “Star Trek Beyond” read simply “In Loving Memory of Leonard Nimoy” before going to “For Anton.”

The critical reviews and box office numbers for “Star Trek Beyond” have been universally favorable and a fourth installment has already been greenlit. Also in the works, a new CBS TV series, Star Trek Discovery will debut in 2017. However, Star Trek’s domestic box office appeal appears to be slowing down, as “Star Trek Beyond” did substantially worse than its predecessors when it debuted in the United States this weekend. “Star Trek Beyond’s” $59.6 million haul was down 15% from “Star Trek Into Darkness” $70.2 million debut and off 20.7% from the $75.2 million debut of 2009’s “Star Trek.”

With a hefty budget of $185 million, “Star Trek Beyond” will need to perform well overseas if it wants to make a profit.

The Star Trek franchise might be drifting and losing some of its  mojo, but unlike many franchises that have been cosigned to the dustbin of history, Star Trek is the unlikely series, with the unlikely cast of characters that refuses to go away and die. J.J Abrams has taken the franchise and made it fresh and relevant enough that Paramount has officially confirmed a  fourth entry in the reboot series. There is no release date set yet, but the studio confirmed that Chris Hemsworth will reprise his role of George Kirk.

To be sure, Star Trek is 50 years into its journey to the final frontier, but the iconic characters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc,  still resonate with old and new fans alike. The franchise is still a global phenomenon and shows no sign of pulling into dry dock. The future of Star Trek is to keep moving forward and evolve with the entertainment landscape, but never lose sight of its core beliefs and positive view of humanity.  

Live long and prosper. 

A Brave New World and the GOP Nightmare

A seismic shift has taken place in American politics and its repercussions will be felt for years.

Against all odds and conventional political wisdom Donald Trump, aka, the anti-Christ of NY, has become the presumptive republican nominee. It was a long laborious process involving, a lot of bombastic tweeting, disparaging remarks about immigrants and women, simplistic slogans; penis size comparisons on national TV and ugly fear mongering. And many people in America and around the world are shaking their heads in disbelief, wondering how did it all go wrong.

The first impulse is to simply dismiss the average Trump supporter as an uneducated, gun-totting, beer drinking middle age white men or women who are simply uninformed voters. However, there is a more readily apparent explanation at hand, and some political pundits simply dismissed it altogether, or just didn’t think it was a major factor in the 2016 presidential race. The 800 hundred pound gorilla in the room that is roaring at the top of its lungs is comprised of equal parts voter disgust in our political system and good old fashion anger.

Donald Trump, much to his credit, has managed to tap into this voter anger, and has ridden the wave to unprecedented political heights. And sadly, if he goes on to win the general election and become the next POTUS, the political landscape, and the modern GOP will be forever changed. Gone will be the days of substantive debates and political correctness, and in its place, we will get flim-flam men like the anti-Christ of NY, unapologetic fear mongers that will conduct themselves like school yard bullies and shout stupid inflammatory insults during staged rallies.

The brave new world that the anti-establishment movement has ushered in will be a backward looking, divisive, mean-spirited animated corpse. The future of this movement, if it indeed it has a future beyond the general election, will be short lived and aimless. The party of Lincoln is bruised and battered, and it will need to become more inclusive and hopeful if it wishes to survive. Until the GOP collectively comes together and decides to stop playing the role of “the stupid party” winning the white house will remain an illusive dream.

For the time being, the establishment wing of the party will have to formulate a workable strategy to distance themselves from the inevitable anti-Trump backlash in the coming months. If the Republican Party is lucky they will merely lose the general election, and keep control of the House and Senate. If lady luck deserts them, then the GOP might really feel the burn and lose the congress and have a democrat in the Whitehouse.

On a good note, the 2020 presidential race is right around the corner …

Harlem not feeling Bern!

In the last few days, Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff have descended on New York hoping to deny Bernie Sanders a win in the big apple.

Hillary Clinton and New York have a long-standing relationship, and it can be argued that the relationship is not mutually beneficial. In certain political circles, Hillary Clinton is seen as a fraudulent transplant that only moved to New York in order to further her political ambitions. To be sure, Hillary Clinton’s real road to the white house began in earnest when she became a senator representing New York State. Needless to say, New York has been very good for secretary Clinton. Harlem, more than any other neighborhood in the five boroughs, has a special relationship with the Clintons. It was here that Bill Clinton opened his presidential office after leaving the White House.

