I’m sure everyone was waiting for my take on this, so here we go. Unless you’ve been living inside a media blackout of some kind, you’ve seen the recently unveiled redesign of the USS Enterprise from the new Star Trek film.

(“filled-in” image by Mark T. via TrekMovie; based on the original from the PopWatch Blog)

As you may have guessed, fanboys across the world exploded after the big reveal, with reaction split down on the middle on whether they loved it or hated it. We all knew the ship would be getting an update of some kind; the CGI model used in the remastered episodes of the original Star Trek TV series would be nice, but seeing that in the new film would just be wishful thinking. Personally, I am a bit disappointed with the new design; while it’s a clearly a Trek ship (saucer, check; twin nacelles, check; deflector dish, check; and so forth), it looks far too futuristic. It looks like a ship technologically on par with ships seen in Star Trek: The Next Generation, and chronologically, that takes place over a century later! The ugliest parts are the damned glowing curved lines on the warp nacelles; they really stand out, and in a bad way. None of the other Enterprises had anything like that.

The interior of the ship fares considerably worse. The bridge shots we’ve seen line up with technology that’s far in advance of even Star Trek: Voyager, which is the last series chronologically (Star Trek: Enterprise was a prequel, remember). That series had a few stories where crewmembers interacted with technology from the 29th century and beyond, and the new bridge looks just like it. For that matter, Enterprise had recurring characters from the 31st century, and their technology was also similar to what we’ve seen on the new bridge!

All of these sweeping alterations add up. Overall, the ship design is a very jarring change, and I can foresee it causing nothing but problems as far as continuity is concerned. Like any other massive franchise, Star Trek has continuity problems already, but this stands to be the biggest one, and it can’t be simply written off. The producers have made quite clear that the film is not a reboot, or a reimagining, or any of that nonsense. It’s firmly entrenched in Star Trek continuity proper.

Now, I’ve always maintained that some fanboys are going to be pissed no matter what, and since the new Star Trek film is aimed not only at Trekkies but also at the general public, it won’t really matter in the end as long as the film makes money. While true, Star Trek is one of those unique instances where continuity is the core apsect of its appeal. That’s why the radically different ship design may confuse even casual Star Trek viewers. We’ll just have to see how the final film turns out; hopefully, director J. J. Abrams and crew will craft a thrilling tale that will compensate for its shortcomings. (The full trailer released over the weekend alongside Quantum of Solace looks pretty damned good!)

Besides, it could be worse. It could be Watchmen, which is going to get absolutely slaughtered by comic book losers no matter how good of an actual film it is. Case in point? V for Vendetta.

A few days agos, I watched the film Singles for the first time since its release in 1992. The damn thing gave me flashbacks to my high school days, as many of the songs and bands on the film’s highly popular soundtrack ranked amongst my faves back then. Grunge music, as a natural evolution of heavy metal (not the glam shit, mind you), was a big deal to me in my adolescence; in the first half of the 1990s, I couldn’t get enough of Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, and even Screaming Trees. Plus, I fit right in with the fashions of the time, as my usual garb had always been a t-shirt, flannel shirt, and jeans. (I still wear such clothing to this day.)

Like many musical fads, however, it was not meant to last. Those bands’ musical output declined in quality as time went on; I attribute a lot of this to the tremendous pressure placed upon them by the record companies and the press as a result of the genre’s popularity explosion. In some cases, the fame went to the bandleaders’ heads. Eddie Vedder became an insufferable, arrogant prick, and Chris Cornell ended up leaving Soundgarden to pursue more radio-friendly pop rock. (The culmination of which was Audioslave, a “supergroup” he ironically also left for the exact same reason! What’s his next gig, a collaboration with Hannah Montana?) Kurt Cobain really cracked under the pressure, and committed suicide in 1994. In other cases, bands held on while legitimately experimenting with new sounds, only to implode within a few years.

A classic example of grunge’s downfall is the tragedy of Alice in Chains.

While Pearl Jam and Soundgarden’s later albums were questionable, Alice in Chains was consistently at the top of their game. Even though some metal and grunge purists might have balked when the band made an appearance on MTV Unplugged, even acoustic renditions of their hard-hitting songs were perfect.

As the 1990s drew to close, however, their output was nonexistent. We got a few live albums and compilations, but that was it. Things really came crashing down, though, on April 19, 2002. That’s when Layne Staley was found dead in his apartment from a drug overdose, after no had heard from him in weeks.

Seriously, how fucked up and sad is that? When I first heard the news, I was appalled. Okay, so no one had heard from him in weeks, but did anyone try to contact him during that time? All signs pointed to Staley dying friendless and alone, and that’s fucking terrible. I believe his contributions to rock music were severely understated; forget all of the imitators (like that asshole from Creed), I’m talking about Staley himself and his work with Alice in Chains. While very much part of the “alternative” fad, Alice in Chains managed to bring a new form of heavy metal into the limelight. And unlike many other West Coast metal bands, they had a singer who could actually sing! Alice in Chains has a new singer now, and he’s got some skill…but it’s just not the same. I have serious reservations as to how their forthcoming album will turn out; the last studio disc, mind you, was 1995′s Alice in Chains. That’s a hell of a high standard to meet.

