Star Trek Review
Star Trek
Directed by: J.J. Abrams
Written by: Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Eric Bana, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, Anton Yelchin, John Cho, Bruce Greenwood
Back in 2002, I remember being pretty excited about a little movie called Star Trek: Nemesis. It had the promise of action and adventure, along with an epic screenplay written by John “Gladiator” Logan. Sure, Star Trek: Insurrection had been a disappointment, but based on the curse of the odd-numbered Trek movies, that was to be expected. The next even-numbered movie would make things right again… they always did. But then a strange thing happened: Star Trek: Nemesis didn’t make things right again. Not only did it suck, but it also tanked at the box office. There would be no saving Star Trek after this one. The franchise that once represented a vision of the future, had now become a thing of the past.
Years later, as Hollywood started playing with the idea of reboots, someone realized that maybe Star Trek didn’t have to die after all. With a fresh, young cast and a serious makeover, maybe they could re-introduce the concept to a whole new generation. And who better to oversee this re-imagining than the current king of sci-fi, J.J. Abrams? He had certainly earned the unwavering support of geeks everywhere, but would he have the skill to steer the Enterprise in the right direction? In case you haven’t heard, the answer is a resounding yes.
This Star Trek movie is both a prequel and also a fresh start to the series, setting the stage for a whole new chronology to unfold in its wake. It is a brave new take on the franchise, one that some fans will feel uncomfortable with, and yet the core elements remain in tact. As we are first introduced to James Tiberius Kirk, he is a troubled youngster, clearly smart and talented, but with a massive chip on his shoulder. One day he gets in a bar fight with some Starfleet cadets, and crosses paths with Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood), who happened to serve with Kirk’s father. He challenges Jim to enlist in Starfleet as well, and enlist he does, even though his hot-headed and rebellious nature threatens to derail his career at every turn. Coincidentally, Kirk finds himself on board the Enterprise at the same time that its crew runs into Nero, a Romulan who has travelled back in time, hellbent on destroying Vulcan, Earth, and anything else that stands in his way.
Many have called this the best Star Trek movie since Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, and indeed, there is a similar importance placed on having a bad ass villain. Eric Bana is fierce and intense as Nero, although admittedly his back story is somewhat glossed over in the movie (it is more fully explained in the Star Trek Countdown comic book mini-series). All that really matters is that he is simply an evil guy who wants revenge, and the fact that Kirk has a history with him makes for a bit of addded drama. There are no grey areas to explore, no last minute double crosses or clever plot twists. The movie is set up to be a straight ahead action movie, and that’s exactly what it is.
J.J. Abrams and his team have taken cues from Battlestar Galactica, Star Wars, Firefly and many other recent sci-fi series to give Star Trek a much more visceral feel than ever before. There are hand-to-hand fights, phaser fights, and dog fights in space. The ships are not slow and lumbering, they are quick and mobile. When a ship takes damage, you feel it, and you see the repercussions. Handheld camera work adds to the grittiness but never gets carried away, while bold angles and sweeping camera movements maintain a high level of energy and intensity at all times.
Star Trek has never looked this good. It’s true that the technology for the special effects are finally at a point where they can do it justice, but it’s not just the technical advancements — they’ve clearly put a massive budget behind this thing. Paramount has shown a serious commitment to the property here, bringing Star Trek to a level playing field with all the other major blockbusters and comic book movies out there today. While some may take issue with the sleek, shiny look of the bridge, or constant barrage of lens flares, the space battles alone are some of the most visually interesting ever captured on screen. Heck, they even dispense with the age old accusation that all aliens in Star Trek are just humans with weird foreheads, by adding lots of interesting digital creature FX.
It’s a difficult thing to reinvent and update something without losing the intangible feel of the original, but they do a good job of re-using certain sound effects and visuals to unlock bits of nostalgia from our minds. There are moments early on where the movie struggles a little to find its footing, and tries a bit too hard to be hip and sexy (although it’s good to know that the Beastie Boys are still being enjoyed 250 years from now). In the end, I can forgive some of these missteps because I think the goal was to help the audience to identify with the main characters by starting on Earth in a familiar environment, before the crew actually goes off into the final frontier.
The most important component to this whole project, however, was definitely the cast. These folks had the unenviable task of redefining iconic characters, staying true to the original personalities without falling into bad impressions of the previous actors. They all deliver beyond expectations. Karl Urban is perhaps the most impressive; he simply disappears into the role of Leonard McCoy to the point where he is unrecognizable. Zachary Quinto certainly looks the part of Spock, but he plays him as a much more young and unpredictable version of the character (and he even has sex appeal!). Zoe Saldana, Anton Yelchin, John Cho and Simon Pegg all bring interesting new dimensions to their characters, but the center of the film is Chris Pine. Although some people had concerns that he was just a no name pretty boy, he absolutely nails the cocky and rugged attitude of Kirk without mimicking Shatner’s signature delivery. (I still could have seen Matt Damon in the role though, especially since Kirk is basically Will Hunting.)
All this being said, I don’t think that Star Trek is a flawless film. There are some major glaring issues with this movie, most notably in the plot department, and I’m surprised no one has really complained about them. Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, J.J. Abrams’s partners in crime from Alias, write scripts that are tailor made for blockbusters, plain and simple. They paint with broad strokes and they think in terms of set pieces and punchlines, not logic and subtleties (these are the same guys who wrote Michael Bay’s The Island and Transformers as well).
There are all kinds of weird coincidences and unlikely events that we must accept in order to bring the crew that we know together on the Enterprise, things that really push the boundaries of believability — yes, even for a Star Trek movie. For the most part, I think we are willing to let it slide, because we want it to happen, but on paper I think this script would have looked pretty weak, maybe even indistinguishable from a fan script in some places. It’s the cast and the special effects that make us forget how mindless a lot of this movie really is.
Still, most people seem willing to overlook these issues, and I can understand why — once the action takes over, you are hooked and enthralled and willing to forgive just about anything. It’s been a long time since we’ve seen a hero like Kirk in a major blockbuster, someone who is so much fun to root for, a loose cannon who shoots first and asks questions later. Plus, the movie has a great sense of humour, something that so many action movies lack nowadays, and it has an unmistakable chemistry among its crew members that simply crackles on screen.
I can happily confirm that Star Trek is back in a big way, and will probably be around for some time to come… living long and prospering, if you will. Are there things I miss about the old Star Trek? Sure, but I can’t deny that J.J. Abrams has given us a hell of a ride and a promising start to a whole new adventure. This is what was needed to make Star Trek a mainstream phenomenon again. Where they decide to go next is anybody’s guess, but with this crew I am willing to follow them just about anywhere. — Sean
SCORE: 
Recommended If You Like: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Wars, Serenity
Comments (127)
vulcano destroyed, a sword like in star wars, an ice planet like in starwars, a relation between spock and hura? too many flaws for me, spectacular crap
Posted by max64 on May 9th, 2009its “vulcan.” the sword you’re refering to in star trek is metal and is in one fight… the character knows fencing. They were on the ice planet for 10 minutes and it was nothing like star wars’ Hoth. And the relationship between Spock and Uhura gives Spock a more human appearance given his emotional standpoint in the movie. You sir max64 are spectacular crap.
Posted by bob46 on May 9th, 2009I can’t remember when Kirk got so many a$$ kickings in one movie! I loved that Uhura has desires, being a randy black female I grew up with the Uhura icon played by Nichelle Nichols only giving it up for the good of the crew. All of these characters were real and honest. Young Spock beating the bully senseless, Young Kirk nearly trashing his step-dad’s cherry Corvair, Chekov didn’t get as much face time as I would have liked–but I’m glad his brilliance was slightly exposed. I see my own life reflected in these characters. I’m a genius orphan with a bad temper too many step fathers and too many boyfriends. I just wish there was a starfleet I could take my talents too. Delta Vega seemed more Klingon prison planet of Uhra Pentae, then Empire Strikes Back to me, course where ever there is George Lucas or Industrial Lights and Magic, the Empire goes with. What can you expect in 2 hours? Liberties most be taken, plus as people change the way icons are expressed changes. Pretty green girls will always be pretty, but now they are smart, smart black girls will still be smart, but now they are sexual too. Dr McCoy is still a curmudgeon, but he’s also creative. Bravery has a new face in this movie, too bad none of those faces was Andorian. I can’t wait for the next installment.
Posted by puba on May 9th, 2009I didnt read your review Sean as I am seeing this tomorrow night! I just wanted to see what you gave it. 3 and a half? Fucken pumped for it!
Posted by AdamH on May 9th, 2009We did a podcast about this one and covered some of what you discuss her Sean but you certainly have written a fine review. I for one think the genius in the casting of relative no-namers allows for the continuation of the movie into high end television. Shows like Battlestar Galactica (which I finally just finished (wow)) have shown us that it can be done. Abrams and his crew are from TV, so it makes sense they might want to take that route.
Posted by Ian on May 9th, 2009Yeah wow. Gosh new Star Trek and 4 hours of BSG back to back is a lot.
Posted by Ian on May 9th, 2009went to see it with my dad yeasterday, I really really really enjoyed it, every second of it!! Good fun, good action, …
“I love this ship, it’s exciting!”
