J.J. Abrams is a man who I’ve always thought was way overrated – I’ve hated just about everything that he’s been involved in including Alias, Felicity, Mission Impossible III and that god awful Cloverfield. I’m also not a Trekkie, I’ll watch Star Trek the original series on occasion and Voyager whenever it’s on but I hated the Picard crew with a passion. So for these reasons and more I wasn’t really feeling the new Star Trek prequel movie. I wanted to be the one who comes out hating this movie, but I can’t. Abrams has knocked this one completely out of the park. This is an almost flawless movie. The acting, plot, pacing, cinematography, SFX is almost perfect.
Beyond the reasons listed above I thought all the trailers for this movie were, “Meh” and the casting really awful. But a funny thing happens as you watch, it soaks in that I was completely wrong, this cast is absolutely perfect and spot on. I started to have double vision, I could easily imagine these people 20 or 30 years older with their big stomachs and years of experience being together as a crew. I always say how much I hate prequels, but it’s time to say that when done well they can be a lot of fun. It’s just very rare that it’s done well. Prequels should be more than just “how the big things came to be,” they should be about the characters themselves and the little moments, things and character “ticks” that fans of any given show come to love.
It’s great fun watching Scotty (Simon Pegg) run around the engineering room and scream for the first time “She’s breaking up,” or watching Spock (Zachary Quinto) give James Kirk (Chris Pine) the Vulcan pinch or watch Dr. Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy (Karl Urban) showcase his neuroticism and how about that Nyota Uhura (Zoe Saldana) she was hot back in the day and doing it with Spock – not Jim like I always thought. Yeah there’s a lot of nice little fan service and winks and nods in this movie. Something the Wolverine film completely lacked.
If I had to quibble it would be Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman script centers around a time traveling Romulan, Nero (Eric Bana) who is out for revenge against Spock was a bit silly and for some reason the only good Star Trek movie villain is still Khan. This guy Nero never commands the screen and his motivations while clear and plausible somehow lacked gravitas. But this movie isn’t really about the typical conflict, like I said it’s about the fan service. Watching the characters meet for the first time, seeing the chemistry build and their interactions.
There was also a big, gaping whole with regards to Jim’s relationship with his mother. I kept waiting for a scene between the two and we never see it. It seemed weirdly out of sync with everything else in the film. We see his birth and the death of his father, yet we never once find out what type of relationship he had with his mother. Did he hate her, love her see her. How did she feel about him knowing his birthday reminded her of his father’s death? The movie begins with his birth and everything surrounding it. So it would have been nice to have at least about the impact it had on their relationship and how it shaped James to be the young man he is in the film.
Star Trek is a truly good, dare I say great movie. But I don’t think it has a lot of re-watchabilty and it’s not in the league of say The Dark Knight, but it’s clearly one of the best films of this year.
Final Grade A
EM Review
By Michelle Alexandria
Originally Posted 5.08.09
Couldn't agree more. I am a Star Trek fan, most all the series, but have been very disappointed with the most recent films. this film – however – DOES hit it out of the park.
absolutely!!!!!!!! I mean the movie flowed well and the cast took you in. I'm a star trek fan and i can honestly say, "Will who?"
It may seem hypocritical somehow to say that a very good movie is over-rated, but that is EXACTLY what "Dark Knight" is…It was not even the best "comic-book"(superhero) movie of the year(Iron Man gets that honor).
So, it pisses me off when you say that "Star Trek" does not have the 're-watchibility' or is 'not in the league' of DK!
I will be thinking of you this weekend as I go back to see it a 2nd time!!!(this time with my 11 and 9 yr old children)
Your review is truly flawed for a few reasons, including but not limited to the fact that this is a REBOOT of a franchise, not a "prequel" as you so often state. Wolverine is a prequel. Star Wars 1-3 were prequels, this, like Batman Begins, is a reboot. even though there are nods to fans and long-standing traditions, this is still a reboot, plain and simple. In fact, it's not even that. It's the beginning of another, alternate time frame and alternate universe in Star Trek.
And no, I've never been a Trekkie and i think I've barely watched a Trek movie, but this movie was absolutely incredible.
If you want to be nitpicky, Fox considers Wolverine a reboot and not a "prequel," as well.
You missed the point about the time travel! This is a NEW reality for them, caused by Nero's time travel – in our reality Uhura and Jim did get it on – in this subtly changed reality, she was with Spock. In our reality, Jim's father WAS NOT KILLED by Romulans and Vulcan didn't blow up, and Spock's mother was alive and well. Nero's time travel CHANGED all of that. It is indeed a reboot because they now live in a different reality from the one we know, and it now is a clean slate for JJAbrams to work on – he can change whatever he wants to without worrying about canon as long as he sticks to his own redeveloped canon.
I really liked the film, however I felt that about half way through it was in danger of losing the plot…literally…up until "Future Spock" turned up I thought the new "re-imagined" crew were doing an excellent job, and the movie was succeeding on its own merits. Forming a crossover with "classic trek" weakened the movie in my opinion. A totally new beginning a-la Battlestar Galactica should have been the order of the day. I thought the mind-meld flashback scene was lazy scripting and the whole "You have always been my friend" lift from Wrath Of Khan was slightly embarrassing. The whole "Red Matter/Black Hole" premise was just "wrong" too – if you ARE going to link the film to "classic" trek, then at least be consistent with it's laws on reality (wormholes can lead you back in time – black holes just destroy stuff!). However the film recovered towards the end and finished on a high. I also loved practically all the new characters, and I'm looking forward to a sequel with hopefully no "classic trek crossover" baggage. 7.5/10
I agree that's why I couldn't give it an A+ or go on the limb and call it a "great" movie. Because it lost its way for a bit there before recovering and I thought the Time Traveling and alternate timeline stuff kind of dumb and lazy writing. They wanted it both ways: A complete reboot with a new history, but also link it to the original.
Absolutely! But not to worry – still a good movie, and a sequel (which I'm sure will come) will undoubtedly be even better!
red matter was a recent development in the comic prequel (countdown) to the movie. wormholes can destroy stuff too like in ST:TMP when the enterprise was caught in one. black holes, if u get the right one, will take u on a time travel journey. i know, cause i've been thru one before.
"I thought the mind-meld flashback scene was lazy scripting and the whole "You have always been my friend" lift from Wrath Of Khan was slightly embarrassing."
the scene was concise, for brevity is wit of the soul. and a man shouldn't be embarrassed to express good and loyal feelings. throw your ego away, it will do you no good.
ooooookay….
Check out the big issue website. Star Trek director JJ Abrahams and Simon 'Scotty' Pegg talk about relaunching the Enterprise:
http://www.bigissuescotland.com/features/view/57
This movie is better than DK. DK, for all of its greatness, had dull moments. Star Trek never stopped for a second. Joker carried DK to greatness, but Star Trek, as a whole, is a better production.