Two maligned Star Trek and James Bond films share the same villain problem

Fan service is the lowest form of playwriting. In some cases, it’s a cheap act of flattery meant to make the viewer feel special by knowing a semi-obscure character or moment from a previous movie or episode. And sometimes it’s an even less expensive sentimental act that seeks to spark engagement by bringing back a beloved character, even if they have no relation to the story being told.

Nothing can turn me off a movie or TV series faster than this crude, emotionally fraudulent approach to storytelling. Unfortunately, it’s more common than ever. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is full of fan service, as are the new “Star Wars” films and series (although “The Last Jedi” by Rian Johnson largely manages to avoid it). But at least these franchises usually strive to provide a narrative and/or thematic focus for the introduction of fan-favorite characters. The same can’t be said for JJ Abrams’ awful “Star Trek Into Darkness” and Sam Mendes’ James Bond bizarre “Spectre.”

These two films have a lot in common. They followed films considered to be the best episodes of their franchises. The audience brought an abundance of goodwill to the theater. These filmmakers were playing with house money; they could have gone any creative direction without resorting to fan service. Instead, they took two iconic villains – Khan Noonien Singh and Ernst Stavro Blofeld – into their reimagined universes, where neither had any history with the protagonists. This proved disastrous for “Star Trek Into Darkness” and greatly hampered “Spectre.”

After Abrams’ 2009 blockbuster “Star Trek,” fans were eager to see where the young, fresh-faced crew of the USS Enterprise would boldly go. Because Abrams and his writers were working within their Kelvin timeline (different from the canonical “Star Trek” universe created by Gene Roddenberry in 1966), they were free to introduce new characters and storylines that, over time, could massively expand the brand’s fan base. Alas, Abrams returned to his “mystery box” and teased fans with a peculiar new villain named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch).

From the moment Harrison was announced, speculation ran rampant that this character was Khan. Although Cumberbatch repeatedly dismissed rumors about Khan, Abrams and the writers played coy. I went to a pre-release press event at Bad Robot in 2013, where journalists spent most of the day pestering the creative team with questions about Khan. Many of my colleagues thought it would be a disappointment if Harrison wasn’t Khan, but I was dead set against it. “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” was an event because Ricardo Montalban’s character had been one of Captain Kirk’s most formidable adversaries in the original series. He was not an entity in the Kelvin timeline.

Cumberbatch’s Khan reveal, which comes halfway through the film, is a groan. Yes, Kirk is lashing out at him for killing his mentor, Captain Pike, but there’s nothing sizzling about their acrimony. The film ultimately hits a brick wall by changing the ending to “The Wrath of Khan” and having Kirk sacrifice himself to save the Enterprise. Spock’s emotional reaction to his friend’s death rings hollow, if only because these characters lack the history of William Shatner’s Kirk and Leonard Nimoy’s Spock. Fan service doesn’t get more obnoxious than that.

Unlike “Star Trek Into Darkness”, the Daniel Craig-led rebooted version of James Bond was several films in the making when they decided to introduce 007’s nemesis Ernst Stavro Blofeld. But they faced the same problem in that Craig’s Bond knew nothing about Blofeld. Unfortunately, director Sam Mendes and his writers made the same mistake that tripped up Abrams and company: they introduced Christoph Waltz’s villain as Franz Oberhauser before, at the end of the film, revealing that it was Ernst Stavro Blofeld. This is intended to elicit a gasp from the audience, but the moment arrives with a thud because Bond never acted like he had a history with Oberhauser until Blofeld told Léa Seydoux the not-so-shocking truth.

The “Spectre” team (Craig also had an uncredited role in the rewrite) should have ditched the absurd half-brother twist and simply cast the film with Waltz identified as Blofeld. The family drama unnecessarily complicates an already complex narrative (which would have barely held together without that extra tsuris) and undermines what, for the most part, is an expertly directed 007 adventure, enlivened by a number of stunning action set pieces. It’s a disconcerting misstep. Inserting Specter into the mix of the rebooted series wouldn’t have been a disservice to the fans if they had done it directly. Instead, they were way too clever with the reveal and felt obligated to revisit this silly family dynamic in “No Time for Die.” (actually, I would have preferred the abandoned idea of ​​making Ralph Fiennes’ M the villain.)

Please, directors and writers, I beg you: no more fan service. Unless you’re Joe Dante slipping Robbie the Robot or the Time Machine into the background of a trade convention. This is not only allowed, but encouraged.