Jump to content





Set Phasers on "Preposterous"

Posted by Nathan Strum, 05 June 2009 · 235 views

Movies
I went and saw "Star Trek" Thursday night. And I'm a little disappointed.

You see, I had some choice material already thought-up for my review. About the movie being an utter, unwatchable train-wreck. About how they'd screwed everything up, and the characters were all just vapid, Hollywood pretty-boys. I even had a great line about how Star Trek the movie was basically like an over-the-hill Hollywood starlet that had had one-too-many plastic surgeries, and you kind of felt bad for it because it had too much work done, looked all trampy and fake, and was still dumb as a fence post.

And now I can't use it. Any of it. I had to start over from scratch.

I'm a little disappointed about that.

As much as I hate to admit it, Star Trek was actually a pretty-good film. Not bad, in fact. Flawed to be certain, but not the horrible, catastrophic disaster I was sort-of hoping for, in an admittedly sadistic way. (Bad reviews are always more fun to write.)

But I'll admit it - I enjoyed the film more than I expected to.

The characters, for the most part, were pretty well-written, and if not faithful to the originals, at least recognizable in their respective roles, and in some cases (Chekov, for example) actually improved (admittedly, for Checkov that wouldn't be too hard).

The actors (whose names I don't recall - so I'm assuming they're all relative unknowns) did a pretty good job. The most annoying thing I found, oddly enough, were the instances where they were lifting lines directly from the original series. Dr. McCoy was the most frequent with at least one "I'm a doctor, not a (insert occupation here)!", and various insults aimed at Spock. It all seemed a bit too self-conscious, and it would have been better to just let the new characters figure out their own such phrases and moments, instead of having the "classics" down pat already. It all seemed rather forced and obvious, like "Hey, let's hit the audience over the head with this one now!" There were other obvious nods to the original series and movies, too. I don't think they were really necessary, but I suppose maybe they keep the Trekkies, Trekkers or (gack) Trekkans happy. I found them a bit distracting, since I found myself thinking "Oh hey... they took that from such-and-such film".

One thing they did do well, is they kept the background characters (Sulu, Chekov, Uhura, and Scotty) basically where they belonged - in the background, as supporting characters. One of the problems Star Trek in general ran into, as that when the original series became a cult classic, the ancillary characters likewise achieved cult status - and they were never meant to. They were supposed to be perfunctory characters. Seat-fillers, essentially. And what happened over successive Star Treks is that the shows became over-populated with what should have been minor characters getting too much screen time, instead of focusing on the core relationships at the heart of each series. Here, however, they struck a good balance between using these characters, without them getting too much of the spotlight. Each of them got their moment, and that was enough.
Spoiler

Generally, I thought the backstories were pretty good.
Spoiler
Aside from that, they did a nice job of developing his backstory, and letting us into his world a little bit. Maybe spending a little more time on McCoy would have been good too, but he seemed to be the one most directly aping his original-series counterpart (which I found a bit distracting), so maybe it's just as well. Scotty, on the other hand, came off as kind of a goofball,
Spoiler
How the sweaty-heck did that happen?

The main villain (Nero) was decent. At least he's got motivation, if not much in the way of smarts. Certainly as far as Star Trek movie villains go, he was a far cry better than some of the ones they've had (although hardly in the league of someone like Khan).
Spoiler
It would have been nice if they could have developed a villain to be an ongoing nemesis for the future. I think that's something Star Trek has sorely lacked in the movies.
Spoiler

As for the plot... well, it was serviceable. And I think that's all it was meant to be.
Spoiler

There were points in the film that were just absurd to the point of ridiculousness.
Spoiler
Certainly, that could have been handled in a better way. Star Trek in the past has excelled at making techno-babble at least seem plausible. And of course, there were plot holes all over the place big enough to fly a starship through.
Spoiler

Still, I was able to (mostly) suspend disbelief and eye-rolling enough to enjoy the ride for what it was: a pretty decent Star Trek-flavored sci-fi action movie, with just enough likable characters to keep my attention for the duration of it.

What I really found annoying though, although there was mercifully not an over-abundance of it, were "shaky-cam" scenes. Particularly in space battles. Let me say this to all directors out there: THAT IS REALLY ANNOYING ON A BIG SCREEN! You create special effects and edit your films on relatively small monitors that aren't three stories tall and don't fill your entire field of vision. So stop assuming that just because it looks good on a desktop, that it won't be headache-inducing and impossible to watch in the theater! KNOCK IT OFF!

This is exactly why Speed Racer didn't work (that, and really awful acting).

Despite those problems however, and despite my best intentions, I actually did find myself enjoying the movie.

Several times, I actually sat there and thought, "hey - I'm enjoying this". Although really, if the movie had been holding my attention all the way through, I shouldn't have actually been thinking that until after the movie. But whatever. I still have to give them credit for what I'd call a successful reboot of the series.
Spoiler
I wasn't expecting any of that. I figured they'd use time travel to somehow go back and fix it. Well, that didn't happen. So hat's off for not taking the easy route. I think that was important because it made it "seem" as if anything could happen,
Spoiler

In the end, me and the twelve other people in the theater all seemed to like it well enough. Maybe it would have been even better with a crowd, but there's something to be said for going to a 10:30 PM showing on a Thursday night. ;)

In the end, Star Trek gets a rather generous 7/10.


Up next: Up




Went and watched this movie with Mrs.Jboypacman and a few of our friends and we rather enjoyed it as we felt it was "total fan-service" for those that watched the original Star Trek years ago.

As for the lines of Doctor McCoy being lifted from the original that was our favorite part! lol. :ponder:
  • Report
Don't know his name either, but Spock is played by the guy who does Sylar in "Heroes" :ponder:
  • Report
Never watched it.
  • Report
Saw Up today, it was quite good.  Make sure you see it in 3D, very impressive.
  • Report
I'm going this week with some people from work. I'm less interested in the whole 3-D thing than in just seeing the film itself, but they want to see it in 3-D, so we probably will. The whole 3-D thing is kind of a nuisance since I already wear glasses, but I expect if anyone is going to do it right, it will be Pixar.
  • Report
My dad and I were concerned about the polarized glasses, but they fit over our glasses w/out any problem.  I didn't noticed any left/right image cross-talk like I have in the past at 3D IMAX movies.
  • Report