Now, team Hillary is making the rounds in Harlem hoping to avoid taking a loss in their own back yard. According to political pundits Bernie Sanders has virtually no chance, however the Brooklyn-born Vermont senator isn’t ready to concede Harlem. Admittedly, team Sanders has tapped into a progressive enthusiasm in his home borough, but nonetheless, the campaign has struggled to make inroads in the historic neighborhood in Upper Manhattan that is considered the heart of Clinton Country.

Hillary Clinton kicked off her New York campaign at the Apollo Theater in Harlem on Wednesday. The Democratic presidential candidate emphasized her roots in New York, where she served two terms as a U.S. senator. She lives in Westchester County and her national campaign headquarters is in Brooklyn. The former secretary of state, who leads Sanders in pledged delegates (1,243 to 975) in New York polls, stressed that she would deliver where her primary rival Bernie Sanders could not.  

The Sanders campaign, fueled by an unstoppable stream of small donations that is enabling it to compete in New York, said it is looking to open an office in Harlem over the next few weeks. But so far, there’s little evidence the neighborhood is ready to embrace the Vermont senator. The campaign is even having difficulty nailing down a venue for a rally. Rev. Charles Curtis of Mount Love Bapist Church on Lenox Avenue confirmed that a minister working with the Sanders campaign reached out to rent the church for a campaign event and that he turned down the offer. Curtis admitted that he turned down the Sanders campaign primarily because of a packed schedule of community events; however, he was hesitant to say he would be willing to host the senator even if the church was free.

“Right now, based on what I have seen, and the people I have spoken to, I doubt seriously if he going to do well in Harlem. Clinton has the support of most of the African-American clergy.”

Ouch!

Obviously, trying to harness votes or a venue in Harlem is a near impossible task for the Sanders campaign. The chief criticism of team Sanders is that they do well with white voters in states like New Hampshire and Wisconsin, but are unable to expand their voter base in ethnically diverse states like New York. Sadly, even in the democratic presidential race, it all comes down to black and white voter enclaves.

Despite the fact that Harlem isn’t feeling the Bern, the Sanders campaign is holding a rally on Thursday at Saint Mary’s park in the South Bronx.

Batman v Superman … The Battle for Super Mediocrity

In going to see Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, I  kept my expectations exceedingly low. I am happy to report that my lack of faith was amply rewarded. That being said, I will forego the traditional review and potential spoilers and instead share a few thoughts and let the fanboy war play itself out.

Is the movie good?

That depends.

If you to liked the 2013 reboot of Superman: Man of Steel, then its more of the same thing with Batman shoehorned into the story. However, if you didn’t like director Zack Snyder’s retelling of Superman’s origin, then this movie is not going to win you over.

The problems that were inherent in Man of Steel still remain in Batman v Superman: the run time (2 hr 33 min) is too long and the pacing is off, at times the movie seems to be going nowhere. The action scenes come from the Michael Bay school of explosions. The destruction and death count in this movie exceeds Man of Steel, which I didn’t think was possible. Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck and Jeremy Irons did a good job with the material they had to work with. Jesse Eisenberg was a horrible and annoying Lex Luthor and he should never have been cast in the role. The musical score is intrusive and bombastic.

Most problematic of all, the movie is essentially a Batman love-fest co-starring Superman.

Lets be clear, for all intents and purposes, Batman v. Superman is first and foremost a Batman movie with the obligatory scene (yet again) of the murder of his parents and his subsequent tumble down a bat-infested shaft. Unfortunately, this iteration of Batman has no moral constraints and he straight up kill’s bad guys with reckless abandon. To be sure, the comic book Batman always walked a very thin line between being a vigilante and a costumed criminal, but Snyder’s Batman is a sadistic savage who tortures criminals by branding them with his bat symbol, and has no compunctions about mowing them down en mass with advanced artillery fire. 

Sadly, the character of Superman doesn’t fair any better. For the most part, the Man of Steel is reduced to being a full Christ Metaphor, condemned to a life of endlessly rescuing people (mostly Lois Lane). He is essentially a god incarnate, with Earth benefiting from his benevolence, but helpless before his whims. The likable and optimistic Richard Donner Superman has been replaced with Zack Snyder’s chiseled and simplistic Superman who is majestically removed from the very society he hopes to protect.