Posted by bert belgium on May 9th, 2009Are there no purist left? To change the time line of the whole trek universe, anyone not bothered by this fact alone shouldn’t call themselves trek fans!!!
Posted by Frank on May 9th, 2009Get a grip Frank. I grew up watching the series when it originally aired. Just because I don’t go to conventions doesn’t mean I am not a huge fan, especially of the original crew. We saw it last night and loved it. We’ll also do something we haven’t done in decades, go back and see it a second time next weekend. This is not only a solid reboot…it is a cast that bring a lot more to the backstory in both film, and hopefully TV.
Posted by Dawg75 on May 9th, 2009Hi Sean!
Good review, gonna see it today, can’t wait. This is my poor mom’s Mother’s Day gift…don’t make me choose mom.
I read the “Countdown” graphic novel and it was good, but I can perhaps see the plot holes beginning to form. Overall, the book set things up pretty well. The book portrays Nero as a tragic figure, a good man turned “Ahab”.
The grapic novel gave us a view of what became of some of the Next Generation characters. It tells you what Data, Worf, LaForge, and Picard have been up to. I recommend reading it.
Two major Star Trek worlds destroyed? Talk about reimagining the Star Trek Universe. I suppose there are still millions of Vulcans around the Federation, on ships, bases, and pure Vulcan colony worlds. Perhaps a planet “New Vulcan” will emerge?
This will really open things up for Trek novelists for sure. A new blank page universe and history to flesh out. The novels were getting a little stale too. Maybe be this “Trek Universe” will be treated like the Marvel Comics “Ultimate Universe”…a parallel canon.
I wonder what events will follow this story? What becomes of the Romulan Empire? They will become even more paranoid now that they are vulnerable. Perhaps the Romulans and Vulcans will join now that they both have no homeworld…a fusion of cultures? Logical, emotionless warriors? That could lead somewhere.
Will the Romulans and/or Vulcans mount a “time mission” to correct the course of things? Are they even aware that things are different? Will Future Spock reveal the truth of the future?(Is that future as it was lost?) Or will he use this as a chance to make positive changes for Vulcan and Romulan culture(Correct the things that allowed something like this to happen)?
Does Future Spock living in the past pose a danger to the future timeline? Could the Federatiion have a darker future now? Will some Next Generation characters never be born now?
How will this all change the Mirror Universe? Why wouldn’t the Q Continium stop the Supernova? Might they care about the existence of the Universe if nothing else? What would happen if the Supernova collided with the Nexus?
How will this impact the future Generation timeline? The Dominion War? Will the Kitimer massacre still go down? If not, will Worf ever join Starfleet? Will the cloaking device still be shared with the Klingon Empire? Lots of questions.
I like the idea of two separate verses, one familiar and comfortable and one full of uncertainty and new possibilities. I am obviously interested in this new Trek Verse but I don’t want to see the old one erased either.
Can’t wait to see the movie. I would love to hear Sean and Reed discuss all of this…I call for an emergency Trek Nerd podcast dealing with these very issues.
Posted by Joe Puglia on May 9th, 2009For everyone that is sweating about the timeline issue:
It bothered me too…but if you read interviews with the writers and J.J. Abrams, plus taking into account they say ALTERNATE reality in the film (denoting the first one still exists) they fully meant that this new reality exists in parallel with the reality of the TV shows and films of the past. So it’s not destroyed, it’s existing in another dimensional timeline.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 9th, 2009…and no, that isn’t taking into account the “Q continuum” or those space police that i was told about from Voyager.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 9th, 2009Great review! I’ve been a Trekker forever, so I was really rooting for this reboot to go well. I saw the movie last night and was very disappointed with the plot as well. There was just no depth to it. However, the characters were terrific. Simon Pegg as Mr. Scott was a real standout, I must say. And though I had initital doubts about Karl Urban’s McCoy, I was pleased to discover they were unfounded.
Live long and prosper, Star Trek franchise. I’m looking forward to the next movie.
Posted by Legend on May 9th, 2009For Puba, Interesting side note on Mrs. Nichols. One of my friends claim in an interview she told the story of wanting to leave Star Trek after the first season because she thought the character development of Uhura was over. She was at a NAACP convention that year and actually brought up her reservations to one Mr. Martin Luther King! He said basically she would be crazy to leave that role as it was the first professional black woman ever seen on network television. MLK a trekkie!
I made my friend laugh during the new Trek when see Tyler Perry as the Star Fleet Commander I said, “Well its a sure thing now – Medea goes to space”
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009This is a very good movie and I had a revelation that I think will help a lot of people with reservations about seeing the reboot. I went into this screening yesterday with a happy-go-lucky, enthusiastic attitude. My friends and I had a great time. Afterward, we started to think about some of the plot points, and yes, if you start to break down the science and plot points the movie falls apart. Driving home I remembered the horrible time I had at the Batman Begins screening, and I realized the power of putting your mind in a receptive state prior to seeing one of these reboot films. See, I was intensely writing a script at the time of Batman Begins and the hammy dialogue of that film really bothered me and ruined the experience. By forcing my mind to be accepting and open yesterday I was able to enjoy Trek and enjoy the debate afterward.
That being said, Sean is right about the energy, piss and vinegar these young versions of our heroes bring to the Star Trek canon. It is f*cking fun to see the beginnings of these cadets careers and think how the teamwork grows over the years. The writers did a masterful job of finding a backbone for a successful reboot; Kirk and Spock’s friendship and teamwork took years to develop let’s examine how these individuals (with trouble childhoods) became friends and professionals.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009I was disappointed with Star Trek (2009). I was hoping for a lot more from the movie. First Contact and Generations were better than this film. Sorry Rus.
And what the hell was that ice planet part and the monster about?
Star Trek (2009) Cast Pictures
http://film-book.com/star-trek-2009-cast-pictures/
Diora Baird is an Orion in Star Trek (2009)
Posted by Film-Book dot Com on May 9th, 2009http://film-book.com/diora-baird-is-an-orion-in-star-trek-11/
I hope to hell a good honest straight guy got the chance to put on Diora’s green make-up! thats a lot of paint!
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009how come reed farrington wasnt writing this review
Posted by Teo on May 9th, 2009>>> wonder what events will follow this story? What becomes of the Romulan Empire? They will become even more paranoid now that they are vulnerable. Perhaps the Romulans and Vulcans will join now that they both have no homeworld…
Romulus is not destroyed yet… not for another hundred years or so. After Nero had finished wiping everyone out I assume he eventually would head back to Romulus (along with the huge sphere of red matter they have from Spock’s futureship)and make-up with the official Romulan empire enough to deliver to them the means to prevent the sun from going supernova. But that will not happen for another 100+ years so he has plenty of time to cause trouble until then.
Posted by Damndirtyape on May 9th, 2009This installment of the Star Trek universe was BOTH great and terrible. I suggest you go watch it again because you will find it has a lot less staying power than other good Star Trek films. It combines elements from “Wrath of Kahn”, Star Wars (see random CGI creaters attacking jedi, Hoth, and Jar Jar cuteness), and other general pop scifi. The biggest issue is this: Is this a Gene Roddenberry Star Trek story? The answer that you would get is a resounding NO! There were no parallels to the real world that we learned anything scientifically, philosophically or morally about. No hard questions were posed. Good movie but much more similiar to the Star Wars prequels than to Star Trek in general. The actors were great, dialogue humorous and the direction on point. All this means is more form and no substance. This issue is with the writing and it’s an issue that movies as a whole suffer from. What amazes me is that something polished in so many ways can be lacking such soul upon final analysis. Correct title: “Trek Wars: Attack of the Clones”
Posted by Zach in Phoenix on May 9th, 2009Nice review, Sean. I saw the flick last night and was pretty entertained. Maybe the plot had some problems and there was maybe a little too much action for my taste. But you’re right about Chris Pine’s Kirk. I loved his take on the character and it was fun to watch him on screen and his interplay with Spock. Karl Urban was great, too. I loved the energy him and Pine brought to their roles. I found it a little awkward how they kind of went around the deck at times and let all the characters have their time in the spotlight, but I guess there’s no real good way of doing it.
The sequence when they were sky/space diving onto the drill and seeing Sulu bust out his skills was pretty awesome.
Posted by dan on May 9th, 2009I’d like ta see some of you haters of the new movie, do a better job than what JJ did. I’m not the type ta go to the movie all dressed up like a Klingon, but i am a pretty big fan of the old tv show and the old movies. I thought the movie was awsome. The direction
Posted by Derek on May 9th, 2009Abram took the franchise was pretty creative, and made for, not only Star Trek fans, but even people that never cared for Star Trek to begin with. The Cast did a great job
playing the old school characters.There were plenty of in jokes from the old show and movies (like the traning course that Kirk cheated on;They mentioned that in Star Trek 2; and the fine green chick he was gettin it on with, like in the show.), The action was great and you got to see the original Spock. For cryin out loud, what more are ya’ll haters looking for?
Tribbles
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009Need I to say anything, Folks go watch this film its not just entertaining its mind blowing and I love it till death. Go ahead and watch it friends.
