Movie Review: Star Trek
I would warn you that this review probably contains some spoilers, but really, the new Star Trek movie was spoiled long before I started writing this review.
It was widely known that J.J. Abrams was brought in on the new Star Trek movie to breathe new life into the venerable franchise, which had sagged in recent years and went into hibernation after the forgettable spin-off series “Enterprise” failed to bring in many new fans while turning away a lot of the existing fan base.
Abrams certainly gave the franchise a fresh canvas from which to proceed, but in the process, the movie he created basically disavowed everything the franchise, with its ten movies and five TV shows, had created. In fact, the movie does more than disavow them; it basically says none of those things ever existed, so we are now free to do whatever we want.
If part of the filmmakers’ goal was to please Trek fans, as they’ve claimed, then they’ve failed miserably on that account. Anyone who has even just casually followed the Star Trek franchise would recognize this movie as running completely counter to many of core themes of Star Trek. As for the other (and primary) goal — attracting new fans to Star Trek, I doubt this movie did that. If you are someone who has not seen a second of Star Trek in your life, this movie would come off as just another run-of-the-mill sci-fi action flick filled with gorgeous CG effects, lots of explosions, and cliché dialogs. Not bad, but certainly nothing that won’t get overshadowed the minute the next summer blockbuster sci-fi film comes along with more and bigger explosions.
I can’t talk about my biggest complaint about the movie without giving away much of the ending. So click to read at your own discretion.
The characters
One of the reasons I had strong reservations about the movie was that the cast looked like “Star Trek: 90210″, but I can deal with a younger, sexier crew if they portrayed their characters faithfully. And yes, I realize that this is a prequel, so they won’t act 100 percent like their characters on the TV series or in the previous movies. However, all the main characters in this movie come off as so far removed from their old counterparts that it’s virtually impossible to see this crew of the Enterprise maturing into the people portrayed on the Original Series.
Chris Pine certainly displays the brashness one would expect in a young James T. Kirk, but the problem is that the brashness is basically the only thing his Kirk shows. Pine’s Kirk goes through the entire movie acting like an arrogant, pompous James Dean-wannabe, going out of his way to thump his nose at any hint of authority or the chain of command. It is hard to see this Kirk becoming the Kirk on the Original Series, who, while he would defy orders on occasions when he feels it’s necessary, still at his heart believes in the chain of command. And the movie gives you no hint that the young Kirk would start behaving more like the old Kirk. In fact, he’s rewarded for breaking every rule in the Starfleet book, which one can only assume would encourage him to keep doing so. The young Kirk takes his rebel-without-a-cause act so far that instead of pulling for him, you spend the whole movie wishing he would get shot by a Romulan phaser rifle, be eaten by the mutant Jurassic Park escapees he’s fleeing from, or just have his neck broken by Spock.
The other main characters also suffer from similar problems. In general, they all come off as smart-ass, loose-cannon college kids whose attitude would have no place in Starfleet Academy:
- Zachary Quinto’s young Spock spends most of the movie with an arrogant half-smile on his face and seems a lot more human than Vulcan, which is the exact opposite of what the Spock character is supposed to be. Yes, he’s younger and hasn’t acquired the discipline the older Spock displays, I get that. But really, can you see Spock, even in his younger days, making out with Uhura (yes, Uhura) in front of an audience in the transporter room? Or pounding Kirk’s face on the bridge because of a few insults?
- Speaking of Uhura (Zoe Saldana), her role in the movie seems to consist of acting like jailbait and engaging in that forced, where-did-that-come-from romance with Spock. Moreover, she comes off as the snobby brat who would bug her professors constantly to try to argue her way into a couple extra points on an assignment.
- Karl Urban actually does the best job of all the main cast in portraying his character — Leonard McCoy — in a way that makes it seem plausible that he would develop into the person Star Trek fans have come to know. Yet, even he suffers from a case of rebelliousness for no apparent reason other than that he’s younger.
- Chekov (Anton Yelchin) looks nothing like his older self and is basically a bundle of hyper-stimulated nerves with a mouth that tries to cram in as many words starting with V as possible. Hey, “nuclear wessels” was funny when you do it once or twice, but when you take that one shtick and make it all that the character is, it just becomes annoying.
- John Cho as Sulu comes close to his older counterpart on the Original Series in one unfortunate way: He got about two lines and a sword-fight scene, and the rest of the time he was just pushing buttons and counting out loud.