After the lack luster box office results of Man of Steel, Zack Snyder clearly showed himself to be a tone deaf director that didn’t seem to understand and respect the character of Superman. Instead of giving us a Superman that is interesting and inspirational, he makes his Superman a grim, super powerful alien threat that must be stopped by Batfleck. To be completely honest, Snyder’s version of Superman is a seriously flawed depiction, and sadly, the character is worthy of so much more. Unfortunately, the version we got is “Superman” in name only.

Does the movie works as a stand-alone story.

No … absolutely not.

At best, Batfleck vs. Psuedoman is a movie intent on selling the audience advance tickets to a future installment. Yes, that’s right; BVS is nothing more than a 2 plus hour trailer for a Justice League movie that will be released a few years down the road. In other words, this whole movie is a cash grab promoting another movie that will continue the cash grab.

Warner Bros. wanted to emulate the success of Disney/Marvel and instead of taking their time and building up a DC cinematic universe, they decided to take the easy route and release a big budget action movie devoid of soul and wit. To that end, Batman, as always, is grim, dark and moody, Superman is equally grim, dark and moody, and subsequently, the world that they inhabit is grim, dark and moody. So in essence, BVS is layer upon layer of grim, dark and moody. Abandon all hope and forget about laughter, Batman vs. Superman is super serious and they don’t let your forget it, not even for minute. Basically, it’s all a bit depressing.

Is the movie a must see event?

If you’re a die-hard fanboy, then the answer is yes. Batman fighting Superman is a wet dream come true. However, casual moviegoers might find themselves somewhat bored and a little disappointed with the vast majority of the film. Luckily for Warner Bros. Batman vs. Superman has a built in audience that will see it no matter what anyone has to say, but I suspect its window of box office opportunity might be very small. Despite all the hype, many moviegoers might decide to spend their time and money on the eagerly anticipated Captain America: Civil War or X-Men Apocalypse, when they are released in a few weeks.

Reality TV and the Politics of the Poorly Educated

America has a love affair with reality TV shows. On any given day the entertainment industry provides a buffet of shows that run the gamut from ratchet and ghetto to outright educational. For instance you can feast on "Love & Hip Hop," or "Married At First Sight" during primetime and then wash it down with a nice helping of "Alaskan Bush People" or "Treehouse Masters."

Admittedly, some of the programs are pretty entertaining. I have spent to many hours watching "Alaska The Last Frontier" and imagined myself to be a tough frontier man, hunting and trapping wild game to put food on the table for my family before the onset of winter. Yeah, that’s right, man vs. nature from the comfort of my coach.

Guilty pleasures not withstanding, there is a dangerous and often unnoticed downside to reality TV. For better of worse, the American viewing public believes what they see on TV, and more troubling, they see reality TV celebrities as trust worthy and knowledgeable.  

Who can forget “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertso, and his infamous GQ magazine interview? His definition of sinful behavior:

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

The LGBT community was understandably upset and A&E Networks (which produces Duck Dynasty) quickly went into damage control mode and suspended Robertso. In the same interview, the reality TV celebrity also said cotton-picking blacks — back in the good old days — were singing and happy. It should be noted, that many fans of the show, conservative politicians and political pundits agreed with Robertso’s comments and defended him.

Obviously, reality TV celebrities are very knowledgeable and the viewing public can wholeheartedly trust their expertise and views on modern immorality, history, and  slavery.

 The best and most extreme example of this phenomenon is the ascension of reality TV celebrity Donald Trump  as the frontrunner in the 2016 Republican presidential race.

Putting aside fact that the Antichrist of NY is making a mockery out of our political process, and he is completely unqualified to be our next President, he is also, like it or not, a glaring example of America’s downward spiral in terms of civility, critical thinking and education.

To be sure, race, income level, religious afflictions, and gender all play a crucial role in voting tendencies, however, voter education level is the glaring eight hundred pound gorilla in the room, that no one wants to acknowledge, let alone talk about.

The Pew Research Center released data in August of 2012 about the GOP gains among working class voters that found: “Lower-income and less educated whites also have shifted substantially toward the Republican party since 2008 election cycle.” Moreover, among white voters without a college education, the GOP holds a 54 percent to 37 percent advantage among non-college whites.