Posted by Brian on May 9th, 2009Meh. Starship Troopers without the satire. There is nothing on the line despite the films desperate tone trying to convince you to. Every time a character has a solution it works perfectly the first time. The characters are beyond cocky because the whole darn thing is so artificial in all the wrong ways.
This thing works in the same way THE MUMMY works. I’m not a fan of either movie because despite watchable characters and a breakneck pace, the thing is pretty disposable. Nobody is going to learn much from watching this…There is no ‘wonder’ in the film because it is too interested in moving on to the next gag instead of actually taking a breath.
Posted by Kurt on May 9th, 2009rus, theres supposed to actually be a tribble in the film heh
Posted by Rccola on May 9th, 2009Karl Urban, Zachary Quinto and Bruce Greenwood were awesome though. Seriously awesome.
Posted by Kurt on May 9th, 2009I was surprised how much fun this movie was. Yes it was a bit plot lite but the strong cast made it work for me. The casting by the way was pure genius. I feel that all the actors did an excellent job being faithful to the original characterization without making it cheesy. Good Job J.J. I’m eager for more adventures with this engaging crew. (The husband and I are already thinking about seeing it again)
Posted by froggiegirl on May 9th, 2009I was 16 years old when the first episode of the original Star Trek series initially aired (and yes, I watched it.)
I had plenty of reservations concerning the re-boot of a series I had enjoyed most of my life, and deliberately kept from peeking at various postings about the movie before I saw it.
After seeing the film for a second time, I can honestly say that (despite some plot holes that might bear future explanations): “The best crew of the most beloved starship in the history of science fiction is alive again!”
Looking forward to the future missions of the Starship Enterprise.
Posted by JRispoli on May 9th, 2009Kurt, Row Three is letting me down…I went there to get your buds reviews and comments and nothing!!!! Maybe you have something now, a few hours later.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009Kurt, I hear you on the film being very disposable and I do think it will not be one I seek to watch over and over in the future, but this film is a prime example of the MAGIC OF CINEMA! I don’t mean the typical definition of cinema magic were the audience is transported to another world, but the magic were a film rekindles your love for a past story, past characters and old myths. I feel just as Wolverine suffers from too much too soon, Star Trek is hitting the public at the perfect time. When this film starts rolling and the audience starts to feel good about the young versions of Kirk, Spock and the rest of the crew THE MAGIC OF CINEMA is taking place. You can’t explain it, bottle it or predict when it hits. You just need to let yourself go and enjoy the ride.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 9th, 2009Thank you…Rus.
Posted by Derek on May 9th, 2009I too thought the movie was awesome, and it seemed to balance the nostalgia, with an updated fresh take on the original setup. Of course some things are changed around but you have to remember that the whole time travel thing messed everything up. In the original continuity there was no mission to Vulcan that brought all the crew together. So everyone has to stop getting hung up on thinking about the old original continuity. I was thinking of something interesting and that is comparing the new actors versus the old, and the big difference is the voices. Except for maybe Urban as McCoy, every one has a wimpy voice. Think about it, Shatner is Shatner, Nimoy has one of the great voices in all of entertainment, Takei has a deep voice, and Doohan was one of the great voice guys of his time. Of course the main difference is that the new guys are playing younger versions of the characters, so we get Pine playing Kirk at 20-21 versus Shatner playing Kirk in his mid-30’s. The other difference is that almost all of the original actors got their start on the stage where training and using your voice was much more important than modern film and TV with the mikes and all.
Posted by Maopheus on May 9th, 2009Sean, excellent review! Too bad some of your opinions are wrong. Ha ha.
I’m having a hard time writing my review. I have a bunch of written notes that I don’t know how to coherently put together. I’m going to be bringing my notes to our live podcast on Monday, so I hope to have a lot to say, but I’ll probably be incomprehensible as usual. When I do finish my written review, I assume Sean will be posting my review as well, or at least my review will be in a Treknobabble.
Kurt, I too thought Urban, Quinto and Greenwood were excellent. So far, I’ve agreed with everything you’ve said about the film. Maybe I should wait for your review and then copy it and put my name on it. Ha ha.
Posted by Reed Farrington on May 9th, 2009Did you guys who liked this movie WATCH the same movie I did? This movie was CRAPTACULAR! I am no purist. I understand the flimsy attempt to create an alternate timeline so they can get away with the things they did, and so they can start another installment. But to make a cadet a first officer, then somehow outwits a ten year Vulcan veteran to take the commander’s chair of the prie ship of the Federation at 22 years old? The lame plot, redesign of the Enterprise…I could have look past it all. I was even distracted by the SMOKING Uhura…but Michael Bay created a Blackbeard for a captain. And transwarp teleporters? Why even have a ship if you can do that? I did like the fact that Winona Ryder dies and has limited exposure…she is still a bad actress. Can you imagine a child born from her womb? OUCH! Bring on the Idiocracy, because if so many of you are applauding this stinker, then you obviously are the double-digit IQ types who are propagating! Woe to the Republic.
Posted by kalani on May 9th, 2009Well I saw it and overall I liked it. I’m glad Trek is back, whatever it takes I guess. As a film watcher, I thought this was a good action film with good acting and great effects. The effects were the most realistic yet. The ship combat scenes were awesome and I could watch phasers fire and torpedoes launch for hours.
I thought Scotty was a bit of the court jester, but Doohan, (A real life bad ass) had played Scotty humorously (But with heart and wisdom) in the later films.
I was disturbed by the whole rank and promotion system. Spock is a Commander and Kirk is a Cadet. Five ranks and about 15 years of service (In today’s military) separate them. A day or two goes by and Kirk passes Spock? He goes from Cadet to Captain of the Federation flagship after one mission? That was the most implausible part of the film!
I get that his instincts saved Earth and he is destined for greatness, however one mission and he is CO? That is no reward. How can he learn tactics, diplomacy and management? OJT? That is a tough pill to swallow. It makes no sense. The guy wouldn’t even have gotten into the academy.
That aside, I liked Kirk. I just wished they didn’t rush things. I get that they had to set the stage.
I was a little put off by the way the destruction of Vulcan was handled. Yes Spock would be upset, but wouldn’t the death of six billion humanoids be upsetting to everyone? Didn’t the Vulcans make first contact and forge a strong relationship with Earth? Even Han Solo seemed to feel sorry for Alderaan.
In the films defense, you have to move things along. There isn’t the time to show the logical development of a friendship.
Being that future Spock is sticking around, I hope he cooks up a time travel mission to save Vulcan.
I wish they incorporated more of the “Countdown” graphic novel into the film because it explains better why Nero is so hateful and that he used to be a good man. When he closed his eyes at the end, I understood it better after reading the book. The book also explains the shaved heads and the cranial tattoos.
I am not completely opposed to the new timeline, and I don’t fully buy the two separate timelines thing yet, but my question is: Did they have to change everything to relaunch this franchise? I thought the intent of the reboot was to tell the story of how these characters came to be and then how they came be together. I don’t think that story was yet told.
Since this is an alternate timeline, how did the crew originally come together? We know they did, but that will remain unexplored. That story was never really told in the official canon and it could have been here without fundamentally changing the characters histories.
I don’t mind a reimagining or reinterpreting of existing characters or material but this whole “alternate timeline” plot construct did not seem neccessary to achieve that. A fresh perspective and new appeal could have been added without literally destroying Rodenberrys universe.
In fact, the pre-five year mission years and the academy years are fertile unmined areas to set stories in.
Like I said it was a good movie and even my wife and mother enjoyed it, but looking through the lens of a serious Trekkie, I have some feelings and thoughts I’ll need to sort out for a while.
Posted by Joe Puglia on May 9th, 2009“But to make a cadet a first officer, then somehow outwits a ten year Vulcan veteran to take the commander’s chair of the prie ship of the Federation at 22 years old?”
You set off the nerd alarm
Leonard Nimoy just called you a dickhead on SNL.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009Reed is struggling just like Spock! His Vulcan side can not get past the trashing of 40 years of lore, but his Human side wants to feel love so deeply. Monday night his head explodes! Film at 11.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 10th, 2009Great review Sean. I also liked the movie. It was just one of the those movies where you just kinda sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. There was a downer with Spock’s plot, but enter Simon Pegg’s Scotty and the movie was back to kickass levels again.
The music, although very manipulative at times, was pretty good showing hints of old trek themes were a nice touch. Uhura&Spock love story was pretty weird and I still think it is, but I definitely forgave any flaws and grips I had with the film because it sustained an awesome & fun energy which not very many movies can pull off nowadays.
I think they were telling us with the destruction of several homeworlds that they aren’t going to back to well of species that trek has accumulated over its history. I certainly didn’t recognized many of the aliens in this film except for vulcans&romulans of course. Maybe they are just going to introduce new ones from this point on, if there are sequels that is.
But I’m no trekkie, so maybe guys like Reed know every alien in this film? By the way Reed, do you have an Enterprise Salt Shaker? I want one of those.
