JJ Abrams Star Trek Movie and Beyond...

[Dualnames]

I think the Movie was pawning. It was funny without even sweating to it.

"Her first name is spoiler?"

"No comment."

[Renal Shutdown]

I've watched it now, and I can't help but feel somewhat violated by it.

Let's start, by explaining my history with Trek.  I loved the original series, I saw it as re-runs as a kid.  I used to watch it week in and week out.  It was the highlight of my week.  My dad used to watch it with me, too, so maybe that adds to my love of it, as we rarely watched much else together.

I know the plots were hokey, it was the mid-80's, and it all looked dated.  There was a sense of fun about it, though.  It's how I wanted the future to be.  The girls were attractive, and the men were heroes.  There was action and science and garish colors.  It was perfect.

Then, in the late 80's ('88/'89, i think, we got stuff a year or two late on the BBC), along comes a brand new Star Trek show.  I was so excited.  I couldn't wait.  It was a dream come true, as I'd seen the originals a couple of times over.

I sat down and watched the first episode of The Next Generation.  It was downhill from the theme music on the opening credits.  The captain was an old, bald, french pansy.  The chief engineer spoke too fast.  There was a boy genius.  There were no awesome fight scenes, and I learnt nothing about life.

Two or three years later, I started watching TNG again.  The first officer looked better, with a beard.  But other than that, the series still did nothing for me.  It was still all political correctness and techno-babble.  Welsey Crusher still existed.  They'd killed off a main character in Tasha Yar, but she was a rubbish character, so it didn't have much of an impact.  I sat thru the entire series, and I think I enjoyed <5% of the episodes, but that was mostly due to Reg Barclay and/or Q.

Along comes Deep Space 9.  The same techno-babble's there, and there's some inanely dull characters and plots.  But, after a while, it picked up.  They still had the political drama, but it was coupled with some better characterisation and a bit more action.  Odo will always bore me.  The show seemed to fade out with a big build up and a weak ending.

Then there's Voyager.  Dull opener to the series, but soon picked up after.  As they were travelling across the galaxy, they didn't need to get bogged down in dull stories, as after a while, they'd just be too far from that area for it to matter.  On the whole, it was mostly watchable.  The ending was all kinds of suck, though.

After that, it's prequel time.  The actors, writing, effects, and characters were good (except Phlox).  The music was stupid, as was the Temporal War main plot idea.  It's a shame it got cancelled, as this was the first time I'd felt any real affinity for Trek since the days of Kirk.  Sadly, there were too many people raised on TNG, and it failed to captivate people.

As for movies, I like First Contact from the TNG ones, the rest were dire.  Voyage Home was crap, but I enjoyed the other 5 original cast ones.

So, now you know my brief history with Star Trek, let's move onto the new movie!

Chekov's replaced Welsey in the boy genius role, despite not even being in the first season of TOS.  There's plenty of other plot holes, not covered by the 'Alternate Timeline' excuse.  It's like JJ Abrams and his cronies have looked at Star Trek and thought 'we'll take the names, and very basic ideas for characters' and we'll just make the rest of it up as we go.

There's plenty of references to stuff, sure, but it seems to me to be more of an unfunny parody than an homage or a reboot.  They also seemed quite happy to throw something in to the mix, for the sake of making it more lowest common denominator entertainment.  

'People like ninjas, lets give Sulu a katana.. but how do we explain it..  Hm.. Fencing. That'll work.'  Katana's aren't used in fencing, and when he fighting, he wasn't doing much to resemble fencing.  Scotty and the water?  Did they really need to throw in a transporter blooper plot device in?  It all seemed really tacky and contrived to me.

New Spock, Zachary Quinto, didn't do too bad a job, but then, I don't really think he had much to work with in this movie.  It was mostly rehashes of things Nimoy's said before.  They same goes for Bones, who I was pleasantly surprised with.  When it was originally announced, I predicted Gary Sinise to play him, and was shocked when they opted for the 'Guy from Doom', but he did a fine job.  Scotty was an inspired casting, and Sulu was a nice choice.  Uhura and Chekov came up lacking, one was dull and one was annoying.