After winning the Nevada caucus, Donald Trump, attributed his victory in part to the poorly educated that supported him, “We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated.”

And the poorly educated love him.

According to an entrance poll conducted by CNN, Trump polled highest in Nevada among those with a high school education or less. To be clear, Donald Trumps recent surge has less to do with his “Make America Great Again,” campaign slogan, and more to do with "poorly educated" Americans voting against their best interest.

Nine months ago, the thought of a reality TV celebrity actually becoming President of the United States was completely laughable.  Fast forward nine months later and laughter has turned to outrage and disbelief. The Antichrist of NY is having a good laugh at our collective shock.

 To recap:

The presidential race of 2016 is actually a political I.Q. test, and much to the dismay of most people with half a brain cell, we are failing gloriously.

And here comes the punch line…

The American electorate, comprised of — overwhelmingly but not limited to — poorly educated, white Republicans might make a reality TV celebrity our next Commander in Chief, who by the way, will have the nuclear launch codes. 

Pretty funny, right?

Trump and Christie … And the Bullies Shall Inherit the GOP

New Jersey Gov. Christ Christie, aka, “Jabba the Bully,” has officially endorsed Donald Trump, aka, “the Antichrist of NY,” for president. And somewhere in hell a little demon just got their wings.

A lot of political pundits were, so they claimed, shocked by this turn of events in a political season that was marked by many wild swings.  Actually, in a perverted and utterly shameful way, it makes perfect sense.

Love him or hate him (59% of New Jersey voters disapprove of the job Gov. Christie is doing), Jabba the Bully is a career politician that happens to be a pragmatist. As things stand, the republican presidential race has essentially become a three-man slog fest consisting of Donald Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz R-Texas, and Sen. Marc Rubio R-Fla.

Christie’s endorsement of Trump is based on three factors. First, he has made the political calculation that the Antichrist of NY might actually win enough delegates and get the republican nomination. Jabba the Bully might want to be on the short list for Vice President, or more likely, get a cabinet appointment. The Czar of Krispy Krème Doughnuts is a vacancy that he could fill.  

Second, Gov. Christie doesn’t like Ted Cruz, who he sees as political opportunist that represents the worst of Washington dysfunction, and he absolutely hates Marc Rubio, who he pummeled in the New Hampshire debate for being overly scripted. Third, Donald Trump wants Christie in his camp. The Antichrist of NY is really good at tweeting disparaging remarks about his opponents, and slinging mud at his campaign events. However,  despite all his reality star showmanship, Trump is unable to put a coherent noun and verb together to explain any of his policy views and therefore, Christie has been recruited to help in that department.  

 Christie’s decision to jump back into the presidential campaign alongside Trump, a mere two weeks after dropping out, is a colossal reversal of fortune for a popular Republican governor who three years ago was considered a leading 2016 presidential contender. In a cringe worthy interview, on ABC’s “This Week” the famously pugilistic governor, whose presidential campaign slogan was “telling it like it is,” had trouble explaining his support of Trump’s policies and instead sputtered inane platitudes about the electability of the billionaire businessman and former Atlantic City casino tycoon.

“Given the other options on the stage, let me tell you something, he's the strongest, best guy to be our nominee to beat Hillary Clinton and to be the next president of the United States.”

Not exactly a ringing endorsement from the guy that loves to tell people to sit down and shut up. But alas, Gov. Christie is really a “sad guy” that has come to the sobering realization that his political aspirations have turned to ash, and all his tough talk wont help him get back his mojo.

Adding fuel to the fire, some of Gov. Christie's former allies are no longer marching in lock step with him and instead have decided to attack his endorsement. One notable example, Hewlett-Packard CEO,  Meg Whitman, a former top supporter and  co-chair of Christie's national finance team issued a statement denouncing the governors endorsement as "an astonishing display of political opportunism."

Yup ... that pretty much sums it up.

So, to recap:  

Jabba the Bully has been reduced to endorsing Donald Trump,  and  the Republican establishment is working overtime to derail the good ship Trump before he can seal the deal.  David Duke and his KKK pals really like the Antichrist of NY, and he in turn, refuses to denounce them. And Jeb Bush is sitting at home, shaking his head in disbelief, asking himself "how did it go so horribly wrong?," while the rest of us are left wondering, when did the bullies come to inherit the GOP?