Posted by Pr1mal on May 10th, 2009The green skinned roommate of Uhura’s that Kirk shags is a species from the original series, I can’t recall the name. Of course there are plenty of inconsistencies between this movie and the original continuity. Even in the original, Kirk becomes Captain at a much younger age than normal, I think he sets the record for youngest captaincy but even he did not get to be Captain right out of the Academy. I think some of the history suggest that he was field-promoted to Lieutenant while still a cadet which is not unprecedented. The movie does stick with the idea that Spock is older than the rest and more experienced. Of course everyone remembers that Spock was on the crew of the Enterprise in “The Cage” never-aired pilot. Chekov has been suggested to be the youngest and we can overlook the fact that he did not join the original series cast until the second season, a fact that even the writers of Star Trek II forgot. There have been unconvincing explanations for how Khan could remember a guy who was not on the cast at the time. OK, so what’s my point? There have been inconsistencies and continuity problems throughout the entire history of the franchise. The “Enterprise” series itself was a total inconsistency. This is just what’s going to happen when you try to revamp/reboot/revitalize any franchise. You take the best parts, some new stuff and whip it into a mixer and hope that something good comes out.
Posted by Maopheus on May 10th, 2009I agree that this is an excellent movie, but other than that I pretty much disagree with most of your review, Sean.
The start was awesome, I don’t find it to be flawed at all. Also the so called “poor fanscript” I don’t agree with. I simply can’t see all the flaws you’re talking about, other than the fact that old-spock shows up out of nowhere. Other than that I find it to be pretty awesome, and I am a non-trekkie that has never watched any of the movies and in total perhaps 10 mixed episodes from TOS and TNG.
Posted by Kasper F. Nielsen on May 10th, 2009For all the people who are worried about the continuity with this Trek Universe and the original Rodenberry universe…I don’t know really who cares.
BSG did a wonderful job rebooting a franchise fresh with barely a connection to the past (They did have Richard Hatch on for a totally different character) and did a masterful job. Smart stories, great new characters and just great reinterpretation.
This Trek sucked. This was no BSG, or Batman Begins or James Bond Casino Royale. This reboot sucked. And I really really really wanted to like this movie.
Let me start by saying the cast was wonderful…Karl Urban was great as McCoy, Simon Pegg was great as Scotty, as was the Zoe, Quinto and the rest of the cast. What sucked was the direction, story, dialogue, and production design.
Can anyone tell me why the Enterprise looked so futuristic, i.e bridge, certain hallways, and the rest of the ship looked a Brewery? Are they making beer?? It looked like the Guiness Brewery I went to in Ireland last year. Did they run out of money? And where was everyone? Does no one work the engineering section except Scotty?
Why did Eric Bana and his boys talk like a bunch of surfer dudes? Was the dialogue written by Keanau Reeves? Why are they speaking english so well…awfully educated for lowly miners. Couldn’t they just speak Romulan a little bit and then switch to english like they did in “Hunt for Red October”? Why is a miner driving a ship loaded with so much weaponry? Did he attack worlds on his spare time? I thought he was into an honest living?
Why didn’t Kirk, Sulu and Crewman Olson burn up in the atmosphere? Or at least show some friction on re-entry. Is there no atmosphere on Vulcan? Yet they breath on the planet. They were entering the atmosphere weren’t they? If you try to introduce reality elements into your movie, like no sound in space when the crewmen got sucked out of the Kelvin, then stick to that. Don’t do something sound and then throw it out the door when you find it convenient.
What the hell is red matter???…and please don’t tell me to read the comic book. If you make a movie it should be self contained and if you introduce a plot device please explain it…film class 101.
And why did Spock put Kirk on a space pod and eject him onto a ice world where he might possibly die???? Why not drug him up and put him in the brigg? And if you are going to shoot him down to the planet couldn’t you at least do him the favor of shooting it closer to the outpost? And couldn’t you at least alert the outpost they were on the way? Scotty and the little alien thought they Spock and Kirk were food transport!
And the alien that went after Kirk…chased away by a torch??? Come on??? The monster was such a mean baddie that it was afraid of a itty itty fire???
I could on but I can’t. I think this movie will do well. People enjoyed it because it was fast paced and humorous. I hope it does well. But I really wished I enjoyed the ride. Forget about it being a Trek film, it was just a lousy poor expensive piece of movie making. Long Live Michael Bay! Oh, uh um, I mean JJ Abrams.
Posted by 1138 on May 10th, 2009The green skinned chick is actress Rachel Nichols. She starred in the horror film P2. She is in the upcoming GI JOe and had a role on Alias. So JJ Abrams has worked with her before. Im a fan and think she will be a name in film over the next few years. I give Star Trek an 8 out of 10.
chuck
Posted by entertainmenttodayandbeyond on May 10th, 2009I liked the movie a lot, but yeah I have to agree some of the coincidences and broad strokes bothered me a lot. There also could have been less young Kirk stealing a car and more development of Bana’s character.
Posted by Paul on May 10th, 2009good movie easymac
Posted by kris on May 10th, 2009“and the rest of the ship looked a Brewery? Are they making beer?? It looked like the Guiness Brewery I went to in Ireland last year.”
I was wondering about the engineering design too…well on Wikipedia they list the filming locations and they did use a Budweiser brewery. I did think it was weird design but I don’t blame them for using a real location to help with budget – there is to much waste in Hollywood already, I can live with it.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 10th, 2009I think Abrams could have made a few more changes that would have really helped this film. It would have been so easy to add some additional shield effects on the space suits during the jump sequence.
The ice planet monster was totally unnecessary and feels like a trailer scene. Unfortunately all this crap with the monster hurts the transwarp teleporter scene – to much time and distance has past. I don’t feel throwing Kirk to the planet is unwarranted, remember they are trying to show Spock as emotional, plus getting rid of mutinous crewmen has been going on since the sailing days.
“The 3 years Later” title card replaces all of the scenes were Kirk would show his skill and knowledge base, therefore, making people not feel he earned the rank he is given later. Abrams depends to much on the Kobayashi Maru scene to justify Kirk prowess. He could of added a little dialogue were they talk up Kirk’s skills in the trial scene to help buttress that he is one of the top, yet cocky, students.
My biggest problem with Red Matter is its been used by Abrams in Alias.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 10th, 2009Hey “Hey Rus in Chicago” I know getting rid of mutinous crew members by way of “walking the plank” or setting them adrift has been done for centuries, granted and I agree. But it is the 23rd century where it is supposed to be a little more civilized. Also just the way Spock did it, someone so scientific and careful and by the book Starfleet…well to me it seemed irresponsible to do it the way he did. As I said all he had to do was alert the outpost to pick him up or shoot eject his pod closer to the outpost…but then again they wouldn’t have had the gratuitous space monster sequence.
Posted by 1138 on May 10th, 2009it was good…not the best star trek since khan but def the best since first contact(not that that is a tall order).they didn’t give enough texture to nero i thought,i wanted more depth and background on his storyline.the film needed another half hr/hr to get it all done but the time they did have was well used.i am actually hoping for a sequel,maybe a new timeline entirely.normally such a thought is a fan boy’s nightmare but i like the crew and the finished product enough to believe that the future of star trek is in capable hands.zachary quinto was dead on as spock,tho i am not sure if the uhuru/spock love affair really works.anyway…glad star trek hasn’t ended with my generation.
Posted by brendan on May 10th, 2009I just saw Star Trek. I was quite underwhelmed, but didnt out and out dislike it.
I thought it was actually quite boring in many parts despite the fast pace. I just didnt really care about what was happening, I thought Chris Pine was rather bland, and I’ve always found Eric Bana to be rather bland as well. A lot of the action was shot in ways that I wasnt particularly oriented with what was happening. I find the overall look of the movie not that amazingly visually interesting.
I find it weird that this is a 96% on RT and some return to form, yet everyone claims they hate the Star Wars prequels. I actually think all three of those movies were more fun than this, sue me.
The best I can say is that like XMen 1 and (for me) Hellboy it seems like a better film is coming and this is just putting the pieces together. If thats so the existence of that film will maybe make me like this one more. As it is, its a 2/4 from me.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009Also, at times it felt kind of Joss Whedon-y, which for me is not so good.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009Goon: Ditto. See the raging debate in the Rowthree “MY HAPPY PLACE” thread on this. The new Trek film feels like the whedon written Alien: Resurrection film. Empty calories, despite a lot of good actors doing their thing. It’s the script, a total wash except for the few character moments.
Posted by Kurt on May 10th, 2009“The new Trek film feels like the whedon written Alien”
Maybe its the Winona Ryder connection
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009“This thing works in the same way THE MUMMY works. I’m not a fan of either movie because despite watchable characters and a breakneck pace, the thing is pretty disposable.”