As for Kirk?  If you took out all the names, I'd have just assumed he wasn't there, and the plot relolved around some random guy who'd lost his red shirt, and somehow made it all the way thru the episode.  The only time I actually liked him, was the scene with the hands, but that was because of the humorous situation, not thru his acting.  It's hard to play someone as iconic as Kirk, and this random guy just wasn't up to the task.  (Bakula in Enterprise is the only one who's come close to being in a similar vein).

All in all, I pretty much hated it.  I've already lost all respect for Abrams due to his show, Lost.  (More time-travel ahoy!).  And Cloverfield was over-hyped and messy.  He over-complicated the idea of original Trek, and threw in the typically unoriginal theme of time-travel, failed to recreate the key character (Kirk IS Star Trek, hence the Pike based pilot being scrapped), and just made a generic Sci-Fi action movie.

It reminded me of the Star Wars prequels too much, and it failed to capture my imagination like the original series did.  This was after I went in un-hyped and expecting the worst.  Usually I'm pleasantly surprised, but on this occassion I feel as if my childhood's being crapped on.

I'd expect all the people who enjoyed it, were the people who preferred TNG, or people who are new to Trek in general.  It's nice that it'll get more people into the show, but it just means that the later incarnations of it will sadden me even more.

EDIT:
Beastie Boys - Sabotage.  Was this really necessary?

[Anian]

Renal, I think you have a nostalgy warped memory. I think you just liked the original ST cause it reminds you of your childhood and you were too young (and let's face it there weren't so many shows of that type around).Then you got older and it started to be below you.
Personally I can watch ST (actually the end of Voyager and later seasons of NG are my favourite) but I'm not all that "into it". But I'd certanly let my kid watch STNG and such, cause it would be fun for him/her. When you get to be a teenager you either love it or don't care much about it and watch it sometimes for fun.
You really shouldn't be that uppset with the film, yeah it probably sucks on the basic level, but it's an okay action movie and that's what Hollywood thinks is enough at this day and age. I mean all the series and seasons are not that good but there are great episodes and it is a part of the culture of the western world.

On a perosnal note, there are a lot of technobabble plots in ST and to me that's just lazy, like when you watch a detective series a can't figure out who the killers and it turns out you couldn't figure it out cause you didn't have all the facts and info in the first place. And what the hell is with letting an untrained and unschooled boy driving a starship with more than a 1000 people on board!!! Surely there is enough people who went to college and are qualified to pilot the thing, I don't care if he's a "genius" and he can push buttons. 

[Renal Shutdown]

I'll freely admit, as a generic Sci-Fi movie, it's got its' merits.  But it's not the Kirk era Trek, and it never will be.  I'd have much preferred they left that series alone, and made something new.  But, Abrams has become somewhat of a cliché nowadays.  It's like he's believing his own hype, and it's affecting his work.

And it's not nolstalgia affecting my memory, though it does make me remember it more fondly.  It's more to do with the feel of a show.  TOS felt fun, whilst TNG felt like I was struggling in physics class, after just failing sociology.

It's the same with Battlestar Galactica, the original was all swash-buckling adventures in space, where the remake was so full of religious subtext and political intrigue, that it was bogged down.  It felt like a relief when it finally ended, yet, it still left me thinking it was missing something.  Same thing goes for the Star Wars trilogies, 4-6 were an adventure, 1-3 became too complicated/contrived trying to explain stuff (why did they feel the need to mention midichlorians?).

Firefly, even though short lived, was relatively recent.  It didn't drag on, it was genuinely fun to watch.  If they spent ages telling me about the science or history or stuff, I'd find it dull.  Andromeda was watchable, if I ignored it's high and mighty attitude regarding quotes, as the majority of the characters were likeable.