MSNBC: The Place for Politics … Leaning Backwards

The writing has been on the wall for a long time. Throughout 2015, after years of dismal ratings, the leadership at MSNBC decided to  pivot to a hard news format and announced many programming changes.  The afternoon line up was virtually dismantled and many familiar faces were demoted or handed pink slips.

The shows that were spared: Hard Ball with Chris Matthews, All In with Chris Hayes (which may get canceled), The Rachel Maddow Show,  The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, and Morning Joe show with Joe Scarborough and Mika  Brzezinski.

The shows that were demoted: Politics Nation with Rev. Al Sharpton moved from Monday to Friday (6 p.m.) to Sundays (8 a.m.)

The shows that got the ax: Ronan Farrow Daily, The Reid Report,  The Cycle, Now with Alex Wagner, and The Ed Show. 

The latest victim seems to be the Melissa Harris Perry show or MHP.

The show, which launched 4 years ago, has been repeatedly pre-empted in favor of providing more coverage for the political farce that we call the presidential campaign of 2016.  The self-proclaimed “nerd-land” host issued a statement in which she explained to her staff and loyal viewers the reality of the shows future:

“Here is the reality: Our show was taken — without comment or discussion or notice — in the midst of an election season,” she wrote in the email, which became public on Friday. “After four years of building an audience, developing a brand and developing trust with our viewers, we were effectively and utterly silenced.”

If the leadership at MSNBC has indeed canceled the MHP show through a process of attrition it comes as no surprise, and sadly, it continues a long downward spiral for a cable news station that once had some journalistic standards. Starting with the abrupt departure of Keith Olbermann in 2011, the struggling cable network has desperately tried to find a winning formula to keep pace with the ratings of  the FOX News Channel. 

Giving up all pretenses at being a liberal counterweight to Faux News, the management at MSNBC has cast off any semblance of racial diversity and journalistic integrity, and instead, has embraced a more homogenous on-air look to score bigger ratings. However, to be fair, there are still a few non-white faces on the air, Tamron Hall, Joy-Ann Reid, Kristen Welker, former RNC chairman Michael Steele, Harold Ford, Jr. and  Craig Melvin to name a few. But lets be honest, that list is conspicuously small and ever shrinking.

Unfortunately, Melissa Harris Perry and "nerd-land" have most likely been consigned to the dustbin of history. In retrospect it was a good show, hosted by a supremely qualified and educated woman who genuinely cared “about substantive, meaningful and autonomous work.” 

Sadly, the management at MSNBC doesn’t value such work and anchors, and the whitewashing of the network will continue into the foreseeable future. "The Place for Politics" has no place for liberals like: Keith Olbermann, Ed Shutlz, Dylan Rattigan, Martin Bashir, Karen Finney, Krystal Ball, Touré, Alex Wagner, Cenk Uygur, and Rev. Al Sharpton. 

The look of MSNBC has become decidedly white and conservative and some anchors think that is a good thing. Joe Scarborough of Morning Joe went on the air (August, 2015) and gleefully thanked network chairman Andy Lack for cleaning up the liberal network. I guess if the conservative whitewashing of MSNBC is okay with Joe and the rest of the “antichrist of NY” cheerleading squad, then it must be a good thing. 

Real investigative journalism is overrated anyway.

RIP  MSNBC …

2016 Politics and the Antichrist of NY

In June of 2015 Donald Trump, aka, the “antichrist of NY,” launched his presidential campaign and no one took him seriously. Fast-forward eight months later and the reality show guy has the republican establishment worried and desperate to find anyone who can stop him…  its no longer funny. 

The sobering reality that Trumpeinstein might become the next President of the United States has far reaching consequences.  For instance, if the antichrist of NY keeps on winning, winning, winning and he becomes President: the GOP gets back the Whitehouse, Obama care is overturned, millions of people get deported, Wall Street and the rich get huge tax breaks, the shrinking middle class gets the bill, Reince Priebus (the chairman of the RNC) can breath a sigh of relief and keep his job. Happy ending all around, right?

Not so fast.

 If the antichrist of NY does indeed keep winning, and becomes the 45^th President, there will be some political fallout. In particular, Trump’s ascension to the Presidency will galvanize democrats and independent voters like nothing else. Voters could actually do the unthinkable and actually go out in huge numbers and vote. Huge voter turnout is typically not a good thing for the GOP; simply put, they lose elections when voter turnouts are huge.