By this description, arent any of the Indiana Jones movies also this? Fun is fun, and fun alone is good enough for me. I missed the sermonizing in this Star Trek movie and you’re right, nothing to chew on but popcorn, but that alone isnt the problem. I just didnt think what else was presented was much fun. I thought it started out cool, liked Kirk’s dad, liked seeing them as kids and the start out at the academy…
but all of a sudden they’re this high rank without seeing how they hell they deserved it, what StarFleet actually learns, and Kirk is being promoted to 1st officer and it doesnt seem to make a lick of sense why. Spocks a high rank but he also seems to be in school? I’m confused. The action scenes had so much helicopter panning while shaking and that visual style I’m not so much a fan of, I felt really disconnected to it in a lot of the same ways I couldnt get attached to Wanted. I kind of just sat there and a movie happened. Not much to be offended by, but nothing to remember, and that makes my thumb lean down instead of a mild pass.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009Didnt actually read seans review until just now
“these are the same guys who wrote Michael Bay’s The Island and Transformers as well”
Oh god now it all makes sense. Fail.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009Goon, I never thought I would agree with you on anything, but I agree with many of your criticisms of Star Trek including not liking how the action was shot.
Posted by Reed Farrington on May 10th, 2009Kurt, Goon, Reed, everyone… the more I think about the movie and read the comments about the science and plot holes; I agree that the movie has major flaws. I still enjoy it, for lack of a better phrase, what I describe as the Magic of Cinema. I think the box office, word of mouth and appeal is going to be huge for this movie due to the audience desire to rekindle their movie relationship with the iconic characters of Star Trek.
Beyond serious trekkies, Kirk and Spock are part of our culture in one way or another for over 40 years and this movie is coming out at the perfect time to capture that nostalgia. You add the fact that we get to see these iconic characters as sexy young adults and you have a really powerful mix.
All of this nostalgia is covering a really weak story, plot holes and that is what is really interesting to me. It’s like George Lucas famous line “movies are binary they are either positive or negative – you can never predict when one will break throughâ€.
I guess what I want to interject is what other movies which exploded due to their perfect timing and the audience wanting the return of familiar characters? I submit these to start:
Ironically, the first Star Trek film had this appeal because of the long gestation the material developed in reruns and with fans of the TV show growing up.
Terminator 2 exploded on to the scene as people were desperate to see the terminator again. Unlike this film, T2’s script holds up over time.
In a way Titanic is part of this discussion, how would anyone predict the pined-up desire to see such a historical event given the Hollywood treatment. It’s a story every child hears about in history class and it had numerous film versions (one that is actually better then Cameron’s) and the world was waiting for this ‘reboot’. Like this Star Trek, Titanic’s melodramatic script is its biggest negative.
The Wiz is a favorite of my childhood and was a jazzy, African-American reimagining of The Wizard of Oz with Diana Ross and Michael Jackson as the scarecrow. (Might be a stretch because I don’t know if it made the money they wanted) A must see for any serious film fan.
Hook did very well and fed the public’s desire for more Pan magic.
In a way Phantom Menace is the same as Star Trek; it feeds the public’s hunger for a return of characters and myth with very little script to back it up. People will go see Star Trek to rekindle even if they hear the script is bad.
Thoughts?
Posted by rus in chicago on May 10th, 2009Might as well do the nitpicks at this point
1. LENS FLARE!
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 20092. Chekhov can teleport freefalling Kirk and Sulu but not Spock’s mom?
3. Neros bottomless pit ship
4. Its weird that Nero can wait for 25 years for one dude, and his crew are completely fine. No mutiny or anything. Everyone’s good with chilling out waiting?
5. Reverse nitpick: I liked the Beastie Boys use.
6. Nimoy overused. see 9.
7. Cloverfield Ice monster is afraid of torches?
8. Vulcan destruction treated like it aint no thing.
9. Spock interfering with time so damn much. Nobody is blown away that time travel exists, or is bothered that Spock basically blabs about their discoveries. Way to be a spoiler, Spock. Telling Scotty about his discoveries, man might as well go up to Kurt Cobain and say “You’re gonna write this song and it goes a little something like this! DUH DUH DUH, da-dadada DUH DUH DUH” – telling Kirk about his alternate timeline dad, such a tease, and Spock’s thus basically responsible for Kirk’s dad dying. All of this is just glossed over.
“Unlike this film, T2’s script holds up over time.”
I dont like the Terminator series. I’m in the minority on that too. Possibly the most popular movie I dont like at all.
People have been talking about BSG lately and its reboot because of this one. I wish a few people would talk about the Caprica spinoff pilot. I watched that recently and was very very much impressed and look forward to that show. Kind of Gattaca-y. People who are missing out on the rumination and sermonizing this Star Trek lacks should definitely go pick that one up. Way smarter than this movie.
Posted by Goon on May 10th, 2009(A tidbit preview from the Row Three review going up tomorrow) –
“Good science has never been Star Trek’s forte but here it is positively insulting. From ‘Red Matter’ (and apparent left-over from Abrams’ Alias) to a transporter gag involving Scottie that is almost as silly as the one Spaceballs. Watching Kirk follow Mr. Scott along a water pipe in a water filtration contraption this side of the ‘cruncher pistons’ from Galaxy Quest makes Star Trek parodies officially obsolete; the real thing is content to carry that mantle.”
Posted by Kurt on May 10th, 2009“Kirk about his alternate timeline dad, such a tease, and Spock’s thus basically responsible for Kirk’s dad dying. All of this is just glossed over.”
Actually that is a great point Goon. Spock is partially responsible for Kirk’s dad death, though accidental. Yet Kirk doesn’t even respond to that notion.
Another reason why I did not like this movie.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009AWESOME MOVIE!!!
Thank you Sean for a great review.
My favorite thing about this movie, besides scotty, was all the old liners.
“damnit man, i’m a doctor not a physiscist.” “BEAM ME UP SCOTTY!” “LIVE LONG AND PROSPER”
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009“I’M GIVIN HER ALL SHE’S GOT”
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 20091138 – I mean the personal loss was enough for Nero to hang out for 25 years to find Spock, but hothead Kirk doesnt really even put 2 and 2 together or say a word.
I mean seriously, young Spock has just abandoned him on Ice Monster planet, and future Spock shows up and says “oh btw I caused this timeline change, your dad died because of it. my bad” and its nothing. You’d think he’d have had enough
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009Nero’s entire planet and way of life was destroyed. Kirk’s father died before he even knew him. Out of all the things to nitpick, I don’t think this is one of them.
Posted by Sean on May 11th, 2009Why does a mining ship have torpedoes on it? Why was Spock on the ice planet? Why doesn’t Kirk even bat an eye when confronted with TIME TRAVEL, why is Scotty also on ice planet. This just scratches the surface. Star Trek may be the most nitpickable movie in the history of cinema! ha! The story convinces are ludicrous. Suspension of disbelieve is like I-10 bridge in the L.A. 1994 quake. It falls in on itself.
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009convinces is supposed to be CONVENIENCES. typos argh!
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009yeah Sean, but they use Kirk’s fatherless existence as part of his “Rebel Without a Cause” personality – you can’t have it both ways.
This is why time travel plots are so messy. I agree old Spock did way to much, esp. the last scene were he tells his younger self to befriend Kirk?! Really!? Couldn’t the young Spock come up with that on his own, wouldn’t that have made his character stronger.
I go back to my original premise – its a story full of problems masked by nostalgia and sex appeal!
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009I dont think its the most nitpickable movie ever. And I dont expect Kirk to be as mad as Nero, but he kind of just takes this news about his dad and about time travel in general so easily. You’d think he’d be mad at Spock, or at least retort when Spock insists they’re friends. Kirk is so frequently naive and prone to anyones suggestion this entire film..
Thus, “Kirks father died before he even knew him” isnt a good excuse to me about him not caring… when he joined StarFleet on a dime after Pike plays the Dead Dad card.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009still no Star Trek post on Row Three?!! WTF!? Guess more evidence Filmjunk is #1…..snap!
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009Sean is one guy. We are co-ordinating several across many time zones. It should be up presently.
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009Yes, if I had to co-ordinate with Reed we’d never have a review up.
I agree that the whole ice planet is a massive stretch, and one of the things I had a problem with, particularly the fact that Kirk managed to meet up with both Spock and Scotty. However, they did explain that Spock was on the ice planet because it was close to Vulcan and Nero wanted him to see it destroyed.
Also even if Kirk’s lack of a father was the reason for his troubled childhood, that doesn’t mean he understands that it is the reason. And he knew that Nero was the one directly responsible.
Posted by Sean on May 11th, 2009“was on the ice planet because it was close to Vulcan and Nero” – It’s a big planet, Kirk happens to crash about 1km from the cave and be accidently chase there by big Cloverfield beastie? To then head off and find Scottie cooling his heels only another couple clicks away. I’m not buyin’ it. That is lazy screenwrinting of the worst kind.
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009Those things were kind of like how all the major Star Wars characters happened to still be linked together as children.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009yeah, like Luke crash landing miles from Yoda…it happens all the time in these type films. the bigger problem is the characters don’t earn anything, that’s screenwriting 101 and Abrams should know better. If you are going to challenged Kirk’s character with the beastie, he should earn his escape by doing something that defines his character for the audience. All he does here is display his running ability. It makes the beastie a waste. Spock should have earned his insight on the good he and Kirk could do together at the end of the film. the only character that really earns her position in the film is Uhura. Hmmmmm, Abrams does like writing for females??
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009Agreed Goon. We used to call that sort of idiocy “The Star Wars Effect, even when we were 12!)