Grunge falling apart really pissed me off, even though we all saw it coming. It’s the way of things, especially in the music world, but that doesn’t make it suck any less.

We all know the Rock Band games are great. But every year, they’ve been putting out a new set of plastic instruments. And since Rock Band is really a game in which you need four players to enjoy to its fullest, that can get expensive very quickly.

Let me clear up one misconception: you don’t exactly need the new instruments to play the game. Rock Band 2 will work with the original Rock Band‘s plastic guitars and such. However, the new instruments are generally vastly improved over the originals, so for the best play experience, you really do need them. So you’re looking at hundreds of dollars over the course of a few years! That’s the cost of a damn game console!

After the phenomenal success of Rock Band last fall, its main competitor, the Guitar Hero franchise, followed suit with this year’s Guitar Hero World Tour. Formerly a guitar-centric game, Guitar Hero‘s gone the Rock Band route by adding drums and vocals to World Tour. So if you’re a fan of both series, you’ve got double the amount of hardware to buy!

Last but not least, there’s all of the downloadable tracks. While it’s cool that you can keep getting new songs to try out, which extends the replay value indefinitely, the cost adds up over time. With few exceptions, I like to pay for my games once.

As fun as Rock Band is, it’s just not worth the financial investment for me. (Plus, the amount of noise my lackeys and I would make playing the game would likely get us evicted from my apartment complex.)

Though, I will admit that the Gene Simmons AXE guitar looks pretty cool…

The Internet age has given us many things, one of which is an explosion of music. Like never before, budding artists can create and promote their tunes themselves, and sites like MySpace Music make it even easier for bands and fans alike to connect.

Of course, with every grand step forward is an equal step back. In this case, it’s the resurgence of so-called “indie rock.” Like the name implies, “indie rock” means “independent,” as in the bands aren’t generally tied to a major record label (or often any record label at all!). While that seems harmless enough, the problem lies in the fact that 99% of these “indie” bands are complete garbage, and that their arrogance far exceeds any purported musical ability. (Oddly enough, they all look like stereotypical Wesleyan students.)

Let’s begin with problem number one. With the prices of music creation software and instruments having dropped exponentially, anyone can create music in the comfort of their own home. Of course, this doesn’t mean they should actually do it; you can buy a toolkit from Sears, but that doesn’t make you a licensed auto mechanic. Anyone can throw together some beats and noises in GarageBand; I should know, as I’ve done it myself! However, I’d never consider myself an “indie rock” musician. Neither should these clowns. Take a fucking music theory class, fer crissake.

As for the arrogance issue, “indie rock” has become a badge of honor amongst these artists; bragging rights, if you will. It’s become a very exclusive clique, and those who wish to proceed to proper record deals or record music outside the clique are shunned. To be fair, this is hardly exclusive to the “indie rock” scene; we live in an age when new genres of music are literally made up out of thin air every day, just to separate themselves from other bands. Or, they claim to mix genres together to create a new one, when in reality, it’s just more of the same ol’ bullshit. Half the time, they just throw out random genres they claim to be a mix of, when they’re clearly none of them! “We’re an eclectic mix of zydeco, steel drums, and a kid banging on a milk carton with a wooden spoon!” Yeah, okay.

I’m all for new music, but when a majority of it is just arrogant prissy garbage, then it’s got to go. Would it kill you to take some guitar lessons?

I saw some action figures from Hellboy II: The Golden Army at my local Toys R Us the other day, and after doing a bit of a double-take, I immediately got very angry. No, not because they were shoved at the end of an aisle to make room for the smorgasbord of Star Wars, Transformers, and WWE figures. It’s because of what was done to the packaging, and the likely reasons why.

The Hellboy II figures are not advertised under the film’s name, you see. Instead of the movie logo, there’s a stylized, shortened version that simply reads HBII. The only place on the package where the full name appears is in some tiny legalese on the bottom of the back. You can see where I’m going with this, but trust me, it gets worse. The action figure of the hero of the film, Hellboy himself? He’s not even called by his proper name. What, pray tell, does the package claim his name is?

“Red.”

No, I’m not fucking with you. You might want to read it twice. Instead of using his actual name, the powers-that-be opted for his nickname/codename. This makes no logical sense, because on the official website, they’re clearly labeled as Hellboy II: The Golden Army figures, and the title character is named correctly.

So why the change? Think really hard, people. Remember, I said the changes make no logical sense. And what’s a longstanding enemy of logic? Self-proclaimed “morality.” I’m guessing that uppity, holier-than-thou parents didn’t want their precious little children to see the word “hell” on a toy package. This is complete and utter bullshit, as there’s no shortage of other products (like video games) that have the ol’ H-E-double-hockey-sticks on them. (Including, of course, the sadly crappy Hellboy games.) Not to mention the fact that television shows have no problem dropping the H-bomb in casual conversation; that often includes cartoons, commercials, and even the evening news! Last but not least, the Hellboy II toys themselves aren’t violent, gory, or anything like that. However, there’s plenty of toys that are rather bloody, and you can find them in the same aisle.

Protecting your child is one thing. Blinding them to the realities of the modern world is another. The word “hell” isn’t harmful; it’s just a word. Grow up and cut your kids some damn slack. Ironically, many of the parents who complain the most about words like “hell” are extremely religious. If that’s not a double standard, I don’t know what is.