If it hadn't been those characters, I'd have probably enjoyed it a lot more.  I just feel like they're ruining a perfectly good show, just to cash in and to save on the writing effort.  People who see the movie first, and then later check TOS, will be disappointed, because TOS isn't a typical Hollywood summer blockbuster kind of show.

[Anian]

Well they used the old names and characters and made what they wanted to do with ST brand with the script, again it's just lazy adn I agree kinda annoying.

You obviously love more of that spaceoperatic/adventure feel to series and you're right to have such an opinion (I kinda agree there) but it's hard to make more complicated stories without involving science and politics and religion in it...and once again, they're lazy. But on the other hand, ie todays fantasy novels are mostly about some politics. Could it be it's this modern age? Think about it - Tolkien didn't go much into politics with LOTR and Howards Conan and stuff but today more and more of the popular novels/series are methaphores and political and religious like G. G. Kay or George Martins Songs of Ice and Fire. When did all books become T. Clancy, John Grisham or M. Crichton stories I really can't tell. When did "deep" started to become "complicated". Even TV series, actually they're the main provider of such stories - ie Heroes, 1st season, not that "deep" of astory, could've been a bad ass movie but no, they stretched it out by complicating things (not too mention with editing and storytelling) and now they've turned it into a soap opera (same with the mentioned Lost).

I can write rather big posts myself. 

[Trent R]

Saw it today and it absolutely blew me away. Loved it through and through.

Personally, I feel the movie did an excellent job of incorporating the Star Trek shows into it. It didn't retcon, but rather allowed both to exist and still tell its own story. And I've never liked Star Trek, but I knew enough characters to enjoy it--which a original sci-fi could not do.


~Trent

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

It sure had a lot of them there wow-o-explosions and such, didn't it?  Oh, and I agree with about 98% of what Renal Shutdown said except that I didn't think Chris Pine did a bad job considering the horrendous script.  I still feel the script for this movie began as something else and they hastily wrote Trek in the title and threw in the characters to get it sold. 

[Andail]

I actually saw this!

Me and a friend decided to see a movie, since nothing else was going on that particular day, and I go to the movies like once a year or something. I'm such an anti-cineaste.

Anyhow, I've always looked down on Trekkies as the geekiest of the geeky, and what I know of Star Trek is confined to a couple of names and phrases.

This being said, I kind of enjoyed the movie
Of course, I first had to discard all hopes and ambitions of actually seeing a decent, serious, plot-driven movie; and instead quickly accept the fact that this was just a big heap of pompous, patriotic, self-satisfied clichées and random special effects.   
The plot-holes were so grand in their absurdity that it actually amused me. All-in-all, a worthwhile experience

[Dualnames]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_trek#Feature_films

Numbers tell the truth.

[Renal Shutdown]

Numbers, to me, in terms of box office takings don't mean a thing about the quality of a film.  They show how much promoting has gone into the release of a movie, and they show how watching a film in a cinema costs more these days.

For example the highest earner of the Indy films, is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which is certainly not the best of the series.  Both Austin Powers sequels are apparently better than Gone with the Wind.

As for reviews, Rotten Tomatoes style, they don't show whether any of the reviewers show any bias.  Reviews in general are matters of personal opinion, and a movie that gets panned across the board may turn out to be someone's favorite movie of all time.  By all means, I'm not saying 'don't watch this film', I'm merely saying if The Original Series was your favorite, you stand a higher chance of being disappointed.

[MillsJROSS]

I saw it a while ago, but have yet to comment on it.

I loved it. I had high hopes for it, and it actually exceeded my expectations. I came with the understanding that this movie wasn't made for Trekkie fans, but it was made to be palatable to a mainstream audience. Let's face it, the original series was preachy and awkward, it didn't even find a decent audience until it was picked up for syndication. That's not to say it was bad, by all means I love the original series, but I can recognize why it only appeals to a certain audience.