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009“The Star Wars Effect, even when we were 12!”
damn, look at the big brain on Kurt! you were some bright motherfuckers at 12!
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009That’s cause we had the Metric System.
Posted by Kurt on May 11th, 2009i agree with rus. but alot of time in the movie kirk stood up to the stiuation just to get the crap kicked out of him. but it was his Resilience that set him apart. He would never quit or back down. And i was hoping he would put up more of a fight when it came to the fight between him and spoc. But i guess he was trying to get his job.
I still think it was a fantastic movie.
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009does anyone have an answer as to why Pike made him 1st commander so fast? maybe i missed something but it didnt seem like Kirk was any position to just be picked like that. Pike totally Palin’d Kirk.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009I actually like this line of discussion here. Even though most people love this movie I do believe there is a small contingent out there (some here obviously) that had problems with the film and did not enjoy it all or as much and not because it wasn’t a good Trek…but that it was just a poorly constructed movie with a horrible screenplay and horrible direction.
I am one of those guys and I was hoping for the best for this movie. But the silliness of it all just took me out the context of the film completely.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009Pike saw the awesome potential, and told Kirk. Christopher Pike apparently is godlike in his ability to judge leaders, but seriously, Kirk is an action guy. American leaders need to be action guys, otherwise people won’t follow them (except in Star Trek: The Next Generation of course).
Posted by Henrik on May 11th, 2009as the retort twords palin…more expierence then obama…and his first 100 days proves that. but i’m not here to talk politics.
I think it was a logical choice. I mean Pike has an idea of what Kirk can do. He’s the one who got him to even join the academy, so obviously he has faith in him. I had no problem with that.
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009He picked Kirk to be his 2nd in command because he was…there???? I’m not really sure myself other than it was necessary to get the plot moving forward.
I think his reasoning was that he was interested in helping Kirk with his career and perhaps he had no 2nd commanding officer. I did hate how Spock offered his candidacy for 2nd in command…it just seemed so presumptuous and out of character to do so…to neat.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009“as the retort twords palin…more expierence then obama…and his first 100 days proves that. but i’m not here to talk politics.”
please no replies, please no replies, please no replies
Posted by Jay C. on May 11th, 2009@ Rick.
No problem with picking a guy though a genius and just fresh out of the academy and who really wasn’t supposed to be there in the first place and who is a hot head who obviously needed more maturing and besides that, you mean Pike didn’t have any other senior officers on board??? Especially on the bridge???
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009“…more expierence then obama… but I’m not here to talk politics”
in that case all I’ll do is quietly laugh at you for thinking this, and we can just call it even.
As for Pike, potential is potential, but Kirk was also big time in the doghouse. Pike’s really going out on a limb promoting him even if its under an unusual circumstance. But there was nobody else who could have done this job?
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009Haha Jay, I can see your face as you typed that. Scary stuff.
Posted by Henrik on May 11th, 2009This sounds like the Blomkamp/Halo argument all over again.
Posted by Jay C. on May 11th, 2009posted before reading Jays plea for lack of diversion. I’m done. Id rather keep it on nitpicking this movie to death anyways.
One nitpick I saw from fanboys that I have no problem with is apparently Uhura cant speak Klingon in Star Trek 6, so something in this movie is wrong continuity wise.
I dont care about that. it makes no sense that the communications officer wouldnt know the language of their largest enemy.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009Nobody else was able to stop the enterprise from being destroyed with the rest of the fleet. I think Kirk had gotten out of the doghouse by saving the lives of everybody on board the Enterprise, including Pike.
And Goon, I know Rusty told you that you didn’t watch it correctly, and you do seem to have missed out on a lot. When the Enterprise goes away to meet with Nero, it is manned by academy members, since all of the senior officers and the entire real fleet is conveniently off doing something else. It’s lame, but it’s there. You’re the one guy who almost always takes these things at face value, I think if you paid attention, a lot of the plot holes do get a (lame, deadborn and completely arbitrary) specific explanation.
Posted by Henrik on May 11th, 2009if you wanna email me we can argue politics all day long.
but 1138 you talk about other senior officers…like who? ohurra, she is an interpreter, languages. whats she gonna do. talk them out of blowing up the earth. that hits way to close to home. and maturing or not, it was a gamble to say the least, and the gamble paid off.
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009thank you, thank you, thank you
I’m sitting here waiting for tonight’s live show to share my thoughts on Star Trek. Should be a fun show.
Posted by Jay C. on May 11th, 2009“This sounds like the Blomkamp/Halo argument all over again.”
I could have maybe looked past all that and bought Pike going on instinct, but the only thing we saw Kirk do in school was cheat. its like when the only way I could beat the giant sea monster in Cobra Triangle in 1988 was for the came to freeze except for my character and i just sailed around the boss. i really wish I got more time in Starfleet. One problem i expected in advance of the movie is that these people were all together at such a young age, and i was interested to see what they did to deserve such confidence so fast, and Im not sure I got much of that at all.
And again, Kirk was in the doghouse, which adds another level on top of things.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009I believe I offered this back in the tread some were…
“The 3 years Later†title card replaces all of the scenes were Kirk would show his skill and knowledge base at the academy, therefore, making people not feel he earned the rank he is given later. Abrams depends to much on the Kobayashi Maru scene to justify Kirk prowess. He could of added a little dialogue were they talk up Kirk’s skills in the trial scene to help buttress that he is one of the top, yet cocky, students.”
they also tried to cover their ass by having Pike say something to the affect “Our entire fleet is on the other side of the galaxy so all you cadets will be rushed to active duty..” It was a throw away line to help justify unranked cadets in power positions and lay the ground work that there aren’t any other officers on board to fill in for Pike…big stretch!
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009“if you wanna email me we can argue politics all day long.”
if it ever needs to come to that, its a deal. but I’m not really interested in that, if you want to see what my retort would have been you could dig through Row Three archives from before the election, its there somewhere.
“and you do seem to have missed out on a lot. ”
As I said, at some point I got bored and tuned out. When something like this happens its not always easy to get yourself back in the game. What happens is when a movie loses you, you can focus and nitpick better, but may miss out on some of the other details that other people are absorbing. When you’re bored, some things just go in one ear and out the other, you’re talking to yourself about how bored you are.
Thats the problem with saying a movie bored you. You have to kind of go back after the fact and rationalize why. A sense of ‘fun’ is subjective enough that being bored can be a good enough reason for anything, but its one of the least convincing counterarguments you can have.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009couldnt of said it more confusing, myself.
i just think this movie though as visually awesome as it was, this hole blog/post page has opend my eyes a little more. the movie, explains little, and leaves alot to be inferred, or assumed.
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009@ Rick.
Uhura is a senior officer with higher rank than Kirk…does not matter what they do…it is the next rank in line that takes command if the commander chooses to do so that way.
Besides we don’t know who else was on the bridge anway, JJ never bothered to explore that option. There were more people than the just the main crew. If you really think about it really was dumb decision since this Kirk was really a hot head who really made no decisions whatsoever…he never really did anything smart in the movie other than get his ass kicked. He was led around like a puppet.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009going back to how Kurt compared to Starship Troopers. I didnt think about it at the time but its obvious why that movie came to mind. Upstarts get recruited and schooled and by the end all the kids are running the show. But in comparison Starship Troopers spends a lot more time at the academy making it clear how these people fit into these specific roles. I think we got more of Spocks childhood schooling than his Starfleet schooling.
I’m not saying this movie needed to be Harry Potter and get introducted to all these teachers and classes, but for an origin movie with not much else to say, I hoped for a bit more insight into that thing.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009I have this image of what is going on in St. Catherines:
Jay C. is sitting, waiting on Reed while eating a Quizzos Flatbread Pizza as Reed runs around his house.
Reed, “Should I wear a yellow or red Trek blouse.”
Jay, “What the fuck, come on.”
Reed, “Should I take some of this chocolate for after?”
Jay, “Fuck no.”
Reed, “Wait! I need to eat something. Do you want some rice and bar-be-que sauce?”
Jay, “Fuck, let’s go!”
Am I even close?
Posted by rus in chicago on May 11th, 2009He figured out that the enterprise was being setup by the fake distress call from Vulcan. That’s pretty smart. Sure, it was lucky to be in the exactly right locations at exactly the right times, but that’s how these LOST-guys picture good storytelling.
Posted by Henrik on May 11th, 2009Thats a cheapshot and you know it, considering you’ve watched like one or two Lost episodes ever, and the people who wrote this have nothing to do with Lost.
Abrams has little to nothing to do with how Lost operates. Lindelof was a producer on this but what does that really mean. The writers of this film are Michael Bay’s Island and Transformers go-to-guys…
so dragging lost down by attacking the writing is just flat out wrong.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009I am not attacking the writing, but the storytelling. The guy who directed this movie, created Lost and executive produces if I am not mistaking? I don’t see how you can absolve him of anything, even though you may like one and not the other.
I see alot of the same breakneck pace, plot-hole laden, arbitrary actionscene inserts as I have seen in Lost, although you are right, I have not seen that much. Like 3 episodes.
