Star Trek Into Darkness — Lacks Vision and Noble Principles

StarTrek_NCC-17_600by Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News

I’m coming up on 50, so I was raised in the Star Trek generation. I remember watching the TV series nearly every day when I got home from school. Loved it.

And a child, I was raised watching Jetsons.

So, even though I was super busy last night, given the concurrence of our local rural theatre getting 3D, I decided to go to the midnight, first showing with my son.

I was deeply disappointed. Two stars.

Yes, the modern graphics were great, as you would expect; and the acting was good. There was one time early in the film where I actually physically flinched as a spear seemed to fly past my left ear. But so many other things were much less than great.

But overall, the movie came across to me as a propaganda piece, not as a visionary piece.

Here are some examples of how it lacks future vision and is barely a step ahead of where we (public technology) are today technology-wise.

  • The idea of exotic energy powering things wasn’t even broached in the least.
  • The energy source for the Enterprise resembled a Tokamak reactor, very large, super complex, tons of components — a boondoggle of modern energy technology. The stuff we deal with in the exotic free energy sector, which is in process of emerging now, is far more simple, far more power dense, far more clean.
  • All their propulsion was display involving some kind of glowing phenomenon, rather than imaging reaction-less drives with no fire or heat or light involved.
  • The “torpedoes” were fission devices.
  • They still had roads and cars, ships, buses, elevators. At least the cars floated, but they didn’t even fly.
  • Never did you see a craft do a sudden change of trajectory, other than a rapid acceleration to warp drive.
  • Their communication devices were were flip-open phones you had to hold in your hand. Not a bit more advanced from what we have now.
  • Their medicine was hardly advanced, if even advanced at all from where we are today.
  • They had to run to get from place to place in the craft and in the city. They didn’t even have personal flight packs — something we are a few months away from now.
  • The explosions in space still involved fireballs, notwithstanding the lack of oxygen in space.
  • I had to laugh at the laser guns that recoiled. How stupid do they think we are, or how stupid are they?
  • The space craft were cavernous, not conserving space or being efficient.

The black ops who are flying “UFO” craft around the earth presently (not that all UFOs are of human origin, but I think a majority are) are more advanced than the craft shown in the movie.

My blood sugar was low, so I didn’t have full brain capacity, but I had a hard time following the plot of who was “good” and who was “evil” and why. It was very muddy and confusing. Freedom wasn’t a theme of goodness at all.

The “plot” was so reminiscent of the false flag operations that keep being unleashed on us. Some terrorist does a mass terror event, and so Captain Kirk goes after him, captures him, is manipulated by him, and … [don't want to spoil it for you]. It turns Captain Kirk into a mercenary.

The movie seems to be trying to show the genesis of the Star Trek that we watched as kids. Yet I did not at all relate to the ethics that they were showing as being the foundation for that peaceful exploration endeavor. They militarized the origin, making it spring from the military industrial complex frame of mind.

Captain Kirk had no compunction against breaching the “prime directive” of not being detected by the civilization being assisted by their intervention to prevent cataclysmic destruction.

Near the end, with the unveiling of a UN-like flag, it put the UN on an undeserved pedestal — the UN being a socialist-dominated, totalitarian-oriented, depopulation (aka subtle slaughter) agenda promoting, Communist-supporting, freedom-opposing, gun-rights-(personal defense)-slashing, government-centric organization. (I’m not against the idea of an international body. That’s why I founded http://RSICC.org prior to getting involved in Free Energy reporting. It was to provide a freedom-based alternative to the UN.)

Again, I call it a propaganda piece for social conditioning, not at all a visionary piece that inspires humans to greater achievement and ethics.

If there is one redeeming quality, it does make a case for a reason why extraterrestrial visitors do not make their presence known: the “prime directive” being that they can watch and help, but they just can’t be seen. Civilizations need to advance primarily through their own merits — the chick hatching from the egg.

I wouldn’t recommend the film. I doubt I’ll ever see it again.

That said, I did have a cool experience driving the 1.5 miles home from the theater. My blood sugar being low, and the time being 2 am, my head was a big fuzzy, and coming out of that 3D movie experience, driving down the road actually felt like I was flying a space craft. And as I walked into my kitchen, it resembled, to my impaired mind, the bridge of the Starship Enterprise. That was pretty cool.

I got to be Captain Kirk for a few minutes. But it was the Captain Kirk I grew up with, not the Captain Kirk of this latest film, for whom I felt was lacking in “hero” attributes from an ethical point of view.

# # #

See also:

ANTI-GRAVITY FOOTER

ANTI-GRAVITY TECHNOLOGIES

ANTI-GRAVITY RELATED