Star Trek Beyond: 5 Ups And 3 Downs (The Science Edition)
Star Trek smashes it out of the park for science.
Whilst a lot of sci-fi plays fast and loose with the laws of physics and the limits of technology, Star Trek has always had a reputation for not only throwing in some genuinely good science, but actually predicting a lot of future technology.
It might be my slightly weird crush on Zachary Quinto's Spock (it's the eyebrows), slightly less weird lust for Sofia Boutella's Jaylah (digging pale chicks) or my completely understandable passion for John Cho's Sulu (oof), but I really liked this movie. This is in no small part due to a lot of the very classically Trekkie nods to real world science.
Something that they do often, and they do well, is taking a concept that is just emerging right now, and developing it to the nth degree. Whilst it's impossible to truly predict the future of science and technology, this tactic probably goes a long way to helping that uncanny knack Star Trek has for accurately depicting some of the things the future might hold.
However, nobody is perfect, and there are still a couple of science clangers in there. Granted, science fiction has to employ the odd bit of artistic licence, or movies would be an exercise in tedium, but it doesn't stop science nerds like me gleefully calling them out on it, and it certainly doesn't stop us enjoying the film.
So, here are 5 ups and 3 downs (and one I couldn't decide on) of the science in Star Trek Beyond.
(Spoilers ahoy. Obviously.)