Ed Note: Spoilers
If you're a Trekkie, and I mean a REAL HARD CORE Trekkie; well, you're going to have a problem with the first third of Star Trek. Maybe.
Then again, maybe you'll LOVE this movie. Yep, I think so.
Last night Paramount Pictures hosted the sneak preview event for the J.J. Abrams-directed prequel at the Navy Pier IMAX, and I have to admit it. I'm hooked. I should back up, though, because you want to know about the movie, right?
(SPOILER: RED ALERT! RED ALERT! DON'T READ BELOW IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW!)
Well you decided to keep reading, so its not my fault if you get mad for knowing stuff that you didn't want to know.
First and foremost, we now know that Romulans aren't necessarily evil by nature, they got screwed over. This is a fundamental idea that I wasn't clear about before, but then again, unlike my partner, Tim, I had never seen the other movies and only partially watched the original series. Anyway, now a renegade Romulan named Nero (Eric Bana) is really pissed off at Spock (Zachary Quinto / Leonard Nimoy), so much that he waits 25 years just so that Spock can know the same pain that he does.
This story angle of loss-driven-revenge is a quality foundation Abrams uses to build layers of connections between the prequel and the TV series and previous movies in the Star Trek franchise throughout the movie. A key difference here, though, is that he accomplishes it in a way that addresses a criticism of other prequels like those in the Star Wars franchise. Rather than just create scenes without context, Abrams uses his skills as a story-weaver to comprehensively address so many questions that pop up for the serious viewer, that folks actually are satisfied with the suspension of disbelief experienced along the way. The result is a very well-written and produced movie that also takes the summer blockbuster to a whole new level.
Both casting and production elements (visuals, sound, effects) truly take on a scale that befits the pic's universal scope and goalpost-moving purpose. There is a sense of feeling like you are suspended in space, on the deck of the Enterprise, and the Romulan vessel as envisioned by Bad Robot's (Abrams' production firm) army of cinema artists and sound gurus. Indeed, in radio interviews earlier in the week, Abrams has said that he thought carefully about wanting to make this movie for all movie goers, not just for Trekkies. In my opinion he succeeded.
Casting Chris Pine as the swashbuckling Kirk was a master stroke. Not only does he carry the movie well, he actually embodies a more than a bit of the 'ol Shatner / Ford / Connery leading man, sex symbol qualities that carries each of them still today. The ensemble casting in tandem, though, especially the way Quinto literally became Spock (so much that he and Nimoy seemed to be a believable same persona), was so effective with each actor assuming their characters so completely...well, it blew my mind.
Anton Yelchin as Chekov, Jon Cho as Sulu, and Zoe Saldana as Uhura were superb; although I would have liked more character development behind them, as well as their individual roles in achieving assignments to the newly-minted Enterprise in the first place. I also was disappointed that more time was devoted to the friendship between Bones (Karl Urban) and Kirk beyond a simple setup scene.
All in all, I felt that the acting was very believable, but I know there will always be people who can't accept the new actors in the old roles. Get over it. If you're hanging on to the old folks in the old roles, you might want to remember...only one of them was able to appear in this massive pic, and that's because he IS one of the two leads in the original franchise. Nimoy still has it, and the magic when he appeared brought the instant screen cred that should shut all the purists' arguments down. Star Trek earns its bars, and by the end of the picture, he insures that the torch is properly awarded to the new cast in a very dramatic and fitting way.
4 1/2 stars out of 5 in my book. Go see it, and "Live Long and Prosper!"
(Thanks to WGN-TV9 Chicago / Paramount Pictures for the tix to the Sneak Preview.)
I have almost nothing negative to say about the flick and what little I could say is just the purist in me dying a little and crying out in protest. This film can truly give Wrath of Khan a run for its money for best Trek film, a feat that none of the other films could ever really aspire to.
My hightlights were McCoy and the scene with the two Spocks, but the truly awe inspiring moment was the smile on my wife's face when it was over. She's a Trekkie now too at long last and I'm eternally grateful :)
Here it is: http://evolvedcolonies.blogspot.com/2009/05/star-trek.html
Props should also go to Bruce Greenwood.
I've loved this Dude since 'NOWHERE MAN", "THE SWEET HEREAFTER" and "THIRTEEN DAYS".
Very solid, underrated actor.
Did a great job as Captain Pike.
HAve you seen Star Trek Bloopers?
http://hahaha-havealaugh.blogspot.com/
I loved this new Star Trek movie, however, because first and foremost it is a modern, action sci-fi movie. Then, underneath, it's a Star Trek movie. The familiar themes of the original Trek made it easy to slip into, but the quickly severed backstory made it feel like it was my own, instead of the Star Trek my grandpa would have watched with my dad.
I completely agree with your assessment of the way Abrams masterfully tied up plot holes and brought everything neatly into place. While there was the usual actiony "yeah right" moments (two people shooting it out with a dozen, one small spaceship against the battleship) the rest of the story was so well-done that it was easy to let those go.
I gave it 4/5 but I am in general agreement, and look forward to a sequel.
I enjoyed this film, mainly because it was well made. And I have no gripes about the breaks in Trek continuity, especially since I feel that if you suspend disbelief - which is the whole point in Science Fiction - Abrams pulled off his reboot in a plausible way. And I am most grateful that Abrams has successfully injected new life into a dying franchise. Not only was this the first Trek film since 2002, but also there has been no TV Trek since 2005. If this film had flopped, we'd likely see no new Trek until 2020 at the earliest. Instead we get a sequel in two years, and who knows what television might follow.
Yeah Abrams!
Thanks you guys! Love it or hate it, you've made my day by taking the time.
SF
--
Scott Foval
www.scottsbigmouth.com
www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-foval
scott@foval.com Email/IM
The new Uhura isn't half as sexy as Nichelle Nichols was. The new Scotty was positively giddy and Chekov's Russian accent was over the top.
Great action and it was true to the spirit of the original series.
Worst Star Trek movie ever!
I lost count of the recycled plots, clichés, ridiculous plot contrivances and outright stupidity.
You are entitled to your criticism. In tne meantime, the studio will be counting its profits while preparing for at least two more sequels.