I guess I maybe should not have said LOST-guys, I thought the two writers were in on that one as well. It’s only the director and producer that is involved with Lost.
Posted by Henrik on May 11th, 2009uhurra does not have the capacity to make any decision making. senior officers or not, “ballsy” is not her or the docs strong point. and if they diddn’t explore the other officers then why even consider it.
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009it was a gamble by the captain, and it paid off.
“The guy who directed this movie, created Lost and executive produces if I am not mistaking?”
JJ Abrams directed Lost’s pilot, and thats it. Im not sure he’s ever otherwise been credited as anything other than a producer or creator. Its like “Tim Burton’s the nightmare before christmas” – its Burtons characters, Burtons creation, and his vision is throughout, but thats Selick’s film. Likewise, on Lost, Abrams developed and produced but anyone familiar with the show knows its Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse’s baby. Those producers are actually heavily involved with writing everything, and over 100 episodes fleshing out the particular storytelling. I’m not sure Abrams even came up with anything other than the general setting, I’m not convinced he ever had an ending or a fraction of the mysteries or character ideas.
I type this because it keeps coming up whenever Kurt blasts Lost based on Abrams’ MI:3 – it has nothing to do with anything.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009“it was a gamble by the captain, and it paid off.”
I dont think you could call it that – you can look back with 20/20 and because alls well that ends well, Pike is some visionary. But considering Spock abandoned him and he had to be rescued by old Spock and Scotty, so much of that is just luck and chance. Kirk didnt even get to outwit or trick the ice monster to save himself, all he did was run.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009so don’t blame kirk, blame the writer. just because he chose to run from a man eating space monster doesn’t mean he’s not capable of other amazing things. I found it interesting though that the monster through away that first wolf looking monster to chace down the smaller of the meals
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009@ Rick
“uhurra does not have the capacity to make any decision making. senior officers or not, “ballsy†is not her or the docs strong point. and if they diddn’t explore the other officers then why even consider it.
it was a gamble by the captain, and it paid off.”
What do you mean Uhura is not have the capacity to make any decision? She is a senior member of the command crew on the bridge! Just as Sulu or any member of his team. If these guys aren’t capable then get of the bridge! They shouldn’t be there. Just because someone is ballsy doesn’t mean they are capable all they are is ballsy and sometimes that gets your ass handed to you. i.e. the bar scene. Kirk got his ass handed to him…in fact he got his ass handed to him alot.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009@ Rick
“so don’t blame kirk, blame the writer. just because he chose to run from a man eating space monster doesn’t mean he’s not capable of other amazing things. I found it interesting though that the monster through away that first wolf looking monster to chace down the smaller of the meals”
But it would have been nice to find out what he was capable of other than sleeping with women. I mean Kirk loved women but man this guy was sex fiend. He never demonstrated any other ability…where was this genius Kirk that graduated the academy in 3 years. The writers never demonstrated this aspect of him. He couldn’t even get on the enterprise without Bones help. He had to sleep with a women reprogram the Kobayhsi Maru and then turned it into a cocky joke and he relied on Spock for info to get out of the jam and Sulu had to save his ass on the antenna array. Yeah some ballsy quick thinking character.
The actors were great the writing sucked.
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009hahah, i’ll agree with that. star trek is defiantely out of my scope of knowledge, i’m just going off the movie. I wasn’t saying that ohurra couldn’t make decisions i’m just saying…since were going off the movie i assume..is that she made 0 decisions the whole time. If he graduated in three years that leads one to believe he’s obviously talented and skillful. Yeah he got his but kicked in the bar scene but it was him facing atleast five guys. he took 3 of him out. i think thats a good fight for one on five
Posted by Rick on May 11th, 2009@ Rick.
That’s true It did take five guys but man that last guy should have broke Kirk’s jaw in like 900 pieces! The way he was laying blows!
And in the end it was Spock’s girl anyway! 
Posted by 1138 on May 11th, 2009Listening to the show and I think Jay makes good points, but I hope he realizes its a catch 22.
If you can just accept and turn your mind off to one thing, and ask people to just go with a movie and be a kid – well when another movie comes along and you dont like it, you’re gonna have to give the same courtesy back, and I dont see that happening
And I understand the eternal battle vs. just letting yourself run with something emotionally and turning your brain off, vs. overanalysing and nitpicking. For me all I can say is I walked in with no love for Spock and Kirk built in (I’m a TNG guy who has never watched TOS), and while it started off good for me, it just didnt grab me viscerally. When I go back and try to figure out why I’m in the vast minority disliking this, thats when the nitpickings start showing up, and it may start looking to others like you hate the movie simply because of lens flares.
When it comes down to it, I didnt get into the characters, and the story never made up for it. I think it may be that simple.
Posted by Goon on May 11th, 2009I have just returned home from viewing the new Star Trek movie and although I found it to be a wonderful experience I must say that the absence of William Shatner left an enormous void in both the thread/integrity of the movie… and my heart. He is so much the essence of Capt. Kirk (and such an excellent actor) that the film simply screamed for his presence in some form. That, Mr. Abrams, was the true “Black Hole” you created in your new Star Trek endeavor!!!
Posted by Anne on May 12th, 2009lol 1138 true that. most the time when he got the crap beat out of him there is no way he’d be walking away from it. and who cares if she’s spoks girl, from what i hear theres no pussy like green pussy
Posted by Rick on May 12th, 2009“Listening to the show and I think Jay makes good points, but I hope he realizes its a catch 22.”
I agree, the show would have been better if it didn’t become a black and white issue were everyone put Reed on the spot to make him prove why he didn’t like it. The whole “its good and to nitpick it is a waste of time” is such b.s. Why can’t the attitude on these movie discussions be “It was good lets talk about what could of made it better” I mean we are on a movies site because we like discussing movies, no?
I offered this at Row Three (another site that is in the throws of you either support the film or you don’t):
Just to be clear, I liked Star Trek, but it has some rookie screenwriting mistakes that could have been solved that would have made it so much better! That’s o.k. because like Altman said, “you learn more from the mistakes that filmmakers do then you do the hits†Basically all of my problems go back to screenwriting 101, action equals character.
Example 1: the ice planet – Kirk should have made active and unique choices that display something about his character instead of simply running away and having Spock show up out of nowhere to save his ass. Abrams wasted this scene and it could have been fixed so easily. Example Solution: On his way to the outpost have Kirk come in contact with the beastie pursuing a human that turns out to be Spock and Kirk saves him through some creative actions. It does the same thing as whats in the film but uses the scene to give the audience more insight in to Kirk’s mind and problem solving; this will help them buy him as the natural leader of the Enterprise later.
Example 2: Spock’s interaction with his younger version at the end of the film. Old Spock, unlike old mystical Obi-Wan Kenobi, does more damage in this film then good. Obi-Wan give advice not formulas and solutions. Here Spock is constantly stealing thunder from the new stars Abrams is trying to establish. There is no reason in the last scene between the two Spocks that the younger Spock shouldn’t be able to realize that Kirk and himself can do great things together. They just did some amazing stuff, why does old Spock have to steal his thunder by vocalizing it. Have a good scene between the young Kirk and Spock and put old Spock off to the side. By having the older Spock telling him what to think Abrams again pulls the rug out from under one of his main characters.
That is two examples of were Abrams and the screenwriters didn’t maxmize every scene. I’m to tired to give more but you get my point.
Posted by rus in chicago on May 12th, 2009Anne, I am an enormous fan of Shatner, yet I didn’t mind him not being in the film. Your reference to the “Black Hole” was keen-witted. In fact, maybe the “Black Hole” was actually a metaphor for Shatner’s presence in the film. Nah.
Posted by Reed Farrington on May 12th, 2009rus i 100% agree with you
Posted by Rick on May 12th, 2009Just stepping in to say I saw the movie today and enjoyed it, but also entirely agree that the plot, science and etc problems mentioned in all these past posts could have been completely avoided if it weren’t for what has to be pure laziness on the part of the Producer and writers. Though the thing that stuck out the most to me was no obvious friction when jumping to Vulcan, and the idiot who didn’t pull his chute in time with people yelling for him to do so? C’mon, Moronic writing.
As for Uhura, wasn’t she a cadet too? Not an senior officer? She just happened to speak 3 romulan dialects so Pike gave her the job. What I couldn’t stand was, regardless of her being in a relationship with Spock (god please no say that didn’t happen), was her unprofessionally following him around the bridge, etc. Disgusting. Even for a new cadet.
Posted by Me on May 13th, 2009I watched the movie and as above there where things I liked and disliked about it. I am glad to have star trek back.
Likes:
Good action, good acting and great effects
I thought the effects were great – best ever in star treks history
The take on the original characters by the new cast was good – Karl Urban’s take on McCoy was great, at times he sounded just like DeForest Kelley.
Great to see Leonard Nimoy back in star trek
Dislikes:
Why, Why, Why did they create an alternate timeline, it has been said that it was so they can get away with the things they did, and so they can start a new instalment. Star Trek TOS cover three years, so much of there story was not written or made. There is such a large gap before the TOS and between some of the movies. I believed the intent of the new movie was to reboot and tell the story of the young characters and how they came together. This movie did not do this for me. What about the five year missions?