As a sign of how bad the characterization is in this movie, they even made Scotty (Simon Pegg) annoying. Seriously, how the heck do you make Scotty annoying? And what the hell is the deal with that little weird, completely out-of-place alien sidekick of his (pictured)? Did you stumble onto the wrong set, Jar Jar?
Also, I didn’t like how conveniently every one of these characters gets placed in a post of power aboard the Enterprise when most of them start off being cadets. Most preposterous of all, of course, is the way Kirk goes from suspended cadet and stoleaway to captain in a day, in much the same way that Homer Simpson becomes a submarine captain in the episode where he joins the navy reserves, except with less humorous results.
Squeezing in homages and missing the point
The filmmakers seemed to think that preserving the essence of Star Trek meant running down a checklist of trademark lines and shticks. Mind meld, check. Have Bones say, “Dammit, I’m a doctor, not a …”, check. Have Chekov say a word starting with V, check, check, and check. Throw in some photon torpedos and transporter sequences. OK, now the old fans are happy, right?
WRONG! What Abrams and company didn’t seem to get is that a good Star Trek production doesn’t need a single Vulcan nerve pinch, a single “nuclear wessel”, or even a single photon torpedo. It’s all about the story, stupid, and this particular story betrays everything that is Star Trek. Star Trek has never been about those things, or big explosions and effects. Remember, this was a show that won a loyal following despite having fights between Kirk and a guy in a giant lizard costume and some of the cheesiest special effects you’ll find on TV in any era. To think that fans of the franchise would be appeased simply by seeing a few old trademark lines forced into a decidedly un-Trek-like production is patronizing.
Look, I’m not asking for the movie to mimic the Original Series in terms of the campiness, the hamminess, or the laughably bad effects and fight scenes. In fact, the Star Trek franchise hasn’t been about that ever since the 60s. What it has always been about is the vision of a Utopian future, where people have evolved a better nature. This movie doesn’t give any trace of those improved sensibilities. As one example, Spock doesn’t like Kirk challenging his authority, so he gives him a neck pinch and orders him thrown into an escape pod and marooned on a dangerous ice planet. Where the heck does that fit in with Starfleet’s enlightened principles? In fact, the characters in this movie are more like what humanity is now than what they are supposed to have become in the future of the Star Trek universe.
I know it’s not easy to concoct a good story that fits within the frame that the Star Trek franchise has laid down, as so much has already been done. However, in this case, it was as if the filmmakers didn’t even try. It seemed like they just said, “Oh, it’s hard to comply with the parameters of the Star Trek universe, so we are just going to obliterate that universe and do our own thing.” Hey, if it’s hard to set a story within the existing frame, then don’t do a prequel. Set it in the future. In fact, this story could have been set in a time following all the previous Star Trek shows and movies and would have worked better. As it is, it turned its back on everything that came before it and in essence delivered a big middle finger to all that Star Trek was and the fans who loved it.
You said it, Shatner.
In the end, this movie didn’t rejuvenate the Star Trek franchise. It merely created a new entity that co-opted the Star Trek name, and judging from the quality of this movie, these new voyages would have nowhere near the staying power of their predecessors. Before, I was hoping this movie might spawn a new TV series. Now, I’m just wishing we could create an alternate reality where this movie never existed.
My rating: A steamin’ pile of poop
12 hours later, I'm just as bummed as I can be about the crapiness of the new ST. I think the shoehorning of the catchphases are sticking in my craw the most, almost as if mocking the old series. And I disagree with you about Bones, he was just as mediocre as the rest of the cast. I am stunned at how good the reviews are for this movie right now. A LOT of Kool-Aid drinking going on. Reminds me of Phantom Menace. Then people slowly realize what a pile of grannie panties this film is.
I think part of the reason for some of the good reviews, like this one in the N&O is that the people writing them aren't fans. They don't understand that most fans of the show aren't fans because of the technobabble or sci-fi gizmos, but because of the show's vision of the future and the good stories. They don't get that Star Trek, at its core, never depended on cool effects to draw audiences. Also, they compare this movie to the Original Series, and they don't realize or they ignore the fact that the franchise moved on past the campy 60s series long ago and went in a much more serious direction where, again, it was much more about the utopian vision of the future instead of blowing stuff up.
