Giant Freakin Robot

World-renowned astrophysicist and the director of New York City’s Hayden Planetarium, Neil deGrasse Tyson has done a lot to make science exciting for kids and students. In pop culture, Tyson had a hand in finding Superman’s home planet of Krypton, and he weighed in on the actual weight of Thor’s hammer, Mjölnir. Now Tyson has now chimed in on the age-old question: which is better, Star Wars or Star Trek?

In an interview with Business Insider, Tyson explains why he’s a Trekkie, and why Star Wars never caught his attention. Tyson says, “I never got into Star Wars. Maybe because they made no attempt to portray real physics. At all!” Despite his love of Star Trek, the host of StarTalk Radio did compliment Star Wars for the planet Tatooine’s double suns:

I like the double star sunset scene (on Tatooine). Most stars you see in the night sky are double and triple stars, so that’s a very common thing we would expect in the universe. But, yeah… [as he displays the 'Live long and prosper' hand sign]”

Once he chose a franchise, he was then asked which Starfleet captain he preferred. Tyson picked William Shatner’s Captain Kirk, which is surprising because Tyson seems like a man of intellect, rather than a man of action. It just goes to show that Neil deGrasse Tyson is an old-school Star Trek fan. I wonder what he thinks about J.J. Abrams’ take on Star Trek.

With the release of Star Trek Into Darkness firmly in all U.S. theaters, it’s time to start the countdown to its sequel film, Star Trek 3. Although J.J. Abrams next film will be Star Wars: Episode VII for Disney and Lucasfilm, the 46-year-old director haven’t completely ruled out returning to the director’s chair for Star Trek 3.

In an interview with TrekMovie.com, J.J. Abrams confirmed that there have been no formal discussions of Star Trek 3, despite what his producing-partner has said about the third film in the Star Trek reboot film series. If there were a third film in the works (and honestly why wouldn’t there be considering that the main cast has signed on for three Star Trek movies), a 2016 release date would be ideal for the upcoming 50th anniversary of Star Trek.

Star Trek Into Darkness is finally out, letting everyone judge it for themselves after being the subject of rampant speculation, debate, and name-calling for over a year. Now we can all move on to arguing about the future of the Star Trek franchise. After all, it’s very much unwritten at this point. Director J.J. Abams has signed on to helm Star Wars: Episode VII, and it’s anybody’s guess whether he will also be able to handle Trek 3. So where Trek 3 will go from here is anybody’s guess.

Into Darkness improved over Abrams’ first Trek in every way, but it also skewed the new timeline even further from the Original Series. At this point, it’s clearly a straight-up alternate universe where pretty much anything can happen. And while we’d love to see Trek 3 actually serve up a whole new story and villain, there are also some classic Trek races and enemies we’d love to see enter the new Trek-verse

It’s finally here. We’ve been writing about Star Trek Into Darkness for so long at this point that I’m surprised we aren’t already in the middle of the 23rd century. While much of the debate has centered around Benedict Cumberbatch’s role, as someone who neither loved nor hated Abrams’ first Trek outing, I’ve been more interested in seeing if the director and his writers could build on the reboot’s potential while avoiding the problems that plagued that deeply flawed film. The good news: they learned the lessons they needed to learn, and Star Trek Into Darkness is a thrill ride that improves upon its 2009 predecessor in every way.

First a bit of housekeeping. I’m going to do my best to leave as many of the movie’s secrets unspoiled as possible, but there is one crucial issue — Cumberbatch’s role — that pretty much can’t be discussed without spoilers. As such, I’m dividing this review into two sections. Up top I’ll be more general, and then below the bold spoiler warning I’ll dig into specifics. Let’s have at it.

If there was one area where Abrams’ Trek excelled, it was the action. That hasn’t changed here. Into Darkess is packed with breathtaking set pieces that are executed beautifully. There’s still something thrilling about seeing the Trek universe realized with a modern blockbuster budget. Whether you’re a Trek fan or not, Into Darkness works very well as a science fiction adventure flick, and it’s a damn good time, even if that’s all you’re looking for.