logo Sign In

Post #361516

Author
Shawn of the Deli
Parent topic
Abrams is Destroying Star Trek like Lucas has Destroyed Star Wars
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/361516/action/topic#361516
Date created
24-May-2009, 1:57 PM

My review

Star Trek filtered through a Star Wars mentality.

I totally get what J.J. Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman are trying to do here, and I support it. Without giving too much away, they’re trying to restart the Star Trek franchise by going back and focusing on the iconic, beloved, original characters who put Star Trek on the cultural map in the first place. And they want to do it without being locked in to what was established so definitively in the 79 episodes of The Original Series (TOS), six movies, and even in the spin-off TV shows The Next Generation (TNG), Deep Space Nine (DS9), Voyager (VOY), and Enterprise (ENT).

It makes sense to go back to the original crew. With the TNG crew played out after 2002’s execrable STAR TREK: NEMESIS and none of the other spin-off shows warranting a promotion to the big screen, Abrams and company really had only two choices: create an entirely new crew and concept and risk audience apathy, or go back to the familiar but put a whole new coat of paint on it. Let’s face it: it was not that difficult a choice to make. Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov are still the best-known characters of the franchise. It’s been many years since anything significant has been done with them on screen. And it would be very difficult to pass up the chance to tackle these classic characters and put a fresh new spin on them and the universe they inhabit.

In taking this approach, Abrams and company did neither a total reboot, a la the Sci-Fi Channel’s recently completed Battlestar Galactica TV series, nor a proper prequel that ties in directly and adheres faithfully to the established continuity. It’s a little of both--the filmmakers try to have it both ways. And for the most part, they succeed.

The fates of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the rest are now unwritten. Anything can happen to them. Some can die, or leave Starfleet in a huff, or lose a limb. This adds a tremendous amount of suspense and drama to the proceedings, because you CAN’T rely on prior knowledge--what you know from the TV series and the movies is no longer applicable. So this movie is not really a prequel in that it doesn’t set the stage for TOS. It simply CAN’T. You won’t be able to walk out of this movie and then sit down and start watching the original TV series and the original-cast movies and have it feel like a seamless fit.

And that doesn’t bother me, really. Why bother going back to Kirk and his crew and making new movies about them if we already know exactly how their lives are going to play out over time?   The good news for longtime fans is that this movie doesn’t negate or wipe out what has come before. Abrams and Co. make it fairly clear that the original timeline is still in place, still intact, and if you want to revisit it, just pop in your DVDs of TOS, TNG, DS9, etc. It’s all still there. We even get a new detail about Kirk’s personal backstory as it exists in the original timeline.

But if you want to follow the NEW adventures, you’d better go in with an open mind. Because Abrams and Co. don’t pull their punches. They are not afraid to upset the apple cart and depict sweeping, drastic, and, quite frankly, shocking events that bring significant changes to the Star Trek universe as a whole.   With all that out of the way, I’ll get to the FUN stuff.

As for the cast--by and large, they’re terrific.  Abrams makes it sing. He's assembled a cast that is terrific, and - for the first time in Trek history - actually gives each and every one of them something to do that helps define them as characters.

Chris Pine shows us a somewhat different James Kirk from what we’re used to, which is only natural given the nature of the film, but by the end, you can see him settling in to being the Kirk we know and love. Pine also carries himself well during the action and fight scenes, and he's good at portraying a rough-around-the-edges Kirk who’s developing his notorious magic with the ladies. He is also good during the more comedic moments. And during his scenes with Leonard Nimoy as the elderly Spock, he more than holds his own. What I WOULD like to see in future films is Kirk portrayed as a bit more intelligent, more thoughtful, more cultured, and more strategic than he’s shown here. We get to see plenty of Kirk as a rough-and-tumble man of action in this movie, but there’s a lot more to him than that.

