Simon-PeggSimon Pegg, writer, actor, director, creator of the cult comedy Spaced and co-writer of the movies Shaun Of The Dead, Hot Fuzz, Paul, and The World’s End, amongst other genre classics, who played Scotty in Star Trek: Into Darkness, has told Star Trek fans to “fuck off.”

Fans at a Star Trek convention in Las Vegas voted Into Darkness the worst outing ever in the Star Trek franchise. Pegg, in an interview with Mike Ryan at the Huffington Post, responded, “I think it’s like when you tire of an indie band that you love because, suddenly, they get a number one single. You don’t necessarily start disliking their music, but you stop liking them because you’re pissed off that they’re famous, or whatever.”

In terms of box office, and sheer numbers of viewers, Into Darkness is the most successful Star Trek film ever. “More people saw that film than any iteration of Star Trek that existed before. That is probably slightly annoying to some Star Trek fans — which I totally understand.” Continued Pegg, then erupted, “It absolutely isn’t the worst Star Trek movie. It’s asinine, you know? It’s ridiculous. And frustrating, as well, because a lot of hard work and love went into that movie, and all J.J. wanted to do was make a film that people really enjoyed. So, to be subject to that level of sort of, like, crass fucking ire, I just say fuck you. Not you, but the people who said that.”

Pegg qualified his outburst, expressing the possibility that Into Darkness is simply not as loved as previous Star Trek films simply because it is the newest, it hasn’t yet achieved that seasoning of time that through nostalgia renders a special place for even the cheesiest production in the heart of an SF fan.

“It hasn’t been around long enough. It’s the newest one. It’s the one people least recognize. If you look back at things you really love, there’s a big list: The things that you’ve got to re-watch and enjoy, they are going to be more up there. The thing that you know the least will be at the bottom. So it might be that, too, you know?” He added.

We disagree. Stark Trek: Into Darkness was a brilliantly entertaining action SF thriller. Well deserving its success. But what it was not was a Star Trek film. Yes, the characters, the places, the bad guys, the ships, had the same names, even the scenario felt like Star Trek. What it lacked was the Star Trek philosophy, the spirit of exploration, the spirit of an intelligent human culture taking its wonder and hope into the future, the essential Trekkiness that has imbued the TV shows and the movies since Gene Roddenberry created the original in the 1960s.

That’s why it is the worst Star Trek film. Because without that spirit it is not, not quite a Star Trek film.

Star-trek-into-darkness-banner

About The Author

C S Hughes

C S Hughes is a proud member of the TV generation, studied film and communications, collects the paperback books of Philip K Dick, loves science fiction and fantasy books, B grade movies and cult TV, American thrillers and British noir, restoring vintage watches, reading poetry, creating innovative illustrated poetry books which are available in Apple’s iBooks format, and cake. Especially cake. He has also written short stories, and has a collection of horror stories coming out in 2015.

3 Responses

  1. Rick Brumfield

    No, this was not the worst ST film, the last one was. That was truly un-ST. This one at least had an extremely strong character in Khan. Everything around him was horrid & un-ST, but he was great. I think what JJ, Pegg & others miss (& I love those guys) is that ST is about really strong characters – not caricatures. These people have a past, they have standards, they have humanistic qualities. The ships are important. These last 2 movies treat them as set dressing or deus ex machina instead of characters themselves that we care about. Strong leaning on science/pseudo-science. They tried to make it believable in the past, incorporate fringe ideas, now they just say red matter & leave it at that. And probably the biggest thing: it incorporates so much literature & history. If you look at pretty much every series & many of the movies (I never saw Enterprise so that may be different), they often relied on Shakespeare, Mark Twain, Conan Doyle, & so many others. They were philosophical. Was there corniness & cheesiness? Yes, but always secondarily to the main story idea.

    What confuses me most is that within his own IP’s JJ is very philosophical & thought provoking. The mystery is strong. But his take on ST is just so… poor. Sad.

    Reply
  2. C S Hughes
    C S Hughes

    The 2009 J J Abrams Star Trek was about the young Captain Kirk – it was driven by his character – it was his story, he and the others were essentially learning and approaching the tenets of the Star Trek universe, so there was a little more scope there to diverge from the original.

    Reply
  3. Alan Stephen

    Star Trak into Darkness was an awful mess from the get-go with Captain Kirk and Bones “stealing a religious relic” Why? and the Enterprise being underwater surely the people must have seen the ship submerge.The ending where they must chase Khan to save Kirk why? When they have over 60 other frozen superpeople to take whatever they need.Don’t get started with doing a surgical strike on the Klingon home-world with over 60 weapons overkill no?
    I could go on and on bad movie,bad movie 2 hrs of my life I’ll never get back and a waste of talent and money.
    No Mister Pegg F?%K Y@U

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.