I recently saw two sci-fi movies from 2009 back to back, within a couple of days --
Star Trek and
Caprica -- and they could not have been more different.
Star TrekI've watched
Star Trek over the years, starting with the William Shattner crew, in their jewel-tone duds and cosmetically Spartan spaceship. They cruised into the unknown, trying to understand the inscrutable and often destructive needs of each shapeless, shifting life form that they encountered.
Star Trek was philosophical in the same somewhat heavy-handed way that
Planet of the Apes was, but I like them both because they speak to the wider, universal issues of life. I often felt spiritually elevated after watching a
Star Trek episode (which is certainly not the case with every TV show) because the deeds of the crew often represented the best within us.
The new
Star Trek movie will be more enjoyable if you are familiar with the series, but it stands on its own as a swashbuckling adventure movie set in space. There was interest and excitement from the first few frames, and it never let up. It was based on the first series (it takes place before Captain Kirk got his ship), but was also different enough to not simply repeat the past.
Some Spock-related stuff about emotion vs. reason was typical bad philosophical dumbness; emotions are not in
conflict with reason, as the series often suggests; they are simply
different from it. Emotions are not an alternative form of cognition, they are just a psychological response based on the ideas we hold. Note them, and move on.
Anyway, this point was only expressed briefly in a conversation, and didn't intrude any more than that into the movie or the plot. I enjoyed the film from start to finish.
CapricaBattleStar Galactica: Caprica on the other hand, was an entirely different matter.
I do not watch the
BattleStar Galactica series, because it seems like a cynical soap opera in space, and this movie reinforced that impression. Although I liked the cast and it was fairly well-made, the artistic style, pace and plot were uninteresting to me. It was like
Ordinary People meets science fiction. There was too much of the former, and not enough of the latter.
Very little happened, and the movie spent endless amounts of time dwelling on narrow personal experiences and events. I'm sure this is all done in the name of "realism", but by way of comparison, I felt like I was watching Captain Kirk do his taxes for an hour and a half.
The fact that the majority of the movie takes place on the streets of Toronto (or wherever they filmed it), and in the characters' homes and cars, should tell you something. This is science fiction as told by a video camera held by someone's friend, like reality TV set in another time and place. It does not portray what I feel about my life, or what I wish to see in the lives of fictional characters.
I don't watch movies to see
the ordinary and
the passive.
I think what we have here is a clash of schools of artistic thought.
Star Trek represents the Romantic school, and
Caprica represents Naturalism.
Star Trek had a sense of excitement born of the fact that events of great importance were occurring, and important values were at stake. The characters had the ability to change the outcome of these larger-than-life events (such as a planet being destroyed, or not).
Caprica had a sense of boredom, born of the premise that life simply "happens" to us, like traffic or weather, that principles and moral values and long-term goals are not important, only our reaction to the events
of the moment is. Although crucial and important things happen to the characters in
Caprica, they experience it as a steady, even-handed stream of disembodied events with no wider emotional relevance or links to principles or other events.
I did not find this inspiring, and I would not want to be like any of the characters from
Caprica, or even meet or talk to them. I don't think about life simply
as it is, I think about life as it
can and should be, and I expect the movies I watch to do the same thing. Even movies that are naturalistic or tragic in nature can at least have a moral dimension that speaks to what we ought to do and feel, and these values drive the plot.
ConclusionCaprica never rose above the helplessness of the moment, it offered me no vision of the way things should be, and therefore offered me nothing of value by my standards.
Star Trek offered a heroic vision of life, and presented it in an exciting and entertaining package. It was worth two hours of my life. The hour and half I spent watching
Caprica was wasted.