Simon Pegg is hilarious as Scotty, but his slightly manic version of the character doesn't really gibe with the laid back, always a little toasted version from the show and the original movies. But whatever, he's great and he makes the character work. He’s played mostly for comic relief here. My main criticism with regard to Scotty is that he falls into his familiar place just a little too quickly and easily, given the circumstances surrounding his arrival aboard the Enterprise. The establishment of his relationship with Kirk--right down to Kirk calling him “Scotty”--came off, at least to me, as just a wee bit rushed.


As the young Spock, Zachary Quinto doesn’t quite capture the essence of Nimoy--I found his delivery to be a bit on the robotic side on occasion, and even arrogant at times. (Nimoy played Spock as a Zen master, while Quinto plays him as almost a sociopath. He's simply unsettling), It’s not a bad performance by any means, just a different interpretation of the character. In the future, though, I would like to see Quinto try to incorporate more of the wisdom, the dignified demeanor, and the gentle wit that Nimoy brought to Spock.

Karl Urban is WONDERFUL as Leonard McCoy, from start to finish. Karl Urban is astonishing as Bones.  He captures the spirit of the late great DeForest Kelly marvelously. The irascible nature, the sarcasm, the irreverence, the nervous raise of his eyebrow--it’s all there. One thing is certain: Urban MUST have a bigger, more central role in future films.

My prediction is that the breakout character in this movie will be Zoe Saldana's Uhura. She's absolutely gorgeous--you can't take your eyes off of her. She carries herself extremely well, projects an air of confidence and ability, has a lovely speaking voice, and has good chemistry with both Pine and Quinto. It's a really strong performance, and I think she’s given more to do and more of a characterization than Nichelle Nichols was given in all six original movies combined--and maybe even the TV series, as well.

Anton Yelchin is  my only complaint...as Chekov and has a great scene where he really shines. He’s a bit more of a charterer  than a character.

As Sulu, John Cho gets less of a chance to make a strong impression but has a few very nice moments and gets to take part in one of the film’s most thrilling sequences.


Bruce Greenwood is very effective and likable as Captain Christopher Pike. His performance is more or less consistent with Jeffrey Hunter's, and I wouldn’t mind at all if he returned in a future film. His relationship with Kirk, as portrayed in this film, shows lots of potential for further exploration.

Eric Bana’s obsessed Captain Nero does not rank among the best-developed or most compelling antagonists we’ve ever seen in Star Trek. He’s certainly no Khan, who without a doubt remains the most memorable and dramatic villain ever faced by an Enterprise crew. But I wouldn’t place Nero among the utterly forgettable and inadequate bad guys from the last couple of Next Generation movies, either. He’s okay. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for Leonard Nimoy... it almost would have been enough just to see him back on the screen as Spock after 18 years. But to see him play such an important role--one that doesn’t give him a lot of screen time but is nonetheless absolutely essential to the story (unlike Shatner’s return as Kirk in the ill-conceived mess that was STAR TREK GENERATIONS)--makes it all the more special and essential. It’s clear that Nimoy had a good time playing Spock again. There's a warmth, a sense of comfort, and a level of gravitas in his performance that I don't think we've really seen since STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN. Nimoy’s Spock (referred to in the end credits as “Spock Prime”) is shown the utmost respect and treated with dignity--again, unlike Kirk in GENERATIONS. And there are two moments--one between Nimoy and Pine and one between Nimoy and Quinto--that are really quite touching.

Overall, I found STAR TREK to be a high-octane, fast-paced, exciting, funny, and even poignant adventure. It does what it set out to do, which is make Star Trek accessible to a new audience and forge a new direction without being constrained by the franchise’s history--while respecting and acknowledging everything that came before .  There are some rough spots here, to be sure, but I think Star Trek has gotten the shot in the arm that it’s needed for quite some time.

At the end of the movie, as Pine walks onto the bridge of the Enterprise in that yellow tunic, Chris Pine IS Captain Kirk.  And that is all that matters.