The aftermath of Trump winning the Whitehouse could result in: a liberal tea party like revolution, which in turn, could result in the Republican Party losing the House and the Senate. Afterward, Reince Priebus will hang his head in shame, lose his cushy, high-paying job and might have to flee the country … maybe Mexico will take him in. 

Establishment republican’s like Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. have made the above calculation and are understandably scared out of their minds. And they should be. The antichrist of NY is truly the gift that keeps on giving, and he could actually benefit the democrats by winning the republican nomination and becoming America’s next commander in chief. 

I have no evidence to back up the following claim, but I think Debbie Wasserman Schultz (the chairperson of the DNC) probably keeps Donald Trump in her prayers, and wishes that he remains’ in great health and spirits. After all, it’s not everyday that the antichrist of NY helps you keep your job and dismantle’s the Party of Lincoln.

New Star Trek Running On Empty

J.J Abrams’ reboot of Star Trek was a bombastic, yet miraculous film. Despite its many flaws it holds up well as you watch it, but if you give it any serious thought and revisit the whole enterprise (sorry, couldn’t help myself) the movie was a colossal one trick pony held

together by our collective childhood nostalgia.

Four years later we get the inevitable sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, which is sadly an utterly mediocre, action movie that is willfully stupid and completely devoid of internal logic in its narrative structure. I don’t want to give away any major plot points or spoil the OMG moment in the movie so I will keep my examination as generic as possible.

Is the movie an action packed, thrill ride? Yes. Check your brain at the door, and you should be fine.

Is the movie good and does it keeps the essence of Gene Roddenberry’s dream alive?
No. 

Star Trek Into Darkness is a bad movie that is painfully dumb and pessimistic. Life-long Star Trek fans are probably burning Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof in effigy. To be sure there are plenty of great, eye-popping, mind-blowing scenes involving big explosions, spacedives, and starships crashing, that are wonderfully shot and edited, but action set pieces cannot save a movie that is built on an objectively bad and idiotic script.

For example:

Kirk violates the Prime Directive and subsequently is busted down to first officer in the opening moments of the movie and Pike is given back command of the Enterprise. Huh?

John Harrison the villain of the story (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) is a genetic superman who is being forced by the head of Starfleet (Peter Weller) to design weapons, ships and commit acts of terrorism. Huh?

A suicide bomber blows up an archive in London, which turns out to be a secret base for black ops guys Section 31. Huh?

The bombing triggers a meeting of important Starfleet personnel. Prompting that meeting was the true purpose of the attack, and a ship piloted by the ‘mysterious’ John Harrison destroys the meeting room. Pike is killed in the attack,  and Kirk is giving back command of the Enterprise (again) and sets out along with the rest of his crew to track down and kill Harrison. Huh?

John Harrison is able to beam himself from Earth to the Klingon homeworld Qo’noS, (which apparently has no sensor defense system) using a personal hyperwarp transporter device. The device can be carried in your hands, and it can beam you sixteen light years. Huh?!?


The list goes on, but I am trying to keep the spoilers down to minimum. Needless to say, the movie is littered with violations of internal logic and consistency. The whole thing craps out pretty fast and all that is left is a sense that Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof simply didn’t care. They had action set pieces and a clumsy, unsatisfying ending that they wanted and pesky little things like logical impediments weren’t going to get in their way.

Ironically, the cast is the biggest strength of the movie, but sadly they are so completely wasted, it’s almost criminal. In particular, the character of John Harrison in the hands of Cumberbatch could have been an iconic performance, but instead the crappy script hamstrings him and all he can do is growl bad lines, punch guys into the ground, jump about, and look menacing. Such a colossal waste and a missed opportunity.

Is Star Trek Into Darkness the worst film in the franchise? No. The Final Frontier or Insurrection or Nemesis are far worse than STID. That being said, they are all pretty bad movies - Star Trek Into Darkness included – and I would rather have a root canal done by a pissed off Klingon dentist than be forced to rewatch any of them. At its best,  Star Trek is about the exploration of the human condition, something not remotely on display in either of J.J. Abrams’s films. 

Reportedly, Star Trek Into Darkness had a budget of a $190 million. That accounts for all the gee-whiz special effects … but what happened to the script? Star Trek Into Darkness is not the death knell for the franchise. But Abrams’ new Trek is clearly short on the hope and the optimism of Rodenberry’s vision.