If the movie's goal was to appeal to the people who only loved the original series, it failed. There's no reason it should have tried to go down this path anyway. Hardcore fans will either love the series because it's got the name "Star Trek" attached to it, or hate it because of some minute detail. So if you appeal only to them, you'll lose some of your audience with each new movie.

It's goal was to bring in new fans (and make lots-o-money), and I think the numbers clearly show that it did. I don't think it pushed that many fans away, either. This was a fun movie. I didn't learn anything from it. But the casting was superb, the music was wonderful, and the action was great. Did the plot suffer a bit from opening up the series to more people? Possibly...but I don't particularly think the original movies had great plots either.

This movie hit the right note for me.

-MillsJROSS

[IndieBoy]

Saw it yesterday and really liked it. I haven't got much else to say that hasn't already been posted here.
Overall: Hypothetically, if the whole Star Trek franchise thing started with this movie first then I see a positive future in the concept.

[The Meek Geek]

 
I have not posted anything on this topic for quite awhile, I'm sorry for the delay -- I've been busy calibrating my new Windows 7 O.S., but that's another story...

MOVING ON...


I've noticed a great deal of mixed emotions from you readers. Some love the new Star Trek, some hate it, some like it, some are indifferent to S.T.

Again, with it's flaws overlooked, I found it quite the Popcorn Movie; a real thrill ride. It renewed that boyish imagination and sense of adventure I had when I was a kid when my folks would go out to dinner while they left me with the Babysitter and the TV, and a McDonalds Happy Meal while I would watch Star Trek T.O.S.

The movie took me back to those fond days.

*  *  *

Anyone here going to buy the new DVD/Blue Ray version with extra features?
If you already have, please let me know if the the features were cool.








***SPOILER ALERT***

I watched on G4 -- ATTACK OF THE SHOW, that, there are Klingon's with masks in a flashback scene with the evil Romulan. Anyone see that scene?

***SPOILER ALERT***

[TerranRich]

I'm getting the Blu-ray edition as soon as I can. I have a PS3 and an HD monitor and, by God, I intend to utilize them!

[The Meek Geek]

Great!

Please let me know the cool features when you see it on Blue Ray!

[Chicky]

I have the Blu ray, special features are okay

Good film though and surprising seeing as every odd numbered star trek movie is shit

[Crimson Wizard]

Erm... well, I never ever ever watched a Star Trek movie before, I just heard something about that and I think I saw that funny looking starship model. Anyway curiosity made me watch this.
I don't know, maybe it is because I am not ST fan, and ST does not mean anything to me, but I found the movie... average. I could not make myself not to think about a number of stupidities both in design and character actions; I am just starting to hate sci-fi movies lately because of those, I think.

Most stupid points I remember:
- Inner starship design. That's the gold trophy in the idiocies contest. Ewww. When people make combat unit in real life they usually tend to get every important controls as close as possible, so that they always be in crew members reach. Now, in that starship they have a labyrinth of corridors and some silly looking engineering bay with lots of giant water tubes, which are just lie/hang there exposed for unknown reason. When a guy (Chekhov was his name?) wishes to access teleporting beam controls he have to run across the ship along all those corridors ASAP to get to another console, instead of, I dunno, run the appropriate software on his own terminal. Speaking of which....
- Manually controlled teleporting beam. *cough* *cough*.
No comments.
- That evil mr. Neron likes to dig into the planet's core to place there "red materia" instead of just detonating it in planet's vicinity. Lots of extra fuss - and what for?
- Nor Earth, not Volcan do not have any planetary defences, no aviation, no SAMs at least, which could destroy that stupid planet-digging thingie?
- That highly intelligent and cool mr. Spock sends a crew member to the hostile, icy planet, inhabited by carnivorous animals, without any weapons and supplies and - to finish the list - to the random location, instead of teleporting him right into the outpost.
- A huge carnivorous crab/spider abomination finds some puny human, which, most certainly, is an unknown specie to it, more attractive prey, than a huge, good-looking meaty wolf-like creature, common to its areal........

Oh well...