Hmm, I am more intrigued to watch it than ever and am glad I finally read a negative review so I wouldn't have my hopes up too high. Nice job, John.
I just don't understand all the love for this film. Currently, it's pulling a 96% positive rating on RottenTomatoes.com. Trekkie issues aside, it still was one of the laziest pieces of filmmaking I've seen in a long time. I mean, Kirk is born during an attack during which his father is killed . . . and then has to face the selfsame villain who offed his old man? Where did that plot point come from, Scriptwriting for Dummies? (And what's worse is that that the filmmakers don't even use that fact to flesh out Kirk's character but drop it entirely! So Kirk doesn't even care that he's facing his father's killer?!) And then kiddie Kirk steals a 300-year-old car, which somehow still runs and still has gasoline in it, even though everybody's long ago converted to antimatter, and plays a 300-year-old band on the stereo (the Beastie Boys?!), for no other reason than "because it's kewl"? That'd be akin to, oh, one of today's kids making off with a horse and cart with a minstrel in the back playing "Greensleeves" on his panflute. And then there's a scene where roughnecks insult Kirk in a bar, just so he can get beat up by them to show how tough he is, and then Spock gets insulted by Vulcan bullies (Vulcan has bullies?), just so he can show how emotional he is under that aloof facade, and on, and on, until the cliches and the plot holes and the stupidity cause your brain to melt and start leaking out of your ears.
Ugh. In the future, will we be able to execute people for crimes against creativity?
And don't get me started on Hottie!Kirk. Despite the fact that he looks like a Calvin Klein model, he scams on every girl in sight, uses pickup lines that Leisure Suit Larry would consider too obvious, and spends his final exam munching on an apple like some prep-school snot who knows he never has to study because his daddy's on the Board of Trustees. (I'm sorry to say, fellow Trekkies, that I am talking about the Kobayashi Maru scenario.) And then he's promoted to First Officer and then Captain for that kind of behavior?! To whom is that a likely, or attractive, scenario, except for thirteen-year-old boys who think that school sucks and that girls will fall all over them if they can just do an ollie on their skateboards?
After I saw the movie, I thought of it as just another example of how Hollywood underestimates the intelligence of its audiences. I felt vaguely insulted that someone thought people would be satisfied with this shoddy, gaudy, unoriginal pablum. Well, my cynicism about the taste of the average moviegoer has just been restored.
At least there's one good negative review out there. (Of course, the author's being flamed like no tomorrow on Rotten Tomatoes.) I suggest you check out it: it's well-written and pretty damn funny, especially the graf on Kirk:
http://antagonie.blogspot.com/
Thanks for the comment, Rebecca.
I just noticed that this post is the first item under the "From the Blogs" section on the CNN.com story about the movie . Pretty neat. I wonder if those choices are hand-picked or some sort of search algorithm.
Glad to see I wasn't the only one bothered by the fact that young Kirk was listening to "Sabotage." Just points to how ill-conceived this movie is. That said, it boasted a great but not spectacular opening weekend. The real test will be if it holds up through word of mouth. Most other ST fans I know have been hesitant to see it and are waiting for reaction from real fans. I think it will be interesting to see how the buzz swings in the next few weeks. Honestly, if the movie peters out next weekend, that could end the tenure of Abrams, thankfully. But where would Trek go from there?
For context, Wolverine had an $85 million opening weekend, and that was a mediocre flick as well. Of course, if for whatever reason Trek goes south and dumps Abrams, they could always just do another time-travel movie and push the reset button on the whole scenario set up by this movie and then go from there. The new movie has shown that continuity doesn't matter; just do the time-travel thing whenever continuity gets in the way. But they've got the cast signed up for 3 movies, and given the hype surrounding this one, I regrettably can't see them dumping Abrams unless he doesn't want to do another one.
Thank you for your excellent review. I couldn't agree with you more about the character presentations and the sterile use of catchphrases to feign "paying homage" to The Original Series. In my opinion, Star Trek (2009) is a horror and an abomination – a disgrace to the entire ethos of Star Trek.