According to Box Office Mojo, opening weekend was pretty weak for STID, it made $86.7 million in four days, impressive numbers to be sure, but well short of the $100 million Paramount executives were expecting. Some of that probably has to do with the state of the economy and the price of movie tickets, and worse yet, after a four-year wait for the sequel, the movie going audience might not be interested in Kirk and company.

Perhaps the most ironic movie trivia that comes to mind when I think about the new Trek vs. the real Trek is that despite its limited budget, and being over thirty years old, Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan is still the best movie in the franchise.

Go figure…

A Nice Quiet Room?

Fresh off his double-digit win in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday night, Mitt Romney wasted no time conducting a series of morning show interviews. And in the span of a few short minutes he succeeded in demonstrating the real venture capitalist behind the rehearsed smile   and “average-Joe” campaign sound bites.

To recap:

Romney went on the Today Show Wednesday morning to celebrate his New Hampshire victory and during the course of his interview with Matt Lauer he was asked about his position on the issue of distribution of wealth and income disparity in our country. It should be noted that the Today Show is not 60 Minutes nor is Matt Lauer a “got you journalist” browbeating the guest with hard-hitting questions.

Towards the end of the interview Lauer asked a pretty straightforward question that should have been easily fielded by Romney.  

 Lauer asked, “Do you suggest that anyone who questions the policies and practices of Wall Street and financial institutions, anyone who has questions about the distribution of wealth and power in this country is envious? Is it about jealousy or fairness?”

Romney who is suppose to be a polished politician responded by saying, “I think it’s about envy. I think it’s about class warfare.”

Wow…

At this point in the interview (much to his credit) Matt Lauer provided Romney with the opportunity to clean up his response and clarify his position and take his foot out of his mouth.

Lauer asked, “Are there no fair questions about the distribution of wealth without it being seen as envy?”

Romany’s response, “I think its fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like. But the president has made it part of his campaign rally. Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires, billionaires, executives and Wall Street. Its very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach and I think it will fail.”

Romney’s response has the virtue of demonstrating two points that speak to many questions about his character and fitness to be our nations next commander and chief.

First, Mitt Romney is clearly out of step with the American people. It may come as a complete shock to him and his campaign staff, but a presidential campaign is indeed the proper forum to discuss pesky little things like wealth distribution and tax policy, and the like. The American people are pretty smart, and we don’t appreciate venture capitalist with delusions of grandeur deciding our fate in nice “quiet rooms” or “members only” country clubs.

Secondly, Mitt Romney is an elite, robber baron who lacks anything in way of compassion and empathy. The occupy Wall Street crowds and all the people who lost their jobs on account of his company, Bain Capital are irrelevant in his world view. Mitt Romney only cares about Mitt Romney and his super rich buddies. 

Is it any wonder why the Tea Party folk can’t stand him and the rest of the GOP is searching desperately for ABM….

 Anybody But Mitt.

Hank and His Rowdy Mouth

The marriage between Hank Williams Jr. and Monday Night Football came to end last Thursday when ESPN decided to permanently pull the “Are you ready for some football?” intro from its MNF telecast. The move came on the heels of comments that Williams made on Fox n’ Friends in which he made an analogy that President Barack Obama and House Speaker Rep. John Boehner golfing together was like Nazi leader Adolph Hitler and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu playing a round.

Understandably, ESPN decided to discontinue its association with Williams and on Thursday made it official. Williams' theme song has been part of "MNF" since 1989. The song was a version of his hit "All My Rowdy Friends Are Coming Over Tonight" that he altered to match each week's game. He owns the song and all the rights to it, so ESPN will not be able to use it in any way.

Many commentators and comedians have come to William’s defense, claiming ESPN was infringing on his right to free speech. His defenders included the left-leaning Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar of "The View" and Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" and on the other side of the political landscape Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.

Luckily for the world of music and mass media, Williams has cut a new song “I'll Keep My ..." calling out "Fox & Friends" and ESPN. Early in the song Williams says the U.S. is "going down the drain" and says it's becoming "The United Socialist States of America." He mentions keeping "Fox & Friends" and ESPN out of your home toward the end of the song.

Cool lyrics…I see a Grammy coming out of this.