All the new Starfleet cadets (Kirk and crew) could not have enlisted in the same year… there may have been 10 years between Kirk and Chekov.
To make a Starfleet cadet a first officer and to then for him to outwit Spock and to get the captains chair of the flagship that is only out of space dock is too much, there is no real rank and promotion system in place. It would have taken years for TOS Kirk to get to be Captain and along the way leaning tactics and diplomacy. I think Kirk has the record for the youngest captain but not right out of Starfleet Academy.
The red matter – Alias (Abrams must have a thing for red balls)
The destruction of Vulcan – No, No, No – I do believe (after watching TOS and Movies) that Kirk and Spock and team would have done every think or anything possible to stop this as they did in Star Trek IV – the Voyage Home, yes the one were the team travel back in time to save Earth from destruction. Why did they not do the same here? The Vulcan’s are intertwined with star trek (Rodenberry’s universe)
Chekhov teleports Kirk and Sulu in freefall but not Spock’s mother
The absence of William Shatner – Abrams stated that he could not find a way that feet right to bring old Kirk back from the dead. Well this is Sci-Fi and as Shatner stated any thing is possible.
The Movie was good but I did not find any real story to it – too much, too fast.
Battlestar was a re-imagined version of the series and it worked. The reboot of star trek was a way of trying to keep all happy. Has the story worked? Would the Kirk, Spock (young and old), McCoy and team that we have watched and traveled with for so long have saved Vulcan?
Star Trek 12 – Save Vulcan
Posted by Ray on May 15th, 2009It’s amazing that for a bunch of devoted Trekkies, the majority of you focus on all of the things wrong with the reboot, instead of appreciating what has been achieved here. Star Trek is back!
All you purist moral crusaders and disciples of Stephen Hawking seem to forget it’s science fiction – not a bloody documentary. If the average audience member suffered from nosebleeds trying to understand the “hard” science you all want to see – the box office stats would be dismal, and Star Trek would be consigned to the scrap heap for good.
Sure there are plot holes and inconsistencies. Who knows, maybe the vocal minority will luck out and get “Star Trek – The Certified Science Professor’s Edition”, complete with University lectures and a tear-out intelligence quiz!? Oh yeah, and the total film length is 16 hours, so nobody needs to feel rushed.
So dust the lint off your velour uniforms, polish those pins, and go suck your thumbs in the corner, while you checked your boxed set of The Next Generation for scratches. Leave the rest of the world to be entertained.
I loved the new film. It breathed life into a stale and over-franchised brand. Bring on the next installment!!
Sean’s review is simply perfect.
Posted by Jeff on May 22nd, 2009This movie is VERY well done. The later TV series, especially after Next Generation, were lame and without relevance, drama, inspiration or challenge. The movies had drifted into a very smug staleness.
The vitality seemed to be back in Roddenberry’s original view of these futuristic space explorers, the projection of the human condition and the exploration of human possibilities. There is brilliance in the original setup of character traits and duties on the ship, of the regularly surprising aliens and events in space, , negotiations with aliens and the concept of Starfleet. NOW, this movie brings us back to the highly valuable original path and IT FEELS GREAT TO SEE THIS HAPPENING! Bravo Leonard Nimoy, acing it once again!
Posted by Robert Johnston on May 23rd, 2009The story is good,but making twenty year old novices into first officers is unbelievable. This story sets up the crew into power way to early in the franchise.
Costumes are lackluster, awful, dull and duller. The Star Fleet uniforms look like walmart wear. Spock Prime is the only character with interesting futuristic clothing and theost engaging character in the film.
The Makeup is likewise horrible or these actors are butt ugly. The make-up shows discolored skin, blotches and blemishes in close-ups and the standard bruise over the right eyebrow of lead character James Kirk. Audiences watch film to see beautiful faces. Eric Bana as villan Nero looked better than the Trek crew in close-up. By the way the Punk heavy metal makeup for the futuristic bad Romulons was unimaginativealthough well done. We have seen it before. The Romulon costumes looked like cheap overcoats and too standarized for that wild beyond the edge look… Their clothes were boring cliches.
One bright spot visually was Rachel Nivchols as Gaila in green body paint. She was interesting and gorgeous.
Casting is seriously flawed also.
Posted by dean on May 30th, 2009Zachary Quinto as Spock is unappealing uninteresting, unlikeable, and terribly un-Spock like. His Young Spock is a boring petulant little man. Zoe Zaldana as Urhua sulks her way through the role. The Spock/Urhua romance is as palpable as roadkill. Watching these too unlikeable characters in a limp romance is a big eiooooyuc and kind unbelievable. Chris Pine as Kirk would be tolerable if we did not have to see the pores and flaws in his skin. His acting is infantile and brought nothing new to the screen, or the role. He has the look and style of a dumb football player.
Some casting choices were successful
Simon Pegg as engineer Scott, Karl Urban as Bones, Bruce Greenwood as Cpt. Pike and Winona Ryder as Spock’s mother each brought personality and life to their characters.
JJ Abrams used CGI effectively but missed the ship err boat on character presentation. His lack of trekkie love shows.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Muppet Babies…
A Pup Named Scooby Doo…
Tiny Toons…
Cartoons have long known that an easy way to revamp a failing series is to simply repackage the characters as younger versions of themselves.
Unfortunately, Hollywood seems to be falling into this mindset as well…
While I kinda liked the new Star Trek (despite the painfully bad seating at IMax), I couldn’t get past the fact that there were literally decades between the ages of these characters (heck, wasn’t Spock several hundred years older?)… and now suddenly they’re all the same relative age and in school together?!
Also have to agree with an earlier comment that its ‘youngness’ made it feel more like part of the Starship Troopers franchise than part of the Star Trek family…
Posted by siparaka on June 2nd, 2009Sean, i do not think you are going to like my FILM REVIEW for Star Trek:
http://film-book.com/film-review-star-trek-2009/
You believe this film brings Star Trek back in a big way. I agree that the film made splash but so did the Titanic when it nearly broke in two during its sinking.
It does have a more visceral feel, especially at the beginning of the film but hand to hand combat scenes were weak, especially the one on the drilling platform. Been there, seen that.
Posted by Film-Book dot Com on June 3rd, 2009Well I am now most of the way through your second ST review.
Must say I enjoyed the movie and would have more if there was less of the stupid humor items (knocking heads, giant hands, Ice planet monsters, Scotty in the water pipes etc.)
I agree that the decision for spock to launch kirk to the ice planet was odd. I also do not believe that the federation would have sent old ambasitor Spock to deal with the super nova.
Where are the planet defece of Earth and Vulcan?
The pit in the mining ship was usles. Why would you have the control systems over the big hole. the giant pit only makes sense as storage.
Thanks again for a good listen.
Posted by CharlesG1970 on June 9th, 2009I think I enjoyed the film once I switched of to the plotting of it and accepted it for what it was going to be, but I found the science fiction script very weak.
I was worried the film was going to be Bevery Hills 90210 in space with it’s pretty cast and it just about managed to pull away from that and be loud and enjoyable, but I don’t see how there’s enough in this film to sustain you seeing it again.
I found the cinematography extraordinarily distracting, there was so much lens flare and bleaching it was difficult to see what was going on and that frankly made me not really care if I was seeing people dying on screen or not. The choice to have a lower frame rate to sharpen up the images and reduce motion blur for the majority of shots in the film to heighten the action I also found detracting.
The baddie was too two-dimensional for me and I struggled to mind whether or not anyone ended up killing anyone and the bad science and junk plotting was a major issue for me.
Why was there a lightning storm in a black hole? Why did no one seem to care they were leaving massive destabalising gravity well singularities in the hearts of vulnerable solar systems? Why did the mining ship have an absolutely pointless layer of water in it? Why didn’t a single ship get sent out from either the whole of Vulcun or earth to simply blow up the mining drill that was offensively digging in to their planets? It was so lazy that everyone just stood there like lemmings and watched.
This was a massive triumph of style over substance and I mean that in its most positive and negative aspects. The main thing to say really is that this is not a Star Trek film. The feel of it is so much like a mix of Battlestar Galactica and the original Star Wars and I think it’s up to people to make of that what they will. It will be interesting to see if they reverse engineer this in to a television series. I think I’d be up for seeing that.
My advice for the film…
…switch off brain and Engage.
Posted by Tinta on June 14th, 2009Okay, somewhere along the comment line I saw someone commenting on the ‘impurity’ of changing the Star Trek timeline. Um, excuse me? Really? Wow. So it’s never been done before, right? What about the Mirror Universe? What about All Our Yesterdays? What about the numerous times Enterprise crews and other ships traveled back in time to change events in the past?
Posted by Donovan on December 7th, 2009This movie was an interesting and refreshing look at what it might be like if things had gone a little differently. I didn’t personally care for the destruction of Vulcan because, hello, greatest race EVER…but that doesn’t make it bad, and Trekkies loving the idea of an alternate timeline does not mean they should turn in their commbadges and phasers(although if you really have those, you might want to think about hiding them…)
Great movie, good review, nice work.
Leave a Reply