Here are a few of my observations. I'm being told that my comments are too long so I'll post it in a few parts:
Part 5 –
* Vulcans – a society based on logic and reason – embracing prejudice against those who are biracial, in the 23rd Century no less;
* Vulcan High Council members just sitting around for Spock to beam them away to safety?;
* Uhura's role as essentially non-existent – (just eye candy for Kirk and a squeeze for Spock.) She does nothing on screen except appear pretty – no translations, no interception of messages. Did she actually do anything – I know she said that she translated something earlier but that doesn't really count (This characterization is actually a move backwards from Nichelle Nichols contributions in a 1960's TV show). How in the world could Kirk successfully act as the commanding officer of anyone if he's continually striving to score on any Starfleet female cadet who happens to pass by? How is this indicative of the "actual" Kirk and his self-control with regards to women under his command (i.e. Yeoman Janice Rand)? Note: It was only in TOS episode "The Enemy Within" in which the aggressive Kirk attempted any sexual contact with a member of his crew);
Part I:
* The bar fight was so contrived – with Kirk & Starfleet cadets acting like undergrads at a frat party;
* Kirk as the "chosen one" is contrived in my opinion – The Original Series writers portrayed Kirk as being an exceptional Starfleet captain based on life experience, sound judgement, and dedication to his oath of service and the Starfleet mission (for instance in TOS episode "Court Martial". It showed his peers and superiors (other capable Starfleet captains, such as Commodore Wesley in "The Ultimate Computer" and judges in "Court Martial"), and it contrasted him to several Starfleet captains who forgot their pledge
to observe the Prime Directive or spaceship captains who made tragic errors in judgement (i.e. like Captain Tracy in TOS episode "The Omega Glory", starship Captain R.M. Merrick in "Bread and Circuses",
and Commodore Matthew Decker in "The Doomsday Machine".
Part 2 –
Not to mention that in the real Star Trek TOS universe, Captain Kirk had a brother – from "Operation: Annihilate!";
* The bullshit speech of Captain Pike in this movie – about Kirk's test scores being off the scale – is absolutely unsupported and is just more contrivance by producer/director J.J. Abrams and the other Hollywood executives who are looking for another James Dean style white hero for 2009 and beyond (again, in my opinion);
* A worthless CGI monster chase scene on the icy planet (have we seen something similar to that before?) – with the monster being chased off (when it's time to move the threadbare plot forward again) by Spock with a simple torch flame. Note that this was followed by a scene where older Spock and Kirk do a stroll to the Starfleet base nearby, with no fear of the now defunct monster;
Part 3 –
* The whole premise of the ice planet scene – Why would Spock jettison a fellow Starfleet crew member, even one who was misbehaving, in an escape pod (with a trajectory set for a dangerous world – environmentally and with hostile inhabitants) rather than just confining him to the brig?;
* Kirk's supreme arrogance during the Kobayashi Maru training exercise, and Spock (as, at most, a junior officer) as the "creator" of the Kobayashi Maru exercise????? What is Starfleet Academy exactly, some kind of junior college institution that has been waiting for the Kirk-Spock pair to make sure it gains accreditation??
* Sulu carrying a sword (and the villain on the platform) conveniently having a sword also – and not just shooting him point-blank – in the 23rd Century? Also, his introduction as the helmsman who failed to release the "inertial dampener" brake – typical, subtle Hollywood denigration of persons of color – introduce the Asian guy as one making a mistake,
Part 4 –
* Scene after scene after scene where Kirk is hanging on for dear life with his fingertips but manages to "triumph" (as a kid, on the drilling platform with Sulu, aboard the Romulan ship while battling Nero);
* Chekov's atrocious accent and his unbelievable & inexplicable mad dash from the bridge to the transporter room ("I can do it, I can do it,…") while Kirk and Sulu are accelerating toward the ground (Just what made him able to lock in on the falling pair, when the person assigned to the transporter wasn't, is never explained;
Part 6 –
* Trans Warp beaming?? Talking directly with your future self (young Spock & old Spock)?? – I mean, how contrived can you get? How much did they pay Leonard Nimoy to put his stamp of approval on this travesty?? Thank goodness the "real" creator of the Captain Kirk character, William Shatner, wasn't part of this junk!!;
* Scotty being transported (conveniently) into a big transparent water pipe for comic effect? With the water flow suddenly and conveniently stopping once he's flushed out? I guess this new Kirk can't even get his hair wet??;
*Spock being responsible, solely, for the destruction of Romulus? (Even on Earth in 2009, important engineering and scientific work is reviewed and independently checked.) Why wouldn't the same be true on Vulcan?, and finally;
* Tyler Perry's useless appearance as the no-name, unimportant Black guy to pin the medal on the contrived "hero" Kirk (typical of J.J. Abrams use of Black actors in the television shows he's produced, such as 'Alias'; he makes sure the African-American actors are seen but he (and the other producers) also make sure they're absolutely non-essential to the story arc, especially if they're Black men. Note how there were no Tuvok style non-white Vulcan kids reciting math and philosophy in those little pits, but when the Vulcans were evacuated, there was a shot of a Black Vulcan guy – an extra, obviously- who had no speaking role.) Given how reckless and absolutely lucky this younger Kirk is portrayed as being, at best he deserved a letter of recognition, but not a medal.