For the record, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

Despite claims by Williams and his defenders, ESPN did not trample his first amendment rights and (I cant believe I am going to say this) Fox n’ Friends did not engage in “gotcha journalism.”

On the contrary, Williams got to exercise his first amendment right and shot off his rowdy mouth. Fox n’ Friends did not twist his words, and they provided him with the opportunity to clarify his statements. The Federal Government did not in any way violate his constitutional rights, he was not detained or arrested, nor was he beaten, tortured or coerced into making any false or misleading statements.

So in conclusion, Hank got to speak his mind, and because of the inflammatory nature of his comments, ESPN decided to no longer do business with him. This is within their rights as a “for-profit” private enterprise. One other point, private companies (which are now considered “people” thanks to the Supreme Court) are NOT constrained by the 1^st Amendment.

Many people do not understand free speech.

Yes, Hank Williams, Jr. has the right to free speech. But that right comes with strings attached; specifically a private citizen is not afforded 1^st amendment protections as an employee of a corporation. The employer has the right to stifle the speech or terminate the employee if the employee in question hurts the corporation’s image or bottom line. When one takes a job they agree to the conditions specified by the employer. The courts have ruled that one may either refuse the employment or quit the job.

 Williams spoke his mind (such as it is) and ESPN didn’t like the negative publicity that came their way as a result. In this country, private citizens, even wacky guys like Hank have to take responsibility for what they say. When you compare the President of United States to a psychopath who murdered millions of innocent people, you will find that most intelligent people will find that offensive. ESPN has every right to make sure their highest rated show does not start off every week with someone who offends people. That is their right.

Hank is still free to speak his mind just not on ESPN’s dime.

We're Mad As Hell part duh

Some politicians and mass media political pundits have gone on the record and have said that the Occupy Wall Street protests are staged events. According to people like Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cane, the demonstrations are political theater designed to deflect attention away from President Obama’s failed policies. Wishful thinking to be sure, but unfortunately, that is not the case.

The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are a real organic movement that has put a spotlight on the dysfunctional nature of our government and the gross economic disparity among the have’s and have’s not. The recession and social problems that currently affect our nation are not a new phenomena born into existence in the last three years. The issues that currently confront our nation have been looming in the background for the last four decades, and hoping that the problems will magical disappear or the next generation will deal with them is no longer a sustainable policy.

We have two choices before us; we can have a hard decade or a miserable century.

The problems that confront our nation are complex and daunting but not impossible to fix. But everyone, and that means, rich, poor, and middle class have to equally sacrifice in order to turn things around for generations of Americans unborn. Admittedly fixing what is broken wont be easy, but in order to gain some insight into how to proceed, we first need to examine the past…

The stock market crash and the resulting great depression came about in 1929. President Hoover and his administration were more concerned with fly fishing and putting Al Capone behind bars rather than helping reducing the 25 percent unemployment rate in the country. So FDR was elected and probation (18th amendment) was repealed and the country muddled along until 1933 when the American people demanded that the President and Congress do something. This resulted in the much-vaunted New Deal…

Fast-forward to 2011 … massive unemployment, foreclosures, rising poverty rates, out-of-touch-do-nothing Congress, well meaning but impotent President, crisis of confidence, protesters demanding, “do something.”

Sounds familiar? Of course instead of repealing probation, we hear vows to repeal and abolish Obamacare from the face of the Earth, but the similarities are pretty uncanny.

So what to do? Here are a few ideas…

We need to get the big money out of our political process. Super-pacs need to be outlawed. Corporations should not be allowed to pay for political outcomes. Our democracy should not be for sale.

We need to honest with our selves. Tell the truth about the state of our economy, and the plight of the 99 percent. Corporations are not people. Taxing the rich so they pay their fair share wont kill them. 

Close tax loopholes for corporations and over haul the tax system.

Arrest and prosecute the robber barons in Wall Street and the banking institutions that caused our economic meltdown. No individual or corporation should have free reign to destroy our economy and the American Dream.

Lastly, stop electing people who are unfit or unqualified to hold office. The crazies should not be running the asylum.

Our political leaders should care about protecting and advancing the interest of our nation rather than lining their pockets with donor money. They should be willing to compromise to serve a greater propose. But most of all they should have some damn empathy.

We have the democracy we deserve, and right now we have grid-lock because we are too easily distracted by the things that separate us rather than focusing on things that we share in common.