J.J. Abrams and the rest of the Star Trek (2009) executives should be tar-and-feathered for mangling Star Trek so badly. It's a shame more people haven't criticized this movie more.
I had just seen the film. Every one has been saying how brilliant it was.
It is the worst film I have seen for a long time. Apparently the writers are big star trek fans, but to be honest there very little that would suggest they sat down and watch all 79 episodes. All they've done is use the cliche's and make a remake of every 'coming of age' movie and set it in space. This was a film purely for idiots who like big bangs and special effects. The biggest mistake in my opinion was having Leonard Nimoy as the link between this movie and the rest of the franscise. Had that link not been there, it might have been a bit more acceptable, but thw writers have been lazy and sat in a room and said 'You know what, we've got to appeal to the mainstream audience which is 16 year old morons from the deep south / or Chav's from Essex, London. We can't have a deep plot because people are stupid. There not that many Star Trek fans anymore so what we'll do is give Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek the finger and tell it THE HOLLYWOOD WAY.'
My horror is the kids will now think the Star Trek XI is about being arrogant and getting to the top by screwing people over just like Cap'n Kirk. The writers have gone into their little book of cliche's and come up with this.
You forgot to mention that Captain Pike;s history has changed. The crew from The Cage are all gone. Spock served with Pike 11 years before serving with Kirk and Pike wasn't the first captain, it was Robert April and according to one novel, the chief engineer was George Kirk, Kirk's father. What happened to Kirk's older brother. Spock would have spurned Uhura's advances – that was to get the testosterone going in the teenage boys.
As you said, by setting it in an alternate reality is a HUGE COP OUT. Friends have been saying, 'but it's set in an alternate universe'. No, it's because the writers are rubbish. Abrams has NEVER seen Star Trek. It shows. It was simply cashing in.
I passionately hate this film and feel that they've soiled the whole francise. It a very arrogant version.
Part 1
I thought it was odd to that Sarek seemed to support Spock's decision to go to Starfleet Academy. In TOS he didn't speak to Spock for years because of his decision not to pursue the Vulcan Science Academy. Remember Uhura in TOS tried unsuccessfully to get Spock to say she was beautiful when she asked if Vulcan had a moon and he said it had none. The only relationship if any that would make sense is Nurse Chapel and Spock. Even then he resisted it.
As for Vulcan bullies and Vulcan prejudice against humans and biracial children being out of character is not too far fetched. We've seen Vulcans make comments about how superior they are. I know not which episode but in TOS I think Amanda mentions Spock being teased as a child by Vulcan children. Logic is something they mature into not born with. It was those experiences that drove Spock prime to excel to the point that T'Pring calls him a legend among his own people. He had to be more Vulcan than a full blooded Vulcan did just to be respected in his culture.
Part 2
Why everytime did a Captain leave the ship with his First Officer left in command do they say "You're the Captain now?" Like a red shirt knowing he was marching off to his death they knew they would be the new Captain. I know that anyone in command even temporary command could take liberty have himself called Captain whether his rank was Captain or not but it seemed weird.
Liked the action, effects, green orion cadet, but lacked substance. How will they act in the next one?
Wonder how they will they differentiate the two versions of Star Trek canon in the novels and books? Star Trek Prime? Maybe Star Trek, Star Trek – A, Star Trek – B, C, D to distinguish the different alternate realities created every forty years they decide to reboot again. You know like they do with subsequent Enterprise ships they letter them to distinguish them. Since rebooting canon in a new alt reality will Abrams remain faithful with the new canon he creates? Meaning will they keep facts established in the new Trek universe consistent? I hope so because since they wiped the slate clean they have no excuses for not at least being true to their version of Trek.